Thanks for the link to your 2019 presentation and audio. Lot of potent ideas, and thought provoking point of view. A whirlwind packed into 12 minutes, actually. It would be very interesting to see a slightly slowed down version of the same thing, expanding on some of the ideas, maybe considering how some of this might actually look on the 10 year timescale you suggest is necessary (I'm not disagreeing with that analysis), and also in light of the disposition of political forces in the US and elsewhere. Cheers!
Thank you, Peter. Much appreciated, as always. I do agree that there is a considerable amount of hard thinking to do be done about foreign policy regarding the global transition to a low carbon future. We're barely scratched the surface. Having realized the challenge internal to the United States, my attention has been largely on domestic issues, as you might have noticed. Hopefully, I will soon get the time to take up the global dimensions of the challenge of our lifetimes.
Throughout human history, TPTB (i.e. the elites) have used spurious claims of influencing the weather to enhance their power. If that were happening now, how would life be different?
Thanks for this, nice article. I applaud how you highlight the role of mass media in constructing social myth in the neoliberal era. Many of us construct our identities around the shows and other cultural 'products' that we 'consume'; not only this, but we also use these mass media products to construct our understanding of others in our society. 'Others' in this case being people that we have virtually no personal contact with, and therefore we are completely at the mercy of the subliminal messages that we see on television or the internet. Once the stage is set and we are predisposed to believe certain things about certain groups, the necessity of profit causes media to reproduce these prejudices and these beliefs calcify.
This process has continued for many generations in the United States, but is being imitated by many other media companies around the world. For example, from where I write in Finland, many of the most popular live TV shows here (Survivor, Love Island, the Bachelor/Bachelorette) are simply copied from shows in the U.S., while streaming services allow us to watch sitcoms like Friends and HIMYM which construct our own visions of the U.S. This is a sort of cultural imperialism, where domestically produced cultural products are squeezed out or made to look like Hollywood products in order to attract viewers. This process can in many ways (or at least partially) explain the rise of right-wing politicians in Europe and beyond, as the isolationism produced by mass media causes social bonds and civic engagement to weaken. Thomas Frank wrote about this well, but another American writer/novelist who observed this trend well was David Foster Wallace in his essay 'E Unibus Pluram: Television and U.S. Fiction' and novel 'Infinite Jest.'
This was a long comment, but I wanted to say that your article was well written and insightful for this reason. The political impotence we are seeing is partially a result of the ubiquity of mass media entertainment coupled with a breakdown of social bonds produced by neoliberalism. It also helps to explain why we are unable to address structural problems such as the ecological crisis or the threat of super-weapons. So we turn to undemocratic but entirely necessary measures by institutions who are forced to overreach in order to sustain the economic processes we are reliant upon; thus we have the era of central bank capitalism, where QE programs, once thought of as an extreme and temporary measure, has become the norm of the last decade and probably will be for years to come. That is, unless we can do something about it.
The elites will opt for victory, not compromise, in the domestic Cold War. A group which is winning will not suddenly slam on the brakes and offer concessions. They will enforce their narrative, and make it increasingly costly to oppose it. They will create buy-in from below by making alternatives impossible. Sticks are cheaper and more reliable than carrots.
We seem to be drawing different conclusions from 2016. The elites stopped the populist Sanders in 2016, and they neutralized Trump, who certainly made his own share of mistakes, then the elites of both parties made sure he lost in 2020. The elites have no reason to share power, and they have increasing control of the narrative and capacity to police discourse and prevent alternative narratives from having an impact. But, the future is unwritten and I can always be wrong. Nonetheless, I expect the elites to increasingly use sticks and try to maintain control that way. I hope they fail but hope is not an expectation, let alone a strategy.
Is the border wall being built? (Elites want cheap labor).
Are we switching from income and wage taxes to property and import tariffs? (Elites prefer dodgeable income taxes to property and import taxes. Income taxes are a domestic and international shell game).
Are elites in the US seriously reconsidering their seven seas, seven continents military footprint, which is a global guard service for multinationals? (The elites, multinationals run all the think tanks, academics, foundations, centers, media etc).
Are elites funding Anti-Globalist Think Tanks? Is there even one anti-globalist think tank of note?
Oddity: The WaPo defines nearly every aspect of the US as embedded with structural and systemic racism. But the WaPo has never said US foreign-military-trade policy embodies white structural racism. The US can spend $6 trillion on Iraqistan, and not Baltimore, and the WaPo goes mute.
Are elites saying, "Great Britain spends about half what the US does on healthcare, and gets about the same results. Let's go the national health insurance"?
True, the Trump tariffs on China have remained in place, but really are mild, and who knows what happens at ground level, in terms of enforcement. And even this maybe be because Xi and the CCP have become unbearable. Even elites are being forced to contemplate less relations with China. But not because of populists.
Was the Wuhan virus story played to the neoliberal- elite tune, or the populist tune?
Thanks for the link to your 2019 presentation and audio. Lot of potent ideas, and thought provoking point of view. A whirlwind packed into 12 minutes, actually. It would be very interesting to see a slightly slowed down version of the same thing, expanding on some of the ideas, maybe considering how some of this might actually look on the 10 year timescale you suggest is necessary (I'm not disagreeing with that analysis), and also in light of the disposition of political forces in the US and elsewhere. Cheers!
Thank you, Peter. Much appreciated, as always. I do agree that there is a considerable amount of hard thinking to do be done about foreign policy regarding the global transition to a low carbon future. We're barely scratched the surface. Having realized the challenge internal to the United States, my attention has been largely on domestic issues, as you might have noticed. Hopefully, I will soon get the time to take up the global dimensions of the challenge of our lifetimes.
Throughout human history, TPTB (i.e. the elites) have used spurious claims of influencing the weather to enhance their power. If that were happening now, how would life be different?
Thanks for this, nice article. I applaud how you highlight the role of mass media in constructing social myth in the neoliberal era. Many of us construct our identities around the shows and other cultural 'products' that we 'consume'; not only this, but we also use these mass media products to construct our understanding of others in our society. 'Others' in this case being people that we have virtually no personal contact with, and therefore we are completely at the mercy of the subliminal messages that we see on television or the internet. Once the stage is set and we are predisposed to believe certain things about certain groups, the necessity of profit causes media to reproduce these prejudices and these beliefs calcify.
This process has continued for many generations in the United States, but is being imitated by many other media companies around the world. For example, from where I write in Finland, many of the most popular live TV shows here (Survivor, Love Island, the Bachelor/Bachelorette) are simply copied from shows in the U.S., while streaming services allow us to watch sitcoms like Friends and HIMYM which construct our own visions of the U.S. This is a sort of cultural imperialism, where domestically produced cultural products are squeezed out or made to look like Hollywood products in order to attract viewers. This process can in many ways (or at least partially) explain the rise of right-wing politicians in Europe and beyond, as the isolationism produced by mass media causes social bonds and civic engagement to weaken. Thomas Frank wrote about this well, but another American writer/novelist who observed this trend well was David Foster Wallace in his essay 'E Unibus Pluram: Television and U.S. Fiction' and novel 'Infinite Jest.'
This was a long comment, but I wanted to say that your article was well written and insightful for this reason. The political impotence we are seeing is partially a result of the ubiquity of mass media entertainment coupled with a breakdown of social bonds produced by neoliberalism. It also helps to explain why we are unable to address structural problems such as the ecological crisis or the threat of super-weapons. So we turn to undemocratic but entirely necessary measures by institutions who are forced to overreach in order to sustain the economic processes we are reliant upon; thus we have the era of central bank capitalism, where QE programs, once thought of as an extreme and temporary measure, has become the norm of the last decade and probably will be for years to come. That is, unless we can do something about it.
The elites will opt for victory, not compromise, in the domestic Cold War. A group which is winning will not suddenly slam on the brakes and offer concessions. They will enforce their narrative, and make it increasingly costly to oppose it. They will create buy-in from below by making alternatives impossible. Sticks are cheaper and more reliable than carrots.
History is shaped from both above and below. I don't by stories that only include elites. That was debunked in 2016.
We seem to be drawing different conclusions from 2016. The elites stopped the populist Sanders in 2016, and they neutralized Trump, who certainly made his own share of mistakes, then the elites of both parties made sure he lost in 2020. The elites have no reason to share power, and they have increasing control of the narrative and capacity to police discourse and prevent alternative narratives from having an impact. But, the future is unwritten and I can always be wrong. Nonetheless, I expect the elites to increasingly use sticks and try to maintain control that way. I hope they fail but hope is not an expectation, let alone a strategy.
The masses have forced the elites to abandon neoliberalism. I would say that's something.
Well...maybe. In public.
Is the border wall being built? (Elites want cheap labor).
Are we switching from income and wage taxes to property and import tariffs? (Elites prefer dodgeable income taxes to property and import taxes. Income taxes are a domestic and international shell game).
Are elites in the US seriously reconsidering their seven seas, seven continents military footprint, which is a global guard service for multinationals? (The elites, multinationals run all the think tanks, academics, foundations, centers, media etc).
Are elites funding Anti-Globalist Think Tanks? Is there even one anti-globalist think tank of note?
Oddity: The WaPo defines nearly every aspect of the US as embedded with structural and systemic racism. But the WaPo has never said US foreign-military-trade policy embodies white structural racism. The US can spend $6 trillion on Iraqistan, and not Baltimore, and the WaPo goes mute.
Are elites saying, "Great Britain spends about half what the US does on healthcare, and gets about the same results. Let's go the national health insurance"?
True, the Trump tariffs on China have remained in place, but really are mild, and who knows what happens at ground level, in terms of enforcement. And even this maybe be because Xi and the CCP have become unbearable. Even elites are being forced to contemplate less relations with China. But not because of populists.
Was the Wuhan virus story played to the neoliberal- elite tune, or the populist tune?
BTW, I loved this post.