/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19044697]

The political landscape is radically shifting the ancient divides of Left and Right are giving way to the ultimately more irreconcilable polarity of Local and Global; the now locally grown food of Leftist bourgeoise families will morph into the erstwhile Right "local" nationalism of new jingoist nation-states; the global openness of the Left will be exploited for the sake of erstwhile Right tools of capitalistic accumulation of wealth. As if this weren't enough, the balance of power lies the hands of an elite who control and operate the media and delimit the boundaries of what we all consider to be true and false. New concepts are inorganically forced into language by sinister groups of slavish clients. Now all of this seems to remind me of one famous British author: George Orwell. What is your favorite novel by Orwell? Mine is Nineteen Eighty Four.

[Anonymous No.19044808]

>>19044697
https://aeon.co/essays/can-the-liberal-order-be-transformed-by-global-government?utm_source=pocket-newta

[バイポラーたん !Gh99z/1SzU No.19044978]

>>19044808
Don't know why this thread has no replies, maybe because lit doesn't actually read. Studebaker's assessment of the liberal order is lucid and adroit. Many of his observations resonated with me.

>The radical democrats completely divert attention from the order by making politics about the local level – about you. You become the one responsible for the order, for the flows, and for any instability those flows bring to your community.
Explains why the liberal academic establishment is so eager to politicize all facets of American life
>As economic integration increases, those nation-states lose the ability to meaningfully represent their populations in the order’s institutions. The more economic power the liberal order has, the more vestigial the nation-states become.
So the Dark Enlightenment has developed a brand of reactionary ideology that isn't wholly unjustified. It's true that power continues to flow into the hands of the elites, although this trend may not always continue
>We can continue to embrace the nationalist strategy of keeping the liberal order alive by creating the conditions under which it will die.
This is most probable. People can sense that the forces that govern their lives are far removed even from their national heads of government. So, their sense of nationalist exceptionalism will urge them towards reclaiming a semblance of power. The demarcations of left and right will invert. Studebaker suggests that regression to localism would lead to the resurrection of extremist ideologies such as communism and fascism. Recent events in Europe seem to support his claims. However, he does not remain totally convinced that this would be a bad development, compared to the all-obscuring veil of globalism.

[Anonymous No.19045008]

the people in control are controlling your view.
all you have to do is look away abd see there is more emptyness to people than what is on the news.

orwell in a time of conglomerate publishers and yellow journalism.
should know that he is himself a part of the problem.
and like his main character in the book, catharsis happens when you say fuck the rules. imma do me.
stop doing your job.
stop following them.
just say hey to your neighbor and be minful of emergency exits.
its the best any of us can do.

[Anonymous No.19045078]

>>19044697
>ancient divides of Left and Right
>ancient

>The terms "left" and "right" appeared during the French Revolution of 1789 when members of the National Assembly divided into supporters of the king to the president's right and supporters of the revolution to his left.

[Anonymous No.19046231]

In order to properly understand the contemporary political climate I recommend the work of Antonio Gramsci, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Louis Althusser, Slavoj Zizek, Claude Levi-Strauss, Jacques Lacan, Guy Debord, and Michel Foucault, Georges Sorel, Charles Péguy, and Alexander Kojève

[Anonymous No.19047747]

>>19044697
>irreconcilable polarity of Local and Global
Whatever you mean by that is pure wrong. Locality can exist in some global federal government just as well or better as within a nation. Globalism is a utopian vision though. Nationalism is the strongest political force that exists.

>>19044978
>Don't know why this thread has no replies, maybe because lit doesn't actually read. Studebaker's assessment of the liberal order is lucid and adroit.
Because from the first paragraph it gives it away as totally ideological and wrong and I don't feel like reading beyond that. WWII was a war to export liberalism (and communism) by force, not just "defend it". The liberal institutions I suppose he's referring to that came out of WWII are the IMF, World Bank, etc but they were never about anything more than managing exchange rates and encouraging private investment not building up welfare states or anything like that. The biggest change occurred 50 years ago (not 30) when they went to floating rates and the macroeconomists embraced rational expectations and such instead of Keyensian notions on public spending.