Friday, October 16, 2020

how monolithic are the elites?

When we talk about “the elites” it’s easy to fall into the trap of assuming that we’re talking about a single well-defined entity with a clear-cut agenda and a clear-cut ideological position. But then when we look at what the elites actually do it can be puzzling. For example the elites seem to be obsessed with the vital necessity for population growth but at the same time they seem indifferent to plummeting birth rates. This doesn’t bother the far right since they assume it’s an evil conspiracy theory to replace white people with non-whites. But that’s a bit puzzling as well. The elites want globalism and the most enthusiastic supporters of the globalist project are white people. In fact the most enthusiastic supporters of all the projects being pushed by the globalist elites are white people. Globalism is a white person ideology.

I would like to suggest that maybe the solution to such puzzles is that the elites do not represent a single well-defined entity with a clear-cut agenda and a clear-cut ideological position. Maybe the elites are not monolithic.

Maybe the elites are actually divided into multiple factions all with different agendas, and are united only by their desire to maintain elite power and by their fear of losing that power.

There seem to be members of the elites who subscribe to doomsday environmentalist beliefs (OMG the planet will die unless we reduce world population by 90%!) but they’re just one small faction. The majority view within the elites seems to be that capitalism requires a continually increasing population. There are members of the elites who would like to see the UN become a world government, but there are others who want a global American Empire run entirely from Washington.

There are members of the elites who care about nothing but corporate profits. There are others who are ideologically motivated and want to socially engineer a perfect world. There are members of the elites who are True Believers in the LGBT and feminist agendas while there are others who see those ideologies merely as tools to maintain their power by divide-and-conquer tactics.

There are members of the elites who would like to see totally unfettered free markets, while there are others who favour rule by massive bureaucracies.

Maybe we’re not dealing with a single vast conspiracy but with half a dozen or more elite factions all pursuing their own goals.

Perhaps the elites never have been monolithic. To take the 19th century English elites as an example, they included some pretty nasty types but they also included do-gooders who had genuine concerns for the poor and they included cynics who recognised that it was advisable not to make the lives of the poor too miserable. Churchill is a good example. Winston Churchill was one of the most vicious, cynical, dishonest men who ever walked the Earth but he was a strong believer in social programs to help the poor because he believed that that was the only way to avoid a socialist revolution which would have ended with people like Winston Churchill hanging from lamp-posts.

I think it’s true of our modern elites as well. Some are psychotic monsters. Some are well-intentioned but misguided. Some genuinely believe their social engineering projects will make society better. Some are motivated by a desire to avoid getting lined up against a wall and shot.

The elites are a coalition of interest groups with widely varying agendas. Some of those agendas are pure evil (such as the neocon agenda), but some are paternalistic and in their own way well-meaning. Some of the elites are simply old-fashioned American imperialists. Some are sincere internationalists. Some are motivated by pure greed while others are ideologically motivated. Some are motivated by hate and some by fear. Some are egotists who want to be seen as saviours. Some are completely decadent (such as those pushing the LGBT agenda), some are idealists.

It’s just a theory of course.

Monday, October 12, 2020

maybe the elites are not really in control

One popular theory to explain the Cultural Revolution that has swept the western world in the past six decades or so is that the whole thing was engineered by the ruling class (the elites if you like). It’s a theory that I’ve personally entertained. It’s certainly easy enough to see why the ruling class would have considered things like mass immigration and feminism to be to their advantage (in the case of feminism the motive would have been to weaken the unions). And the Cultural Revolution did serve as a useful means of distracting people from economic issues.

An alternative explanation would be that the Cultural Revolution was largely a spontaneous phenomenon, possibly the inevitable result of things like the decline of Christianity, urbanisation, mass media, etc. The ruling class took the opportunity to profit from the Cultural Revolution but in this scenario they were not responsible for creating it.

There is a third possibility - that the ruling class unleashed the Cultural Revolution but then lost control of it. In this scenario they failed to anticipate that ideologies such as feminism and Gay Liberation were going to attract a sizeable number of highly unstable, and in many cases mentally ill, people. Such people are very difficult to control. The end result was that these ideologies rapidly became much more radical than the ruling class had expected (or hoped). These ideologies developed their own momentum and Woke Capital simply decided that the safest course of action was to go along with them.

The elites may no be smart as they think they are (or as we often think they are). They’re not Bond villains. They’re not criminal geniuses. They’re motivated by greed, fear and a desire for power. They’re often surprisingly mediocre people. You don’t necessarily gain power and wealth by being smart - you just need to be focused, ruthless and have no ethics.

There’s also the question of the motivation of the mainstream political parties. To what extent are politicians (on both the “left” and the “right”) True Believers in Social Justice and Wokeism and to what extent are they merely cynical and cowardly? You have to ask yourself whether the average politician has any actual principles at all. Are they merely whores?

This also applies to journalists, who are definitely whores. Are journalists Woke simply because that’s the best way to keep their jobs?

It is possible that nobody is actually controlling the Cultural Revolution. Maybe nobody ever was controlling it, or maybe certain groups were controlling it but they have hopelessly lost control.