It is virtually impossible to ignore politics but it’s a
strange game to watch voluntarily. Not exactly enjoyable as a spectator sport is it?
A strong undertow in all kinds of political
advocacy seems to be revenge, the revenge of one social class over another. Not
at all dignified as a motive but as a motive it seems to be strong one. Political activists tend to act and speak as if they are not so much interested in reform, but something more akin to revenge against those they perceive as their
enemies. Of course political enemies are portrayed as bad people but
enemies always are. In a similar vein, social justice warriors seem far more concerned
with revenge rather than justice.
Revenge is a core element of politics simply because the enemy
is a core element of politics and only the apolitical seem relatively free of
it. This is not to claim that naked revenge is all we need consider when we attempt
to analyse political behaviour. The issue is more diffuse than that and also
bound up with a sense of grievance.
Yet in political hands grievance goes awry too. For
one thing political grievance in the developed world can be so absurdly contrived. So contrived that we
may as well assume it is not genuine and the grievance is merely the means to an end. That
end seems to be revenge again, not amelioration of the grievance. Perhaps amelioration
without revenge won’t do because the grievance would have to be genuine.
To take a topical example. Climate change activism appears to be the
revenge of an uneasy middle class over the uppity prosperity of all those lower
down the social scale. Sometimes it is revenge on all those who ought to be
lower down the social scale but aren't.
Revenge on their love of consumption, their homes, their
cars, their proletarian tastes, their holidays. Most of all it is revenge on
their children, those brats who could so easily turn out to be smarter than Hugo
and Cordelia.
2 comments:
A telling aspect of this is how the ideological weapon deployed against the proletarian thickoes is popular science. To get convincingly censorious, you really need to have read a couple of books on climate, and be able to re-hash some Monbiot articles. Maybe even do some independent Googling to select some facts. Without an arts or Humanities degree, that sort of thing would not be possible.
Sam - it is telling, although I'm never sure about the intended audience. There is always a preaching to the choir feel about it.
Post a Comment