The logic of regression

I've thought a lot of the last 6 years or so as a regressive historical period, largely because of the romanticism of force. But the logic of that regression is becoming clear to me, today, as I thought about it.

The last 6 years or so have been about getting tough on problems to solve them. Most of the people doing so have not really thought about whether that would work or not. They just kind of carry that logic around with them, whether it accomplishes their goals or not, because it's an implicit idea of how to deal with people and tough problems, right or wrong.

And the last 6 years has been political groups and even a lot of individuals getting tough on problems and on one another to solve them. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen, so to speak. Those who can't handle the pressure shouldn't be dealing with it, so this foolish little logic goes. So we're going to create more pressure than any normal human being would be able to handle until we get our way.

It's a nice little philosophy of progress, isn't it? And it's almost indistinguishable from the Nazis or the Communists, except based upon how far one will go to get ones' way, right or wrong. The Nazis and the Communists were willing to engage in mass murder, political imprisonment, imperialism and a whole load of messy means of imposing themselves on the world. Today's democratic activists and parties wouldn't quite so far. We should thank them for that, I suppose.

It's a brilliant logic to defend bullying one's way through whatever problem one encounters. You pressure until you get your way, and if anyone complains that what you're engaged in is bullying and not genuine democratic debate and engagement, you dismiss it as not being able to handle the pressure. It's brilliant, really, because it puts everyone on the defensive for why they're not with you in the heroic struggle, and putting everyone on the defensive means that you never have to deal with challenges to your cause, your logic, or your thinking about the matter.

For whatever reason, what autocracies and democracies both have in common is a love for the tough guy. The strongman. The leader with the iron fist. It implies protection from danger, they think. Even though the empirical reality is clearly made more dangerous and scary by tougher tactics, when they are used as a rule rather than as little as possible.

It's this instinctual attraction we have to tough over thoughtful that is constantly suckering our stupid little species, much of the time.

We get better at it. That is the real advantage of liberal democratic government over other forms of government. Even when liberal democratic governments and cultures are screwing up, there is a process of self-criticism and education which helps us learn from our mistakes, even if it is often far too late to take back the harm caused. And even if we are constantly making excuses for persistently turning to tough when we need to be more thoughtful, generally, especially when we must use force.

And that is how a regressive period happens, I think. People get scared. They demand tough action. And tough action is taken, whether it solves problems or not. And the society has to live, once again and in a tragic little cycle, through the consequences of their demands for touch action.

It's so sad. And it's been sadder living through this particular regressive period than it has to read about it in history books. Because past periods are over and done with. And this one has been present and so completely unnecessary, productive of very little (at least the tough responses have been productive of very little) and destructive of far too much. Tough advocates will claim now and forever that they are responsible for all the good that has happened during this period and during periods past, because they claim credit for virtually everything good that happens while they were forcing their way through a problem, whether they deserve credit or not.

And as long as people trade their liberty for the protection of their toughmen and toughwomen - liberal, conservative or otherwise - they always will. As people become less afraid and less willing to give up their liberty so easily, and as toughguy approaches to so many of even and especially our most difficult problems of war and peace and security and danger fail, we will, hopefully, look elsewhere for solutions.

But for now, we just look for diffferent tough guys. Because it's never occured to us that, perhaps, looking to tough rather than thoughtful with the use of force is the reason and nature of many of our problems in the first place.

Love,
Ben