Apocalypse Later, Motherf*ckers!

From time to time I find myself entertaining a semi-regular sanity check: Is it just me or is the world rapidly going into the toilet?  I don't think it's me but if you take a look at Donald Trump and Elon Musk and the billionaire tech bros with the stupid smug smirks on their ugly pusses, does it look like they have any inkling how fucked up everything is?  My working assumption has been that their stolen wealth provides a nice cushion and buffer from the misery that their thievery has wrought on the planet and most of its inhabitants.  But I never ruled out that having gotten more than enough of theirs, their sociopathology and bad character has blinded them (willfully) to the harm that they do. 

The distinct picture I get from 2 recent books on the topic, Gil Durán's The Nerd Reich: Silicon Valley Fascism and the War on Democracy, and Naomi Klein and Astra Taylor's End Times Fascism (and the Fight for Living World), is that my assessment may be too kind.  The Epstein Class as Klein and Taylor call the tech oligarchs and their courtesans are actively engaging in behavior that they are fully aware is dooming the planet.  Emblematic of their pathology is their cramming of AI, the last gasp of an otherwise flatlined Tech sector down the throats of the rest of us.  AI -- the elusive sci-fi technology that could only be approximated through the resource-consuming Big Compute of Large Language Models-- may well be a bubble, but in the meantime,  the edge lords of Silicon Valley have captured former skeptic Donald Trump whose administration is greenlighting a race to the bottom of the rare earth, fresh water and petroleum barrels, environment be damned, in the construction and operation of data centers across the planet.  Their obscene accumulation of wealth aside, the bald pursuit of riches is itself an inadequate explanation for their behavior.  As both books demonstrate, the class has built around itself a cathedral of rationalizations for the imperiling of the planet and all of its inhabitants who are not members of their rarefied cohort.

While Durán's book focuses on the tech oligarchs and features venture capitalist Peter Thiel and those who drift in his orbit (programmer turned edge-lord philosopher Curtis Yarvin, fellow Tech Bros Marc Andreessen and Balaji Srinivasan and most prominently and breathlessly, Thiel "mini-me" J.D. Vance among them), Klein and Taylor’s account includes also those (like Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee and megachurch pastor John Hagee) intent on hurrying along the apocalyptic teleologies of their Iron Age religions and the ethnonationalists (particularly the Christian variety, such as Christ Church pastor Doug Wilson of Moscow Idaho, along with Trump administration's Jewish Nazi Stephen Miller and such denizens of the internet at Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes and Andrew Tate) motivated by a desire to preserve a supremacy of their own identity that was fabricated by delusions bred of  sociopathology to begin with.  In all cases in contrast to fascisms of the past, the end times fascists have no program for the masses whose support they require in order to sustain their grip on the planet whether through voting in numbers large enough for plausible deniability of fraud or suppression of the opposition, or through mere mute acquiescence if not thrall to their superiority and centrality to what is left  of the future of humanity.  

Empathy in this world view (if it could be felt by any of the cohort) is a weakness.  While the Epstein class thrives without a natural capacity for it, their method for building electoral support for their ultimately trans-governmental project in spite of the harm it does for most people promotes antipathy.  As Klein and Taylor describe the rise of it:

The story they told was a simple one: The struggle you are having paying the bills and finding a decent job? It’s not the fault of the bankers and speculators who crashed the economy, or the politicians who passed the bill on to you. It’s all those migrants, driving down wages and draining public services. This was the true great replacement—the substitution of migrants for bankers—and it worked, achieving the old trick of channeling rage down instead of up once again, by convincing people they needed to “take back control” (as the Brexit slogan went) not from oligarchs but from immigrants. 

The good news for the rest of us, per Klein and Taylor, is that the very flaws of personality and character that obsess the end times fascists with the accumulation of power, wealth and rationalizations for their antisocial proclivities do not lend themselves to excellence at the building of the coalitions that may be required for the sustaining of their dominance:

As the Italian scholar of fascism Alberto Toscano writes, “The pathological personalization of power is at the core of the far Right’s rise.” In practice, this means that end times fascism, unlike its predecessors, is not led by disciplined and buttoned-up generals but rather by vain and messy influencers, a category that now includes egomaniacal and attention-obsessed politicians and CEOs.

Elon Musk-- let loose by Trump to have his way with the Federal government through the auspices of the edgily named DOGE-- is the paragon of the class.  His goal of continuing the cream of humanity's story on Mars depends on terraforming a dead, poisoned and poisonous planet, to give the inheritors a landing place after spending earth.  What makes the asshole think he can terraform Mars when we don't have a clue how to terraform Earth, a much saner and more immediately beneficial project? 

As Durán reminds us, in spite of their high regard for their own genius and fundamentalist belief in their transcendant mission for themselves in whatever form they take, they are still humans, still subject to the laws and strictures of earthly human society.  In spite of their criminal ambitions, Trump designs of de-regulation aside, there are existing ways we have at our disposal to put on the brakes.  Although it is inconceivable that if we are successful in putting a stop to their momentum there will not be persistent revivals of their goals. As Durán writes: 

To prevent this, we need investigations, hearings, prosecutions, and likely some kind of truth and reconciliation commission. We need a full postmortem of our brush with national death, as well as prison sentences and severe financial penalties for those who participated in, or profited from, the defiling of our government. 

Is it possible that the vast bulk of humanity will prevail? Klein and Taylor remind us that the Trump administration's seemingly unstoppable "mandate" for de-immigration rapidly lost support as soon as the face of it became apparent-- ICE goons in masks battering down doors to remove parents from their sobbing children and Americans being shot in the face and back by faceless invaders sent by their government.  Across the country, the neighbors of ICE's victims, far from applauding the fascist mission of their government naturally banded together in defense of ICE's targets.   Furthermore, movements sprang up spontaneously in opposition whenever data centers mysteriously proliferated across the country with little public discussion.  Americans by and large understand that the massive consumption of resources and attendant outpouring of toxic externalities are being forced upon us in spite of their intention to make us obsolete, and they are not taking it lying down.  The cry is spreading across the globe, evidenced by Italians successful banding together to force Jeff Bezos to move his invasive wedding celebration elsewhere 

The point ... is to show that the Hobbesian cliché that we will inevitably turn on one another in emergencies is just one of the many stories that people have made up. And as we’ve seen again and again, from the neighbors lending a hand in storm-ravaged North Carolina to the legions of volunteers cleaning Valencia’s streets after the floods, there are plenty of people whose actions expose that story as a cynical lie.

More or Less is a Choice

Digging through correspondence with a recalcitrant Green, I have found drafts of emails never sent that nevertheless seem as close I ever get to expressing my feelings about third party voting in general elections.  The subject is the exact nature of what sucks about Democrats, and the reason they should be voted for in general elections anyway (and implicitly, a case for participating in Democratic primaries).

%%%%%

In my view, the GOP fundamentally suck.  They are malformed humans—they are broken in very similar ways which is why they are now acting as one in spite of their fetish about the individual.   The demoncraps in question—the culprits—an actual pointable toable finite collection of miscreants have deep character flaws.  So it’s deficient humans on the GOP side “versus” “democrats” of poor character.  In the world they both agree on—the neoliberal hellscape of individual responsibility, entitlement on the GOP side, meritocracy on the dem side, “free” market supremacy—the GOP are the alphas.  They have the courage of their convictions.  They are true believers.   The dems are betas.  They see the GOP’s success since Nixon and they want it for themselves.  They were not born malformed so their GOP-Light version is experienced by them as a cool “smart”-fad.  A fad of smartness because it cops from the Alpha playbook.  The notion they are pushing is, Hey the GOP may be onto something but they’re the GOP.  We’re now onto the same thing but we are the Democrats!  Don’t drink Coke!  Drink Pepsi!  And the novelty of it and their ersatz entitlement born of their merit imbuing their zeal with an irresistible (in the moment) confidence took over the party.  And because they’re meritocrats and “liberals” (though be careful not to say that out loud because daddy Bush turned it into a dirty word) it gives their brand of neoliberal a hep, savvy in the moment made for TV “sex” appeal (but not more than the FCC will allow).  

In short I think in reality these character flawed people had a bad idea that created a fad that had actual consequences in the world.  And one of those consequences is that people started to hate them.  Yet they never learned--- the fiction that they were offering a cool, improved brand of the juice that the GOP had in their bones that people would choose because it was cool and improved—I mean everyone who is everyone was on board with it.  Every elite person who looks down through their ray bans at the tacky GOP version, was a Democrat now.  Corporate C-Suites, Hollywood boardrooms, Cultural figures, Journalists.  The small thin "mainstream" that employs us, that we are allowed to see on tv, was democrat.   Meanwhile, the GOP became masters of the conversation that was only allowed on Fox pointing out the obvious.  Do you want to schedule an intercourse session with the cheap plastic  perfectly made and more expensive ersatz version that the democrats are offering, or do you want to fuck the real thing?  The people want to fuck the real thing.  The democrats are fucking annoying.  But to get back to my point, the people responsible for this, who are stuck in 1992, trying to put on their ray bans and play sax on Arsenio as though anyone is still interested in that—they are aging out.  Many of them will be pushed out by attrition.  The young ambitious meritocrats trying to take over the party will be outnumbered by people whose eyes have opened.  I am sort of afraid that we’re too late in a way to fix things the easy way. I think I’m grieving a bit for the dream of socialism by consensus, but Zohran and the new genuine breed of Dems do give some hope that the contrast between the lizard people of the GOP and the actual small d democrats is going to cause seismic cognitive dissonance.  

I’ve gone a little out of scope with my reply—I keep wanting to say that my feelings about the political system we have are 1) it’s got to go; 2) until the momentum for that builds, we are stuck with a winner take all duopoly and one of those 2 parties is less harmful than the other—it even sometimes does the right thing though we like to focus on all the wrong that it does.  (the wrong I think is mostly attributable to the finite group of bourgeois professional managerial Beta absconders with character flaws-- stuck in their behavior loop a la Ezra Klein who thinks we need to run anti-choice candidates-- who we must work to see relegated to the dustbin of history) 3) Given the winner take all nature of elections, it matters very much who the winners are.  4)  3rd parties are not winners.  They are where votes go to die.

Only people who vote in elections materially impact the outcome.  Most people who vote in general elections understand the choice: More fascism or Less fascism.  Those are the people it is the job of the Less Fascist party to win over. To the extent that not enough people who understood the choice voted for More Fascism over Less Fascism, that is on the Less Fascist party/candidate. This should not be controversial.

There is another group of general election voters however.   These are voters who do not understand the choice.  They believe the choice is between voting that makes you feel bad and voting that makes you feel good.  If voting for either More Fascism or Less Fascism does not make them feel good enough, they have to find someone else to vote for.  Far too often these are people who self-identify as ideologues of the left or right.  It's the ones on the left that I have the most issue with, even if their assorted blocs turn out to be too small to impact the outcome of the election.  These are leftists who are generally reacting to punish or teach the Less Fascist actual choice a lesson-- their desire to oppose Less Fascism is why they vote at all.  The really twisted ones will vote for More Fascism to spite Less Fascism.  But the bulk are ballot spoilers who vote merely to register their unhappiness with the Less Fascist choice.  In effect, when the Less Fascist candidate/party loses, these voters share in the victory of the More Fascist party.  And the beauty of their victory is that while they would love to take credit for the Least Fascist party's loss, they do not feel they have to own the More Fascist victory.  No wonder they vote like they do.  When they win they feel wonderful about themselves.  And even though their victory is the equivalent of More Fascism, they can feel themselves absolved from voting for More Fascism.  

The feel good nature of their vote will persist, even in the face of More Fascism due to this neat trick.  It's why I obsess about them so much.  Why do most voters understand the choice, but the often otherwise very intelligent self-pleasuring ideologues do not?  What are they missing?  For one thing they are missing that the general election is not and can never be the sum of dissident politics.  The general election is one day, a day on which only 2 choices-- two flavors of fascism: more or less-- are on the ballot.  It's too late to do anything about the choice, and most of these folks missed their chance in the primary anyway, preferring to reserve their Unlike for the general election.  Their duty if they are serious about anti fascism is to do merely the bare minimum that is their part in forestalling More Fascism.  They are shirkers because shirking pleasures them.  Moreover they have a self-righteous disdain for voters who understand the choice and behave responsibly, regardless of the lack of pleasure in that task.  This is why I find the choice-missers so odious.

Not to put too fine a point

Toward the end of a long piece for Spectre Magazine in which socialist writer DK Renton carefully builds a history-based counter-argument to the notion that Trump's second administration is exhibiting signs of fascism, he writes:

Trump isn’t a fascist yet, his party isn’t in its core politics, his voters are largely the Republicans of 2012 and 2008, rather than an army committed to certain outcomes in advance. But the distance between him and fascism has narrowed to such a fine point that it would take very little to cross it. 

As some boob on the internet with no reputation to protect, I have the luxury of not concerning myself with strict formalities.  From my perspective Donald Trump is eagerly embracing the forbidden mantels of fascism and authoritarianism that I'm surprised as someone closer to his age than I'd like to admit (he could be my oldest brother's oldest brother) he did not internalize an antipathy to in the wake of Hitler's defeat in World War II.  Then again, what I am witnessing seems to me to be the apotheosis of the easy sociopathy exhibited so freely by members of his class in the 1960's of my youth. 

I try to get inside his head to understand, but there's no room in there.  The space is completely occupied with "Me".  But in their unfettered lack of self-awareness, he and his loutish accomplices remind me very much of a cross between  a certain type of suburban New Jersey blue blood in whose homes my father, a self-employed poorly compensated floor scraper would often ply his trade and the more successful than he nouveau riche contractors he would frequently work with.  Somehow I experienced both, and though my father never talked about it, my invisibility when he would bring me and my twin brother thirteen, preschoolers, along on rare jobs, felt like a blindness on the part of the blue blooded dames who would casually toss about racism and contempt for the poor, careless of my father's feelings and without filter as though my brother and I in our food-stained little outgrown hand-me-down shirts and shorts with our impressionable little brains weren't there.  The loud and crass contractors who simply ignored us took for granted that my father would have no objection to their racist complaining and liberal sprinkling of the n-word in casual conversation on the job when thanks to their discrimination no black people were anywhere around.  In church we learned and sang that Jesus loved the little children of all colors, but he was exceptional.  Most adults it seemed, especially the comfortable ones -- maybe because change was so much in the air in those days -- were preoccupied with their hatred and satisfied with white society's stinginess toward those who were fighting for fairness with their slice of the pie.  Rich people assume the non-rich hate them because they envy them.  In my case, the hatred comes from my formative experience of them.  Among the worst, most contemptible people I've ever met, and I'm convinced Donald Trump and his posse are the same.  These are the tax shirkers and wealth hoarders and planet rapers who complain about the entitlement of the poor. And Trump and his team are emboldened to be doing something about it.

In their recent article on the subject of End Times Fascism in the Guardian, Naomi Klein and Astra Taylor make a distinction between the fascism of 100 years ago, focussed as it was on creating an earthly utopia from the ashes of the world it sought to destroy, and today's kind of illiberal go for broke state sponsored capitalism, utterly and intentionally conscious of the ravages it is wreaking on what's left of the planet it's been destroying with an escape plan reserved strictly for the traitorous oligarchs who are carrying it out.  A small but powerful group using the fragments of state power dutifully servile to it in the person of amoral autocrats such as Trump, Israel's Netanyahu, Hungary's Orbán, India's Modi, etc., in order to shut every one else out.  It's the culmination of a project described in recent works like Richard Seymour's Disaster Nationalism, Douglas Rushkoff's Survival of the Richest and Yanis Varoufakis' Techno-Feudalism.

There are definitions and lists of characteristics of fascism, but I am finding Google's AI list among the most succinct and useful:

Extreme Nationalism: Fascism emphasizes the nation's importance and often includes a strong sense of national pride and a belief in the superiority of the nation. 

Militarism: Fascist regimes often prioritize military strength and glorify war, viewing it as a way to achieve national greatness. 

Cult of Personality: Fascist leaders are often portrayed as charismatic and infallible figures, and their followers are encouraged to worship them. 

Suppression of Dissent:  Dissent and opposition are harshly suppressed, often through violence and intimidation. 

Social Hierarchy: Fascism often features a belief in a natural social hierarchy, with some groups seen as superior to others. 

Control of the Economy: Fascist regimes often exert significant control over the economy, sometimes through state ownership or regulation. 

Racism and Xenophobia:  Many fascist movements have embraced racism and xenophobia, targeting minority groups and promoting national purity. 

Use of Propaganda:  Fascist regimes often use propaganda to manipulate public opinion and create a sense of national unity. 

Rejection of Democracy:  Fascism is typically opposed to democracy and free elections, viewing them as weak and ineffective. 

 The rest I feel emboldened to say is quibbling.