371. The joyous (IV)
Someone on Twitter observed, on seeing some Extinction Rebellion activists block a road, that his housemates were furious and that the government was soon bound to “take action” due to popular discontent. He was wrong, for the Extinction Rebellion—along with BLM, the LGBT campaigns, and antifa—are the government. These are para-state organisations that enforce the permanent bureaucracy’s rule; the parties and the party bureaucracies are merely another interchangeable part within this system—politicians and ministers flit to advisory roles in the civil service, corporate bureaucracies, and NGOs; and all these are the same creature.
This is why the police stand back when statues are pulled down by BLM; they were told to. A Conservative politician might get up and propose a law against mobs pulling down statues; but that was already illegal—it is just that the people who are really in charge did not want to enforce that law, and so it was not enforced. Similarly, the people who are really in charge want thousands of Haitians to cross the border into America and thousands of Africans to cross the English Channel. They want it, so it happens.
This has all been described at length by Curtis Yarvin, and also, in a less sophisticated and directionally incorrect way, by Chomsky (he thinks this uniparty system inclines to the right, but he is wrong; and he is part of the uniparty himself). I like to compare the situation to the German Democratic Republic; nominally, the GDR was ruled by a National Front that was led by the Socialist Unity Party (a forced amalgamation between the Social Democrats and the Communists) but included all manner of other parties. There was an East German Christian Democratic Union; a liberal party, the Liberal Democratic Party of Germany; a nationalist party pitched at former National Socialists, the National-Democratic Party of Germany. There was also representation for “mass organisations”—roughly equivalent to BLM, antifa, and the various LGBT campaigns—so that women’s organisations, unions for journalists, leagues for sportsmen and technologists, and so on were represented in parliament.
Now, I will admit, East Germany was more totalitarian than our system—but only slightly so. Thousands of people really did go through the fiction that the Liberal Democratic Party of Germany had some substantive say in East Germany policy; surely, comrade, it must do—after all an LDPG MP chairs the volkskammer, the people’s parliament. The fact that an LDPG politician was allowed to chair the parliament of East Germany has about as much significance as the fact a Conservative politician can propose a law to ban people pulling down statues—precisely none. Despite being functionally puppets, these parties and mass organisations published books, daily newspapers, and position papers in order to keep the Potemkin system functional.
Importantly, these were not simply staffed by Communists pretending to be liberals or nationalists; and we can tell this because when East Germany began to crack it was the LDPG newspaper that allowed the first critical comments about the regime to be published. No, for the most part the people who joined these organisations were sincere liberals, Christian democrats, or nationalists; they just lied to themselves about the significance of what they were doing—or thought that even if they were powerless and could not articulate their beliefs fully it was at least useful to remind Germans that these other beliefs existed, albeit in an abbreviated form.
They would say, for example, “We are for liberal-democratic values, in the service of building socialism and defending our socialist fatherland!” In exactly the same way, today’s Western parties say, “We are for conservatism, in the service of diversity, equality, and inclusion!” The only difference between our system and the GDR is that we have the pretence of competitive elections, whereas the GDR just had a single list to vote for; as we saw with Trump, if a genuine outsider is accidentally placed in office the whole system—all the parties—turns on him as one.