|
A Revolutionary Psychology
October 29, 2007 Imagine
it. The State is on the
verge of total collapse. Seeing
little difference between the federal government and a Mafia gang, the
people are increasingly refusing to pay taxes to the corrupt government.
Elections see dramatically lower turnout over the years as
politicians no longer command power or respect within the community.
Cops and soldiers increasingly refuse to obey orders.
Crooked, politically connected corporations pine for their
government dime, but the Fed and its inflation-breeding,
counterfeiting ways are no more (boo-hoo).
Meanwhile, people go about their business more or less as they
did before; only now, private defense agencies, community councils and
other means of organization are rapidly developing.
It's an uncertain time, but as people increasingly take
responsibility for themselves and their own, a freer world is emerging.
Sounds good, no? Well,
forget it! No,
people are not ready.
The values and psychology upon which an anarchist culture would
depend simply don't yet exist on a large enough scale.
We have few allies. It
seems people care little about our carefully constructed intellectual
theories no, they prefer bread and circuses. I'm
sure our friends at the Mises Institute
can provide a fascinating economic explanation for this, but it will
sway nobody. Mass rallies,
strikes, and demonstrations will only preach to the converted.
Heated sermons about "I
hate the State rah rah rah
" are not likely to work, either.
Anarchism is a risky proposition given the world's authoritarian
history, and people naturally don't want to take risks that they think
won't pay off. You
say you want a revolution? The
revolution will not be
televised. It will not
be glamorous. It will not
be a sudden overthrow of world governments.
It will not be a
violent, climactic struggle against the Dark Side of the Force.
Instead, it will be a quieter revolution of the mind. The
biggest hurdle to such a transformation is the statist psychology and
"sense of life" shoved down our throats from an early age.
It underlies all the wars, programs, ideologies, and institutions
that anarchists oppose. It
is, in short, a negative, malevolent view of the world and of human
nature. What distinguishes
this psychology? Fear,
envy, passivity, irrational thinking, collectivism, moral relativism,
unearned guilt, learned helplessness, and a sense of humanity as
fundamentally bad . . . these are our true enemies. Fear
and envy are great weapons against people's spirits. The Passivity
further weakens us. It keeps
you simmering in silence as petty bullies, ignorant bigots, bosses on a
power trip, and crooked politicians get away with crap they shouldn't
get away with. It lets
people evade responsibility for themselves, throw that burden on others,
and blame others for their own failings (welfare and lawsuits against
McDonalds come to mind here). It
makes students stay nervously silent when asked for their opinions in
class. It makes people
stumble in confusion when there's nobody watching them and telling them
what to do. Passivity is
really a more extreme form of laziness; waiting for other people to take
care of things, to ask the right questions, to take action.
And there are plenty of people who are more than happy to grab
the ball while you're lounging on the bench. Meanwhile,
irrational thinking leaves our minds cloudy, less able to think things
through and more willing to accept B.S. just so we can feel
better or feel like our fears,
prejudices, and actions are justifiable.
Listen to frantic voices on the radio scream about human beings,
no different than you and I, who are part of an "Axis of Evil"
or "steal our jobs" or "invade our borders" or
otherwise threaten us. Look
on as people justify absurd practices, policies and government programs
through emotional appeals not actual facts, reason, or principle.
And watch as people buy it hook, line, and sinker!
All because thinking
for two minutes is a painful experience beyond mention . . . . Collectivism
is a threat too. It's hard
for anyone to argue for their own life, their own liberty and their own
happiness when they lack a firm concept of self to begin with.
How often do you hear that we must surrender individual interests
to the "greater good" whatever that
means? Have you ever noticed
a sort of twisted team mentality when it comes to nation-states or petty
politics? Democrats versus
Republicans, Moral
relativism eliminates our ability to distinguish right from wrong.
Witness people who say "Well,
right and wrong are subjective!", "We're
limited in our perception, you can never really say what's what!",
"We should never judge others!"
Then watch them drown their consciences in cheap beer and American
Idol when bullies and tyrants abuse their rights and freedoms. Finally,
unearned guilt leads us to feel like we are fundamentally bad, which
leads to self pity, which in turn makes us willing to accept false
saviors a church that says you are going to Hell if you don't please
an invisible man, a self-help guru or psychic hawking B.S., the latest
"miracle" product or diet, or even an up-and-coming political candidate
promising to "heal" us. Guilt,
like racism or other absurd belief, has to be actively taught from
childbirth, preying on people's insecurities.
People are made to feel this way regardless of anything they have
actually done, and in the end they stifle that part of them that says
they are capable, competent beings who don't need a savior. You're
wondering, why do I blather on about this?
What does any of this have to do with anarchism? Your
mind is really all you have to defend yourself from being illegitimately
controlled, dominated, and taken advantage of.
Some of the above characteristics are just part of being an
imperfect human; we all have justifiable fears and uncertainties and
sometimes we allow ourselves to fall into irrational thinking.
Others have to be actively taught, social reinforcement keeps
them in place and can inflame them to monstrous levels.
As the years pass, you reach a point where you end up tearing
your own self down, and nobody has to do it for you not the schools,
not your family, not society, not the ad men, not the Pentagon.
In the end, this sinister process weakens your mind and spirit,
it makes you less able to stand up to those who wish to dominate, hurt
and control you. This
is the kind of psychology that dominates today one fit for losers,
victims, and slaves. You
say you want a revolution? It's
time for a new psychology to motivate a freer and possibly more humane
society one fit for the 21st Century and beyond.
This is
where the revolution lays. This
new psychology would be centered on a greater respect for life,
autonomy, independence, and self-determination controlling your own
life and your own destiny. It
would also emphasize the things needed to maintain itself direct
action, a healthy suspicion of authority, avoiding unnecessary debt
(which diverts your energies from more essential things), rejecting
needless violence, and uncompromising ethical values.
It would go hand in hand with the kind of institutions that would
arise in a freer society these would reject the idea that coercive
force and domination are proper ways to achieve organization or social
change. This would go
hand-in-hand with a freedom-culture the likes of which we've only seen
in the early days of This
new psychology would reject the current "sense of life" that
dwells in the muck and mediocrity of the world, holding that as the
absolute. It would evoke a
world where people are not in chains (psychological or otherwise), where
they can and must take control of their lives, own their minds, and
become astonishingly moral and competent beings at their best.
I don't mean something naοve like "humanity
is fundamentally good" or evil like "humanity
is basically bad" but rather, "humanity
can and should do better!" Let
me ask you: How often have
you heard such affirming things from the media, the State, religion, and
the B.S. ideologies out there? I
can probably guess the answer as I'm writing this. How
do you encourage this kind of
revolutionary psychology? Picture,
if you will, planting a little seed of doubt in people's minds.
As it sprouts, it will drive people to question the crap they've
been taught, it will cajole them to think that something just isn't
quite right . . . . A person's inner psychology is deeply ingrained in
them, and it is extremely difficult to change once it's solidified.
This is true even if you see that person could be sympathetic to
the anarchist alternative. It's
going to take direct interaction with people, upholding values and
living with integrity education by example, not standing on a
soapbox 24/7. A few
strategic comments, deeds, or cleverly written words, here or there,
will do more to turn heads and slap them into consciousness. Buy
a copy of Murray Rothbard's The
Case Against the Fed for your nephew who aspires to be an
economics major. Calmly
explain to your co-workers, who support Hillary or Rudy, how statist
programs or laws can backfire and grease someone's
palms in the end no matter how compassionate they may seem on the
surface. When your boyfriend argues for the war and against abortion
rights (or vice versa), remind him of the inconsistency.
When your mother says that people are "nuts" and need
to be "saved," or controlled, tell her that it's the criminals
and evil people who need it, not the rest of us.
When you hear complaints about stupid/crazy people, suggest
to them that stupidity is a learned behavior, courtesy of the schools. You
can't make people change, you can't convert them into anarchists or
freethinkers. They'll have
to do that themselves, of their own volition.
Planting the seed of doubt is just the beginning. They'll
find it repulsive at first. They'll
be angry. They'll try to
ignore it. They're used to
wallowing in negative statist psychology after all, they've invested
much energy in it, and it gets to a comfy rut after a while.
But with the proper prodding, they may not be able to stop
thinking about it once they start. But
even planting that seed is a small victory against the evil, amoral,
destructive State such victories don't come often. I too migrated to anarchism after a long, drawn-out process of doubt and hesitation, as the world around me failed to live up to the illusions I had built for myself as a statist. All I need was someone to slap me (thank you Joshua!). Marcel Votlucka is a writer and freelance journalist from Queens, NY. He is a graduate of Stony Brook University, and is a frequent contributor to the Stony Brook Press and the Stony Brook Independent. He is currently finishing work a novella, Neverland: Voices From the Muslim Holocaust. |