What if the ruling class finally realized that this civilization is over?

The collapse of the Euro-Atlantic system into fascism and beyond

Putler. One could not find a more apt example for psychological projection. Photo by Hanna Balan on Unsplash

Politics is an integral part — if not at the epicenter — of our predicament. The crisis faced by this civilization is multifaceted, ranging from the depletion of cheap easy-to-get resources to ecological collapse and climate change — all eventually due to overshoot. While the fact that this civilization is wholly unsustainable starts to gain traction, there is still a great deal of denial when it comes to the heartfelt acceptance of the decline which logically follows… Not to mention admitting the fact that collapse is already well-underway for decades now. But what if our elites in the West, still clinging to the idea of world dominance and limitless power, would suddenly realize that this iteration of a world spanning civilization has indeed arrived to its terminal phase? Would they risk nuclear war to destroy whatever is left of the civilized world? Or, more surprisingly perhaps, is there something completely different in the making?

Thank you for reading The Honest Sorcerer, and special thanks to those who already support my work; without you this site could not exist. If you are new here and would like to see more in depth analysis of our predicament, please subscribe for free, or perhaps consider a paid subscription. You can also support my work by virtually inviting me for a coffee, or sharing this article with a friend. Thank you in advance!

There is a lot to unpack here, so let’s start with the basics by stating that politics is a function of available surplus energy and resources. No surplus, no accumulation of wealth, no power struggles or trampling on freedoms. The more surplus a society can muster, the more intricate and complicated politics becomes. This is why you won’t find political parties and parliamentary elections among hunter gatherers. Similarly, you could find no despots and autocrats there either: foragers are famously independent and prize their freedom more than their own lives. This is what anthropologist David Graeber and archaeologist David Wengrow called in their book, The Dawn of Everything, the three primordial freedoms: the freedom to move, the freedom to disobey, and the freedom to create or transform social relationships. Needless to say, none of this is given in our present day societies. (Why, imagine yourself moving into another country without being stopped, disobey your boss whenever the task is not to your liking, or start a radically new form of governance in your home town. Good luck with any of that.)

As soon as wealth became accumulable — in the form of grain, land, gold etc. — despots were quick to claim ownership of it all, and were even quicker to get rid of those who dared to disagree. In ancient and medieval societies, where the availability of human labor put a hard cap on the amount of resources which could be accumulated, social hierarchies were rather flat and more rigid than nowadays. One big boss, a few lesser bosses with soldiers, and a million peasants. Kingdoms and empires were in essence large protection rackets, where the big boss and his lackeys generously refrained from killing you and defended your village from attacks by the neighboring big boss; as long as you payed your dues.

Fast forward a millennia into modernity, and we see extreme amounts of surplus being accumulated by the wealthy few, with still plenty left for the average citizen. Even the poorest among us in western societies enjoy more comforts than the noble class did two centuries ago. However, this surplus did not only allowed for a broad middle class to appear, but nation states with parliamentary democracies, large multinational companies and international organizations with their huge apparatuses. With such an immense amount of wealth sloshing around, and with so little human labor needed to feed the entire population, a historically unprecedented number of interest groups, governmental and non-governmental organizations, agencies etc. are now vying for power, making politics more complex than ever in human history. It is safe to say that we are at an absolute pinnacle of human social complexity thanks to the industrial revolution fueled by fossil hydrocarbons.

With growth came growing inequality, though. As fossil energy got increasingly harder to get after peak US conventional oil in the 1970’s, almost all economic growth was channeled to big corporations and their shareholders, resulting in decades of stagnation for the 90% of the population. Thanks to the immense wealth generated by financialization of the economy for the top 10% and an unprecedented rise in corporate profits, social complexity kept rising — but only at the upper echelons. The system became dangerously top heavy, hallmarked by an overproduction of elites. As wealth and power kept accumulating at the top, the middle class got slowly eviscerated and the bottom 90% of society began to lose its political power. (Remember, power is always relative: it doesn’t matter if you live a more convenient life than a lord did centuries ago, if your elected officials tend to listen to those who funded their campaigns. Nothing buys you more power than money.) Large parties have thus long stopped catering for the needs of their constituents, except for campaign seasons when everything is promised, only to be forgotten a few months later. And while there were temporary reversals in this trend for short periods of time, the direction of travel was clear: an ever growing wealth inequality eventually resulting in the rule of the rich, aka oligarchy.

Is it any wonder then that the disempowered started to look elsewhere for support? The very appearance of the word “populist” should ring an alarm bell or two here. According to Cas Mudde, author of Populism: A Very Short Introduction, populism is the idea that society is separated into two groups at odds with one another — “the pure people” and “the corrupt elite.” Note the great deal of contempt in this definition: how measurable, objective social phenomena (growing wealth inequality, a rise in the number of corruption scandals, the rise of political dynasties and falling satisfaction with the work of our leaders) are treated as an “idea” — presumably living in one’s head as opposed to being an accurate description of reality. The problem here is not “populism” itself, but the repeated betrayal of voters, and the supposed outsiders to the political scene who are taking advantage of the misery of the disempowered… Only to forget everything they said a few month later, and represent nothing but a continuation of the agenda; further widening the gap between rich and poor, while blaming the latter for their misfortune.

Then what about right-wing parties, often called (or closely associated with) “fascism” in mainstream media? Although there is no single exact definition of the term, one can easily put together one based on the many explanations available online. In essence, fascism is a “populist political ideology, movement, or regime” that is characterized by:

• ultra-nationalism, glorifying the nation (and often race) — raising it above the individual, minorities and other nations

• a belief in a natural social hierarchy, rejecting egalitarianism and thereby justifying inequality, paternalism and crimes against humanity

• strict economic and social control paired with a forcible suppression of opposition, and getting rid of undesired elements of society in large numbers

• centralized autocratic government, where all power is held by a dictatorial, oppressive or arrogantly overbearing leader presiding over an economic system, where companies and employees work together under national unity

• militarism, expressing a desire to obtain/maintain a strong military capability and to use it aggressively to expand national interests and values

As you can see from the list above, fascism covers a spectrum of political views, and is more like a scale than a strict category. Apart from the truly fascist, hard-right parties you would be thus hard pressed to identify all of these traits in the so called “far-right”. (Except for one country where all of these aspects are on full display, with the opposition and the church being banned, elections postponed indefinitely, and minorities being constantly harassed for more than a decade now.) The EU and America is a different story though. While their 20th century history was hallmarked by strong, charismatic leaders both left and right, the situation has been completely turned on its head by now. Old-school hard-right ideologies have slowly morphed into corporatocracy, resulting in a perverted form of fascism (if we can still call it that). Formerly democratic countries have turned into something completely different, irrespective of which party was (or still is) in power. It is the system which has changed, not the political parties. Nobody voted to have such a political system, yet we got one.

Instead of being run by an autocrat the Euro-Atlantic political-economic system is now completely governed by business corporations and corporate interests. Lobby groups, billionaire financiers and former elites (often coming from the old aristocracy) are hiding behind weak, unpopular, incompetent leaders, who sometimes reluctantly, but mostly obediently, enact laws and policies articulated by think tanks and advocacy groups — lavishly funded by corporations and headed by their loyalists. Elections in this system are for show purposes only, providing a thin veil of plausible deniability, while delivering a steady stream of scapegoats left holding the bag for the many failed policies pushed by these elites.

Everyone else who poses a real threat to this well established system receives a label on his/her forehead and gets disqualified from running for office. And if the candidate does get into office despite media smear campaigns, lawfare and assassination attempts, a sea of bureaucrats, advisors, representatives, senators and other unelected members of the government make absolutely sure that nothing substantial changes and the agenda continues, no matter what. Failed peace talks, the attack on strategic nuclear bombers and now the bombing of Iran were no accidents; these actions were part of the policy all along. (Here, just take a look at this policy paper published in 2009 by one of those lavishly funded think tanks and behold how it has been implemented step-by-step, irrespective of who occupies the White House. I highly recommend familiarizing yourself with the policy being enacted as we speak, before reading any newspaper headlines on the origins of this conflict. Hint: the missile exchange has nothing to do with nuclear weapons development.)

As opposed to being ultra-nationalist, this twisted ideology embraced by the West promotes supranationalism, where nation-states voluntarily delegate some of their authority and sovereignty to a supranational organization, often for shared economic, political, or military goals. These organizations often tout big ideas, such as freedom and liberty, while doing everything in their power to crush these very ideas, often by employing Orwellian logic to provide justification for their actions. (Funding a brutal war from a peace fund is but one of the many great examples.) Exceptionalism and superiority is thus not interpreted on a national, but on an ideological level: “Our way of life, our values, our economic model is fundamentally better than yours. And if it takes us to bomb your country to convince you, then so be it.”

A belief in a natural social hierarchy, based on “merit” serves as a strong ideological foundation to both 20th century fascism and to its perverted, modern, corporate form. It serves as a justification for obscene (and still growing) levels of inequality; “multi-billionaires are just that more productive.” While in fact much of their wealth and status is inherited, or obtained through government contracts, forming monopolies and cartels, insider trading or simply by attending the same elite schools as their fellow billionaires did. There is no social mobility to speak of in this system, unless you think downward mobility. Outsiders to the elite are never allowed to even come close to their inner circles. The system has been already solidified and became hermetically sealed to outside influence.

Just like its classical form, corporate fascism exercises strict economic and social control. Narratives, or the stories people believe in, are shaped by mainstream media outlets owned by corporations and oligarchs, while social media sites are controlled by algorithms and AI to suppress dissent. Just like it’s older cousin corporate fascism is trending towards ever more brutal forms of getting rid of unwanted elements in society. While kicking people off from social security or making healthcare unaffordable for “less productive” members of society are one of the more subtler ways, the mass-deportation of “illegals” and those who disapprove of the government’s foreign policy is a marked shift towards more radical methods. And while there might be plenty of criminals among the deported, there are many more complying with all the rules and who are now removed without proof or evidence of wrongdoing. Human rights? Due process? Free speech? The right to organize? You can now slowly forget about those. This is how societies slide into fascism, not by electing the wrong leader, but by the political system making ever more brutal oppression possible. Again, this was already decades in the making, and what we see now is just an acceleration of events.

Last but not least, there is militarism, enriching the military-industrial-complex, justified by a constant threat of war. Fascists — novelist and philosopher Umberto Eco observes — have an “Armageddon complex,” a fixation on annihilating enemies in a grand final battle. They tend to depict themselves as the victim threatened by outside powers, while being the aggressors themselves. This time the expansion of corporate interests and values take precedence over national interests, and often take place against the will of the governed. Ironically, it never occurs to any of the corporatists that stoking conflict all around the world to regime-change countries, engaging in genocide and encroaching on other nations might be the root cause. Here, too, it’s not the “elected” leader who is hurtling its country towards war, but the system unable to rein in its desire for destruction and profit.

Corporate fascism is not the end state, though, and Armageddon is not inescapable. As I mentioned earlier, politics is a function of available surplus energy and resources. As this surplus wanes (as a result of depletion and ever worsening energy returns on investment), so will previous growth in social complexity be thrown into reverse. As economies continue to weaken, supranational organizations will become harder and harder to maintain, even as countries pledge to contribute an ever growing percentage of their income to support them. As food inflation (aka the rising cost of the primary energy source of society) keeps eating into the discretionary budget of the average consumer, so will demand for goods and services decline. With less goods and services sold, however, corporations will be hard pressed to maintain their lavish funding for politicians and either go bankrupt or will be forced to retreat. The evolution of fascism into it’s twisted form, corporatocracy, is a one-way street, turning out to be a dead end.

Trouble is brewing on all fronts: economic, the stock and bond markets, trade, peak shale oil, dedollarization — the list goes on. Soon, there will be more issues than the system could handle, and some of the problems will eventually get out of control. Note, that none of the items on the list can be stabilized; that would require the discovery of another Earth-like planet an hour of flight away. Out of cheap viable resources and means to force other nations to give up theirs, the system is literally living through its end-days. And while a crisis might take an awful long time to finally arrive, when it’s here it can sweep through the system way faster than you could imagine. The population feels it, too: a low-intensity, permanent civil war is already brewing in the background. Debating whether it is sponsored or spontaneous is close to being pointless; the end result — chaos — will be the same.

In light of recent events, a soviet-style collapse of America and Europe looks more and more likely by the day. The question poses itself: what comes next? What comes after the omnipotent rule of corporations and billionaires? The rapture? A full blown civil war? Many of the more clever members of the billionaire class ask themselves these questions nowadays. Some of them are already planning for a long holiday in New Zealand, enjoying the luxuries of their bunker-complex, while others turn towards transhumanism and creating “freedom cities.” Free from legislation and having the freedom to choose their citizens these oligarchs are already planning for a future taking a page from Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games book series. Call this the rise of end time fascism: “a darkly festive fatalism — a final refuge for those who find it easier to celebrate destruction than imagine living without supremacy”.

The arc of human history is hard to miss here: from the first kings of Mesopotamia, through emperors, colonial empires, fascism, communism and now corporatocracy… As surplus wealth grew so did despotism. Democracy, it seems was nothing more than a footnote, an illusion in small print at the bottom of the page. However, that — at least I hope — is not the end of the human saga. As surplus energy from fossil fuels, and with it our massive surplus material wealth wanes, so will the possibility to build more just and equitable societies grow again. It’s not a given, people will consciously and forcefully have to reject the re-establishment of feudal societies, the return of kings and stop oligarchs from turning themselves into the new nobility. Let them live in their shiny high-tech “freedom cities” and upload their consciousness into a server built and powered by fossil fuels. We, the people, would be more than happy to live a free and more equitable life without them.

Until next time,

B

Recently, I was invited for a chat with two kind gentlemen Kenaz Filan and Ahnaf Ibn Qais about the recent conflagration in West Asia and America’s slow-brewing civil war. You can listen to the discussion here.

The Honest Sorcerer is a reader-supported publication. Please consider a subscription or perhaps buying a virtual coffee… Thanks in advance!

Notes:

(1) And what about the arch-neocons, the swamp monsters of the Washington Beltway, London and Brussels? Will they press the big red button, once they come to the same conclusion? Some, at least according to Col. Larry Wilkerson (Collin Powell’s former chief of staff), believe that “its better to prune some branches, as there are already too many of us…” There are, however, a dozen more interest groups, generals and admirals, who know exactly what nuclear war would entail and would rather choose not to hit that launch button. Besides, there are so many issues to focus on, so many more wars to be waged, that these warmongers will always find a new conflict they can cheer for… Not to mention the weapons manufacturers, who pay their salaries and who would lose all their business in a world cleansed of enemies by nuclear war. No, the racket must go on — until it can’t and the system crushes under its own weight. By the time these ideologues realize that it is over, they will be long out of power.