China may be a more ‘authoritarian’ culture because it’s a much older culture, and it’s discovered that…

China may be a more ‘authoritarian’ culture because it’s a much older culture, and it’s discovered that nothing else works. It may be WHY its culture has lasted. /1 https://t.co/RSeTwfEBZX

The cultures criticising it today are a bare fraction of the age of Chinese culture, and aren’t doing well. Our Western cultures, doing the criticising, through the overwhelming majority of our histories were led by authoritarian Kings and Queens. /2

The heavy restriction on social activity and connection that we now call ‘authoritarianism’ is maybe a deeper historical recognition of what Rene Girard discussed in his career. That sociality is really violence. The default state of all societies is violence. /3

Not because humans are naturally violent. But because humans desire, and it’s the clash of conflicting desires that produce violence. Cultures that last clearly have learned something about this, and we’re not very interested in learning what that was. /4

I’ve written a few threads on how what we call modern Western democracy is likely just a holding pattern, between more authoritarian forms. But it’s a loaded word. That authoritarianism may in fact be cultural restriction on sociality. To prevent violence. To rein in desire. /5

Populist leaders who run the course with populism become ‘fascists’. Fascism is just the endgame of populism. Then they become brutal, because populism solves no problems, and they need coercion to maintain control. /6

Today we’re in the middle of an experiment that runs counter to these deeper historical movements. We’re giving sociality free rein, through our communications platforms. /7

It won’t end well. I don’t care that people may love the ‘bait’ of the bait-and-switch these technologies use. It won’t change the outcome. /end