Senhora Daguia
Su Ying
Marta
Rai
Book Cover for 'The Leftover Girl'
Book Cover for 'A Children's Crusade'
Planet Surface (Detail)
Alphane life (detail) , dome in distance
Planet
Priya
Nurse G
Pseudo-crustacean
Han
Pseudo-shrubs (detail)
Jorja
The Dome (detail)

Recent Posts

Category: media landscape

Weimar redux

Weimar redux

I have recently been re-reading Alex Ross’s brilliant historical evocation of twentieth century music, The Rest is Noise, originally published in 2007, and (as ever, it seems!) appear to have come back to this book at precisely the right time. I’m not the only one to have been struck by the parallels between our present age and the nineteen thirties, but Ross’s account (in Chapter 6, The City of Nets) of the rise and fall of the German Weimar Republic, reminds us that Weimar’s fall, as surely as night follows day, led to the Nazi coup d’etat in 1933 and set inter-war Europe irrevocably on the path to renewed confict. 

I actually wrote this blog two weeks ago, but held off on posting it (mainly because I wanted write something less political and more positive), little realising that the Russian demagogue, Vladimir Putin, was about to launch an unprovoked attack on neighbouring Ukraine, presumably with the aim of somehow recreating the Soviet Union. That a ruthless dictator should now be on the march in Eastern Europe makes the Weimar analogy scarily real, so now I’m glad I delayed, even though this meant not blogging at all in February, as my original post has now rather been overtaken by events.  

Most of the articles I read in the run up to writing the original draft a fortnight ago, evoked thirties parallels, with Emmanuel Macron being cast as some kind of latter-day Neville Chamberlain, while Boris Johnson auditions (unsuccessfully, it must be said!) for the role of Winston Churchill. However I’d prefer to focus on the cultural parallels, which appear eerily-precise. 

Alex Ross points out that Weimar was the first modern media-saturated urban culture, as exemplified by 1920’s Berlin, a milieu brilliantly evoked in the Kander and Ebbs musical, Cabaret. Ross asks the question, was Weimar doomed to fail? Was it inevitable that the unique synthesis of the avant-garde and popular taste, seen in the success of Brecht and Weill’s The Threepenny Opera, would be crushed between the twin millstones of commercial imperatives and state-sanctioned high culture prejudices? The two more modern examples, of West Berlin during the Cold War and (briefly) New York during the seventies and eighties, seem to demonstrate that such a synthesis of high and low culture is still possible, but only in very specific circumstances.

Alex Ross also highlights the political weaknesses that made Weimar vulnerable to the far-right, once the Wall Street Crash ended the late-twenties boom which had underpinned its all too brief cultural renaissance. He contends that the moderate elements lacked a firm power base in Weimar, under constant fire from the Communist left and National Socialist right. 

Moderate elements still hold power in most of what we still refer to as the West. Different governments swing slightly toward the right or left of the political spectrum in their particular country, but all cleave to a consensus. This consensus embraces support for Western political and military alliances, differing brands of free-market economics, limited action on climate change, and a liberal attitude on most social issues.

The opposition (on both sides) is more diffuse; the right, while divided into a multitude of factions, is generally against internationalism in all its forms (including military alliances), denies climate change and rejects any measures to ameliorate it, and while professing to love the notion of individual freedom, is dismissive of democracy and human rights, and manifests an alarming admiration for foreign dictators.  

What I’m calling ‘the left’ is even more amorphous, including everything from revolutionary socialists and radical greens, through various groupings defined by modern identity politics. I explored this in a previous blog, coining the term Pluralistic Absolutism to describe the exclusive and hard line approach of many of these groups. The point is that the far right would be prepared to sink their differences if a suitably charismatic leader came along (another Trump or someone even worse), while the left would never unite, as it failed to do in the 1930’s.

In one sense this is a good thing, as the moderate centre doesn’t really have to worry about its left flank and can concentrate its fire on the radical right. How successful they are at this will largely depend on how bad things get over the next few years

At the moment the jury’s still out…

The Author   March 2022

Pluralistic Absolutism and Adversarial Hyperbole

Pluralistic Absolutism and Adversarial Hyperbole

A new (and in Western liberal democracies, at least) dominant philosophy has emerged in these most worrying of times, which I have given the name pluralistic absolutism. Now I did Google this, and nobody seems to have used this precise term before. It is however a new spin on an old notion, that of cultural absolutism; the notion that the values of your nation, region, ethnic group, religious persuasion, social class, or ideological belief system (delete as appropriate) are paramount and cannot be challenged. Like much in contemporary culture, this notion has mutated and been transformed by the influence of the internet, and in particular, by social media. 

Ironically, an innovation that promised to bring peoples, nations and cultures together, has had precisely the opposite effect; the online world has instead atomised society, facilitating the rise of identity politics. Societies have become far more tribal, with people finding others who share their ethnicity, gender, and sexuality (or any combination of the aforementioned) and have similar beliefs, norms and values, within cyberspace. These new virtual communities are no longer necessarily limited by national boundaries. But, rather than resulting in a more tolerant attitude towards difference, a reaction against cultural relativism has led to the opposite. A Holier than Thou attitude has become mainstreamed, as everyone noisily proclaims the difference and uniqueness of their group’s particular take on the world, and its moral superiority to every other point of view.

This worldview has many additional consequences, including a conviction (on the part of everybody, it would seem) that there is a fixed way of doing everything, from watering plants in hot weather to writing genre fiction. All of this is spread and facilitated via social media, often linked to different identity groupings, and taking its place alongside the innumerable conspiracy theories, faddism in medical treatments and diets, and all the rest of the detritus.

Every little identity group now maintains that their narrow view of the world and their particular way of doing things is right and rejects (and often condemns as evil), all competing philosophies and methodologies.

The result of this is civil paralysis and confusion, which is exploited by Populists and authoritarians, and threatens democracy and the basis of Liberal society itself, which relies on tolerance and the willingness to agree to differ.

Accompanying this is what I will term adversarial hyperbole, in itself nothing new in the pages of the popular press. However this is now aggressively colonising other areas of the media once considered immune. Hence, every pronouncement by a celebrity or public figure is now an admission rather than a comment. Mild observations about others are repurposed as ‘brutal’ or ‘crushing’ criticisms! (sidebar: when did our public vocabulary become so limited?) 

Every form of public discourse now appears to be conducted in the most ludicrously adversarial terms, and one has to ask what this fashion for violent public discourse tells us about our culture and about the likely fate of our democracy.

Not wishing to be alarmist here, but the Weimar Republic comes to mind, and others have already drawn parallels between the Reichstag Fire and the storming of the US Capitol by Donald Trump’s supporters. This leads me to the conclusion that the new pluralistic absolutism is effectively a product of the Baroque phase of Western Liberal Democracy, and likely a harbinger of its imminent dissolution.

On that cheery note, ’til next time

The Author    August 2021

The real enemy

The real enemy

The actual result of the Euro 2020 final on Sunday turned out to be the least of our worries; of far more concern is the ticketless thugs forcing their way into Wembley (fer Christ’s sake!) during the final of the European Soccer Championship. These ‘England supporters’ also punched stewards, terrorised legitimate ticket holders and caused damage to the stadium. Others (presumably legitimate ticket holders) booed the Italian National Anthem, while an attention-seeking reality tv star invaded the pitch. 

Monday’s papers brought the news that a British Grand Prix racing driver was attacked and relieved of his £40,000 watch (a gift from his team) in a supposedly-secure stadium car park. In purely-footballing terms this and other incidents has probably put paid to any chance Britain and Ireland had of staging the 2030 FIFA World Cup, but that’s not really the issue.

Away from the stadium, the West End is trashed, England players are savagely attacked by racists on social media, drunk and stoned thugs parade around our town and city centres, threatening people for dining in Italian restaurants (or even just eating pizza!), without a police officer in sight. I personally witnessed this in Birmingham’s New Street on the day after the final.

What this tells us is that criminality and public disorder in this country is getting out of hand, and the real enemy isn’t the Italian soccer team, nor is it the European Union, it’s actually a violent and social media-organised minority who appear to be taking over our streets.

And we know where the blame for all this lies, don’t we?

The man who has cut the budget for policing, decimated youth services, attacked and undermined the judiciary, and subverted Parliament. The man whose vacillations would even alarm the protagonist in a Wood Allen movie! Hiding behind the door so recently and opportunistically plastered with England flags (those vanished pretty smartish, didn’t they? presumably as soon as the winning Italian penalty hit the back of the net!). The same gleaming black door that will soon be issuing excuses and announcing abrupt policy U-turns, as COVID 19 explodes once more and we’re all back in lockdown. 

The problem with Johnson is that, on the surface, he’s plausible. Unlike his role-models around the globe, our Prime Minister is not obviously-deranged, nor is he on first name terms with genocidal dictators. Johnson says the right things (even if he doesn’t mean them), while coincidentally giving out messages of encouragement to the extremists and nutters who form much of his core support.

I referenced in the past the notion of the Antichrist as a metaphor for the various difficulties that threaten us. The problem would appear to be that rather than just the one promised in Revelations, we are beset by a multitude of them. The aforementioned genocidal dictators now being joined by a new wave of megalomaniacal billionaires from Silicon Valley, who have the gall to pretend they’re actually saving us!

All of these people share one obvious character trait with ‘the Father of Lies’, and together with their legions of supporters they constitute the real enemy…  

The Author   July 2021

Modern unicorns part two: Nuclear Fusion

Modern unicorns part two: Nuclear Fusion

It’s a truism that nearly all the news about real life is bad these days. As if to compensate, the media seem to be turning in desperation to increasingly speculative subject matter, presumably in an attempt to boost morale and have something positive to talk about.

In my last post I referenced the stream of stories about Martian colonisation plans which currently infest the popular media. In this post I will cover the other ‘positive science news story’ that virtually every periodical (or at least, all the ones that feature in Google News) is now pushing, namely nuclear fusion.

The line that perennially introduces the subject of fusion power is that it is ‘thirty years away’, in fact it has been thirty years away for the whole of my adult life. It has also been the subject of constant reinterpretation and misinformation, a prime example being the fallacies perpetrated by the advocates of so-called cold fusion in the late 1980’s. Fusion has a tendency to lie low for decades, but like Dracula rising from his grave, will always return when least expected, or wanted.

One of those times is now… 

The current attempts to develop nuclear fusion as a ‘reliable power source’, are characterised by the following; on the one hand, vast amounts of money spent by Governments who really ought to know better, building huge white elephant projects that suck in huge amounts of energy (as well as cash), without giving anything back. On the other, lone ‘geniuses’ working small-scale projects in obscure research institutions, making the same sort of extravagant claims as the proponents of cold fusion. The result is always the same; at best, fusion that lasts for nanoseconds and no prospect of anything approaching commercially-viable electricity generation. 

One side side of me (the Romantic side) hopes that I’m wrong and one these lone geniuses will get it right, the rational side knows this a chimera, and the lone geniuses are in fact the modern equivalent of Medieval alchemists, doomed to spend their lives trying to transmute their base metal into gold.

The fact that any of this gets house room, let alone endless column inches promoting highly-speculative claims, tells us rather more about our current society than the credibility of the fusion lobby.

It tells us we have an obsession with the notion of genius, and of genius (sic) solutions. These are often promoted as hacks (or tricks), i.e. shortcuts that will enable us to solve difficult and intractable problems. As such, they appeal strongly to generations with limited patience and rather short attention spans.

Even a cursory reading of history tells us that these sorts of attitudes have prevailed in the past, usually in times of rapid technological change (the 1880’s and 90’s spring to mind), when even the highly-educated begin to lose track of the giddying pace of change and start to see science as a source of magical solutions. This particular zeitgeist is, of course, ripe for exploitation by charlatans.  

There are however, underlying all of this, some even more fundamental notions:

1, that more tech is the solution to everything

2, that technology is always the solution to existing problems, never the cause of fresh ones

3, that endless economic growth is both possible and desirable

Recent history gives the lie to the first two; one only has to look at the intractable problem of storing the by-products of nuclear fission, waste that will remain deadly for thousands of years; at the non-biodegradable plastics filling our oceans; and to the dangerous climate change being unleashed by releasing millions of years of stored carbon through the burning of oil and gas.

The fallacies inherent in the last statement are nicely illustrated by the recent claim that ‘a population of trillions can be supported off-world by exploiting the resources of the Asteroid Belt!’

When it comes down to it, this guff is ideological and quasi-religious; advocated by people who propose spreading the Abrahamic notions of the Old Testament (‘…thou shalt have dominion over the Earth’, etc) throughout our Solar System and beyond.  

As, like a plague of technological locusts, we seek to consume and destroy everything within our reach.

The Author  January 2021

Standing on the brink

Standing on the brink

We find ourselves at a curious point in our history…
For the last four months all our lives have effectively been on hold in the deep freeze of lockdown. This will change on July 4th, and the mood is best described as impatience mixed with apprehension.
On the one hand, we yearn to break free of the cage we’ve been imprisoned in; to see friends and family properly, to get a haircut, to be able to walk round our local town or city centre, go on holiday or visit a tourist destination, have a meal in a restaurant or a drink in a pub.

On the other hand, we fear that the true consequences of the pandemic and the response to it will now be revealed. These range from the prosaic; merely walking down the nearest high street and noticing how many businesses have closed, never to re-open; to the intensely personal, when one finds one’s job has disappeared and furlough payments are about to end; to a general realisation of how much of the life we knew has now gone, possibly forever.
In the UK, this encompasses a virtual cessation of all live arts performance, with theatres, dance performances, concerts and gigs all now only available remotely, or through recorded performances, combined with the indefinite suspension of public participation in most team sports and indoor recreation opportunities. This is just a sample of things we have lost, new things occur to me constantly, but it’s impossible to keep it all in your mind.

However, the general conclusions are bleak:

* Arts, culture and learning will be disproportionately affected, as populist governments concentrate on mainstream activities to the detriment of anything highbrow, intellectual, radical or alternative
* Life will move decisively online with virtual experience being privileged over physical interaction, and that this will persist, even when the pandemic ends

For understandable reasons, my own ‘virtual world’, the Lights in the sky series provides a welcome and much needed escape. There are now only three more chapters (plus two more ‘interludes’) to be written before the series is complete…

I wonder what I will do then?

The Author July 2020

Letting the Jinn out of the bottle

Letting the Jinn out of the bottle

Something blindingly-obvious occurred to me this morning, something that had never occurred to me previously, but once thought of, could not be subsequently unthought. My insight was that tech, and by this I mean the goods and services purveyed by the billionaires in Silicon Valley, is our culture’s equivalent of the Jinn in Arabian folklore.
The Jinn is capable of great benevolence and possesses miraculous powers, as befits a supernatural entity. But its benevolence comes with a price tag attached. Our relationship with modern ICT would seem a perfect analogue to the wonders formerly promised by the Jinn once released from its bottle, with the difference that your smart device actually delivers to anyone with a phone contract or a broadband connexion. With none of that inconvenient rooting around in dark and dusty caves looking for magical oil lamps.
The wonders performed by modern ICT would (and did) appear wondrous to my parents’ generation, who lived in a world where news came from printed media, two television channels and three radio networks, the banks closed at three (so if you ran out of cash, tough!), telecommunications were strictly voice-only from fixed locations, and researching almost anything usually required a visit to the local library (which also tended to close early!).
I was born and grew to adulthood in this world, and things didn’t really begin to change significantly in practical terms until the beginning of the nineties (although cash machines/ATMs had become available from the mid-seventies, and video gaming had become popular), with the notion of cyberspace confined to science fiction novels. Then, the personal computer, the mobile phone, and the internet all came along in short order, to revolutionise the way we do almost everything.
I find it difficult to think back to a world where you can’t answer almost any question in seconds, where you don’t have instantaneous electronic communication with all your friends, where you can’t remotely map and view almost any location on Earth, or listen to virtually any piece of music at any hour of the day or night.
However, I do remember how frustrating, how slow, and how boring it all was. So I am grateful for Google Documents, email, SMS, Wikipedia, YouTube, Google Maps and all the million and one applications that make life today so much easier.
But nothing ever comes for free…
In exchange for the convenience of all these lovely (and apparently free!) tools and applications, we give (unless we are very savvy) the tech giants unlimited access to our personal data, which they obviously want to exploit commercially by targeting appropriate advertising based on what they (or their algorithms) know about us. There is nothing intrinsically wrong in this, if it means that we are alerted to products and services which we are likely to want to buy, although these algorithms would seem somewhat unsophisticated in their predictions, if personal experience is anything to go by, but hey! Maybe I’m just contrary.
However, If this data falls into the wrong hands, it can be used by criminal enterprises half a world away, adding a whole new level of anxiety, as cyber crime can potentially strike us from anywhere on the globe.
However the most insidious consequences of letting the Jinn of artificial intelligence out of the bottle are less obvious, but actually pose the most serious threats to our society. I refer, of course, to the impact of social media.
People who have been following this blog will know what’s coming next…
The unintended consequences of the spread of social media have included; the destabilising of conventional media and the undermining of journalistic ethics and good practice; the creation of ‘echo chambers’ whereby large numbers of people rely entirely on partial media for their news and current affairs, and are never exposed to any content that challenges their prejudices and preconceptions; the wholesale spreading of falsehoods and insane conspiracy theories; and finally, the creation of forums that enable and facilitate people with dangerous and anti-social views to meet and act in concert.
Did I leave anything out?
The overall effect has been the promotion of extreme views and the destabilising of democracy, which, for all its faults, remains the fairest, most humane and most efficient form of government yet devised.
But it’s not just random nutters we have to contend with…
Much more worrying is the clear evidence that the fabulously rich and privileged elite who run the tech giants have actively been promoting an agenda of ‘disruption’ designed to bring about a series of economic, social and political changes that they believe will benefit themselves and their corporations, to the detriment of virtually everybody else. I was recently both intrigued by the BBC series Secrets of Silicon Valley, which documented this, and appalled by the sanctimony and arrogance of many of the people leading these companies, who appeared to have bought into their own PR, and had adopted the view that their selfish actions are somehow morally justified.
Do no harm, anyone?
In the short term, the upshot of all of the above has been to put us all at the mercy of the various dangerous populists who have come to power in key countries around the world.
Returning to my opening analogy, my inevitable conclusion is that getting the Jinn back in the bottle is a lot harder than freeing it in the first place, and the consequences of summoning this spirit and making use of its miraculous powers, may now have become unstoppable.
The Author June 2020

The Rise of Unreason revisited

The Rise of Unreason revisited

Back in less alarming times, I wrote a blog entry entitled The Rise of Unreason derived from a minor key blues song I wrote back in the eighties. The blog entry (and later versions of the song) referenced the rise of irrational belief systems in contemporary culture, arguing that this tendency, reflected in the popularity of fundamentalist religious views, had now been augmented by irrational behaviour not linked to specific belief systems, but based purely on rumour and conspiracy theories spread online.
There was a time when these were relatively harmless; refusing to accept that NASA landed astronauts on the Moon, or believing that the World is flat, are (in practical terms) harmless eccentricities, and not something that threatens the well-being of society as a whole.
However, the campaign against vaccination which claims, without evidence, that vaccines are linked to autism is a different matter. It constitutes a threat to public health, which has allowed diseases that were under control (such as measles) to become prevalent again. It is also anachronistic and risible to even see this as an issue given the number of highly-talented people who lie on the autism spectrum. Of course, the proponents of these wacky ideas never let facts get in the way of their irrational beliefs.
I was interested to read that the latest unhinged theory, spreading like a virtual plague through cyberspace, namely the belief that 5G phone masts are spreading (or causing, take your pick) COVID-19, is linked to ideas promulgated by the anti-vaccination brigade. The attacks on supposed 5G masts that have followed are reminiscent of the waves of mass hysteria that characterised the late-Middle Ages (which is apt given we have our very own version of plague), and with a side order of Don Quixote, phone masts now standing in for windmills.
With the sort of doublethink that is beyond satire, these people are presumably using their mobile phones to coordinate their attacks on the very infrastructure that makes this possible. Presumably, once a vaccine finally does become, these people will refuse to take it.
Words sometimes fail me

Last train to Woking

Last train to Woking

I have just completed watching War of the Worlds on television and I must say I’m somewhat disappointed. Having endured the cheesy 1953 movie, and the gargantuan Tom Cruise remake, I had hoped the BBC series would cleave more closely to the original novel. First signs were encouraging; the drama was actually set in England (in the original Home Counties and Metropolitan locations, in fact), and (roughly) in the right historical period.
However the cracks soon began to show…
The series makes use of CGI that manages both to be unconvincing and gargantuan (rather like the 2005 film), the action sequences contrived to be considerably less gripping than those in Wells’ novel (fer Christ’s sake!), and the scriptwriter made unnecessary and counterproductive changes to the plot, including introducing a new female lead played by someone previously best known for starring in Downton Abbey.
I could go on, pointing out that Wells’ references a huge variety of means of transport in the book, but everyone in this reimagining appears to either walk or ride on horseback, but what would be the point.
The point I really want to make is that in this new version the BBC seems to be pandering to modern identity politics, as it did with the most recent series of Dr Who. But the organisation would appear to be conflicted, because at the same time, its news division spends an awful lot of its time pandering to the arch-enemies of ‘wokeness’ (i.e. the Brexiteers, Farage, Johnson and the rest of that mendacious crew). Quite why, I can’t imagine! Does the Corporation seriously think it’s going to be rewarded for this craven servility? Farage is already calling for the end of the license fee in his party’s manifesto, and I wonder how long it will survive under a Johnson-led administration.
For once I actually agree with Nigel, although (I would imagine) for different reasons…
The license fee is a regressive tax; you pay the same whether you’re Richard Branson or a lone parent on Universal Credit in rented accommodation, also, the BBC has been operating (effectively) as a commercial broadcaster for most of my lifetime, and I think this subsidy of a private corporation should be withdrawn.
Instead, real public broadcasting following the American model should be funded from general taxation. By this means Radio’s 3, 4, 6 etc, plus regional broadcasting and BBC 4 could be saved while the BBC fulfils its destiny as the new NBC (or not).
But at the end of the day, the problem with identity politics is that it divides us. Divides us in the face of the super-rich (and their populist lackeys), divides us so we cannot muster a coherent response to climate change and all the other environmental threats that we face.
There’s an old proverb applied to political activism, ‘…you either all hang together or you all hang separately’, and with regards to the BBC, it may well turn out that the last train to Woking, will be seen in the future as a dying fall in its futile attempts to straddle various uncomfortable political and cultural fences.
Toodle-oo
The Author December 2019

Cognitive distortions

Cognitive distortions

Catching up with my reading recently, I have been investigating twentieth century psychological thinking and it struck how many of the explanations for irrational and negative thought processes in individuals contained in this body of work can be applied to institutions and to our current dysfunctional culture as a whole.
I’ll give you an example; Karen Horney in 1950 talked about the ‘tyranny of the shoulds’, the notion that things should magically be different from how they actually are. Put in contemporary terms, this neatly describes the notion that Britain should still be an empire and a great power (when it is clearly neither) that characterises the thinking of so much of the pro-Brexit lobby. As Albert Ellis pointed out, building on Horney’s ideas, ‘the struggle to reconcile these thoughts with reality is a painful and unending one’, and this particular psychodrama has consumed British politics for the last several years.
In 1980 David Burns defined a whole series of similar ‘cognitive distortions’, specifically: Jumping to Conclusions, All of Nothing Thinking, Always being Right, Over Generalising and Catastrophizing.
These modes of thought seem to aptly describe our current political discourse, and are particularly applicable to much of the tabloid press, for whom every space rock approaching the Earth is the asteroid that’s going to end all life, every passing storm is a catastrophe in waiting, and every coming Winter will be the worst in living memory.
The problem facing us is that although it’s possible to counsel and treat the individual to rid them of such negative, irrational and self-destructive thought processes, how do you treat an entire culture?
As with all of our present irrationalities, the internet is the medium by which they can spread and infect the body politic and our popular culture..
Not much to report on volume seven of Lights in the sky this month; however chapter five of …when you wish upon a star is very nearly complete and ideas for the rest of the novel and more supplementary short stories (which will eventually be gathered in a compendium to be entitled, Tales from the Collapse), continue to flow unabated.
Some of you may be tempted to the view that my writing is also a symptom (or an example) of cognitive distortion, and there is an argument for that. However, in my defence, I would say that I know that what I’m writing is fiction, and as an author I’m commenting on the culture I find myself in. In short, I am capable of a degree of objectivity and can distance myself from cultural, political and societal tendencies that I observe around me.
However, out in the real world, objectivity seems currently to be in short supply…
The Author October 2019

Swimming against the tide of history

Swimming against the tide of history

Discussing recent political developments as well as longer-term societal trends in my recent blogs has got me thinking, and my speculations have made me somewhat fatalistic.
I (and others of similar opinions and disposition), can hope, in the short term, for the amelioration of the current crises afflicting Western society. We can hope for a rational resolution of the Brexit issue domestically, we can hope that a Democrat is elected as US president in 2020, we can hope for a lot of things…
But there is such a thing as the tide of history, deeper and more fundamental changes that occur underneath short-term political developments. In my last blog I referenced a shift from what I referred to as a written culture to new culture mediated by artificial intelligence. Now I’m not arrogant (or ignorant) enough to suppose that I’ve come up with an original idea, but I think it’s likely that many cultural commentators and theorists writing on this matter will have a different standpoint to me. Many will welcome the change that appears to be happening, rather than regretting or fearing it.
But the point is that, irrespective of your standpoint, this is happening and the way people think, feel and act will change accordingly. People of my generation and way of thinking will rapidly become cut off, isolated in a culture that no longer understands them, and which they feel little or no affinity for. Small changes are straws in the wind; I still have a cheque book which I intend to use to pay some outstanding bills, pretty soon this won’t be an option; I like reading books and I spend some of my time writing them, but how long before a post-literate culture emerges where all books are audio books? Where people rely on virtual helpers such as Alexa to conduct all their transactions; I also like physical shops, but I fear for their survival.
All in all, I feel that pretty soon I’m going to be like an updated version of the protagonist of the 1960’s television series Adam Adamant Lives, an Edwardian adrift in contemporary society…
Of course, another trend, one that is proceeding quietly under all the sound and fury of contemporary politics, may put a stop to this ‘Brave New World’, at least for the majority.
I refer, of course, to the various elephants in the room, climate change, sea level rise, resource depletion, all the issues that drive the narrative in Lights in the sky. I note that in today’s press various scientific institutions, as well some obscenely-rich private citizens, are again discussing possible fall-back strategies should our actions make our planet uninhabitable. It’s the usual guff: NASA wants to colonise the Moon, Jeff Bezos wants to build vast environments orbiting the Earth, where the climate will be, ‘..like Maui, but every day!’, as last on seen the SF flick Interstellar, Elon Musk wants to nuke Mars etc…
I think it’s quite likely that at least some of these ideas will come to fruition, but on a strictly limited basis; probably consisting of a few scientists and military personnel living out barren lives underground on Mars or the Moon, while the rest of us left on Earth mostly die, and the unlucky survivors descend into savagery.
I recently bought the DVD (another soon to be obsolescent piece of tech) of Stanley Kubrick’s brilliant Cold War satire Dr Strangelove, and I think that Kubrick was being prescient here, just not in any way he could have imagined!
But that’s the problem with futurology, things never turn out quite the way you anticipated…
Which, of course, may mean that I’m being unduly alarmist.
Time will tell…
The Author September 2019