Accelerationism

Lately there's been one particular political concept that has really seemed to be especially prevalent, at least it's been more prominently on my radar. That concept is accelerationism. If you aren't aware of what it is, in it's most basic sense it's the idea that the flaws of certain institutions should actually be amplified in order to hasten the downfall of such institutions so that something better might come about. Most commonly, this theory is applied to capitalism but that's not the only institution that people see it as applicable to. Currently I have a certain aversion to this theory. I think it's legitimately naive and distasteful. The main reason that I dislike it is that in it's most inherent nature it is cheering on destruction in the hopes that something better MIGHT come about. It seems as though it is little more than hoping a building burns down because there is a chance a bed of flowers could grow from the ashes. The "might" aspect is where I most take issue. In my view, our institutions are fundamentally flawed and imperfect, I would never argue with that. However, to gleefully cross ones fingers as one looks forward to their collapse isn't an action I see as wise. Our institutions are flawed and imperfect because human beings are flawed and imperfect. For the sake of playing the devils advocate though, lets take this theory and run with it. Let's say that accelerationists get their way. Capitalism is put into overdrive causing the whole system to fall apart. From all of the rubble comes a more mature society that understands the flaws of the old system and builds a new one with those in mind. Things are better and society is significantly more equitable. However, this better society is still made up of the same intrinsically flawed human beings that forged the screwed up old way of doing things and this new ideal system starts to see some cracks in the foundation. The cracks grow into prominence and before everyone knows it, we're back to where we started with a societal framework in desperate need of repair. That is how I envision accelerationism working, and that's why I disagree with it. Instead of speeding up the collapse of what we already have, I really wish we wouldn't be so fatally quick to cynicism and would do what we can to improve what already is. I wish we would do that because the alternative is in my view just taking one big destructive detour back to where we currently are. Make no mistake, where we are isn't great and that's why it's understandable that this political school of thought seems to be rising in popularity. Many see the American political and economic model as having been a complete failure, however where I differ is that while I would never deny the flaws of the American model, I would also never denounce the merits of democracy. I'm pretty big on democracy if you couldn't tell by now. I think it's simply the best means of imperfect human beings managing a society and while it has it's flaws, it's simply the best option from my point of view. Capitalism on the other hand, I'm a bit more iffy on. At least the over bloated monstrosity that it's become here in the States. But even with Capitalism I'm not so sure speeding up it's collapse would even be worth it. I would cite my same reasoning I used earlier in this entry. I have never used any form of denial in my language when discussing the inherent shortcomings of our economic system; it has become a haven for predatory corporate practices and many have been ruined by it. I think that there are far too many people who blindly adore capitalism and would be happier if more took on a more mature outlook on it. When I say that, I'm actually referring to people on both the right and the left. When speaking to those on the right, I'm more talking about the blind adoration of the free market and the blatant disregard for the obvious shortcomings. I'm referring to the love of unfettered capitalism and the devil may care attitude when it comes to much of the destruction and loss that has come about due to this unfettered American version of the institution. But when talking to the left about a "more mature outlook on capitalism" I'm really just referring to the fringe extreme that has simply given up on everything and is essentially just cheering on destruction at this point. I've found myself becoming more and more distanced from that circle that I very much belonged to at one point, but make no mistake, this isn't some sort of situation where I'm becoming more conservative with age. In reality, my views have remained very consistent regarding most things. I've obviously had much growth and have developed some more depth to my views and opinions, but the general direction has remained the same. I've found that while I have remained steadfastly grounded in my appreciation of the objective and practical in terms of the application of progressive policies as an effort to better society, some of my peers have taken on a more divergent perspective. That perspective is an especially bleak one that I guess I'm not quite disillusioned enough to adopt, or rather I'm not emotional enough might be more accurate to say. Being perfectly honest with myself, I would say the reason I've found myself developing an aversion to accelerationism and other such radical ideologies is that I see them as largely grounded in emotion and passion which I see as poor fuel for a world view. I think when people have too emotional of a world view they make a significant concession and that concession is objectivity, which is something I'm not willing to do. By my very nature, I like to hear both sides of a story, and it is because of this that I often find myself playing Devils advocate. I hate that so many people tend to mistake that act with my actual views. It seems that objectivity is more and more discarded in the world today in favor of opinion and that sincerely makes my skin crawl. I see so many people who will happily throw away facts in exchange for opinions that they find more agreeable and I find it utterly disgraceful. It's disgraceful when the right does it and it is in no less poor taste when the left partakes. Getting back to the topic of the entry, I'm aware that there is a right wing version of accelerationism, and it is an especially far right version, but I haven't seen as much of that. Perhaps that might be because I'm not really in many right wing echo chambers (or any echo chambers, at least that's what I'd like to think) but none the less this entry is obviously more focused on the left wing application of the political theory. It is one mainly adopted by more radical circles and they are circles I admit that I at one point conversed with. However I ceased communication for a variety of reasons and that was honestly for the best. Ultimately, accelerationism seems to me, to be an idea bred from unchecked outrage for the most part, and "unchecked" is the key word for me in that analysis. I see those who embrace it as having allowed their emotions, mainly anger, to cloud their judgement and it has especially saddened me to see what such warped judgement has done to many people that, to be perfectly clear, I still consider very dear friends and colleagues. At the end of the day, I know our world is broken. However, I don't want to see this broken house burn to the ground on the off chance a better one could be built. I want to fix the one we already have because I've grown to love it, even with all of its imperfections. Most broken things can be mended, but something that has been burned to ashes cannot be restored.