For two years now I have been hanging on the words of Mencius Moldbug, who's analysis of the politics of our time (Unqualified Reservations) I find almost completely persuasive.
Having advanced a vision of government by for-profit corporations, MM has at last started to lay out the path by which we can get from democracy to responsible, effective, secure government.
His answer so far validates both my high estimate of his understanding, and my pessimism. The logic is completely sound.
The problem with government is politics - the fact that no government can aim primarily at the welfare of the population, or for that matter even at its own profit, when it is constrained most of all by politics to do whatever is necessary to hold off rivals for power.
Anyone who attempts to improve the government, in any aspect, by any method, is committing politics and is therefore part of the problem. MM gives us a steel rule - that in order to become worthy to hold power, the first requirement is "absolute renunciation of official power".
Will this approach - passivism - work? It doesn't seem likely. But, it doesn't seem likely that activism will work either. I've said before, long shots are all we've got
Passivism appeals to me. I even put forward my own version when I refused to sign a petition calling for Gordon Brown to resign. But I have not completely abandoned activism, albeit in the form of half-hearted engagement with the least effective activist movement imaginable.
Since passivism is the prerequisite to step 1 of the procedure for reaction, and since 9a implies at least a 9b, there may be something I can do to bring about a better government. When I find out, I will consider it here.