Intuitive Politics: The Artistic Process of Anarchy

adminWORLD

Metamodern Politics. Intuitive Politcs: Artistic Process of Anarchy

”I don’t know much about politics, but I know what I like.”

By Allen Sands
Podemos (above)

The majority of Americans consider their political obligations to be met by simply having a party affiliation and voting. One problem with our political system lies in the complete dedication to one political party or style. Democrats and Republicans demonstrate this with unwavering consistency, often to the country’s detriment. Straight ticket voting no matter who is on the ballot is nothing more than taking the easy way out. It is shallow politics and not very intuitive.

There are different candidates with different values and goals within every political structure. For example Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are both running for President as Democrats. Both represent very different views as Democrats. One candidate might set an entirely different tone that could either discourage my support or cultivate it. I would not settle for a “second or third choice” for the sake of the party. I prefer to vote for the individual, never the party which becomes problematic for any positive gains within the party itself.

Who’s your favorite artist? What’s your favorite movement? The more intuitive you become, the more difficult it becomes to narrow the list down to just one. It works the same way with politics. The more you learn about politics the wider your context of interpretation becomes. The American two party system is obsolete in terms of metamodernism. The political mechanisms need to be redesigned to meet the diversity of opinion and critical thinking that is barely making its way out of the shadows and into the mainstream conversations.

Our political lexicon that has been shredded into hamburger. Some philosophies as defined by American politics have been virtually revised to mean their exact opposites. Some economic texts have been “cherry-picked”; Adam Smith for example to the exclusion of his deeper message. The same can be said of Marx.

Do all Expressionists paint exactly alike on the surface? Paul Jenkins was an abstract expressionist and a colorist. So was Mark Rothko. Within many political movements there are split-offs and variations. Our two party construct has reduced politics similarly to society’s two dimensional classification of art: Abstract or representational; liberal or conservative; Democrat or Republican; while ignoring all the different nuances and aesthetics within the extreme peripheries of both.

Metamodern Politics. Intuitive Politics: Artistic Process of Anarchy
“Phenomena Heaven Shield” by Paul Jenkins

Our liberal political process has been commercialized, stylized and homogenized into a very well-groomed, predictable, formulaic system. Why buy an original work of art when you can get a shrink-wrapped poster for $19.95? With the convenience of straight ticket voting we still ignore the unique qualities that differentiate the candidates within their own party and these slight variations can make or break a party’s ability to honor their social contract.

It’s the fringe that generally comes out with the radically progressive or conservative edge; artists and those who challenge the status quo. As time, politics and pop-culture march on, what was once the fringe and quirky concept becomes absorbed into the continuum through exposure and repetition. This is also how the Propaganda model works. Through repetition we become complacent in our exposure to bullshit. Unoriginal, bullshit. And we are compelled to look for new alternatives, or to revisit older, classical schools of thought to regain our balance.

ANARCHY, LIBERTARIANISM AND SOCIALISM: THE ABSTRACT EXPRESSIONISTS OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM

Metamodern Politics. Intuitive PoliticsIn the discussion of organic and intuitive philosophies and what true Libertarianism, Socialism or Anarchy is, the common thread is their disassociation to any established standard as the rule. Deconstructed power and reconstructed governance is the prime mover of all three ideologies.

Classic liberalism came with the age of enlightenment, and was later crushed by American faux-capitalism (the neo-liberal approach). Instead of a republic, with the rule of law being our governance, capitalism has usurped the republic (of, for and by the people) and has become the impetus for government. The Alternative Party of Denmark.

There are new socio-political constructs that incorporate traditional libertarian and anarchist ideals into a more democratized mechanism. Capitalism is an economic system, not a form of government. America may be defined as a capitalist state, but it is governed by the republic; an important aesthetic that’s been conveniently ignored. For example the Soviet Union was a self-proclaimed socialist state. But the corrupt state, not private hierarchies controlled production. It was essentially state run capitalism and control of production was never placed into hands of the people as they had expected. The goal was a workers’ co-op structure very similar to what the new wave of American entrepreneurs are doing here and in other countries today, but instead a totalitarian regime emerged to corrupt an otherwise very popular ideology practiced elsewhere in the world with no less success than capitalism.

The public sector (socialism or government run capitalism) cannot be public if private interests are involved with public programs. The private sector cannot be free with an “invisible hand” through government manipulation or vice versa. It is the government that allows specific industries to privatize their gains while socializing their risks or losses which has always saved capitalism in America. And that is what fuels the cycle of sustainable destruction. American capitalism could never survive without subsidies off the backs of the tax payers. Therein lays the rub of differing opinions and applications of libertarianism, libertarian socialism and anarchism. Three concepts that are generally not welcome in traditional American politics.

Pure anarchy vehemently rejects the state and the vertical hierarchy of private capitalism. When the state colludes with private capital they limit individuals to an authoritarian class structure, binding the worker to the whims of both. Post (structuralist) anarchism according to Uri Gordon takes a slightly different view of the power struggle by dispersing it horizontally; instilling a feeling of cooperation and ownership rather than exploitation. One can be an anarchist and still collaborate with others on equal terms.

”You can’t have freedom without a little bit of danger and you can’t make art without lots of freedom. I’ll take the freedom.”

To be a conservative means to be pro-active in preserving traditional values. This is exactly what today’s conservatives and economists have not been doing. The traditional values of classic economic liberalism maintained a certain amount of consideration to conscience and were intuitive to what constituted a humanitarian society within the realm of free enterprise. There was a sense or an expectation of some economic nationalism. The “invisible hand” has to be tempered with justice and opportunity for a true capitalist utopia to exist. Justice and opportunity, two crucial core values of early capitalism have been long discarded from the business models of corporate capitalism today.

“Contrary to popular opinion, libertarian socialism has not traditionally been a Utopian movement, tending to avoid dense theoretical analysis or prediction of what a future society would or should look like. The tradition instead has been that such decisions cannot be made now, and must be made through struggle and experimentation, so that the best solution can be arrived at democratically and organically, and to base the direction for struggle on established historical example. Supporters often suggest that this focus on exploration over predetermination is one of their great strengths. They point out that the success of the scientific method comes from its adherence to open rational exploration, not its conclusions, rather than dogma and predetermined predictions.” – Wikipedia

This sounds very much like the artistic process. Decisions “made through struggle and experimentation”. The struggle is directed by “established historical example”. The strength of artistic development lays in the process or the scientific method rather than “dogma and predetermined predictions”, or expectations for a particular result. The successful artist is preoccupied with process more than result. Out of the process comes result and it is the process that determines the success of the result.

Libertarian socialism is a very intuitive, organic and flexible process. Art is also a very intuitive process. Libertarianism, socialism and anarchism place value on the creativity and innovation of the individual. Capitalism places value on the creativity of the individual and the individual as property. Art is forced to be recognized through its struggle for honesty and skill at problem solving. True libertarianism, socialism and anarchism reach outside of the current establishment’s box pushing for a sustainable, honest egalitarian society through problem solving and reinvention. Like art; society and politics will always hit a wall of entropy until pushed beyond the limits of the box through participation, catharsis and reinvention.


OPEN SOURCE METAMODERNISM

Metamodern. Arts Continued.Metamoderna.org is a political and philosophical think-tank, the purpose of which is to contribute to a fundamental shift in society – in a Nordic and eventually a global context. This societal shift is based upon a set of political-philosophical changes of perspective, from the modern to the metamodern society. It entails qualitative developments of society in a culturally and politically progressive, green direction. The think-tank Metamoderna does not work towards “more of the same” as in today’s society, but rather, towards a new kind of society.


adminIntuitive Politics: The Artistic Process of Anarchy