The Atomized Underclass Has Little To Lose

Many CONservative morons indulge their fantasies about living in a feudal world based on the belief that they can get away with it. This delusion is partly based on the belief that the ancient empires were stable and peaceful- when the reality is closer to continuous conflict, strife, wars and uprisings. Consider how many kings in the past (any empire/kingdom/dynasty) died of natural causes, as opposed to murder, war, rebellion or other ‘unnatural causes’.

The idea that the underclass just accepted their shitty lives without complaining or revolting is not supported by historical records.

There were however a few factors that mitigated the worst of such uprisings or revolts. The people were largely illiterate so plans and schemes could not travel easily over large distances. Most of them had families and lived in small community that enforced conformity. Technology or the lack thereof reduced the ability of people to kill or hurt others.

Today things are somewhat different.. and allow occurrences which were hitherto inconceivable.

The potential of things going to hell is far higher in a technologically advanced and atomized society for reasons that I will briefly list below-

1. Information travels in multiple conduits in far larger quantities with much lower latency than at any time in human history.

2. Family, religions and institutions are no longer the biggest influences and sources of information for individuals.

3. Society is increasingly atomized and people are no longer tied to the milieu and society they were born in.

4. The composition of the underclass today is different from that throughout most of human history.

5. Traditional institutions and obligations such as marriage and kids increasingly don’t figure in the lives of men.

While 2. and 5. have occurred before, albeit on a smaller scale- 1., 3. and 4. have no parallel in history. It is however the rather peculiar linkage between 3. and 4. that make things especially interesting. The underclass today is just as likely to be a 40-something divorced guy fired from a well-paying job in a chemical plant as a guy born to a single mother on welfare. You can see what I am talking about..

Historically literate people with technical jobs, specialized training or experience were seldom part of the underclass. Even those who were poor were part of extended familial networks. To put it another way- those who could fuck things up rarely had the reason or freedom to do so. Today they have reasons, the freedom and technology to make things interesting.

Whatever might happen in the future when this underclass undergoes “austerity” is likely to be uncoordinated but linked. Yes.. actions can lack coordination but still be linked.

Comments?

  1. gunner451
    August 21, 2011 at 8:32 pm

    I would say that #5 is a bit over stated, most men are still tied to some form of relationship to a woman, maybe not the mother of his children but the mother of some other guys children so he still does have some tenuous tie that will bind him and make him feel that he has responsibilities that he must honor, at least in the white community. In the Black community and somewhat in the Mexican community you have the majority of men being raised by single mothers who grew up without any ties to a father and who are themselves fathers without ties to their children. These are the barbarians within the gate that like in England will rise up when the entitlements fail and burn the cities to the ground. It will be the opportunity of a lifetime for whoever is in the oval office as that will be when we go from a soft dictatorship to a true tyranny. Won’t be much fun but at least it will be change.

  2. Mr. Stricter
    August 21, 2011 at 8:40 pm

    All excellent points. I’ll hope that whoever tomorrow’s rebels are they’ll learn from the mistake Wat Tyler made and will remember that the elite will always betray them, always and that if it comes to war do as the Bolsheviks did and show no quarter or mercy. As abhorrent and stupid as the Soviet system was elimination of ALL the Romanov family was a key component to keeping power for as long as they did. Power is more addictive than crack and the powerful always want more and will constantly try to get into power. Get rid of all of them and they won’t be an issue.

    I suspect that as societies start to unravel what will happen will follow the historical pattern, rich vs poor and with the crackdowns simply making things worse for the elite in the long run.

    I suppose a dissolution is possible, the US for example could become multiple nations but any countries that want to be modern and last long term better evolve good redistribution methods. After a while even our tried and true remedy of racism will fail. Once you have your minority free state, guess what all that hate becomes less and less effective and stirring shite with neighboring nations is unwise when your people are hungry and angry and have information. Even Redneckistan will probably have Internet and while those people are more ideological than some, they are far from stupid. Like the song says “Won’t get fooled again.”

    For the short run though it is going to be interesting to say the least, the media’s anti racism narrative vs the needs of the elite to stir up racial tension to weaken class solidarity.

  3. Mr. Stricter
    August 21, 2011 at 8:46 pm

    gunner451 :
    I would say that #5 is a bit over stated, most men are still tied to some form of relationship to a woman, maybe not the mother of his children but the mother of some other guys children so he still does have some tenuous tie that will bind him and make him feel that he has responsibilities that he must honor, at least in the white community. In the Black community and somewhat in the Mexican community you have the majority of men being raised by single mothers who grew up without any ties to a father and who are themselves fathers without ties to their children. These are the barbarians within the gate that like in England will rise up when the entitlements fail and burn the cities to the ground. It will be the opportunity of a lifetime for whoever is in the oval office as that will be when we go from a soft dictatorship to a true tyranny. Won’t be much fun but at least it will be change.

    By the time we get to that I suspect the military and police apparatus might be too weak to do the job vs a determined insurgency. The US has a lot of guns and a lot of bomb nuts and people trained in all sorts of urban warfare. They are already talking of limiting military pensions and sooner than later wages a will go too. Loyalty costs money and when our oft married, oft families soldiers can’t make ends meet they may decide that they should run the show or to pull a no show.

    This might actually be an improvement compared to say the Koch Brothers. And trust me the military does obey but they are not stupid and are not entirely tools of the corporate right. If they do turn, we might well get something far more socialism vis Starship Troopers which won’t be pleasant or modern but will be better than serfdom.

  4. Columnist
    August 21, 2011 at 11:29 pm

    One thing that prevents uprisings in feudal societies is chopping off hands. So the underclass has something to lose.

    Read some history- most empires, kingdoms, fiefdoms were constantly plagued by internal strife throughout history. Why?

    • Mr. Stricter
      August 22, 2011 at 9:48 am

      Columnist :
      One thing that prevents uprisings in feudal societies is chopping off hands. So the underclass has something to lose.

      Read some history- most empires, kingdoms, fiefdoms were constantly plagued by internal strife throughout history. Why?

      AD is right here. The hanged and tortured rebels to death in the past and in the present sometimes it worked sometimes it didn’t. Qaddafi is just about overthrown and that guy was far more brutal than any of the Wests elite are going to be able to muster.

      Also the poor at least in the US are rather well armed, a decent bolt action rifle and some ammo and supplies is about $150-$200 new (The deadly reliable Mosin Nagant) as is a cheap handgun (well about $200 for one that will get you through a long fight and is not intend as a neo-Guidelamp -Liberator, thats about $100) and that doesn’t include all the toys that are easily made (Google Libyan rebels improvised weapons) or stolen or just raw numbers and force

      The Elite make up maybe 1% of the US and as such if people decide to revolt, about the time the Middle Class is eliminated, they are done for. Odds are they won’t be able to afford a big security state anyway .

      And yeah sure foreign Mercs, as Qaddafi learned thats an end game. Your people will turn on you (tribalism is a strong force) even faster and if the USN still controls its nukes.. well no one is stupid enough to risk that…

      Now a victory of the poor is not guaranteed, the Elite could manage to divide and conquer for many years, a race war could break out or they could pull a Moonraker and try to kill everyone else but the odds are in the “Peoples” favor should they wish to pay the price.

      • J.M
        September 7, 2011 at 8:07 pm

        Sorry to burst you bubble but your libyan rebels DID GET a lot of assistance, what do you think those bombings from the NATO were for?

  5. August 22, 2011 at 5:24 pm

    as long a the US was on an upward trajectory and even the poorer people had realistic hopes of a better life, things were stable….

    change that and you might change the stability…..

    wages haven’t been keeping up with the cost of living, easy credit was filling that gap, everything seemed okay until the housing bubble burst……

  6. With the thoughts you’d be thinkin
    August 22, 2011 at 7:32 pm

    “Upon this, one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge.

    The Romans never allowed a trouble spot to remain simply to avoid going to war over it, because they knew that wars don’t just go away, they are only postponed to someone else’s advantage. Therefore, they made war with Philip and Antiochus in Greece, in order not to have to fight them in Italy… They never went by that saying which you constantly hear from the wiseacres of our day, that time heals all things. They trusted rather their own character and prudence— knowing perfectly well that time contains the seeds of all things, good as well as bad.

    And still they spent most of the energies suppressing rebellions and uprisings… something does not make sense.

    If someone puts up the argument that King Louis gave the Romagna to Pope Alexander, and the kingdom of Naples to Spain, in order to avoid a war, I would answer as I did before: that you should never let things get out of hand in order to avoid war. You don’t avoid such a war, you merely postpone it, to your own disadvantage.

    The chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms; and as there cannot be good laws where the state is not well armed, it follows that where they are well armed they have good laws.

    The prince must consider, as has been in part said before, how to avoid those things which will make him hated or contemptible; and as often as he shall have succeeded he will have fulfilled his part, and he need not fear any danger in other reproaches. It makes him hated above all things, as I have said, to be rapacious, and to be a violator of the property and women of his subjects, from both of which he must abstain. And when neither their property nor honour is touched, the majority of men live content, and he has only to contend with the ambition of a few, whom he can curb with ease in many ways. It makes him contemptible to be considered fickle, frivolous, effeminate, mean-spirited, irresolute, from all of which a prince should guard himself as from a rock; and he should endeavour to show in his actions greatness, courage, gravity, and fortitude; and in his private dealings with his subjects let him show that his judgments are irrevocable, and maintain himself in such reputation that no one can hope either to deceive him or to get round him. That prince is highly esteemed who conveys this impression of himself, and he who is highly esteemed is not easily conspired against; for, provided it is well known that he is an excellent man and revered by his people, he can only be attacked with difficulty.

    Ya, but most rulers and ‘elites’ don’t get it.

    There is no other way of guarding oneself against flattery than by letting men understand that they will not offend you by speaking the truth; but when everyone can tell you the truth, you lose their respect.”

    Our Ruling Classes should remember Machiavelli

  7. March 26, 2012 at 10:42 am

    Mr. Stricter :
    As abhorrent and stupid as the Soviet system was elimination of ALL the Romanov family was a key component to keeping power for as long as they did.[...]Get rid of all of them and they won’t be an issue.

    Spot on. The worst enemy is the one left unfinished. How many of the educated are willing to soil their linens in pursuit of victory?

    • March 26, 2012 at 11:21 am

      True. Lenin was one heck of a Machiavellian.

  1. October 27, 2011 at 3:06 pm
  2. February 18, 2012 at 1:48 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 96 other followers

%d bloggers like this: