Cameron and Blond

Erik Kain

Erik writes about video games at Forbes and politics at Mother Jones. He's the contributor of The League though he hasn't written much here lately. He can be found occasionally composing 140 character cultural analysis on Twitter.

Related Post Roulette

3 Responses

  1. I think that Red Toryism – a philosophy which I think Blond never truly let grow into maturity – was stillborn.

    That may be a little harsh, E.D., but my reading of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat alliance makes me think even more strongly that your judgment is correct. Assuming any kind of real Red Tory reforms are even possible in the first place, they have to, I believe, be accompanied by or be a part of an effort to slowly but surely rebuild a shared sense of purpose and authority in civic affairs; “mutualist” or “associative communitarianism,” if it is to have any practical reality, must have mutual and associative institutions and practices to build upon, or else any possible reforms will fall into the hands of the state or corporations, which even with the best of intentions will invariably take up such reforms in patterns that they’ve long since committed themselves to. I suppose it’s arguable that the Conservative-LibDem government will be able to make the sort of cuts which will clear the way towards building what needs to be built, and I’d be delighted if that turns out to be the way Cameron, et al, makes their decisions…but I’m not holding my breath. Blond’s no doubt a smart guy, but I don’t think he’s allowed the full civic and religious insights of his teacher, John Milbank, to interfere with his ambitions too much.Report

  2. Jivatman says:

    There are many policy issues they agree on, but culturally, I don’t think the liberal democrats aren’t likely to be Blond’s vision, which is a somewhat regressive one.

    A principal problem with Blond’s vision of a voluntary society is that it seems to conspicuously ignore a crucial element and pretend it was never invented, it is also the element the Lib Dems are likely to be by far the most sympathetic and understanding of: The Internet.

    Some of the most amazing, collective and voluntarist projects in human history have worked through it: Wikipedia, Linux, Firefox, OpenOffice all open source and non-profit. Other social ones, like Facebook, are corporate owned, but there are some open source alternatives are currently being worked on and it is only a matter of time before they come on line, and possible replace facebook for dominance.

    The relevance for both local in national governments is that they should attempt to place more and more of their functions online, because nowadays public=online. The more they do so, the more the public will be able to view, and democratically participate in their activities, such as bey adding ideas.

    I know Blond prefers face-to-face activities, but the internet is one of the best facilitators of that, just look at meetup groups have revolutionized how local people with shared interests get together.

    The left traditionally favors government ownership of industries, but of course we now know that simply doesn’t work. I wonder if any consider buying up of software and releasing it under open source licenses? In areas such as textbooks, this might even seem to make immediate financial sense.

    by the way, for a longer explication of this, read “The new Socialism” article from wired.Report