Grant Bartley's: The MetaRevolution

For the discussion of philosophical books.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
d63
Posts: 675
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:55 pm

Grant Bartley's: The MetaRevolution

Post by d63 »

“Changing minds is essential to any revolution, then. Social shifting is about changing people’s minds, I’d say, because with peoples’ minds come their goals, and so their lives. And the battle for minds and hearts is a battle for aims and ideals.” –Bartley, Grant. The Metarevolution (2nd Edition) (Kindle Locations 1167-1169). Punked Books. Kindle Edition.

I hesitated to post this. (If I have, you're reading it.) I originally started out with this immersion in Bartley's book with the intent of taking a stealth approach in going thoroughly through the book and submitting an article. But as I vacillate on the choice to click the post button, I can’t help but consider the possibility that taking the stealth approach might be a little like ambushing him and not giving him a chance to respond to any commentary I might have on the book. I mean I am commenting and playing off of what he clearly put a lot of heart and soul into. Plus that, I have always considered what I do on these boards a process in public (consider this Dear Diary Moment 4/17/2020) and it would give me a chance to develop my thoughts on it before I actually sit down to write the article.

That said, Bartley is right here. We’re not just going to vote our problems away. It will require a paradigm shift, a complete change in sensibility. For instance, in America, we would be a lot better off with the social democrat position of Sanders. But as a Social Democrat myself, I recognize that now is not the time. I recognize that before we actually institute the radical change that Bernie represents, we have to convince a little less than ½ of American voters to stop hearing psycho-shrieks every time anything something remotely Marxist is mentioned. And that holds a lot better odds than the above 50% we were looking at 10 years ago.

That said, I want to comment on another quote:

“Well, we clearly need some sort of revolution, even if just to free ourselves from the numbing effects of the conditioning misinforming our heads. We need more freedom because we don’t even know we need more freedom! (If you think you live in a world of optimal freedom, think at least twice. What does that freedom amount to, economically and intellectually? What are its boundaries and limitations? Generally we’re free to seek success as socioeconomically defined, which is currently a very limiting condition, as it means expansionist materialism.)”

There is a lot more to freedom than a choice between Coke or Pepsi.
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 4128
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Grant Bartley's: The MetaRevolution

Post by Lacewing »

Nice points!
d63 wrote: Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:27 pm We’re not just going to vote our problems away. It will require a paradigm shift, a complete change in sensibility. For instance, in America, we would be a lot better off with the social democrat position of Sanders. But as a Social Democrat myself, I recognize that now is not the time. I recognize that before we actually institute the radical change that Bernie represents, we have to convince a little less than ½ of American voters to stop hearing psycho-shrieks every time anything something remotely Marxist is mentioned. And that holds a lot better odds than the above 50% we were looking at 10 years ago.
Agreed. A change in thinking is needed across the board. Any extreme is too much... and threatens the kind of balance that is crucial for health and peace. We must not dig in further for fear of being completely uprooted... and we must not rip plants out of the ground without preparing them for the transplanting. :D Meeting halfway is a courageous venture and shows faith in humankind. It acknowledges that it's not solely about any single platform or view or individual.
d63 wrote: Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:27 pm“Well, we clearly need some sort of revolution, even if just to free ourselves from the numbing effects of the conditioning misinforming our heads. We need more freedom because we don’t even know we need more freedom! (If you think you live in a world of optimal freedom, think at least twice. What does that freedom amount to, economically and intellectually? What are its boundaries and limitations? Generally we’re free to seek success as socioeconomically defined, which is currently a very limiting condition, as it means expansionist materialism.)”
Very true. Mental conditioning probably represents the greatest lack of freedom we can experience. When people are willing to shoot each other over principles and platforms, they are an instrument of larger agendas (driven by money/power). And to lose the ability to reason and love beyond (and in spite of) tightly held ideas and dramas is to offer oneself (and others!) to a kind of "death" while one is still alive. The ability to share and flex and adapt and treasure and explore further is a vibrant lifeforce. That's what I think humankind is capable of when we don't shut it down (such as in service to ego or fear).
Impenitent
Posts: 2934
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Grant Bartley's: The MetaRevolution

Post by Impenitent »

freedom without political correctness is double plus good

-Imp
d63
Posts: 675
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:55 pm

Re: Grant Bartley's: The MetaRevolution

Post by d63 »

“The central problem with our ideologies and their ideals is a problem with our thinking about them, or rather, with the extent of our lack of thinking about them. We endure bad basic ideas as individuals or as societies because we lack effective criticism of those ideas. Thus, one of the core ideas motivating this manifesto is that uncriticality in ideological thinking is the source of profound sociocultural problems, including the paradox of revolution. We could therefore say that the way we respond to the continuing need for fundamental change needs to fundamentally change. Since this deeper change will possibly never be finished as long as history isn’t, it would therefore be eternal revolution. So ideologically-critical thought recommends ideologically-critical thought as an eternal revolution which keeps overcoming the deficiencies of our limited revolutions. This eternal revolution is the metarevolution.” -Bartley, Grant. The Metarevolution (2nd Edition) (Kindle Locations 2978-2987). Punked Books. Kindle Edition.

Ultimately, what this comes down to is recognizing the distinction between the democratic and utopian approach to political, economic, and social policy. The democratic approach recognizes what any Poly-Sci 101 class will tell you: that politics is the art of mediating diverse interests. The consequence of this is that the individual accepts that the only real and effective democracy is one in which everyone has things they like while dealing with things they might not. The utopian approach, on the other hand, wants it all and they want it the way they want it. That is when, regardless of the ideology or belief system involved, things get dangerous.
Post Reply