PRELIMINARY THOUGHTS ON POLITICS IN MODERNITY
Within politics and political thinking, there is an apparent tendency to negate the historicity of politics. Within American politics this is true. By way of example, conservative immigrants have a tendency to forget which political party they and their families immigrated into the country under. Conservative immigrants today somehow see their right to immigrate as superior to the rights of those looking to immigrate today. And when they immigrated to America years prior, conservatives (in general) at the time looked upon them with disgust and disdain. In this way, the process of political thinking has no real evolution. Political thought and political stances have become firmly rooted in the present, with no understanding or acknowledgment of the historical and no forethought into the future. Modern politics are only the politics of the present and the denial of historicity will continue the current trend of disorganized, disorderly, disillusioned action. Or, rather in-action in many cases.
“History repeats itself,” is terribly cliche, but the statement holds true. History does repeat itself and everyone fails to notice. Reagan - a beloved American screen personality - was not a champion of middle-class rights, equal rights, minority rights, immigrant rights, and held an atrocious track record in terms of international and foreign policy. He also wasn’t exactly qualified to do the job - so the similarities to the situation we find ourselves in today is not identical certainly but not altogether dissimilar. The concept of trickle-down economics is a completely unproven falsity that smacks of complete naiveté. The Reagan administration actively killed, suppressed, and oppressed millions internationally while creating tumult for numerous foreign governments. And yet, here we are again - outraged that a popular television personality has captured the Oval Office. Surprised how in a country where marketing, advertising, and branding are real and present in everyday life, a person essentially won a popularity contest that somehow riveted the dull herd of white sheep that is modern America. The pattern is clear, we just refuse to see it. To return to the previous example, even American nationalism - people who were immigrants only one or two generations ago feel national pride, while vehemently denying the inclusion of present day immigrants into society (except of course, when those immigrants are performing less appealing jobs, like making your salad or BEC at your neighborhood bodega or what have you). And of course, not that long ago America partook in mass genocide against Native Americans, wholly endorsed slavery, fought viciously against equal rights for African Americans, denied and continues to deny rights across the gender spectrum, and has time and time again turned a blind eye to obvious genocide and ethnic cleansing. And yet, American political thought only requires you to look back in time about 24 hours. That is the degree of historicity that is required in our current system. The complete negation and removal from the historic element denies us any chance of moving forward in a manner that is equitable or sensible (I apologize for not defining these terms, that will have to wait for a more in-depth piece, but I do hope you can capture my drift).
I think perhaps the same could be argued for many other political systems of the modern age. Taking Israel into consideration in the most general of terms, Israel was founded by the Zionist movement, although now the nation has a great deal of non-Zionist political and religiously motivated action. That in and of itself is somewhat ironic. Israel’s policies (I use that term loosely) regarding Palestine do not seem to stem from an acknowledgment of the historicity of the global Jewish population, which knows full well the immense generational suffering caused by forced removal, occupation, detention in ghettos, devaluing of human life, flagrant racism, subjugation to unpaid labor, unbridled violence, nationalist propaganda, general oppression, etc. And yet, these are all actions which the Israeli state partakes in daily at the expense of Palestinians, in order to secure and expand the Israeli state. Admittedly, I’m not doing an excellent job of explaining this - but essentially political states in modernity act with reckless abandon and at the complete negation of their history. Morals and ethics are not grounded in any state’s historical experience, but are rooted only in the present day (which I do not yet have a suitable term for, but rest assured I will develop one). There exists a denial of historicity, which creates unfathomable anxiety about the future, and complete immersion into the present. I think this immersion into the present equates to an inability of truly being-with-others as Heidegger described it. As such, there is an underlying and growing sense of irony running through politics and being-in-the-world in modernity.
Capitalism and the continued expansion of greater efficiency in modes of production has a role in this to be sure, but the more poignant theory I am in the process of working out is related to the political departure from history. In another brief reference to Heidegger, there is a sense of being-in-the-world but not a being-in-history or being-as-history. Heidegger asserts that Dasein’s relation to the world is one of practical, personal involvement or 'care,’ that the Being of Dasein itself exists as care in the world. Regarding the political sphere, this does not appear to be true, and it is questionable if it has ever been possible, even outside of politics. I would like to delve more into being in modernity and as I see it comparative to Heidegger, but I shall save that for another day this week.
