Ian Welsh on the "Freedom" Protests

 

I've long been an admirer of the writings of the young whippersnapper Ian Welsh.  A tip o' the old hat to The Galloping Beaver for having put him on their blog-roll where I first encountered him.  If you haven't read him before I'd advise you to put him on your frequent reading list.  I think his recent post on the contrasts between left-wing protesters and those stupid assholes in the freedom convoy is particularly astute:

One of the reasons I didn’t condemn the strategy used by the truckers is simple: For a couple decades now, I’ve been saying that this general sort of thing is what the left should do. Change happens only when you inflict real pain. 

...

The left cannot do what the truckers do because if they did, they would be shut down with extreme violence — if they were even allowed to get going. Remember, the Ottawa police chief let the truckers set up, knowing in advance what they were going to do.

Note also, that the right uses decentralized action a lot. Their shooters are created by their ideology, but act individually. 

...

For unions to do what the truckers do they would have to start by decentralizing. No significant  headquarters, few assets to be seized, and leadership that doesn’t matter because anyone can lead. If the “president” is locked up, it doesn’t matter because someone else steps up, and regular members know what to do anyway.

Plus, there needs to an implicit threat. “If you take us out by force, we will keep showing up, and you can’t lock us all up.” The “truckers” (most truckers disagree with them, including the Teamsters) belong to a movement that shows up at school board meetings, that pickets hospitals & legislatures and threatens nurses, and that is generally perceived as dangerous. Politicians don’t feel entirely safe using force and law against them, though this is (or was) far more true in the US than in Canada. The left has spent generations telling themselves that violence is always bad and that even the threat of it should never ever even be considered because Gandhi, Gandhi, Gandhi.

Welsh also points out the elite backing behind these imbeciles:

Then there’s Ontario’s Prime Minister, Doug Ford. Doug could have this stuff broken up easily, and if it truly does need the military, he’s the person with the authority to call them in (the Feds arguably can’t without passing a new law). Doug’s daughter is with the protesters.

FDR alleged (but only allegedly) once said, “You’ve convinced me. I agree with what you’ve said. Now go out and make me do it.” Doug almost certainly agrees with the truckers, but he knows that polling is against him.

“Make me do it.”

Killing people for the market is economic orthodoxy. Impoverishing people so the rich can get richer is economic orthodoxy. Taking care of people, in the US, Canada, and Britain is against the ruling ideology — it is actually not legitimate.

...

Today, unions are illegitimate according to the dominant ideologies. Practically the first thing Reagan did was break a major union (the Air Traffic Controllers). Thatcher showed she was in charge and that things had changed by defeating the Miners in Britain. Punching left is good, punching right is verboten.

The “truckers” can do what they’re doing because they’re doing it in service of right-wing values, not left-wing ones, and they are supported by powerful elite factions, including most of Canada’s Conservative party.

They may well be stopped, and even have the law used against them, mainly because they’ve stopped trade between the US and Canada, but they would never have been allowed to run this far if they were left-wing. They’re legitimate, they have elite backing and the cops are sympathetic.

These are also, by the way, the pre-conditions for revolution: An elite faction in support, enforcer class unwilling to step up, and a popular faction in support (although they are decided minority, which is the only reason they aren’t already in charge).

What we're seeing here is the laying of the foundations of a genuine fascist political movement. It's obviously been germinating for a long time and the fascist [authoritarian] mindset is an unavoidable reality in any industrialized society. Because as capitalism fails to produce wealth it has to cannibalize the society it exists within.  Which means that living standards for the majority will fall. Which makes people angry. Which means that elites have to turn that anger towards scapegoats.  And it is people with brains that cause them to more naturally turn upon those weaker than themselves rather than upon the powerful people who are actually harming them who become the rank-and-file of fascist organizations.  

Unless the Left pulls its head out of its ass and figures out that it has been losing (and losing badly) for decades when all the ingredients are there for it to be flourishing, and subsequently figures out WHY it's been losing, the future will be in the hands of those boorish clods in the "freedom" convoy.  Which means we'll all be doomed.  Because these fuck-heads deny reality and are violent sociopaths who inevitably produce disaster. 

Alas, the current circumstances bring to mind that Yeats' quote:

"The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity."