Pessimistic Utopianism?

 “Hothouse Utopia – Dialectics Facing Unsavable Futures” by Ryan Gunderson, 2021

This book is influenced by Frankfurt School ‘Western’ Marxism, as Gunderson’s idea of ‘orthodox’ Marxism seems to be that it is determinist.  The Frankfurt School’s pessimism came from the Soviet / Warsaw bloc failures; the growing weaknesses of the  working class movement in 'developed' capitalist countries and the triumph of the neo-liberal market project by capital.  So it concentrated on how capital controlled the lower classes through cultural and material means, attempting to counter-act that with critical dialectics.

Hovering over Gunderson’s outlook is the dark present and future wrought by global warming and furious capital accumulation.  The environmental crisis is his main motivator. He realizes the neo-liberal project and environmental techno-utopianism is failing, which is obvious to many.  In a way the ‘alt-right project’ is next, as capital attempts to defend itself by openly authoritarian means.  In this context he looks at how “coping, hoping, doping and shopping” are the methods that many people use to endure the present and the dark future, leaving the cause of misery intact.

COPING, HOPING, DOPING & SHOPPING

To do this Gunderson attacks capital and techno apologists like Steven Pinker without falling into the trap of romantic primitivism.  Pinker claimed that ‘progressive’ intellectuals “really hate progress.” Gunderson points out that all technology is not progressive - ‘progress’ is not facial cognition software and stratospheric geo-engineering.  Instead Gunderson introduces the concept of “alienated reconciliation” in which individuals deal with the cruel contradictions in society by #1) justifying the system as ‘that’s just the way things are’; #2) engage in ineffective actions to solve problems that actually sustain the system; #3) engage in various forms of escapism.  As he puts it “Today, hope is paradoxically sustained in pessimism.”

#1 is obvious, but #2 relates to charity, small group thinking and activities, tiny picket lines – in effect, do-gooderism, moralism and activities that amount to virtue signaling, religious love, bearing witness or performative politics.  These change nothing.  Adorno called this ‘pseudo-activity.’  In a way ‘activism’ like this prohibits thinking by being busy, busy, busy … a problem for some left groups. I know who you are.

Gunderson names several more concepts:  “utopian pragmatism,” “neoliberal naturalism,” “moralizing individualism.” The former involves believing the present system will exist forever – a utopian idea if there ever was one.  The second turns capital into a ‘natural’ state, not one driven by profit, class and production or embedded in history.  The third is familiar to anyone who is in a Twitter©/ FB©/ etc. fight.  There the keyboard warriors of identity slam anyone who mentions class or materialism, or doesn’t like Obama or Harris.  As Gunderson notes, this kind of activity actually boosts the Republicans, the alt-right and the fascists. As an example he addresses the ‘fat acceptance’ movement – which justifies the capitalist food regime of morbid obesity, poverty, terrible food and bad health in the name of ‘fighting discrimination.’

#3 is “hiding” (or doping) - done with alcohol, drugs, Netflix© and entertainment.  As I’ve said before, entertainment is the new ‘opiate of the people.’  He pokes fun at the ‘vanlife’ movement, McMindfulness© and artists like Rhianna getting a billion hits while Chomsky only gets 3.6M.

Utopia / Dystopia

DIALECTICS, UTOPIANISM and a PROGRAM 

Marcuse pointed out that dialectical thinking emerges out of daily life, as contradictions because evident.  It becomes “a critique of conformist logic.”  Gunderson’s academic and odd names for the stages of dialectics are various forms of ‘immanent critique,’ ‘historization,’ and ‘contradiction-crisis diagnosis.’  He describes these three ‘flagellations’ (!?) of dialectics by referring back to the failures of the 20^th century socialist movement.  He endorses something called ‘negative dialectics’ which is open about the future but not determinist. I'm not sure any of these twists are necessary.

Gunderson first quotes Bukharin and Kautsky as to how they assumed socialism was inevitable.  It is not, as the more wide-spread socialist phrase  ‘socialism or barbarism’ originated by Luxemburg shows. Secondarily, the ‘revolutionary subject’ – the working class – was defeated, bought off or ideologically captured, living to survive, according to the Frankfurt School.  He describes the School's ‘negative dialectical thinking’ - which abstains from clear programs – resulting in a sort of pessimistic and idealist quietism where “thinking becomes a more effective means of resistance than action.” So he turns against them.  The Frankfurt School assumed Fordist / Keynesianism would be permanent.  It was not, moving first to neo-liberalism, now towards authoritarianism and fascism. Thirdly, Gunderson believes a “climate revolution” – or indeed any kind – is highly unlikely, but still a goal to work towards.  As part of this he favors a form of ‘degrowth’ in advanced capitalist countries.  (As an aside, he thinks Extinction Rebellion is a form of pseudo-activity.) 

Gunderson’s goal now is a “less bad dystopia,” (depressing idea, that…) and wonders whether “utopian thought is possible today.” He dips into Christian ideas of paradise and Walter Benjamin’s depressing insistence, like so many leftists, on only looking at the miseries and few triumphs of the past.  Gunderson ultimately stands for the liberation of the future and its children and grandchildren, not a focus on the travails of the parents, grandparents and of the past.

He considers the correct idea of ‘utopian’ to be Adorno’s position of “genuine progress as catastrophe reduction.”  Not ‘production for production’s sake’ as in the capitalist and crude Marxoid productionist versions, but the reduction or elimination of environmental, fascist, war, nuclear and poverty threats, using existing technology.  He opposes the idea that the further development of abstract productive forces are the dialectical materialist endgame and settles for a reconciliation with nature.

Lastly, Gunderson introduces another academic phrase, “anticipatory reconciliation,” which understands the present is full of possibilities to prevent a ‘less bad dystopia.’  He grounds this in the ‘dialectic of hope’ of the semi-Marxist Ernest Bloch, who, unlike the Frankfurt School, was not afraid of programmatic demands and “fact-based possibilities.”  Gunderson also endorses common-sense ‘mundane transcendence’ consisting of kindness, observation and understanding.  

What follows is a discussion of various kind of ‘possibilities’ and demands:  1) Socialize energy systems.  2) Reduce work time. 3) Economic democracy. 4) Democratize global climate governance.  He endorses familiar large-scale ‘revolutionary reforms’ (somewhat similar to transitional demands) along social-democratic lines, as part of a movement towards ‘democratic socialism.’  He is a supporter of Sanders and perhaps a member of DSA, but still mentions the need for ‘revolution.’ 

Full of perhaps unnecessary or academic formulations of common-sense or simple Marxist understandings, Gunderson attempts to deal with the weakness of the global socialist Left through making adjustments to forms of Marxism, in order to clear a way to a "less-bad future." This book is perhaps best at using the historically-based views of the Frankfurt School, with a personal twist that refutes them.       

Prior blog reviews on this subject, use blog search box, upper left, to investigate our 15 year archive, using terms:  “Zizek,” “McMindfulness,” “Capitalist Realism” (Fisher); “The Revolution Will Not Be Funded,” “John Bellamy Foster.”  

And I bought it at May Day Books!

Red Frog

October 11, 2022