Edmund Burke, Ilhan Omar, Robert Nesbitt discussed on The Zero Hour
And welcome back to the program. It's been a long week. We missed you before we get into our conversation with representative Ilhan Omar. I want to Pounds. Rhetorical question for you, which is Are we on the brink of revolution in this country? Let's uh, use as a benchmark for that. The Conservatives sociologist and professed to Robert Nesbitt. I'm sorry in this but who passed away in 1996 was that I believe the University of California, Berkeley. He laid down what he considered the 10 preconditions for revolution in front of mine sent it to me just before not long before we started. Recording this program and I got to thinking about it, and I thought I'd run those thoughts by you now. I don't think any of us would agree with all 10. Descriptors are conditions mystery That's Professor Nesbitt puts on his description of the preconditions for revolution and that genuine revolution, he leaned very heavily on conservative thinkers that when Before him specifically Edmund Burke. But let's think about it for a second because it's good food for thought. And while we're getting ready to pivot to someone knows the murderer of the squad, Uh, I'm gonna talk more about Uh, different feelings around changing within the political system and the Democratic Party later in the show, But if not that, are we ready for revolution. Well, let's see what Nesbitt has to say. First of all, he says, A real revolution must follow. And I'm paraphrasing from the imaginative, imaginative conservative. Website. If that seems like an oxymoron, shame on you for being judgmental, But first real revolution should come after or must come after some kind of dramatic change in society, either the economic Or social order. And while it has to be a big change in dramatic change, it's something that may have happened so gradually that people didn't even realize what was happening like a canary. Whatever it is that thing about gradually turning up the water on shrimp. I don't know. Anyway, I would argue that we have been through a drastic change. We've never had a truly egalitarian society economically or socially. What I would argue that at least economically inequality, it's soared to unsustainable levels. In addition, of course, we have the destabilizing effect of Climate change will only get worse. Uh, second and it talks about a breakdown of authority. I would argue that a lack of respect for and therapy authority has now become endemic on the left and the right and the centre is clinging desperately to a sense of respect for a system that is Quickly losing all objective claims to rationality and authority. I've talked about that a lot elsewhere. I won't go into that here. Uh, now this, but says society must have become Relatively recently wealthy or wealthier than it has been. I think he's speaking from his experience living through the student uprisings of the 19 sixties. I don't think it's any way necessary for that. To be a precondition of revolution. Uh, he also says societies should have been liberalized enough recently that people can see what there's still missing. And I would argue that the Internet has, in fact done that has given people a glimpse of what life might be like. What life is like for those of it are better off than themselves and may have created a kind of Pre revolutionary state of fifth, says Nesbitt. Society must be must have become intensely politicized. Well, I don't even think I have to make my case. They're six. The intellectual elites. Having accepted the politicization of society must see the opportunities of politicized and centralized power structure presents to them, and they must hear the eagerly sees it. I think that's been going on a while then there needs to be a catalyst, precipitating event. We haven't seen that yet. Um, revolutions while they will never attract the mass of people says that the conservative conservative must be able to mobilize morally a small cadre of crusaders. To mark the norms of the society, says the imaginative Conservative Now I don't know about marking the norms of society. I know that people on both the left and the right are hostile to the norms of society, at least as they extend to the political process. I think there's validity to that, although its expression on the right is atrocious and And frightening. Um, revolutionaries must paint, he says, is his night precondition and idea like idyllic picture of the future that the future must look enormously bright. I don't think anybody yet has figured out how to paint that picture. But I would argue that it can be painted and that it is extremely possible to imagine a future that is Much brighter than the president. We're living in today tense. This is an interesting observation, and that's part of, uh, as the his paraphrase here, there must already exist a certain amount of guilt. Within and among members of the ruling class. This must be something that is at least 10 generally obvious and exploitable by those who will be revolting. Now, I don't think he means that in terms of repulsive Although he may have felt that way off from but now again here, neatness, But I would argue, is speaking out of his experiences of the 19 sixties when the ruling classes many segments of them embraced. Uh, you know these social changes going on on the left and among the young uh So are we with all this in mind? By Robert Nisbet Standards are we in a pre revolutionary state or not? I guess I would have to say no comma, but Dot dot dot and the But conditions are these. We are definitely in a state where we've had a drastic change in economic Inequality. People are extremely aware of this. We've had a drastic change in the ability of executives and wealthy to escape legal consequences for their actions. I think people are extremely aware of this across the political spectrum as well. We have had a series of catastrophic events..