Revolution, Flashmobs and Brain Implants in 2035

siddesu writes "Marxist revolution, WMDs, flashmobs and other sci-fi items are coming soon in a country near you, according to the UK Ministry of Defence. 'Information chips implanted in the brain. Electromagnetic pulse weapons. The middle classes becoming revolutionary, taking on the role of Marx's proletariat. The population of countries in the Middle East increasing by 132%, while Europe's drops as fertility falls. "Flashmobs" — groups rapidly mobilised by criminal gangs or terrorists groups. This is the world in 30 years' time envisaged by a Ministry of Defence team responsible for painting a picture of the "future strategic context" likely to face Britain's armed forces.'"

Comments

Re:Sigh...

[hey!]

You can preempt that by running the country for the benefit of the people in general rather than for the billionaires.

I'm not sure that's quite right. Or at least it needs more precision. As conservatives like to point out, the level of physical well-being in western societies has reached a point where even most of the poor are better off than the middle class of a generation ago.

It's interesting to think what Marx would have thought if he had access to twenty first century science; his viewpoint is distinctly 19th C. But stripped of its utopianism, Marx has some interesting points about the tendency of power relationships to become exploitive and the stability of that situation when the powerful are completely dependent on the exploited.

The way the power inequalities between the super wealthy and the middle class could lead to stability would not be based on the powerful enjoying profits at the expense of the middle classes material well being. Wealth today after all is largely gotten and maintained by selling luxuries to the middle class. But it is also clear that the middle class is not happier than the middle class of a generation ago, despite being much more abundantly supplied with luxury goods.

I think there is a potential for revolutionary instability in the middle class, but it won't come from their being unshod, unhoused, or unfed. It will come from their feeling that their lives are not in control, and that that control lies more in than hands of others inimical to their interests. It will come from anxieties and the feeling of powerlessness.

Will my job be offshored? Can I ensure entry of my children into the middle class? If somebody gets sick in my family (supposing I am American), will I lose my job or be unable to change my job? Will I lose my house because interest rates drive my mortgage too high? Will my pension fund go bust because my employer borrowed from it?

Arguably, some of these problems are due to bad planning by Mr. Middle Class. You should have considered international labor competition when you chose your job. You should set money by for your kids education, and not worry if you can't afford a private university. If you're worried about losing your health insurance you should work for a company that is large enough to absorb the cost of illness. You should not buy more house than you could afford within the historical ranges of interest rates (or go fixed rate). You should not count on your pension for you retirement.

But whatever the strength or weaknesses of these arguments, if there is enough middle class insecurity is there, and if enough of the middle class feel that others, who have an exploitive interest, have more control in the outcomes of these anxieties than they do, then the middle class will become revolutionary. And despite having a lot more education than the workers of the early twentieth century, they won't be too picky about the intellectual pedigree of the revolutionary theory they follow.

In the end, that is what FDR style big government liberalism was about. FDR was an American aristocrat, the kind of blue blood who could have the King of England to dinner and feed him hot dogs without being the least bit anxious. His policies are basically "hair of the dog" socialism: not actual socialism, but an enlightened self interest in limiting the appeal of the whole socialism package.