Political CV (260127)

From Kubrik’s Dr Strangelove	Because the preoccupation with the personal knows no bounds in this day and age, I would like to briefly list relevant matters concerning myself here.

From my student days, I have occupied myself with the question of how the people could decide as much as possible for themselves regarding societal matters. For example, regarding the built environment. It soon became clear that matters such as public participation and referendums were not the answer. Without knowledge of alternatives and costs, and without actual delegation of authority, it’s impossible to make decisions about anything. Moreover, one can only communicate meaningfully about something with a limited number of people. Exit all forms of direct democracy and public participation.

Around 1975, the insight emerged that the decision-making entities, whether voters or elected officials, do not engage in rational or scientific decision-making. Everyone is embedded in an ideology. Before I can tell the reader anything further about myself, I must first address what a self or, more philosophically, a subject actually is. An old Marxist and often misunderstood term applies here: necessary false consciousness. With the emphasis on necessary, indicating that it is the nature of (human) consciousness that it is colored, ideologically determined.

There is no absolute way out of this, in the sense that one can possess an absolutely true consciousness. The only possibility is to exchange a false ideology for a slightly less false one. That frequently proves difficult enough. Especially if one turns out to believe in a strong and free individual who decides everything for himself, including what he does and does not believe in. It is necessary to approach ideologies – particularly one’s own ideology – critically to switch ideologies. The belief in a strong and free individual, who is born into the world free to make is own choices, is the core of the humanist-liberal attitude to life. Culminating in the neoliberal narcissistic cult that one’s own destiny and thereby effectively one’s own world is malleable. You are a Master of the Universe (The Bonfire of the Vanities — Tom Wolfe 1987). You are by definition to blame yourself if that does not work out so well.

Politically speaking, this meant the end of any form of idealism in the sense of if we all want the good, then it will happen (“Left-Wing” Communism: An Infantile Disorder — Lenin 1920). So I became active in the Dutch Labour Party, hoping to put my insights to good use there. After about six years of activity, I decided that this was a dead end and ended my membership. Around 1984, after all sorts of disappointing experiences as a researcher, I came to the conclusion that even the slightest suggestion of structural change, for example in market structure or the legal system, is taboo. Not only among the ruling power, but also among the so-called opposition. Everyone is trapped in the predominant ideas.

After a considerable number of years of political homelessness and inactivity, I was shaken awake by the murder of Theo van Gogh (2004). Important theme: religion is far from dead and is encroaching. This is not only about the rise of (political) Islam, but also about seemingly innocent ‘somethingism,’ various forms of ‘airy-fairy,’ the unprecedented influence of right-wing religious thought in the US, and the ludicrous resurgence of Jewish orthodoxy. The need for a meaningfull narrative persists. The demise of the socialist ideal does not remove that need; liberal humanist ideology does not appeal to many. This need also explains the rise of identity politics.

It is the most important motive for my attempt to interfere with the world again: the ideological deficit within the opposition must be resolved, if it is ever to stand a chance against the vague or not-so-vague promises of religions.

I escaped from Amsterdam Center in 2025,.chased into the woods. I am a pensionado since 2017.

@VictorOnrust