Re: Sex and the Modern State

Thank you for explaining this. I shan't right now go into detailed criticisms of your ideas about the family, because I wouldn't want you to think that I was trying to draw you out simply so that I could start sniping! I think your idea is a bit different to mine. I don't want to abolish the family, which I see as functional and natural to humanity; but I regret the reduction of the family to the smallest possible unit of reproduction, brought about by the industrial revolution's requirement for labour mobility, and the uprooting of these families from wider communities of trust. A more social democratic economy would be desirable; it would now require (what it did not require in the postwar period) much more of a challenge to capitalism, or at least an international economic order not anchored in the dollar. Pure anarchism seems utopian to me. I don't expect to see an anarchist society in my lifetime; I don't expect an anarchist society to be realised this century. To me, the priority is the survival of organised human society. America is a unique country in world history, and the biggest threat to humanity's future. The emergence of a stable multipolar world is humanity's best shot. Unfortunately, the very process of emergence may destabilise things sufficiently to cause catastrophe. But it can't be helped; the Global South simply will not be kept down any longer. Since I do not expect American policy to be guided by wise statesmanship (ha!), we can only hope that America will gradually adjust to the emerging order without destroying the world. If dedollarisation were followed by a new Bretton Woods type structure, but one serving the interests of the great majority of humanity rather than just the West, then this might create the space for national governments to pursue more social democratic policies as well. As it so happens, I feel that a multipolar world is also our best shot at the emergence of zones in which pederasty might be tolerated. On top of all this is my sympathy with the Palestinians and my revulsion at the support for genocide on the part of America, Britain and Germany, among many others. So all these considerations, for me, point to one overriding goal: the absolute necessity of the collapse of the Empire. Even a new global security structure, however, will not solve the pressing problem of the climate emergency. The habitability of the planet, and the welfare of humans and all living creatures, should be at the absolute centre of every single policy making process. Instead, we have economic and political structures that seem almost designed to make things as bad as possible. A species that is able to live with 12,000 odd nuclear warheads poised to utterly destroy its own biosphere is, I fear, not a rational species. The longer term (100+ years) is completely unforeseeable at present. The world may be so different that any talk of traditional politics, such as anarchism, may become inapplicable; so I think there's little point in speculating. Surviving the 21st century is enough for now.