Author: Pankaj Mishra (2017)
Historical perspective on modern age focused on the revolutionary developments of the late 19th century.
Modern anger among many oppressed groups of people around the world stems from seeing how the elite get the very choicest fruits society has to offer while the masses struggle, leading to retreat into "cultural supremacism, populism, and rancorous brutality" [346]. This is expressed as "negative solidarity" which promotes apathy, isolationism, and ultimately rebellion.
[267] ... individuals, struggling to find a place in the world, or defeated by the whole grueling process, and resigned to failure, boost their self=esteem through identification with the greatness of their country.
[269] Tocqueville: "in their intense and exclusive anxiety to make a fortune ... [people] lose sight of the close connection that exists between the private fortune of each and the prosperity of all."
[270] (continuing) "It is not necessary to do violence to such people in order to strip them of the rights they enjoy; they themselves willingly loosen their hold."
[270] There is something else going on in the societies defined by the equality of conditions. Claiming to be meritocratic and egalitarian, they incite individuals to compare themselves with others and appraise themselves in an overall hierarchy of values and culture. Since actual mobility is achieved only by a few, the quest for some unmistakable proof of superior status and identity replaces the ideal of success for many. Consequently, the pitiless dichotomy of us-versus-them at the foundation of modern nationalism is reinforced.
[345] T.S. Eliot asks if modern impersonal economic order has any "beliefs more essential than ... maintenance of dividends"?
[347] Seeds of the book concept are Nietzsche writing about elite Voltaire versus plebeian Rousseau. Highlighting influence of Bakunin, Mazzini, Sorel, and Tocqueville.
[offline notes 8/2/2017]