An Orwellian view
Life with the new Donks
James Burnham’s book, THE MANAGERIAL REVOLUTION, made a considerable stir both in the United States and in this country at the time when it was published, and its main thesis has been so much discussed that a detailed exposition of it is hardly necessary. As shortly as I can summarise it, the thesis is this:
Capitalism is disappearing, but Socialism is not replacing it. What is now arising is a new kind of planned, centralised society which will be neither capitalist nor, in any accepted sense of the word, democratic. [snip]Society is of its nature oligarchical, and the power of the oligarchy always rests upon force and fraud.
Burnham does not deny that “good” motives may operate in private life, but he maintains that politics consists of the struggle for power, and nothing else. All historical changes finally boil down to the replacement of one ruling class by another. All talk about democracy, liberty, equality, fraternity, all revolutionary movements, all visions of Utopia, or “the classless society”, or “the Kingdom of Heaven on earth”, are humbug (not necessarily conscious humbug) covering the ambitions of some new class which is elbowing its way into power. The English Puritans, the Jacobins, the Bolsheviks, were in each case simply power seekers using the hopes of the masses in order to win a privileged position for themselves.
Power can sometimes be won or maintained without violence, but never without fraud, because it is necessary to make use of the masses, and the masses would not co-operate if they knew that they were simply serving the purposes of a minority. In each great revolutionary struggle the masses are led on by vague dreams of human brotherhood, and then, when the new ruling class is well established in power, they are thrust back into servitude.
This quote from Machiavelli seems to fit very well here:
“Francesco Sforza became Duke of Milan from being a private citizen because he was armed; his successors, since they avoided the inconveniences of arms, became private citizens after having been dukes.”
This is from a person experienced in such matters!
February 13, 2008 at 10:38 am | Trackback












4 comments
I need to give this some thought. It reminds me of something else, but can’t remember what or why.
That is an unfortunate view of humanity. Basically he is saying that social darwinism is all that has ever existed. In that case we will always tend towards animilistic anarchy and likely destroy ourselves.
If we are unable to respect one another as equals in the near future instead of the master slave relationship then I fear our society will tear itself apart. And in the process the thesis won’t matter. It will be rule of the most meek upon earth. The bugs which live off shit shall be all that is left.
David, think tribe. That is all there is in what passes for conventions among men. Societal interaction gets shredded daily.
If you go along with the idea that “You can do what ever you THINK you’re big enough to do” you will hold the grail of society in your hands. The rest is pap!
I remember now. This is Orwell’s view of Burnham’s book. Burnham, without recognizing it, was basically stating the progressive/liberal approach to government…rule by elites, technicians, specialists and scientists (of the real and phony kind). Lippman, Dewey and James promoted it, and, eventually, JFK unleashed the modern kind without being one of them. That is, inviting academics and “experts” into government. What a mess.