Maybe I didn’t explain it very well. I wasn’t saying progress was impossible. But the individual organizations, nations, leaders, etc. often end up getting caught up in this trajectory. Once this happens, there will usually be a new movement to try to fight against the new dominant hegemony. Sometimes the old power wins, sometimes the new one does, but inevitably, whoever wins will keep regressing. But there can still be a big change as the old guard is replaced (or sometimes bullied into submission).
So, it’s probably not universally true, but it’s a pattern that I’ve started noticing again and again as I study history.
it’s why us lefties focus more on systems than on people. a marxist approach to history reveals that this has been happening and likely continue happening until we muster some fundamental change in how we organize. it’s like there’s an 80 year cyclical race where the “revolution” (not the revolution) happens, people accept that it’s not perfect, but it’s an improvement, they fail to educate their children about the problems with the old regime and the current regime, until eventually a time comes when no one remembers the last cycle anymore and the whole process gets repeated.
fwiw, i thought what you were saying was pretty clear hence posting the fascism definition comic that just takes what you said and puts doodles to it. but for some reason you got downvoted to hell and i got hella upvotes. i even looked at lemvotes and saw several people downvoting you and upvoting me, which i find confusing. it seems like lemmy is going through a weird moment
That makes sense and I agree with you, I got a bit confused by the the way it’s phrased since I felt like it implied “Good kicks out bad, good becomes the bad” infinite loop. But general enshittification of most things is a very strong trend in history.
I’ve read about a bunch of “Power consolidation - > one man controls all - > successor is unqualified - > people get upset - > regime change”. Have an upvote for intention :)
Maybe I didn’t explain it very well. I wasn’t saying progress was impossible. But the individual organizations, nations, leaders, etc. often end up getting caught up in this trajectory. Once this happens, there will usually be a new movement to try to fight against the new dominant hegemony. Sometimes the old power wins, sometimes the new one does, but inevitably, whoever wins will keep regressing. But there can still be a big change as the old guard is replaced (or sometimes bullied into submission).
So, it’s probably not universally true, but it’s a pattern that I’ve started noticing again and again as I study history.
it’s why us lefties focus more on systems than on people. a marxist approach to history reveals that this has been happening and likely continue happening until we muster some fundamental change in how we organize. it’s like there’s an 80 year cyclical race where the “revolution” (not the revolution) happens, people accept that it’s not perfect, but it’s an improvement, they fail to educate their children about the problems with the old regime and the current regime, until eventually a time comes when no one remembers the last cycle anymore and the whole process gets repeated.
fwiw, i thought what you were saying was pretty clear hence posting the fascism definition comic that just takes what you said and puts doodles to it. but for some reason you got downvoted to hell and i got hella upvotes. i even looked at lemvotes and saw several people downvoting you and upvoting me, which i find confusing. it seems like lemmy is going through a weird moment
That makes sense and I agree with you, I got a bit confused by the the way it’s phrased since I felt like it implied “Good kicks out bad, good becomes the bad” infinite loop. But general enshittification of most things is a very strong trend in history.
I’ve read about a bunch of “Power consolidation - > one man controls all - > successor is unqualified - > people get upset - > regime change”. Have an upvote for intention :)