I do not normally write about political matters on this blog, but every once in a while circumstances compel me. Today, after the disastrous election results in the United States, is such an occasion.
This blogpost is no analysis or in-depth commentary. There are far better voices and pens than mine for such texts. Rather, what I write here is a touchstone of the times, something that is meant to reflect a particular sentiment at a particular historical juncture.
Yesterday, I was working on a draft for an article I'm co-authoring. I spent most of the day moving between two cafés on campus, drinking tea and writing by hand, knowing that my self-imposed deadline is too near for comfort. In-between two such writing sessions, I was checking mail and social media, and I happened to catch a clip of the coming US president at a rally in Georgia, where he spoke frankly and as clearly he is capable of doing, that the transition would be "nasty". The quotation was alarmingly unvarnished, uttered in a matter-of-fact way that left no room for doubt about whether he was just giving the audience what they wanted. Rather, the foreshadowed nastiness had hard ring of evil truth to it.
What I found most arresting about this clip was not so much the words or the matter-of-fact frankness with which they were said. What hit me the hardest was to hear these words at a time when I was writing about violence and utopian thinking. This is a subject I have written about before on this blog, namely in this blogpost, and this. The ubiquity of violence in how people have imagined their ideal societies is something that continues to astound and fascinate me, and I have spent a lot of time these past two years trying to think of the topic in a more coherent way. And, unfortunately, yesterday's comment by the future US president was a reminder of how relevant this kind of research is. Because however abhorrent and evil the plans of US Republicans are, these plans - as exemplified by the roadmap of Project 2025 - do comprise a utopian vision for the future of the United States. Granted, this is a utopia for a select few, but that is precisely one aspect that fits squarely with the tradition of utopian thinking. The selection involves violence, which also fits with this tradition. The promise of violence that has marked the whole Republican campaign points to a period of pain and suffering, because this is how some people imagine their ideal conditions need to be achieved.
Having heard these horrifying words, having heard them over and over again as I wrote them down for future reference, I sat down and began writing a postscript to the article I am co-authoring, a postscript intended to catch the tenor of the evening before the election, with the promise of violence hanging in the air like smoke after a devastating fire. I do not know whether the postscript will be published. I suppose it will not. But it felt like a necessary thing to write, a kind of memorandum, something to read calmly in a future where things might be better. And, above all, a reminder that for some people, violence is both desired and actively sought out in their quest for what they believe to be a better world, no matter how dark and dreadful that world is.
