Anglo-Futurism is an idea which is slowly gaining traction in England. Here, I unpack what I believe is the philosophical idea behind it.
It draws from the some of the cultural values of pre-Modern English worldview. Bringing them into the present time, in order to provide an opportunity for a brighter future.
It is a non-political and non-nationalistic movement. Even though it has Anglo in its title, it is not restricted to those who are ethnically English. The Anglo relates to English Cultural Heritage. It is not civic-nationalist, as it is a value system which can exist beyond the borders of England or the Anglo Heritage nations (Australia, Canada, USA, New Zealand and Canada).
Anglo-Futurism is a cultural tool to help communities to grow together, rather than apart, as we often see in our Modern technological society.
The most commonly used cultural technologies today are either Marxist based or deconstructivist in nature. Anglo-Futurism is not a technique which is rooted in these ideas. It takes the positive cultural values of pre-Modern English life and draws it forward. The values of love of family, community and spirituality are key elements within this cultural movement.
Instead of using a dialectic process, merging English Cultural Heritage with modern technology to develop a new cultural concept, Anglo-Futurism is a saddle placed on the back of the wild leviathan of technology.
Rather than allowing technology to ultimately influence culture without restraint, Anglo-Futurism seeks to tame this beast and use it for the common good of the person, the community and wider culture.
Only those technologies which help make these ancient English cultural values flourish are promoted. Technologies which encourage people to go outdoors and engage with their community are preferred. While any technologies which foster a culture of isolation and separation between people are discouraged.
Pre-Modern English cultural values
The pre-Modern English culture frames the individual as a person who exists within a network of relationships. They are dependent upon others and others are dependent on them. And so rather than just prioritising an individual’s needs and passions, a person needs to also prioritise their relationships with others.
In the pre-Modern culture, it was common for a person to be part of a local association. These associations were the bedrock of English society, without the need for a strong state. It encouraged volunteerism, which created a sense of belonging. Traditionally, local associations would have included guilds, community groups and local interest groups, all centred around the local village church. Festivals and Holy Days were key components of pre-Modern life.
This makes pre-Modern English Culture local. It is not internationalists. It is fixed to a point in space and time. It is not based in the virtual world, but is grounded in the physical realm. It is wholly real compared to the ‘virtual reality’ found online. And, it is wholly local.
Anglo-Futurist Utopia
The meme associated with Anglo-Futurism is ‘To The Stars”. This provides a utopia to aim for. But we can’t get there unless we are part of a community. Individuals will not survive long term in inhospitable space, communities will though.
English culture is built from the bottom up. It is made up of local communities connecting together. And these communities are made up of people and families, living shared lives. Historically, England was scaled up from these loosely connected communities.
If we want to go “To The Stars”, or build underwater cities, or see mini-nuclear power stations in every town providing unlimited energy, or even see a man made island on Dogger Bank, we need to come together in communities. Not around a political consensus, an elite technocracy. or individualistic identities, but around a cultural movement which believes in a brighter future. Coming together locally in the real world, and then scaling up to go “To The Stars”
NOTE: This is my philosophical view of Anglo-Futurism. This is a new cultural movement and a work in progress. All I have written is up for discussion.
All politics are local, beginning with the clan, fraternity, parish, and guild. To augment his personal power, man embedded himself within these four fundamental groups to boost his familial, martial, communal, and economic interests by boosting his brothers’ interests. A polis is an army is a church is a nation, the bedrock of greater nation. There can be no king without thanes, no federal government without a confederation of towns, no general without platoons to give them the authority, for power is always about the relationship between the authority and the subject. They are the foundation of nation for they secured the tomb of their fathers which is the source of their fatherland.
There has always been many nations in the past. Athens saw themselves not as “Athens” but as “the Athenians” and Sparta as not “Sparta” but as the “Spartans”, for the idea of abstract state divorced from the people is a very recent modern invention of the Enlightenment. It was a result of an increasing bureaucratization of the state’s functions that can survive the downfall of any personnel. What began as a means to ensure a state’s survival and effectiveness in a crisis would lead to a greater divorce between itself and the people. Before that, a state was a personal property of either a king or a people. In fact, there was no state for the first 9,0000 years of agriculture for the clan was good enough when the population density was very low. Only when the land became crowded did the clans confederated into a state that was modeled on the household. Since the clans were the creators, they enjoyed astonishing degree of immunity from the state. But the state, in order to win wars, need the clans to cooperate and obey so that it can survive with enough survivors to hold the land. A king’s worst fear is having the clans defecting in middle of a battle. So, there have always been a tension between the state and the clan, the state seeks to individualize the members by appealing to the supposed universal values and the clan guarding its particular identity and culture and liberty. This conflict is the ultimate source of the universalizing philosophy and religions.
Yeah… I’m very sorry but this is not what Anglofuturism is.
It is a nationalist movement, first and foremost Britain but also the wider Anglosphere. One could say it is civic nationalist but it still celebrates the indigenous British ethnicity and culture.
It is not ‘pre-modern’ but an alternative form of modernity. Arid Roussinos in his ‘Time for Anglofuturism’ deliberately said as such.
It’s also a secular movement. It can be endorsed by people of all religious persuasions but Christianity does not form a core part of it.