The essence of Anglo-Futurism as a movement aims to blend historical English cultural strengths with future possibilities to enhance communal living and cultural identity, and take us To The Stars.
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.
Anglo-Futurism needs to be more than a nationalist movement. If it remains this, then it falls back into Modernist thinking.
Modernism Secularism is the root of the problem. It doesn’t build high trust communities. And if we want to go ‘To The Stars’, you need these basic building blocks in society.
Anglo-Futurism isn’t pre-modern, but I am proposing we need to take the model of local tight knit medieval communities and bring it forward. This will create a high-trust culture which will bring about the bright future.
My idea of Anglo-Futurism proposes a move against the modern secularist ideas of radical individualism and start using technology to help local communities flourish.
Yep. I’ve read them. They are good, but they don’t provide the steps. They look hopefully towards the state, or politicians, or maybe a cultural leader to take it forward.
Personally, I think this needs to be a local grassroots cultural movement. Where political parties can link in with its values of high trust communities, individual responsibility and hope for a brighter future.
I think Anglo-Futurism will open an area of new technological research into supporting and helping local communities flourish. The more time we spend building local communities in the real world, the more chance we will see change.
"They look hopefully towards the state, or politicians, or maybe a cultural leader to take it forward."
This is a big problem that I am beginning to see in a lot of modern movements. It's a top-down solution that leaves more room for arbitrary imposition than spontaneous and organic solution-building and bonding. The state in today's day and age has also become extremely bloated and bureaucratic, struggling to adapt and is basically inept in the face of new changes.
We need more localism and face-to-face contact. Employers are cutting back on remote positions and are calling employees back to the office for a reason.
I, an American, have often marveled at 'pre-modern Englands' accomplishment and the 'we can do anything we put our mind to' attitude. I marveled because I saw that same attitude in the American psyche of days gone by. Thank you for at least putting a name to the latest incarnation of this ideal.
What you speak to here in respect to local associations tied to a physical location as bedrocks of strong communities is something that I have only come to realize within the last week or so (believe it or not!). A lot of the time, interaction within the online world is like eating fast food - it's quick and easy, but only leaves you temporarily satisfied. While working and engaging with others offline is like a nice Sunday Roast!
I would love to see churches once again, part of the medical world. Community health walk in clinics attached to churches as they were in medieval times. Also there was no need for government welfare as the churches agin saw to that need. The welfare system only came AFTER the reformation and the closing of so many churches and abbeys.
I believe this is when the crumbling of the church relevance started. As they used to be used by everyone regardless of belief, for heath and mercy. Churches would once agin have greater purpose than themselves and in such be closer to the teachings of Christ , and in turn be loved by the entire community
Regarding choosing technologies that enable what you are talking about, I find Open Source Ecology (a rather misleading name but there we go) very interesting. Providing open source designs for what they consider to be the key hardware enabling a community to build and farm: https://www.opensourceecology.org/
Also whilst I think about it, in addition to using 'community vs atomisation' as the measure of the worth of a technology, what about considering resilience? For example, digital payments are efficient but reliant on power and data, but cash is resilient (zero power and data requirements for transfer). Could that be part of the consideration?
This is the conservative futurism I've been looking for. I've been making a real-time strategy game where a "conservative futurist" faction fights transhumanists. I've created a working build mechanic and unit movement (see here: https://youtu.be/4ijUkVtNGEY).
On the subject of Anglo-futurism at war, perhaps the army could be split between low-tier "citizen's militia" units and high-tier "warrior nobility" units.
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.
Anglo-Futurism needs to be more than a nationalist movement. If it remains this, then it falls back into Modernist thinking.
Modernism Secularism is the root of the problem. It doesn’t build high trust communities. And if we want to go ‘To The Stars’, you need these basic building blocks in society.
Anglo-Futurism isn’t pre-modern, but I am proposing we need to take the model of local tight knit medieval communities and bring it forward. This will create a high-trust culture which will bring about the bright future.
My idea of Anglo-Futurism proposes a move against the modern secularist ideas of radical individualism and start using technology to help local communities flourish.
Well I’m in favour of an alternative conception of modernity, not rejecting ‘modernism’ all together.
https://unherd.com/2022/08/its-time-for-anglofuturism/
https://mallarduk.com/2023/12/this-is-anglofuturism/
This is what Anglofuturism is. Neither of these articles are by me, proving I am not imposing my vision of the concept.
Yep. I’ve read them. They are good, but they don’t provide the steps. They look hopefully towards the state, or politicians, or maybe a cultural leader to take it forward.
Personally, I think this needs to be a local grassroots cultural movement. Where political parties can link in with its values of high trust communities, individual responsibility and hope for a brighter future.
I think Anglo-Futurism will open an area of new technological research into supporting and helping local communities flourish. The more time we spend building local communities in the real world, the more chance we will see change.
"They look hopefully towards the state, or politicians, or maybe a cultural leader to take it forward."
This is a big problem that I am beginning to see in a lot of modern movements. It's a top-down solution that leaves more room for arbitrary imposition than spontaneous and organic solution-building and bonding. The state in today's day and age has also become extremely bloated and bureaucratic, struggling to adapt and is basically inept in the face of new changes.
We need more localism and face-to-face contact. Employers are cutting back on remote positions and are calling employees back to the office for a reason.
Those articles don't provide anything resembling a coherent philosophy. They are simply a collection of warmed over platitudes.
Anglo-futurism requires English (or at least sufficiently English-like) people. Danes, Swedes, Fins, Flemings etc might work.
It probably also works with Chinese and Japanese majority populations. Hello, Singapore.
You probably can't have anything like an English town if the people are from Somalia, Afghanistan and Nigeria.
I, an American, have often marveled at 'pre-modern Englands' accomplishment and the 'we can do anything we put our mind to' attitude. I marveled because I saw that same attitude in the American psyche of days gone by. Thank you for at least putting a name to the latest incarnation of this ideal.
What you speak to here in respect to local associations tied to a physical location as bedrocks of strong communities is something that I have only come to realize within the last week or so (believe it or not!). A lot of the time, interaction within the online world is like eating fast food - it's quick and easy, but only leaves you temporarily satisfied. While working and engaging with others offline is like a nice Sunday Roast!
I love this analogy 👍🏽
I would love to see churches once again, part of the medical world. Community health walk in clinics attached to churches as they were in medieval times. Also there was no need for government welfare as the churches agin saw to that need. The welfare system only came AFTER the reformation and the closing of so many churches and abbeys.
I believe this is when the crumbling of the church relevance started. As they used to be used by everyone regardless of belief, for heath and mercy. Churches would once agin have greater purpose than themselves and in such be closer to the teachings of Christ , and in turn be loved by the entire community
Regarding choosing technologies that enable what you are talking about, I find Open Source Ecology (a rather misleading name but there we go) very interesting. Providing open source designs for what they consider to be the key hardware enabling a community to build and farm: https://www.opensourceecology.org/
Also whilst I think about it, in addition to using 'community vs atomisation' as the measure of the worth of a technology, what about considering resilience? For example, digital payments are efficient but reliant on power and data, but cash is resilient (zero power and data requirements for transfer). Could that be part of the consideration?
I like that. Building resilience into the system. 🤔
This is the conservative futurism I've been looking for. I've been making a real-time strategy game where a "conservative futurist" faction fights transhumanists. I've created a working build mechanic and unit movement (see here: https://youtu.be/4ijUkVtNGEY).
On the subject of Anglo-futurism at war, perhaps the army could be split between low-tier "citizen's militia" units and high-tier "warrior nobility" units.