What Does It Mean To Be “Governed?”

     By now, our Gentle Readers have probably heard about this:

     Quoth the mighty Sundance:

     Within the recent WEF discussion, Secretary Kerry outlines how freedom of speech is a ‘threat to the global democracy‘ because the governing officials have a difficult time controlling information. Kerry goes on to posit how the next administration, presumably in his hope Kamala Harris, will forcefully structure all the tools of government to stop Americans from using the first amendment to freely speak about issues.
     Governing is too challenging, according to Kerry, when the government cannot stop people from seeking and discovering information that is against their interests. Effective governing required compliant adherence to a singular ideology. Against the backdrop of COVID-19 and a host of similarly related government narratives, if people are free to find alternative information and think for themselves, they become increasingly more difficult to control. Yes, this is said quite openly. This is the mindset of those in power.

     What more is there to say, really? Kerry is merely one aspiring totalitarian among many. They gather at places and events such as the “World Economic Forum.” Parodying them is essentially impossible; their extreme hostility to freedom guarantees it.

     But it occurred to me that a socialist writer actually prefigured Kerry’s global information-control notions in a novel published in the Sixties:

     “Senor Hakluyt, you are a stranger in Aguazul. You will therefore be inclined to dispute the dogmatic assertion that this is the most governed country in the world.”
     Again that air of throwing down a gauntlet in debate, again that cocking of the head to imply a challenge. I said, “All right—I dispute it. Demonstrate.”
     “The demonstration is all about you. We make it our business, first, to know what people think; we make it our business, next, to direct that thinking. We are not ashamed of that, senor, incidentally. Shall we say that—just as specific factors influence the flow of traffic, and you understand the factors and can gauge their relative importance—we now understand many of the factors that shape and direct public opinion? What is a man, considered socially? He is a complex of reactions; he takes the line of least resistance. We govern not by barring socially unhealthy paths, but by opening most wide those paths which are desirable. That is why you are here.”
     “Go on,” I invited after a pause.
     He blinked at me. “Say rather what is your view. Why is it we have adopted this round-and-round policy of inviting an expensive expert to solve our problems subtly, instead of saying, ‘Do this!’ and seeing it done?”
     I hesitated, then counter-questioned. “Is this, then, the extension of an existing policy rather than a compromise between opposed personal interests?”
     He threw up his hands. “But naturally!” he exclaimed, as though surprised to find me so obtuse. “Oh, it is ostensibly that there is conflict between one faction and another—but we create factions in this country! Conformism is a slow death; anarchy is a rapid one. Between the two lies a control which”—he chuckled—”like a lady’s corset in an advertisement, constricts and yet bestows a sense of freedom. We govern our country with a precision that would amaze you, I believe.”

     John Brunner, a gifted and imaginative writer to be sure, was no fan of freedom or free societies. His novels – start with The Long Result and Stand on Zanzibar, proceed thence to Jagged Orbit, The Sheep Look Up, and The Shockwave Rider — make that plain. His visions of societies under benevolent, all-controlling despotisms are a good model to compare to the aspirations of the John Kerries of the world.