A new video from me: How Dune explains political power
As well as all the stunning imagery in the Dune movies — almost every frame is iconic — one of the things I loved about them is they take themselves seriously. After so many years of sci-fi and fantasy films being ironic and self-knowing (looking at you Marvel), it’s deeply pleasurable to escape into a fully-textured alien world.
Part of what gives the Dune universe depth is how prominent a role politics plays — from the feudal-style emperor who is jealous of his nobles, to an autocratic regime struggling to control an oppressed people.
There’s lots of this I could have examined, but in the end I wanted to look at the importance of legitimacy and its different flavours. In a way, it picks up on themes in my videos on realism and free speech: persuasion and ideas have real power, brute force has limits, and forgetting all this is not being ‘realistic’.
If nothing else, this video gave me happy memories of a tutor I had at university. Max Weber was his great passion and he would work him into every discussion, whatever the topic. Well, Peter, here is Weber again, this time in a discussion about a Hollywood sci-fi movie.
(Note: I wrote the video in a way that you don’t have to have watched the movies to follow the argument, as I figure not everyone shares my love of sci-fi, however this means that there are plenty of spoilers.)
Other recent videos:
+ The right is cancelling free speech. The left must defend it.
+ How "lived experience" goes wrong
+ How antisemitic are the pro-Palestine protests really?
+ What people got wrong about Russia (and history)
+ Israel is walking into a trap
+ How Bernie Sanders wins an argument
+ The problem with the media is not what we think
Notes and links
+ I read Humankind by Rutger Bregman and wow what a bad book! It’s basically a reboot of Rousseau with all the nonsense noble savage stuff back without apology. Before agriculture we were all friendly, feminist, egalitarians who didn’t even have diseases (they started when lonely farmers started having sex with animals). Of course we can’t know this for sure because it’s pre-history, but we can look at the evidence from more modern nomad tribes that are peaceful. (Just ignore murderous ones like the Mongols). He even argues at one point, most people died in the Second World War from artillery and other ranged weapons because humans are naturally squeamish about hand-to-hand combat. (Rather than that being just modern warfare.) It’s really bonkers bad! The basic error stems from reading human groupish-ness as ‘decency’ rather than a trait that can lead to both surprising altruism and deep evil.
+ A good contrast to Bregman is Francis Fukuyama’s Origins of Political Order. It tells a much more plausible historical story of modern political institutions came into being. Also full of little interesting asides, such as the argument that female property rights in the West had their origins in the Church wanting women to have the ability to leave them property when they died.
+ It’s an election so I’ve been enjoying the bar chart wars - also this beauty.
+ Cameron appeased the extreme right while Macron wants to confront it. Which approach is best? Daniel Finkelstein in the Times
+ “The gap in masculinity between the left and the right seems to have widened over time. In the early 20th century, the left was as masculine as the right, or nearly so. Today, the right is unquestionably more masculine. What happened?” I’ve no idea who this guy is, but it’s an interesting question. (Twitter)
+ It’s a bit exposing when a see a meme that sums up something I would spend 15mins to articulate in a video.
+ The Past Present Future podcast from David Runciman is currently looking at the ‘great political fictions’, including a surprising piece on Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, suggesting Hyde’s secret is his homosexuality. Recommended.