u/kireina_kaiju

If we rewind back to 2016, when the global shift toward conservativism took place, the world was battered by relentless crises. The Deepwater Horizon disaster eroded faith in both governmental and corporate leadership. The 2008 financial crisis destroyed global economic stability, and ushered in the "gig economy", paving the way for disruptive industries such as Uber. The Charlie Hebdo assassination made conflicts thought to be overseas hit home, making people feel unsafe. The first direct effects of climate change, drought and collapsing ocean ecosystems, were being felt. As a result, between 2005 and 2015, every consecutive year in 105 countries saw a decline in global freedom^([1]). Asylum seekers caused global stress and resentment toward immigrants. This perfect storm caused a rise of authoritarian populism across Europe^([2]).

Studies such as that at the University of Binghamton have shown direct links between authoritarianism, and psychological vulnerability stemming from crises^([3]). The result has been studied as well : implied by this Harvard study, the result is democratic collapse^([4]).

My thesis here, is that any challenge to modern authoritarianism, is going to have to come from addressing the root cause - people's exhaustion and fear. People need to create art, and feel some degree of control over their life and environment, if we would like them to stop giving their power away to others that claim to have a way through the storm.

I would like first to address some sound challenges to my argument. The first and most obvious, is that I am arguing to invest in the arts while people are starving. The model underneath Maslow's famous Hierarchy of Needs, that I believe we are all familiar with and largely agree with, would suggest that we cannot consider self actualization in an environment where foundational needs such as food and shelter are insecure. I am, in fact, not offering solutions to these foundational problems directly - and that is a problem for me. Authoritarian strongmen are. I am going to acknowledge this is a weak point for me, but I am not going to shy away from this completely. It is my view that self-actualization is, historically, the best tool for the job when we are discussing problems like food security. Famously, Norman Borlaug is responsible for the genetic engineering technologies that are responsible for keeping over a billion people alive, winning him the world food prize^([5]). So while I am forced to admit that self actualization has less immediate value, its long term value is unquestionable, and arguably, there are no better tools for securing those needs at the bottom of the hierarchy, than those that exist at the top of the pyramid.

The other challenge my argument faces, is one with the clearest imaginable historic example. Weimar Germany was a cultural and scientific powerhouse, before it created Adolf Hitler. In the modern world, STEM is a tool of authoritarians, and is weaponized. Perhaps now more than ever, with the advent of AI. To address this, I need to stress that I am advocating for personal access to the sciences, and development of arts that have more utility to individuals than to governing systems. The argument that investing governments will not have an immediate ROI (return on investment), is a special form of the argument that I am advocating for arts investment while people are starving, and has already been addressed. Weimar Germany was, indeed, a scientific powerhouse - but one that favored, like authoritarians, predictable, technical problem solving over critical inquiry. Critical inquiry, and the capacity for research, absolutely existed - just not for the common citizen. Weimar Germany was deeply stratified economically. Macroeconomic shocks had destroyed Germany's middle class, and no one but the wealthy had access to the tools and technologies required to become part of Germany's research community. The character of Germany's STEM success can, perhaps ironically, be seen most clearly in the art of Hitler itself. Hitler practiced perspective techniques widely used in architecture and industrial design, with an apparent hope that if he had enough technical perfection and did what society expected of him well enough, art would emerge. His paintings would not have emerged in a society that encouraged personal risktaking and creative inquiry outside of Germany's elite. A personal, accessible science, with the capacity of anyone, from any social class, to perform research and experiment, kicks out the foundation of the system that created Hitler in my view. STEM can be weaponized. STEAM (A for Arts) cannot.

With these challenges addressed (though your arguments are appreciated and will be as well), I am going to focus on the good that can be done through STEAM. The appeal strongman authoritarianism has, is sincere and reflects no weakness of character. People that promote reliable solutions to problem, when nothing experimental seems to be working, are good people to have in a crisis situation. Life presents us with a lot of problems that have no solutions - but we have a lot of solutions that we know work, that simply need to be managed. These solutions, in turn, require human labor, and that labor needs to be coordinated. When people have been enduring crisis after crisis, when they have none of the resources or media one needs to create art, someone coming along and saying, do this simple thing and we will all prosper, can appear like a lighthouse in a storm. However, this inflexibility unchecked leads not only to despotism, but to disaster. Innovation is a survival requirement in a shifting, unpredictable landscape with most of our universe unknown to us. Power given is never power returned peacefully.

Even without the threats of despotism and disaster, the human soul - by which I mean seat of consciousness and will, I am not using the metaphysical definition - is extinguished when yoked to the will of others. Intelligence and craftmanship wither. Life under an authoritarian is similar to being in a kitchen bereft of basic tools and filled with gadgets. Fundamental skills, such as cutting vegetables, proper use and treatment of cookware, proportioning spices, fixing culinary mistakes, manipulating dough, these are all lost. Cooking becomes a matter of following dogmatic instructions, and unintended consequences must be disposed of. The recipes that must be followed are all the result of innovation, and so new recipes cannot be crafted. The act of cooking becomes a deeply unfulfilling chore. Those with real ability are not allowed into kitchens; to become employed as a cook, one must be friends with the right people and demonstrate an unwavering willingness to do exactly as one is told.

And with the soul, the ability to resist authoritarianism, too, is extinguished.

[1] https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2016/anxious-dictators-wavering-democracies-global-freedom-under-pressure

[2] https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/money-worries-and-job-dissatisfaction-drove-europes-populist-boom-research-suggests

[3] https://orb.binghamton.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1137&context=research_days_posters_2025

[4] https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/carr-ryan/our-work/news-announcements/democracy-shadow-global-rise-authoritarian-populism

[5] https://www.britannica.com/biography/Norman-Borlaug

Just four years ago, modern slavery was a major world politics topic. Popular Shows like John Oliver's ran exposé pieces. Everyone associated FIFA with their callous actions and comments toward Qatar's underclass. Organizations such as the HRC had pieces like this https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/06/16/qatar-six-months-post-world-cup-migrant-workers-suffer

Flash forward just four years and everyone seems to have forgotten completely about it, in a year with the World Cup in America and Donald Trump working with Prince Mohammad bin Salman al Saud to grant Saudi Arabia the ability to enritch uranium, and Iran attacking countries people learned about for perhaps the first time in relation to Kafala. This issue is adjacent to so many things happening right mow, yet it simply does not come up.

I do realize there is a war in Persia, Gaza, and The Western Front and Land Funnel. There are numerous human rights issues - though even there Rowling's attack on Amnesty International places this adjacent - and economic problems nations have. I do get this.

But just as many people care about the existence of modern slavery today as did four years ago. And nearly none of them are discuss it during a time probably uniquely suited to garnering attention.

Independence from Great Britain is the world's most widely celebrated holiday (e. after new years, source https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/02/12/which-countries-have-the-most-and-fewest-public-holidays/). July 4th is when they happen to celebrate this world holiday in the US. Therefore, people who do not believe the US is currently worth celebrating, can if they wish instead celebrate the worldwide holiday Independence Day, so that they do not have to pretend to be proud of a country they are not but can have a celebration they can enjoy.

E. Just so we are clear, I am advocating residents of any country to celebrate their own and other country's independence days, or to simply celebrate "Independence" as a concept whenever their own country's independence day comes around, without necessarily having to celebrate their current government. This is to allow US liberals and centrists to celebrate to avoid negative messaging which could in turn disenfranchise them in elections, without forcing them to endorse their nation, which is a concern US centrist liberals have expressed online several times.

E2. I apparently worded this really poorly, if anyone understands what I'm saying and would maybe have suggestions as to how I can rephrase things that would be helpful. What I am suggesting is similar to what people do on Columbus Day in the US, where they celebrate Indigenous People's day instead. I really thought this was a simpler concept than it apparently is.