Raiding the inarticulate since 2010

accelerated academy acceleration agency AI Algorithmic Authoritarianism and Digital Repression archer Archive Archiving artificial intelligence automation Becoming Who We Are Between Post-Capitalism and Techno-Fascism big data blogging capitalism ChatGPT claude Cognitive Triage: Practice, Culture and Strategies Communicative Escalation and Cultural Abundance: How Do We Cope? Corporate Culture, Elites and Their Self-Understandings craft creativity critical realism data science Defensive Elites Digital Capitalism and Digital Social Science Digital Distraction, Personal Agency and The Reflexive Imperative Digital Elections, Party Politics and Diplomacy digital elites Digital Inequalities Digital Social Science Digital Sociology digital sociology Digital Universities elites Fragile Movements and Their Politics Cultures generative AI higher education Interested labour Lacan Listening LLMs margaret archer Organising personal morphogenesis Philosophy of Technology platform capitalism platforms Post-Democracy, Depoliticisation and Technocracy post-truth psychoanalysis public engagement public sociology publishing Reading realism reflexivity scholarship sexuality Shadow Mobilization, Astroturfing and Manipulation Social Media Social Media for Academics social media for academics social ontology social theory sociology technology The Content Ecosystem The Intensification of Work theory The Political Economy of Digital Capitalism The Technological History of Digital Capitalism Thinking trump twitter Uncategorized work writing zizek

The Idiots Who Make History

Until recently I scoffed at the idea of history being shaped by ‘great men’. Such a notion seems obviously ahistorical to me, abstracting from the messy reality of how change occurs and imputing the complex array of causal powers involved to a small group of unusually prominent individuals. But since the referendum I find myself coming back to it again and again. As far as I can see, two individuals – Boris Johnson and David Cameron – have conspired through their conflicting ambition to bring about a cataclysmic change that neither of them ultimately wanted. There were certainly organised groups supporting either of the two possibilities in the referendum. Nonetheless, what ultimately made it possible were two individuals. Or rather their stupidity. Perhaps individuals are more important to political change than I thought.