by W.D. James

To turn, turn will be our delight

‘Till by turning, turning we come round right.

–‘Tis the Gift to Be Simple, American Shaker Hymn

‘Revolution’ will be a central concept in any thinking about political change. Usually, it is thought of in terms of an abrupt, usually violent, change in political regimes. Hence, it would be contrasted with reform, evolution, or conservation.

I tend to think about political change in terms of Spirit: either spiritual energy within a society is waxing or waning, producing a dynamic cycle of change which is not morally neutral. Entropic change caused by the waning of spiritual energy and organic cohesion is the historical norm: usually that energy is leaching out of a society. This is characterized by decay or decadence. In a society experiencing spiritual decadence the strictly material aspect of existence, power (as the ability to effect control), and wealth progressively come to predominate. While, from the spiritual perspective, such a society is in a process of spiritual decay, it may reach new levels of achievement in these materialistic areas. The modern era is such a time in Western civilization. Since Spirit provides the true basis for organic cohesion within a society, that society’s attempt to maintain order as Spirit ebbs away will entail an increasing use of hard and soft power within the society: with internal energy largely gone, external power seeks to stave off collapse but lacks the creative energy to affect an actual renewal.

‘Revolution’ represents the centripetal dynamic of political change, the growth of Spirit or of spiritual energy within a society. It is the positive turning back towards internal cohesion and creativity. As such, it may represent a relatively greater or lesser degree of spiritual power to return society to a healthier condition and it may succeed to greater or lesser degrees. A genuine revolution, then, represents and inaugurates a period of spiritual, cultural, and moral renaissance—a turning, or, more accurately, a re-turning (‘revolution’ means to revolve). A revolutionary movement or a society experiencing revolution will, therefore, tend to emphasize the spiritual or ideal side of things. It will represent a time and process of cultural creativity and human wellbeing will be reestablished upon a more sure foundation. Because the basis of society’s cohesion is internal to itself, it will tend toward decentralized structures.

No doubt this way of thinking of revolution can lead to some confusion in that many of what we are used to calling ‘revolutions’ will not be seen as such on this view. Further, it is not completely an either/or situation: at any one time, there are probably entropic and centripetal dynamics occurring within the same society.

Modernity and revolution

Modernity as a whole represents a time of militant anti-Spiritism, of accelerating entropy. As the Traditionalists would put it, we are at the bottom of a large spiritual cycle. Modernity has also witnessed an unusual number of political revolutions. I suggest that these two things are connected.

As Modernity realized its project of the disenchantment and technological control of nature and of society, people naturally rebelled against that. The liberal revolutions (American and French) sought to reassert the dignity of the human being against that onslaught, but in a degraded form of positing atomistic individuals, not integral persons.

The Marxist revolutions sought to correct this by reasserting the claims of community. Marx himself sought to formulate a materialist philosophy of revolution but its (partially) saving grace was that he never succeeded in exorcising the Hegelian Spirit from his thought. His overall views of human community and purposes within history were essentially spiritual in conception.

From Proudhon and Bakunin forward, the Anarchist revolutionary tradition saw the collectivist and totalitarian dangers of Marxist thought. Consciously or unconsciously, Anarchism ultimately staked its hopes on a natural or organic solidarity which would, ideally, affirm the claims of both the community and the individual through spontaneous processes.

I see all of these as relatively limited revolutionary projects. They represent the attempt to recover something of the Spirit within the context of modernity, but none of them, in their core representatives, fully moved beyond the confines of modernity itself. Hence, they would represent, at best, smaller epicycles of recovery or renewal within the larger cycle of decadence.

Cyclic revolution

If we back out to a perspective capable of seeing the last genuine cyclical revolution, of a more or less full turning, we are driven back to what many term the ‘Axial Age.’ This represents primarily the period from about 800-200 BC, but with Christianity and Islam representing late flowerings of the movement.

For the vast expanse of human history, predating the Axial Age development, humanity seems to have universally existed within a spiritual framework of what I’m fine calling Paganism. This could be considered the primordial human spiritual condition. This essentially is made up of animism and Nature worship. Many peoples have remained in this ‘original condition’ until quite recently.

Whether the development of ‘civilization’ is taken as a sort of fall from primordial innocence or as a genuine advance in humanity, the Axial Age religions and philosophies represent the first Spiritual revolutions within recorded history. As human societies developed in complexity, they entailed both the emergence of new forms of domination and centralization and new developments in human culture.

The Axial Age revolutions represent a genuine reemergence of the Spirit within complex human societies. It is amazing to note that within a span of several hundred years, within the broader context of the 300,000 year or so existence of our species, the great spiritual teachers of most of our traditions emerged. That is in a span of less than 1/3 of 1% of our existence: basically at the same moment.

Confucius and Lao Tzu in China. The Hindu Vedas and then the Upanishads and eventually the Buddha in India. Judaism in the Near East. The Mystery Religions and philosophy in Greece. Eventually Christianity and Islam make their appearance.

Each of these had the spiritual power to shape a spiritual civilization in its image. These are the only full-fledged revolutions we have record of. Increasingly, the spiritual energy of these traditions is sapped. This is what we term global modernity.

Hence, we are due for a revolution! Whether that will be a robust turning, revolving, of a whole cosmic cycle with something like a new Axial Age, or yet another limited revolution constituting an epicyclic turning is yet to be seen. It does seem we are pretty near the bottom of a larger cycle though.

Immanentizing the eschaton?

The mid-twentieth century philosopher Eric Voegelin critiqued the Communist and Nationalist revolutions of that period as attempts to ‘immanentize the eschaton.’ By that he meant that modern revolutionaries were borrowing imagery and ideals from the ‘end times’ (eschaton in Greek) of the various religious traditions, but especially the messianism of Judaism and Christianity, and attempting to realize within history what had originally been conceived of as occurring outside history, in ‘eternity,’ as the supernatural consummation of history: trying to create the New Jerusalem here and now.

In general, I value Voegelin as a fellow critic of modernity. He thought that modern revolutionary movements made a technical ‘category mistake’: they conceptualized as occurring in history what ontologically could only occur beyond history. As a result, their movements usually produced horror instead of liberation: the Terror of the French revolution and the tens, if not hundreds, of millions dead due to Communist revolutions. Hence, Voegelin adopted a conservative or reactionary stance against revolution in general. The American conservative icon William F. Buckley popularized this with the motto “Don’t immanentize the eschaton!”ⁱ

Well, I’m for revolution and I’m for immanentizing the eschaton!

More specifically, I’m for incarnating the eschaton. Voegelin (I respectfully submit) made his own logical error. He wanted to hearken back to these Axial Age traditions and defend them. Fine. But, understood metaphysically and historically, they were revolutionary developments. None of them meant to leave the (at the point they emerged) decadent Paganisms in place. They all represented spiritual rebirths. I’m for that. Further, all spiritual traditions that posit an ‘end time’ of fulfillment never mean that does not inform our current lives and actions. Christianity, I think, especially, entails eternity informing our existence in time. Eternity is now. The Kingdom is within us.

Nevertheless, Voegelin was on to something. Many modern revolutions did end up eating their own children. In the case of the French and Marxian revolutions, I think both the formulation of the ideal to be sought was one-sided (ie, they failed to consider human beings in their full stature as material, intellectual, and spiritual beings) and they quickly adopted anti-human and immoral means in executing their revolutions. That is, I think the problem was not the eschaton but the limited conception of the eschaton and the employment of purely modern technological means.

Our revolution

I do not know, but I suspect, what the future holds for us. I really don’t know if the Spirit intends another epicyclic revolution or a complete cosmic revolution. Whatever it may be, I’m in: the Spirit will decide how deep it goes.

Looking back to those last deep revolutions for guidance, I think we can discern some basic guiding points for our current situation (or really any situation humans have found themselves in).

Dream good dreams. C.S. Lewis, from his Christian perspective, referred to all the myths of all the world’s spiritual and wisdom traditions as ‘good dreams’ that foreshadowed the Christian revelation. Backing out a bit, I take that to mean symbols and values, counter to those of the decaying regime, which speak of human spiritual and natural fulfillment. These are millenarian spiritual visions. The ideal. Utopia. In a sense, this is the easiest part of a revolutionary process. These visions emerge outside the structures of domination of whatever the current regime is. We must learn to dream and see visions. As the Christian Bible expresses it: “And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams.”

Grow organic relationships. We can start practically by building organic relationships within our families, communities, businesses, associations, and friendships. All of the above mentioned real revolutions developed from small groups to civilization-shaping influences. Let’s start where we are. Let’s carefully nourish and build within the relationships we have. Let’s give attention to living as good lives as we can manage under current circumstances. This will represent the budding of new seeds within the barren fields of the current situation. Then those relationship groups can connect with other similar relationship groups….

Build organic structures, cultures, and identities. Let that develop, organically and spiritually, into larger structures. I have previously written of the federalization of organic structures. Let a wholesome (counter-) culture develop within that. Let that form our identities as people of Nature and Spirit.

Resist Babylon. At least Jews, Christians, and Rastafarians have termed the materialistic structures of domination they have lived under ‘Babylon’ from the Biblical story of the slavery of the people of Israel under the Babylonian empire. Babylon must be displaced before the New Jerusalem can emerge. Partly this is a matter of articulating and expressing the vision of the new and partly a matter of very practically and, where historically feasible, countering and reducing the power of Babylon which has reached its own entropic crisis.

Revolution. When historic circumstance are right, let’s do it. That will represent a fruition of our good dreams, but will entail a good bit of sweat and muscle. Reflecting on the examples of the Axial Age (notice that this designation participates in the conceptualization of revolution: the axis around which something turns), those revolutions were capable of revivifying some of what was already existent in their cultures, added new things to that, and jettisoned what could no longer receive new life. That is, they partly developed from within the culture and structures of their times, but transformed what they borrowed from the past, brought in new values and visions, and rejected or left to die what could not conform to the Spirit. They were at least as much creative processes as destructive, though they did involve destruction.

Dream. Grow. Build. Resist. Revolt.

No doubt, when the Spirit moves (or continues to move, as it clearly already is) it will not look this tidy and schematic from the ground. Actual revolutionary processes do not follow a strict chronological script. Yet, these seem to be elements which typically occur. They can provide some insight into the tasks before us and also help us avoid the inhumane errors of much of the modern revolutionary heritage.

i People of my generation may remember the comic strip, and the newspapers it appeared in, called Bloom County. This was essentially a ‘progressive’ cartoon with Opus the Penguin as hero. Given that it was bloom county, there was apparently still some connection between the left and organic reality at that point. There was a ‘conservative’ character who was supposed to be both obnoxious and I think likable called Steve Dallas. His motto was ‘Buicks, babes, and Buckley.’ I knew those kind of ‘conservatives’ in grad school. I did always rather like Dallas though.