I was reading ‘Global Frequency’ by Warren Ellis recently, and if you haven’t read it you should read it. There was a moment that struck me. Late in the story two of the main characters Miranda Zero and Aleph have a disagreement. They are discussing whether to alert the public to a massive impending disaster. Miranda is against alerting the public on the grounds that they will not be able to control the panic. Aleph disagrees. Aleph says the people who die in such a panic will die if Global Frequency fails to stop the disaster as well. Miranda points out that the disaster is the result of a now defunct military project. She explains that revealing the project could undermine the US government. And that could also cause societal break down if people were to learn the truth. Miranda is willing to sacrifice one city to save the country and the status quo. Aleph feels that the people would be better in the long run if they exposed the truth.
‘Global Frequency’ never resolves this disagreement between its two primary characters. And that disagreement is a primary disagreement in activist circles too. Do we attempt to build something more sustainable out of what is already here? Or do we attempt to rebuild from scratch?
Decisions, decisions.
And not easy ones. There is no guarantee that we can rebuild from scratch at this point. And there is no guarantee that the current system is salvageable.
May you live in interesting times.
Professor Harbinger's School for Villains 