“Transition theory” as (failed) transitional object as we transition from the Enlightenment to the Endarkenment

This year I am going to write something short, mostly daily, about what is going on – “2 cents on the Arrived Ecological Debacle” (2cotAED). I have to write it; you don’t have to read it. If you DO read it, feel free to tell me how wrong I am (and hopefully why). Re: the debacle aspect: in 2004 the English writer Sara Maitland  wrote about the “pending ecological debacle.” The expression stuck with me; it’s a debacle because it was foreseen, warned about and was avoidable. Well, it’s no longer really “pending” is it?

Peanuts. As a kid I loved the comic strip Peanuts, by the late great Charles Schulz. All human life was here, from Schroeder and his piano, Lucy swiping the football away from Charlie Brown etc etc.

And Linus, the “smart” one, with his Great Pumpkin belief and… his blanket. He used to suck his thumb and walk around with a blanket that became manky af.

This was a transitional object? What’s that you say?

A comfort object, more formally a transitional object or attachment object,^[1][2] is an item used to provide psychological comfort, especially in unusual or unique situations, or at bedtime for children. Among toddlers, a comfort object often takes the form of a blanket (called a security blanket) or a stuffed animal, doll or other toy, and may be referred to by a nickname such as blankie.

Comfort objects are said to enable children to gain independence and research indicates that these objects have positive effects on children by reducing anxiety in later life.

Still with me?

So, in the “scholarly” (sic) world there’s a whole cottage industry about so-called “socio-technical transitions.” I mean, these have happened – for thousands of years if you wanted to travel any distance on the ocean, it was wooden ships and sails. They got bigger and more elaborate up to the 19th century and then, within a hundred years, gone – a socio-technical transition to steel-hulled coal-powered ships. Lots of other transitions too.

But now, according to these academics, we’re in another socio-technical transition, towards “sustainability.”

Hold on, I have to be AFK to cope with an hysterical laughing fit.

…

…

Back now, having composed mys

…

…

Sorry, thought I was done. As I was saying, “sustainability socio-technical transitions.” Oooh, look, some solar panels. Ooh, look, a Tesla – sorry, another brand EV. Hallelujah, We. Are. Saved.

What’s that? Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide went up by 3.6ppm last year you say?

What’s that? BP and the other oil companies have said that they’re unable to make sufficient dosh from renewables so they’re sticking with fossil extractivism?

What’s that you say? Renewables are in addition to rather than replacing fossil fuels?

There is no meaningful energy transition. Those who see one remind me of the courtiers, flunkies, bootlikers (and bootlickers) in the Emperor’s New Clothes – able to see what they need to see for career or psychological reasons, while believing themselves to be better informed/more insightful than hoi polloi.

There IS a transition going on, one that most transition-peddlers are too scared or stupid (the two feed off each other perhaps?) to see. It’s a transition from the “Enlightenment” – all the ‘nice’ things about freedom of speech, assembly, the rule of law etc (1) back to the Endarkenment (in which Trump will look relatively sane and benign).

The whole “transitions” schtick allows us to cling to our belief in (social, moral etc) progress, to have a post-Marxist teleology.

It’s embarrassing to me that I have been fooled by it, colluded with it (mildly), been under its spell for so long.

Such scholarship as there is is largely devoid of any meaningful engagement with real world real politik, with engagement with questions of power (political, social, economic and especially military) for all its talk of incumbents and so on. Such scholarship as there is is basically of minimal use to people asking the ‘what is to be done?’ question, to people who agree that the cat should wear a bell but want to know – reasonably – well, who will bell the cat? It’s word-wanking as the world burns.

Linus, iirc, finally let go of his comforting blanket. We could do the same.

Footnotes

(1) The enlightenment, separation of powers, parliamentary democracy was always a myth in large parts of the world, where we get “our” raw materials. And when the colonies did try to enact it – Guatemala in 1954, Chile in 1973 etc etc et – the forces of the “civilised” west soon reminded them of their proper place (under the jackboot).