Empire Refuses to Die
A political insight from the very first steampunk novel, Moorcock's The Warlord of the Air
Empire Refuses To Die
“It is strange how all authoritarians automatically assume that the libertarian wishes to impose his own views on them when all he actually wants to do is to appeal to the authoritarian's better nature. But I suppose you authoritarians can only see things in your own terms.”
- Michael Moorcock, The Warlord of the Air
Retrospectively declared the very first steampunk novel, Moorcock's 1971 classic The Warlord of the Air warrants this accolade despite being a literary work that far exceeds anything else in this increasingly familiar genre. The first novel featuring Oswald Bastable, it eventually became a trilogy yet appears to have started as a standalone piece written in the style of a Victorian scientific romance - a subtitle the book picked up in 1974 and still carries today in its omnibus edition, A Nomad of the Time Streams. Different editions have tweaked small details to bring it closer into Moorcock’s expansive mythos - for instance, the speaker of the above line in the original is Count von Dutchke, but becomes von Bek after revision.
The novel is a political reflection on empire structured through an alternative history where the Great War never happens, and therefore the empires of the world continue to thrive and prosper. Moorcock is clearly inspired by H.G. Wells, and his commitment to the Victorian ‘second generation’ of what we now call science fiction (Wells and Verne are half a century after the originator, Mary Shelley). Like Wells, Moorcock manages to construct an engaging adventure romp - when I read it to my eldest son, he fell for the end of chapter cliffhangers hook, line, and sinker! - while simultaneously pursuing political philosophy through conversations and observations.
Because Captain Bastable has been transplanted from 1902 to an alternative 1973, he brings his stuffy Victorian empire assumptions with him, and initially sees nothing but admirable achievements in this ‘world of the future’ filled with giant airships, steam-powered automobiles, and apparent global peace. But as he falls in with anarchists his assumptions are increasingly challenged, until eventually he finds himself confronting the racist underpinnings of colonialism and the extent to which the power of empire necessarily works to suppress and destroy all other forms of life.
In the exchange with the Count that opens this piece, Moorcock has Bastable (our hero) represent the imperial mindset and the imposition of order. To this, the Count laments that Bastable presumes that the anarchists (or libertarians, as the Count here prefers) wish to impose their own view of the world upon everyone else. To the Count, this misunderstands their purposes - it is the authoritarian impulse of empire that requires the single vision of everything to be enforced, the libertarians, the anarchists, the opponents of empire are trying to open up the space of difference that empire has foreclosed.
As the Count is forced to bemoan, the attempt to appeal to the better nature of the authoritarian is doomed because their very basis for understanding the reigning political framework is based upon the imperial and colonial assumption: that there is a superior way of life. Since this has been elevated above other ways of being it is only correct that this should be imposed, even by force. As the Count objects “you authoritarians can only see things in your own terms.” Anyone who does not share the singular view of how everything must be organised necessarily sees dissent as an attempt to impose a different singular view. The idea that there might be many views that could live together peacefully becomes impossible to appreciate.
This novel was written half a century ago, and yet it captures in perfect clarity the political crisis of our time. Then as now, empire has refused to die, and the rhetoric and propaganda of this colonial mindset is searingly dedicated to the certainty that what it pursues is justice. Any deviation from this one true path must therefore be driven by hate, envy, or an attempt to usurp the empire and force it onto a dark path. But the path of empire lies in shadow from its outset - and there is no way it can escape from being a corrupting influence upon all that is good. Moorcock expresses all this in an adventure story about the inevitability of historical forces that is as relevant to us now as the day it was written.
AGREE #ERTDagr_1: Differences
“colonial mindset is searingly dedicated to the certainty that what it pursues is justice”
COMMENT
It seems to me that the issue here is not so much empire per se but autocracy versus democracy. We all see the world through our own lens and tend to find differences discomforting. Autocrats handle such discomfort by forcefully imposing their own vision. In a democracy centralized force is restrained, and differences arise. Differences are still disturbing, but lacking force to stifle them, the only recourse is peaceful, but possibly bumpy, co-existence.
I am intrigued by this Moorcock fellow. Haven't read his work. Maybe I'll get round to it. Thanks for continuing to reveal elements of his writing.