I’m reading it, and enjoying it as a novel. So far. Here is a review plus interview: Worth reading.
One thing troubles me. On the one hand he is pro the Paris agreement, as he says in the interview, to criticise it is:
“It’s so crazily idealistic where the perfect is being the enemy of the good.”
On the other hand, he…
He talks about the black ops and isolated acts of terror. And finance, which as he points out is subject to laws.
So it’s legalism or adventurism.
What is in between?
He ignores what exists!
Can this force be mobilised? How can that be done? That is the question. How can they stop capitalism in its tracks?
I hope he addresses that question in the book.
Tuesday, 27 July 2021
Finished it. It disappointed me — the world runs beautifully, there has been a revolution, and he acknowledges it, “a revolution without a revolution.”
There is an emptiness at the core of the book. a hollow space where the revolution should have been.
The things that worked were “rule of law”. but who owns the state that makes the laws? The executive committee of the capitalist class who are compelled to destroy the world, They can’t do a thing if there is no profit in it.
Yes the people, but there was no opposition. One of the friends got killed — that is it.
They would mow them down and no one was ready for their onslaught of murder. So he left it out of the story.