About
The historical arc of justice could be described as the search for a system of governance for large numbers of people that balances the need for liberation, self-determination, community accountability, and large scale responsiveness to the population being governed such that the needs of the people as individuals are being considered against the needs of the people, and the planet and other species, as a whole.
No system at any point in history has succeeded at this for large populations for any sustained period of time or with any consistency across regions. The best we've been able to achieve has been local systems and temporary periods of liberation cut short by the inability of large scale governance to resist corruption and authoritarianism.
Some systems have faired better than others and the goal of progress is to build off of prior successes while imagining new forms of governance that could better serve us.
Capitalism has arguably failed the worst of all systems as it has brought the entire planet to the brink of ecological collapse, threatening the survival of not just humans but of most of life on Earth. The myriad other failings, and successes, of capitalism pale in comparison to the existential threat it poses and to the fact that it produced such an existential threat to begin with.
There is no country on Earth that should be considered a model of proper governance or a paragon of ethical politics. Rather, a given country's political and economic situation should be considered as part of its geographical, ecological, and historical context with its successes and failures evaluated relative to these conditions.
By this measure neither the United States nor Russia nor China nor Brazil nor the United Kingdom nor any Scandinavian countries nor any country in Europe nor Canada nor Japan nor any industrial power should be considered a model for responsible ethical government or an aspirational example of successful governance.
Imperialism, colonialism, and capitalism are by definition immoral as they are all systems that necessitate the exploitation and suffering of some to the benefit others. Any nation that propagates their use as a means to achieve better lives for its people is a nation that is structurally immoral and working against the well being of the world.
Communism and socialism have failed in various ways in practice, but are ideologically systems that aspire to sustainable ethical standards and universal well being, unlike the previously mentioned systems which are intrinsically self-interested and unconcerned with sustainability or morality outside the immediate interests of their constituencies.
Individual actors in these systems have power and agency over their own impacts and we cannot absolve leaders and government officials who act in morally inexcusable ways as simply being "Beholden to the systems they serve." A president continuing policies of violence and destruction simply because those are the policies they inherited is no more ethical or defensible than the originator of those policies.
The ongoing, and indeed endless, project of building a better world is one that does not and cannot accommodate excuses and justifications being made for those who fight against such goals or who claim loyalty to the status quo because it benefits them. This does not mean zero tolerance or understanding, but rather a moral and political baseline that does not compromise to the interests of a morally bankrupt status quo and instead demands outreach and education to reach those whose core is ethical but whose fear and uncertainty and exposure to propaganda has driven them away from ethical conclusion and political beliefs.
There is no panacea for our political, ecological, and social challenges and changing the world works asks us to be creative and persistent in ways that run counter to our conditioning and dominant narratives. This asks us to be patient with one another and forgiving of our shortcomings, but it also asks us not to become complacent or passive in the face of systems and individuals who are reluctant or hostile to change.
It is a project and pursuit that is ever changing and bigger than any one of us can fully comprehend or understand on our own. It requires cooperation and a willingness to be wrong and face uncertainty clear eyed and with courage and strength that does not always feel justified or natural. The ambiguity of success, the potential for failure, does nothing to diminish the necessity of this project. Revolution is not naive or delusional, it has been, remains, and will be a necessary process at points in history where the status quo can no longer persist without risking extreme harm and upheaval.
Climate change brings us to just such a point in history and it will be necessary for more people to accept and learn to process that life cannot continue as is and will change one way or another. Revolution will happen either by our choice and with our say or it will be thrust upon us by physics - incremental reform is an impossibility going forward and it is up to us to decide what systems we want to change and how we want them to change in response to this.