The Post-WWII Open Society: Fertile Fallacies Destroying Noble Lies

A "Consensus" that is Losing its' European and American Consensus

Excerpt from video above:

Fallibility, and specifically what Soros calls "Radical Fallibility", which posits that all human constructs, ideas, institutions, and ideologies are inherently flawed, deficient. In history we end up with self-reinforcing but eventually self-defeating cycles. Belief creates reality, but eventually collapses because it's deficient. It fails to reckon with certain elements of reality.

Radical fallibility underpins the concept of an Open Society, whereas Closed Societies think they know the truth, or at least some grand truth. So far, so reasonable, even if we disagree.

But it gets deeper. Soros writes:

"Radical fallibility is the cornerstone not only of my view of the world, but also of my personal identity. And as such, it is reflected in my behavior. It has guided my actions. If there is anything original in my thinking, it is this radical version of Fallibility.

Even though all mental constructs are flawed, some of them are fertile. Fertile fallacies are the equivalent of bubbles in financial markets. This lies at the core of my own radical version of Fallibility.

My working assumption allows me to operate with fertile fallacies. I apply them to the outside world, and to my own activities, Opening up Closed Societies.

And Soros gets personal when describing this:

"Radical fallibility is for me not only an abstract theory, but also a matter of deep personal conviction. As a fund manager's, predominant feelings I operated with were uncertainty, and fear. I had moments of hope, even euphoria, but those emotions made me insecure. Worrying made me feel safer. So the only genuine joy I experienced was when I discovered what it was that I had to worry about. I could never acknowledge my successes, it might stop me from worrying.

There's no spiritual contemplation, no rest in a positive assertion or identity, or vision of beauty. Happiness makes the believer in radical fallibility feel unstable. Safety is in fear.  This constant seeking after anxiety, after sources of worry, characterizes how many people live, but he made it into an ideology. This is similar by the way, to the Frankfurt school thinker Theodore Adorno's negative dialectics, so-called. 

And like "The Age of Fallibility" of the Frankfurt school, Soros critiques Enlightenment Reason. In particular, he values free expression over truth, or thinks of free speech and other rights not as a good way to get to the truth or to do objective good, but as a way to find "fertile fallacies". As he puts it:

"It is high time to subject Reason, as construed by the Enlightenment, to the same kind of critical examination that the Enlightenment inflicted on the dominant external authorities, both Divine and temporal. We have now lived in the Age of Reason for the past 200 years. Long enough to discover that reason has its' limitations. We are ready to enter the Age of Fallibility."

And he does think his moral relativism will lead to specific principles:

"The freedom of thought and expression, and the freedom of choice, can be directly derived from our fallibility. Since the ultimate truth is beyond our reach, we must allow people to think for themselves and make their own choices. I derive human rights from being a thinking agent."

So where does authority or the exercise of power come in? Well, it's not enough to avoid the Closed Society, you also have to avoid total chaos. You need to have some control:

Instead of a dichotomy between Open and Closed Societies, I now envision Open Society occupying a precarious middle ground, some that would impose a Closed Society, others that would lead to the disintegration of Society.

Similarly, Soros rejects both capitalism and communism. So while:

The Open Society, like Democracy, is a way of living together, not a blueprint for solving particular social problems, so not a Closed Society. The concept of Open Society is not empty, it's not social disintegration. Indeed, I believe that it now needs to be redefined to include more than just freedom from officially imposed orthodoxy.

But how can recognition of our Open Society, as "Faith in Fallibility", serve as the basis of a whole social order? Can we promote a belief in our own fallibility to the status we normally confer on a belief in ultimate truth? 

The answer, I think, requires a profound change in the role we accord our beliefs. Historically, beliefs have served to justify specific rules of conduct. Fallibility ought to foster a different attitude. 

But in the ultimate analysis, a belief in the Open Society is a matter of choice, not of logical necessity. A belief in our fallibility is a highly sophisticated concept. Much more difficult to work with than more primitive beliefs such as my country, or company, or family... right or wrong."

Now practically, Soros does promote creating an Open Society alliance, kind of like a UN 2.0, but he describes it in pretty minimalistic terms. Anyway, the thinking here is relatively basic. Break down old certainties, because they are believed to be false, but avoid the complete breakdown of society whose institutions and behaviors were actually based on those old certainties that you want to breakdown.

How? Well, if you go down this route, you end up I think resorting to naked power. Because you have no real positive values to give people other than this "faith", as he calls it, this choice to just believe in Fallibility and in the Open Society as a consequence. But Soros doesn't mean that there aren't any bedrock realities, any basic facts. There are:

The fact that our understanding is imperfect does not mean that there is no ultimate truth. On the contrary, the lack of adequate knowledge implies the need for an element of faith."

"My insistence on the importance of the objective aspect of reality is a matter of personal belief. Indeed, it has a curious resemblance to a religious belief. The objective aspect of reality, as I have constructed it, has many of the attributes of God. My commitment to the objective aspect of reality plays the same role in my thinking as religion does in other people's. In the absence of perfect knowledge we need beliefs. I happen to believe in Harsh Reality, while other people believe in God.

Speculation can't change certain economic fundamentals. For example, there are certain clear material realities we cannot alter.

In the early '90s Soros made a lot of money speculating on the British pound. And he did this because he thought there were real underlying weaknesses. But his speculation made it worse. But Soros can justify that because it exposes a weakness of the system of the Closed Society, or relatively Closed Society. It's a traumatic lesson for people on the truth of fallibility. This is a bit like saying getting AIDS is good because it exposes your immune system's weaknesses. But there you go.

By the way, Steve Bassant, Trump's Treasury Secretary was part of Soros's team at the time.

Open Societies are NOT founded Upon Noble Lies, as are Closed Societies.  No, they are founded upon Fertile Fallacies, that create Economic Bubbles, and yield Crass Profits to currency speculators like George Soros 

Who ignore 'experts' like Lindy and don't consider Risk Concepts like Anti-Fragility.