1/Suppose for a moment Karl Marx had not been born.
It is very likely that the 20th century would not have played out as it did. I don't mean to pick on Marx specifically; but individuals induce ideologies, which induce social ties that produce history.
There is nothing particular about Marx's articulation of his ideas that were inevitable; they reflected his observations in the context of his time.
Suppose instead there had been a Dutch writer named Van Halen who published a theory...
2/of capital and social organization that had taken hold. There would then be a bunch of "Van Halenists" in battle with some other group.
Maybe the Austrian Artist got into art school. Or Ayn Rand had stayed Alisa Rosenbaum and never made it out of Russia. The 20th century as we knew it would have played out very differently.
Some might argue the same forces would have come to blows, but it still would have played out differently.
All this is to suggest that ideas and timing matter immensely.
3/So as we are dealing with our current battles, it is important to recognize just how provisional and tentative they really are: they are frameworks that are totally accidental and of our moment.
We reify them in our minds until they take on the strength of steel beams. But they are nothing more than gossamer threads that stitch reality together in a framework we can relate to. They are a set of stories we can reference together, and within them battle for advantage.
4/But less explored is the value of new stories, new ideas, and new accidents — all of which are available to us at any moment.
We can invoke them anytime we like, and there is an infinite supply. Why must we do battle within the stories that have come before, instead of inventing and telling new stories?
Steve Bannon famously said "flood the zone with shit." Why should we not "flood the zone with heroes?"
There is no shortage of new North Stars.
Dave Troy 
Shoq 🌿