The Babel Moment: Technocracy, Theocracy, or Civilizational Rebirth

We are at a deep turning point in human civilization: not the “end of history,” but a critical moment where the entire narrative of progress faces fundamental collapse.

For two hundred years, progressivism has not only reshaped mainstream political and cultural order but has also deeply integrated with state power, forming the operational logic of modern society. In the name of “liberation,” “rationality,” and the “future,” it has driven a hidden yet profound cultural transformation and social engineering worldwide. When this force combines with contemporary technology, what is unleashed is not freedom but a global governance system centered on surveillance and control.

The issue is not whether progressivism has “gone astray,” but that its logical endpoint has always been this. Its utopian impulses and desire to reshape society are inherently linked to the expansion of power, the weakening of traditions, and the erasure of diversity. The current civilizational crisis is not due to the left going out of control, but progressivism fully manifesting under high-tech conditions.

This article argues that we stand at a crossroads of civilization. As technocratic authoritarianism matures and approaches its peak, humanity will soon face a crucial choice: either allow power to reorganize into a higher-level global control system, fully integrating society into an order of algorithms and surveillance, or seize the emerging cracks to strive to rebuild a multipolar world structure, letting freedom and diversity become the core of civilization again.

Only in the diversity of traditions, localities, communities, religions, and cultures can we rediscover the resilience and freedom of civilization. The ebb of authoritarianism does not automatically bring order; the dawn of multipolarity still requires firm political will and ideological preparation.

This is not just a choice of values, but a choice of survival. The global counterattack of the right is a kind of immune response from the depths of civilization.

Back to the Source: The Eternal Left-Right Struggle

Two Different Worldviews

The core issue of political philosophy has never changed; it has only been repackaged. Whether it was 19th-century socialism vs. liberalism, 20th-century planned economy vs. market economy, or 21st-century progressivism vs. conservatism, the essence has always been a confrontation between two different worldviews:

Core Characteristics of Left-Wing Thought:

• Belief that social problems can be solved through rational design and government intervention.
• Tendency to pursue a “better society” or “perfect state.”
• Dissatisfaction with the status quo, demanding thorough social transformation.
• Belief that elite groups possess the correct methods for social transformation.

Core Characteristics of Right-Wing Thought:

• Skepticism about the effects of human intervention, greater trust in spontaneous order and traditional wisdom.
• Vigilance against the concentration of power, advocacy for decentralization and checks and balances.
• Acknowledgment of the limits of human rationality and the complexity of society.
• Emphasis on the value of historical experience and cultural traditions.

Why Does the Left Always Have the Upper Hand?

In the modern world, left-wing thought always seems to have the moral high ground because it caters to human psychological needs:

• It promises to solve problems rather than accept the status quo.
• It offers hope and vision rather than caution and restraint.
• It caters to the human impulse for transformation rather than adapting to the natural order.
• It makes people feel like they are on the “right side of history.”

This moral high ground makes left-wing thought more likely to ally with state power—politicians prefer to promise to change the world rather than admit their limitations.

The Inherent Dangers of Utopian Thought

The Ideological Genes of Big Government

The key issue is not just the “conspiracy” between ideology and power, but that certain ideologies inherently contain genes for expanding power. Utopian ideologies have a fatal characteristic: they claim to know what a “perfect society” is and believe this goal can be achieved through human design.

This ideological logic inevitably leads to big government:

• Omniscient Assumption: Belief in the ability to master all the laws of social operation.
• Omnipotent Fantasy: Belief in the ability to transform everything through policy tools.
• Omnibenevolent Confidence: Belief in the absolute correctness of one’s goals.
• Comprehensive Ambition: Dissatisfaction with partial reform, demanding complete reconstruction.

Whether it is Marxism’s “communist society,” neoliberalism’s “end of history,” or various nationalisms’ “great rejuvenation,” they all have this utopian color.

The Power Appetite of Ideology

Some ideologies inherently have a “big appetite”:

• Progressivism: Aims to eliminate all “backward” phenomena, requiring the state to penetrate every corner of social life.
• Socialism: Aims to achieve economic equality, requiring state control over production and distribution.
• Neoliberalism: Aims to protect individual rights and achieve social justice, requiring state intervention in traditional social structures.
• Nationalism: Aims to achieve cultural identity unity, requiring state integration of ideological consciousness.

These ideologies, once put into practice, find that a “small government” cannot achieve their grand goals, so power inevitably expands. An ideology that inherently requires a big government will, under any institutional background, continuously push for the centralization of power.

Technological Revolution: Unprecedented Enhancement of Governance Capabilities

Technological Limitations of Ancient Rulers

Even in ancient times, we can see the relationship between ideology and political structure. China early on exhibited left-wing characteristics—unified thinking, centralization, bureaucratic systems, social transformation, and cultural unity, successfully achieving large-scale political expansion. Europe, however, has always failed to produce stable large empires, maintaining a multi-centered, competitive political landscape.

But even China’s emperors were severely constrained by technological conditions:

• Slow Information Transmission: Orders from the central government to the borderlands took months.
• Weak Monitoring Capabilities: Inability to grasp the daily behavior of every individual.
• Low Mobilization Efficiency: High cost of organizing large-scale actions.
• Limited Governance Radius: Actual control range limited by geography and technology.

The Amplifier Effect of Modern Technology

Today’s technological conditions have completely changed the boundaries of what is possible with power:

• Instant Communication: Global commands can be transmitted in an instant.
• Digital Surveillance: The behavior of every individual can be recorded and analyzed.
• Algorithmic Manipulation: Precise influence over individual thoughts and choices.
• Global Networks: Governance radius can cover the entire globe.

When the left’s utopian impulses meet modern technology, what is produced is not traditional authoritarianism but an unprecedented possibility of comprehensive control:

• Social Credit Systems: Using big data to assess everyone’s “moral level.”
• Algorithmic Censorship: Using AI to automatically identify and block “harmful information.”
• Predictive Policing: Using machine learning to prevent “potential crimes.”
• Biological Monitoring: Using genetic technology to “optimize” human traits.

These are all done in the name of “progress” and “science,” but the result may be the most thorough enslavement in human history.

Global Ambitions of Governance

More frighteningly, the modern left is not satisfied with controlling a single country and has begun to focus on achieving global governance:

• International Organizations: Promoting uniform standards through the United Nations, WHO, etc.
• Transnational Corporations: Controlling information flow through tech giants.
• Cultural Hegemony: Shaping global values through media and education.
• Financial Systems: Controlling economic behavior through international currency.

This global governance impulse, combined with the amplifying effect of modern technology, could create a global authoritarian system.

The Return of Secular Theocratic Rule

What is theocracy? Theocracy is not just a system where religious figures hold power, nor is it the so-called direct rule by God as the term might suggest. At its core, it is a model of the source of governance legitimacy: not relying on public opinion or institutions, but on a belief system seen as unchallengeable, transcendent, and absolutely true.

In ancient times, this source was the will of God, the Mandate of Heaven, or religious revelation; in modern times, it may be replaced with language such as “the inevitability of history,” “scientific truth,” “human rights supremacy,” or “global justice.” When an ideology begins to view political opponents as “anti-human,” “backward forces,” or “objects that must be transformed,” this is the return of theocracy.

As long as a form of governance claims to represent the highest order of history, truth, humanity, or the cosmos, it falls within the realm of theocratic politics—even if it no longer mentions God, it still exercises oppressive power with “transcendent legitimacy.”

The Theocratic Nature of the Chinese Model

To understand the true danger of modern left-wing thought, we need to recognize that China’s traditional political system is essentially a form of theocratic rule. The Confucian emperor was not a purely secular ruler but the “Son of Heaven”:

• Mandate of Heaven: The emperor’s power comes from the “Mandate of Heaven,” with the emperor himself possessing divinity.
• Moral Responsibility: The emperor is responsible for the “world,” achieving the ideal of “Great Unity.”
• Cultural Mission: To educate the people and spread “orthodox” values.
• Comprehensive Rule: The integration of theocratic and royal power, covering all domains.

Confucianism provided the perfect theoretical packaging for this theocratic rule: sage-king politics, the ideal of the kingly way, the responsibility of education, and the concept of all under heaven.

The Theocratic Transformation of Modern Leftism

Modern left-wing thought is essentially a secularized version of ancient theocratic rule:

The modern version does not claim divine authorization but claims “science” and “historical inevitability”; it does not use religious language but the language of “rationality” and “progress.” However, the logic of rule is exactly the same: a small elite holds transcendent truth and has the right to transform society and humanity.

Why Theocratic Rule is More Dangerous

Theocratic rule is more dangerous than pure despotism because:

• Moral Superiority: Opponents are not just political enemies but moral sinners.
• Comprehensive Control: It seeks to control not just behavior but also thoughts.
• Justification of Violence: All means can be justified by “lofty goals.”
• Rejection of Compromise: Since it already holds transcendent truth, there is no need for compromise.

The current danger lies in the left-wing ideology, using modern technology, rebuilding a global theocratic rule:

• Scientism as the new theological foundation.
• Expert rule as the new priestly class.
• Progressivism as the new orthodox doctrine.
• Global governance as the new world system.

Civilization’s Tipping Point and the Right-Wing Counterattack

The Fork in History’s Road

We are at a critical juncture in human history. This is not a simple political cycle fluctuation but a choice concerning the direction of civilization: either towards global theocratic rule or the rebuilding of a multipolar competitive civilizational order.

The window for this choice may be very short. Once the left’s global governance system is completed, with the power of modern technology, reversing it will become extremely difficult. Humanity may face a truly global, technologically armed authoritarian system for the first time.

The Historical Inevitability of the Right-Wing Counterattack

In this context, the right-wing counterattack is not just a normal fluctuation in the political cycle but an instinctive response for civilizational survival:

• The Trump Phenomenon: The American public’s uprising against globalist elites.
• Brexit: Rejection of the European Union’s supranational rule.
• National Populism: Re-emphasis on local identity.
• Religious Conservatism Revival: Insistence on traditional values.

These can all be seen as intuitive resistance to the global authoritarian trend. People may not be able to articulate the specific theories, but they can sense a huge threat approaching.

The Historical Mission of the Right

The mission of the right at this critical moment is:

Political Level:

• Decentralize power to prevent technology from being monopolized by a few.
• Protect privacy and establish digital-age rights boundaries.
• Uphold diversity and resist the homogenization of global culture.
• Rebuild local autonomy and community identity.

Ideological Level:

• Expose the theocratic nature of left-wing thought.
• Reaffirm the limits of human rationality.
• Defend the value of traditional wisdom.
• Insist on the thorough secularization of politics.

Civilizational Level:

• Rebuild a multi-centered world order.
• Restore equal dialogue among civilizations.
• Protect cultural diversity.
• Prevent the establishment of new theocratic rule.

Rebuilding the Natural Order of Civilizational Competition

True Competition of Ideas

In a healthy cultural ecology, different ideas, values, and lifestyles naturally compete. Some thrive because they better address human needs, while others decline due to losing their real-world foundation. This competition is open and dynamic, allowing people to freely choose, compare, and judge.

The Boundaries of the State’s Role

The legitimate function of the state is to protect borders, maintain order, guarantee basic rights, and provide public services, not to shape souls, direct thoughts, or plan cultural trajectories. A healthy state should remain neutral towards various ideas, providing a platform for their free competition, not taking sides or showing favoritism.

When the state begins to act as a philosopher, moralist, or historical judge, it oversteps its bounds. Whether it promotes liberalism or socialism, it infringes on the individual’s spiritual autonomy.

Equal Dialogue Among Civilizations

On the basis of multipolarity, different civilizations can reestablish relationships of equal dialogue. No one represents the “direction of history,” no one holds the “ultimate truth,” and each civilization is just one version of human society. They can learn from each other, criticize each other, and compete with each other, but no one represents ultimate correctness.

The premise of this dialogue is humility: recognizing one’s own limitations, the legitimacy of others, and the complexity of history. Trump said in his 2017 speech in Saudi Arabia: “We are not here to lecture—we are not here to tell other people how to live, what to do, how to be, or how to worship.” The value of this statement lies not in its motives but in its articulation of the basic principle of international relations in the post-progressivist era.

Conclusion: The True Turning Point of Civilization

Humanity is moving out of the era of progressivism’s collusion with power, not because a better progressive model has been found, but because a deeper danger has been recognized: under modern technological conditions, the left’s utopian impulses may create the most thorough system of enslavement in human history.

The true turning point is recognizing that we face not a problem of ideological competition but a choice between global theocratic rule and a multipolar civilizational order. The right’s counterattack is the last effort to prevent humanity from sliding into the abyss.

When thought is freed from the shackles of state power, when politics returns to being a functional branch of society, and when humanity relearns to coexist amid differences, we can welcome a truly mature civilizational era. The characteristics of this era are not the unity of thought but the freedom of competition; not the convergence of values but the plurality of choices; not a single line of progress but organic evolution.

History tells us that the Chinese model of grand unification thinking once created vast empires but also limited the vitality of civilization. The European model of multipolar order, on the other hand, nurtured innovation and freedom. In today’s globalized world, what we need is not a world empire but a community of civilizations that compete and cooperate in a multipolar framework.

This is the true turning point of civilization. Only in this turning can humanity avoid sliding into a technologically armed global authoritarianism and return to the natural rhythm of civilizational evolution.

This is precisely the “New Babel” moment we are in—a towering tower of unified order constructed in the name of civilization is tottering due to its own arrogance and internal stresses.

Faced with the temptation of global authoritarianism, only by insisting on the struggle of diverse civilizations can humanity break free from the shackles of unified discourse and rebuild a free world based on faith, tradition, and local identity, coexisting and prospering in pluralistic competition.

About The Author

Churchill Hunn

I am an independent political thinker and commentator, focusing on institutional analysis, conservative philosophy, and the underlying mechanisms of civilizational decline. My writing is grounded in an inquiry into the origins of liberty, a reflection on traditional values, and a long-term observation of the tension between personal conscience and authoritative order.
In an age driven by emotion and manipulated by discourse, I choose to return to reason and history in search of the foundations of thought. I believe the fate of civilization depends on a renewed recognition of truth, responsibility, and honor.
I founded Cospecto.com as a platform for critical thought, with a focus on international politics, Chinese history, and moral philosophy—a space where thought is still allowed to breathe.
My Work:
On Intellectual Density

See author's posts