A Symptom That Kills
Progressives' flirtation with social disorder is a recipe for political disaster
Earlier this week, left-wing Twitch celebrity Hasan Piker and New Yorker writer Jia Tolentino appeared on a New York Times video podcast to discuss “microlooting,” a new term for shoplifting concocted by the New York Times seemingly for the sole purpose of the podcast. Both Piker and Tolentino endorsed the practice on the grounds that rich corporations steal from ordinary people all the time. Why shouldn’t us poor schmucks steal back?
Of course, despite the guests’ airy defenses of petty theft, the conversation was also full of plenty of hedging. After arguing that there was nothing wrong with stealing a car and insisting that he would do it himself if he could get away with it, Piker admitted that he has yet to steal so much as a candy bar. Tolentino, who copped to boosting four lemons from Whole Foods, was quick to explain that this had been undertaken solely for the benefit of a needy neighbor, through a mutual aid group she’s been part of “since 2021.”
You can log these among the infinite number of times the well-educated and well-heeled have failed to preach what they personally practice. But the excitement over the prospect of low-level social disorder that was on display in the discussion provides a glimpse into what has become a widespread attitude among upscale progressives: that we ought to excuse or overlook bad behavior by the everyman because bad behavior by the uber-rich is so much worse; that all antisocial behavior is downstream from larger antisocial structures; and that it’s ultimately the “global design of capital” that incentivizes that behavior. Politically, the conclusion is that social disorder is not an issue that progressives need to confront, at least not directly.
Tolentino and Piker are correct that the social contract has collapsed in our new Gilded Age. Many feel that working hard and playing by the rules amounts to holding up one end of a bargain that no longer exists. On top of that, extreme wealth and income inequality has bred widespread social resentment. If Bezos, Musk, Thiel, Zuckerberg, Trump, Epstein, and the like are all above the law, why shouldn’t the rest of us sink below it when it’s convenient?
But while this impulse may be understandable, a tit-for-tat moral code is a recipe for political disaster. Yes, the fish rots from the head down, but that doesn’t mean it smells any better at the tail. The truth is that rising disorder makes achieving the kind of social reform that could reverse today’s obscene inequality much harder. And left-wing ambivalence about antisocial behavior only worsens the problem.
Since 2020 or so, the main progressive response to the creeping, noticeable rise in antisocial behavior has been an injunction to ignore it. That’s partly because today’s progressives are horrified by the notion of involving the police, partly because many are incapable of saying no to anybody at any time, and partly out of a morally admirable urge to protect the down-and-out from further scapegoating. Disorder is only a symptom of a larger disease, they say, so we need to address the root causes, not the downstream effects. The theory is simple enough: if people had decent and dignified lives to begin with, they wouldn’t steal, litter, or vandalize.
The trouble, however, is that the very presence of public disorder makes resolving the upstream causes of it much harder, if not impossible. A rise in antisocial behavior fractures public trust and social cohesion. The inability to maintain basic order in turn draws more people toward civic nihilism and begets a self-perpetuating cycle.
Step on a subway car in Philadelphia today and you’ll immediately notice that it’s clogged with smoke, public drug use, half-eaten, half-rotten food waste, and mystery fluids greasing the floors (not to mention assorted smells of human origin that the smoke actually helps to mask). A decade ago there was nothing near this level of wanton disregard. Some progressives may shrug: who cares? But allowing public transit to exist in a perpetual state of shambolic disorder keeps riders away, wears on taxpayers’ nerves, and continually demoralizes the workers charged with cleaning up the mess day in and day out. Patience runs even thinner when riders see people hop turnstiles to join them on a journey they dutifully paid for. Good luck asking for more transit funding when the crummy subways we already have seem wildly overpriced.
Or consider America’s infamous lack of public restrooms. It costs a fortune to install these things, partly because, as travelogue writer Chris Arnade has colorfully pointed out, they have to be made “asshole proof” as a condition of their existence. Keeping public restrooms tidy and functioning requires nonstop vigilance against the assholes, figuratively and literally. And even then, the assholes always find a way. As a result, public restrooms hardly exist in this country, and in their absence, public life is worse.
To convince the public to invest in public life—in social goods and services—you must first convince them that you care about maintaining a state of relative order. If it isn’t pleasant to play in public parks, ride public transit, attend public school, or simply be out and about in the city because everyone is constantly breaking the rules, all at once, all the time, you will never find the political will to make those public goods any better. After all, any renewed social compact will necessarily be built on a renewed sense of social trust. And trust is in short supply in a society pock-marked by evidence of chronic theft and vandalism.
Yes, rising social disorder is a symptom of a larger antisocial disease. But very often it’s the symptom and not the underlying disease that kills the patient. And for progressives, disorder is a politically lethal symptom. For one thing, progressive promises for more public investment will fall on deaf ears when basic commitments to order are routinely overlooked. Worse, when affluent progressives, from Brownstone Brooklyn to the Hollywood Hills, casually laugh off the very things that make working people’s day-to-day lives more difficult or unpleasant, they will only succeed in inspiring a different kind of class contempt.
Already right-wing rags are having a field day painting Piker and Tolentino as the poster children for an out-of-touch liberalism. The political implications should be clear. Social disorder is notoriously the cheapest, most reliable fuel for right-wing growth. A society in disarray, reactionaries insist, requires an old-fashioned Strong Man to clean up the mess. Of course, conservative solutions will only make the upstream causes of disorder worse. But if the Left continues to hand-wave away—or worse, celebrate—antisocial behavior, reactionaries will fill the void. And their appeals will have an audience.
Dustin Guastella is Director of Operations for Teamsters Local 623 in Philadelphia and a Board Member of the Center for Working-Class Politics.
What Piker, Tolentino and other progressives always elide from these types of account are the millions of working people - subject to the exact same pressures as others - who don’t act out in the same way. They aren’t out shoplifting, they aren’t out and about trashing their own communities and essential services.
Piker and co also absolve individuals of any kind of personal responsibility or agency. People are apparently not possessive of any notion of community over individual and everything they do is wholly determined by external conditions and therefore at least excusable, in fact it’s a desirable inevitability.
There is much more that could be said, but whatever these ideas are, they are not serious ones.
The restoration of the shattered social contract between the state and citizens shouldn’t just be an organising principle; a commitment to its restoration is a pre condition for the success of any left project.
Rebuilding communities is intrinsic to rebuilding its confidence.
The expulsion of anti social elements and those ‘in the life’ by choice necessary to rebuilding social solidarity.
This "whatever this is" is so bad, it inspired me to donate $5 just to write this garbage comment. You have an interesting definition (or lack of one?) on social disorder. You also slide between radically different phenomena with different causes and think lumping them into "social disorder" makes you sound... fuck, I don't know.
I am not the biggest fan of Piker and am not super familiar with Tolentino but this is just stupid. I would consider deleting this if I were you, even if it did earn you $5.
This is embarrassing drivel and someday you won't want your name attached to this writing. Haha. I hope no one with any sway is actually reading this deranged nonsense.