Is it egotistical to write a foreword to my own book? My agent says it's not, but I worry that it is. I decided to split the difference and write one while expressing doubt about it.
First, thank you for picking up this copy of Conveyor, Convier?. I say "picking up" even though it's nearly certain you are reading this as a digital copy. There was a small print run for the collectors out there, but the vast majority of sales anymore are digital. My agent said I should cut this paragraph, too.
I started thinking about Arcturus Convier when I was a little girl. They say it's normal for kids to have imaginary friends. Maybe that's true, but do theirs become so elaborate and inhabited? Arcturus saw me through some of the lowest points in my childhood, like my sister's death from leukemia. I conceived of him as an adventuring sort from the start, so the only way he could describe Adele's passing was that she'd embarked on "the next great adventure." Trite, but what do you expect from a six-year-old?
I don't remember exactly when I created him, mind you. I absolutely don't remember why. I do know that the major influence on his inception comes from my father, who was and is an avid consumer of all things related to nautical history, and piracy especially. Every book or movie or TV show about the age of piracy, he'd either read or seen or it was on his list. I hung around him all the time and so I was exposed to this rich history, and romance, and fantasy, almost as much as he was. Under the Black Flag is one of the first books on the subject I read on my own, which did a lot to flesh out the otherwise cartoonish Convier. I therefore owe about as much to David Cordingly as I do my father for the existence of this novel!
When I submitted a draft of Conveyor, Convier? to the Center for Creative Fiction, I was convinced I'd never hear of it again. I feared it was nothing special, that I placed far too much importance on my childish musings about swashbuckling adventures. I had no idea it would resonate so well with the board of editors nor that they would offer to help me publish it for a wider audience. My eternal gratitude goes to Catherine Foster at CCF for telling me in no uncertain terms that I needed to get an agent immediately, so my interests would be properly represented in publishing negotiations. My success is owed in part to her, as well to the board of editors, and certainly my agent, Howard Khan. Truly, this book might be twice as long were I list to every individual who contributed in some way. I could not possibly name everyone. I can only say that I am grateful for each and every person who touched my life and had any influence on this book reaching you.
With the pleasantries out of the way, I now move to the real reason I wrote this foreword: to call for an end to the violence that ravages our part of the world, though I would be remiss if I did not condemn all violence that plagues human progress and diminishes human decency.
Howard believed it unwise for me to "get political" in these first pages, but this novel is no less political, itself. The breakup of the United States of America, while not having been precipitated by a war per se, is nevertheless the result of actions and ideologies that are anti-human in the extreme. It must not be forgotten nor overlooked that this fragmentation came as the result of decades of political division, of escalating stochastic violence, of increasingly fascist rhetoric, and no fewer than two attempts to violently overthrow the federal government. That legal frameworks emerged to facilitate a gradual slide out of centralized power and toward regional governments is a blessing, considering the alternatives, but in my view these have only delayed the true reckoning. We still share land and borders with those who would see us destroyed. We still inhabit a world rife with poverty and discontent, driven by the shameless exploitation of billionaires and their seemingly omnipotent corporations and investment firms.
When monarchies and warlord fiefdoms began to fall to the tide of nationalism and emerge anew as nation-states, the extent of those states' power was ambiguous at best. The capacity to centralize government functions was in its infancy. Tax collection, the most basic function of government, becomes inordinately complex as the governed territory grows larger. The natural response, perhaps, is increasing centralization of power and the creation of a vast administrative state. Additionally, the first purpose of the nation-state is to defend the nation from aggression. Thus, taxes were collected primarily for the raising and equipping of armies. Turning those taxes inward to build infrastructure and eventually to directly support individuals in lean times is a consequence those first nation-builders likely did not imagine. That such expansion could be benevolent would have been difficult for them to believe, and in all fairness, the record is surely mixed. The state which can giveth can also taketh away. What the state can take away is truly profound, the more powerful it becomes. Some of the most heinous chapters in human history grew out of testing the limits of the nation-state, including wars and genocides that sought in one way or another to impose the will and ideology of one nation on to all others.
But while nations fought, commerce continued. It has been suggested that interdependence via trade networks and production supply chains is the greatest safeguard against war. Recent history has proven it can be quite the opposite, as it builds resentment and defies our seemingly innate human tendency to set ourselves apart from one another.
Nevertheless, commerce and government became deeply enmeshed, with each sector believing itself the superior, the one holding the reins. Events have since proven out that the unaccountability of corporate entities allows them to build power structures that cannot be brought to heel by any state, at least not so long as the global economy is itself liberalized. Supranational entities like the European Union were erected in part to act as a check on this potential for runaway non-governmental power. Unfortunately, the effects have not been what anyone hoped. While the growth of government power is quite visible to the populace, considering everyone knows what their tax bill is, the power of the corporation can grow in the dark, exerted in places the average person may not even know exists, much less will ever see. Corporate boardrooms become the string-pullers of our marionette elected officials.
It turns out that the promise of interdependence was snake oil to lull states into complacency. After all, what politicians want most is to retain office. Keeping the people fat and happy is the surest path to that. If interdependence promised prosperity to all, how could we do anything else? But all it has actually done is allow the flows of wealth and capital to draw nooses around the necks of every state on Earth, and by extension, the everyday people within them. As the CEOs then squeeze tighter to extract more profit, economic prospects dim. Who do the people blame? Not the companies that took advantage of the situation, but the politicians who fell down on the job. Nobody wishes to hear that corporate power now exceeds the ability of states to control it, yet that is the reality we must face. Now that multinational conglomerates have inserted themselves into every nook and cranny of every society, they no longer require a vast global infrastructure to facilitate it. Now, they can divide and fragment every state, diminishing ever further the ability of any government to restrain them.
They do this in large part by funneling vast sums of money into propaganda to convince the public that it is greedy politicians or vague ne'er-do-wells who have derailed the good times. Sometimes, the blame becomes more explicit: racial minorities, fringe religions, and other marginalized groups are scapegoated by propaganda and politician alike, easy targets who nevertheless take time to dispose of, time which can be spent laying the bricks of our final, fatal prison. This is what has shattered the United States of America, a nation founded on promises it never truly embodied nor kept, but whose potential offered hope to a great many peoples. It seems now that those promises shall go unfulfilled forever, and those who emulated the American model may share its fate. The world is made of far more nations now than it was a century ago. In some ways, this is good. Moving government bodies closer to their people can be a positive development, as the government is theoretically more responsive, less remote. But our lived experience has shown that men who see their power diminished in one sphere will seek to increase it in another. With no authority to challenge the wealthy, the only alternative is to become their pets.
The "international system" has found no solution to this problem, and we must understand that this is because it is designed not to solve it. It was built by the very people who now exploit us and seek to further concentrate their power. It was built by those who have profited from the dismantling of America, and who now profit from strife and violence elsewhere. It is not any specific individual or government or company. It is a conspiracy of numerous actors, many of whom may not realize the roles they play.
But if I had to lay the blame at anyone's feet, I would start with the ten richest men on Earth. Yes, they are all men:
[list redacted by publisher]
So long as more than half the world's wealth is concentrated in the hands of ten people, there can be no liberation for humanity, no future save for grinding misery.
It may be sentimental, but Arcturus Convier has allowed me to hold onto hope for the future. The Age of Sail, the Golden Age of Piracy, these were times when the power of nations and traders did not extend to the far corners of the Earth. There was limitless freedom on the open sea. I do not wish to imply that it was an easy or comfortable or safe life. Convier's exploits draw from real history. He does gruesome things, witnesses worse, and is surrounded by both the best and worst humanity has to offer. But above him is no towering agent of subjugation. What he does is the product of his own will, not the pathetic lashing out of a cornered rodent. Let us all find our own will and dare to bite the hand that feeds us, and keep biting until we're as free as Convier himself.
-Michelle Everton
2032