Hmm, Jordan Peterson sees the privileging of group identity over the individual as a left-wing thing. I see it as essentially being a fascist thing, and that the whole left/right business is little more than a figleaf over that.
-
Show this thread
-
Ultimately there's only two real political ideologies: A humanist ideology that encompasses all human beings, and variants of fascism. Anything that privileges the experience of one group, and identifies other groups as to blame, or as the enemy, is a fascism.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @ColumPaget
interesting. that's a new definition but it seems to fit the current moment. past definitions of fascism emphasized different details though. maybe a different label would have less historical baggage?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danlistensto @ColumPaget
what you described is basically authoritarian tribalism. all past fascisms have been authoritarian tribalisms of one kind or another, sometimes very explicitly (Nazism) and sometimes less clearly so (Maoism).
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danlistensto
I would personally find authoritarian tribalism (controlled via appeal to unity against an enemy/threat) to be the very definition of fascism. Maoism was a good point in case, because Maoism frequently created internal and external threats to be struggled against.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ColumPaget
yeah that's what I mean. all fascisms are authoritarian tribalisms. there are perhaps some authoritarian tribalisms that aren't fascisms? I can imagine an authoritarian tribalist system that isn't strictly about rule by force and domination of the outgroup.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danlistensto
hmm... would that be a real tribalism though? Isn't a tribe (politically speaking) an ingroup and thus requires an outgroup? In the end one can argue that it's tribalisms all the way down, it's just that global humanism includes everyone in the tribe...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
traditional tribal societies can absolutely be authoritarian (rule by a chief who's authority is unquestionable) but are not necessarily fascist (institutions and traditions in place to resolve conflicts without resort to violence/force)
-
-
Replying to @danlistensto
hmm, I suspect the resort to force is always in the background. If there's no clearly defined internal or external enemy though, then I'd agree that's not fascism. Fascism for me, is the control of a populace via the selection/invention of a threat or enemy.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.