Eugine_Nier comments on George Orwell's Prelude on Politics Is The Mind Killer - Less Wrong

10 [deleted] 29 March 2012 04:27PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (285)

Comments (285)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: TimS 01 April 2012 07:06:11PM 2 points [-]

From a communications clarity point of view, I like that there is a word for certain failure modes of far-right ideology, in the same way that I like that there is a word for certain failure modes of far-left ideology. Using the far-right failure mode label for those on the far left confuses this distinction.

To me, the defining feature of fascism (or communism) is not use of private, politically motivated violence with the tolerance of the authorities. That's bad, but it's not the reasons that I think fascism is bad.

It's similar to the problem of saying that Nazism is bad because it is socialist ("National Socialism" in the name). Nazism is bad, and socialism (as those speakers intend the term) is bad, but Nazism != socialism.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 01 April 2012 07:11:05PM 5 points [-]

To me, the defining feature of fascism (or communism) is not use of private, politically motivated violence with the tolerance of the authorities. That's bad, but it's not the reasons that I think fascism is bad.

And what are those reasons? Since I really don't see the distinction you're trying to make.

Comment author: TimS 01 April 2012 11:58:24PM 1 point [-]

To speak more carefully - violence for the purpose of influencing the "center of mass" of political opinion in a country, when the government is not uniformly in favor of the political position of those executing the violence - is not the same thing as fascism. More colloquially, tactics similar to voter intimidation have been used by fascists, but not only fascists.

My main point was that an ideological label that applies to both FARC and AUC is not a particularly informative label. If fascism is restricted to the usage I suggested, then it is more informative than that.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 02 April 2012 12:32:10AM 4 points [-]

You didn't answer my question. Let me state it more explicitly. What do you mean by "fascism"?

Comment author: TimS 02 April 2012 12:58:59AM 2 points [-]
  • Fascists seem to believe that there once was a society that lived perfectly. Some of us can become these "Ideal Men" if we are spiritually pure enough (or maybe we can only set things up so that our descendents can be this way). Further, the importance of this spiritual purity justifies any violence in service of reaching this goal.

Fascists are wrong because the imagined past never occurred (like the country song that complains that Coke is a slang shortening for Cocaine - as if there was ever a time when Coke was not a reference to Cocaine).

  • Communists have the same belief in an "Ideal Man," but they think that no one has ever lived that way. With sufficient mental purity, we might be able to become "Ideal" (again, we might only be able to cause this for our descendents). Once we are all ideal, we will be able distribute resources "fairly" and avoid the social problems we face today. Again, achieving that ideal justifies any violence.

Communists are wrong because the existence of scarcity guarantees that schemes of wealth distribution cannot solve every social problem.

  • Transhumanist look forward, not backwards. But they don't say that all social problems will go away. Only that technology will make us so rich that all our current problems will be gone. There's the joke of the person revived from suspended animation in the distant future who asks if there was still poverty, disease, hunger, wars or crime and is told that no, those problems were solved long ago. Then he asks, then why doess everybody seem so nervous? "Well, you see - we have REAL problems."
Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit