Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«158 »
  • Locked thread
Shbobdb
Dec 16, 2010

by Smythe


Was the "Final battle in the LoTR" a joke comment, since the final battle was a crazy person destroying themselves and the greatest evil that had consumed them?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

raminasi
Jan 25, 2005

a last drink with no ice


I'd just like to say that a couple of questions asked here are discussed in Altemeyer's book linked in the OP. It's pretty short, and an easy read, so give it a shot if you've got time. (Briefly, his suggestion for debating authoritarians is "befriend them first," and he has noticed a very strong correlation between authoritarians and people who were raised to be scared of things and avoid new experiences.)

snorch
Jul 27, 2009


Yeah I've definitely noticed that everything PJ has described so far seems to revolve around a creamy center of delicious fear. Going by that model, the Narratives seem to exist mostly to provide something that can later be perceived as being under threat. In a more general sense, the whole thing looks like a self-sustaining vicious cycle of fear and comfirmation bias. The phenomenon of group polarization also looks to be a significant piece of the puzzle when trying to understand this sort of dynamics.

Loel
Jun 4, 2012

"For the Emperor."

There was a terrible noise.
There was a terrible silence.

This is a good read, thank you for posting it.

Tricky Dick Nixon
Jul 26, 2010

The body is but a vessel for the soul, a puppet which bends to the soul's tyranny. And lo, the body is not eternal, for it must feed on the flesh of others, lest it return to the dust from whence it came. Therefore must the soul deceive, despise and murder men.


This is really interesting to me because previously if asked I would describe myself as authoritarian despite my progressive leanings, in that I believe in a strong state authority and strongly disagree with most proposed stateless solutions, but I also am very anti-status quo so its probably on me to re-evaluate exactly that authoritarianism means to me.

I do think it is possible to believe in authority without having faith in it. I have near zero faith in the current authority of government but I do believe in its legitimacy, and in the desire to reform it as rough going as that is. I think the authoritarians described are those who have faith in an authority (whether religious, governmental, etc.) beyond any principle or reason. I've always associated it previously though as a sliding scale of belief in the role of government (versus the alternative side of libertarian thought, though not necessarily the political libertarianism popular today), but honestly I could think of many self-described libertarians that are authoritarians as described here in other ways.

His Purple Majesty
Dec 12, 2008


As the previous poster said this could easily be applied to democrats as well. Only a real tru believer would think that a gun free zone sign would stop someone from carrying a weapon for instance.

Ron Paul Atreides
Apr 19, 2012

I hodl at your neck the gox jabbar




His Purple Majesty posted:

As the previous poster said this could easily be applied to democrats as well. Only a real tru believer would think that a gun free zone sign would stop someone from carrying a weapon for instance.

That's not why those signs get put up

AmiYumi
Oct 10, 2005



I know it's a bit early, but can someone set up a mirror of PJ's posts so I can link non-SA people?

tsa
Feb 3, 2014


Adventure Pigeon posted:

Some of this stuff is characteristic of non-authoritarians as well. Most people have inner and outer narratives; is it what those narratives are that you think determines whether they're authoritarian? Most politically oriented groups, tend towards extremes over time. Is it because those groups are always authoritarian in nature, because authoritarians enter those groups, or because the most passionate members drive the direction of a group, and passion and extremism are often correlated? Is extremism interchangeable with authoritarianism?

Either way, I did enjoy the read, even if I don't agree with everything.

I enjoyed the read too but I have to agree- none of it really seems unique at all to authoritarians. Hell, if you look at the climate change thread you'll see most the same things going on and I wouldn't call the threads demeanor authoritarian at all. You have all the narratives going on, at least.

quote:

Narrative Convergence: When Authoritarians perceive a threat (which is often) their first instinct is to strike at the jugular with overwhelming force. It does not matter how insignificant the threat really is or how wide the gap in power between them and their target is, they want to hit a vital spot with every ounce of force they can muster. The goal is to establish dominance by firstly destroying the threat and any trace of it, and secondly, having witnesses so that other potential threats learn their place. Authoritarians are always look for a big dramatic battle, they are looking for every conflict to go down like the final battle of a Lord of the Rings trilogy. Fierce, fast, big, that is how an Authoritarian wants to fight every battle be it a swordfight or a debate.

Hah, there's a lot of this too. Again, this all seem broadly applicable to most groups and hardly limited to the idea of authoritarianism.

quote:

Authoritarians may be right or left leaning, however, in the US, left leaning Authoritarians (ex Anti-vaxxers, Homeopaths, etc) are essentially powerless, whereas right leaning Authoritarians have a disproportionate amount of influence over the GOP, for reasons I shall try my best to describe in this thread.

I honestly have no idea why you would single out these subgroups more than any other in the democratic party. How are homeopaths more authoritarian than the anti-gun subgroup or any other for that matter? This all just seems very hand-wavey, a neat Just-So story.

Prester John posted:

I have described mostly right wingers because that is what I have direct experience with, but I assume left wing authoritarians are similar. To me the difference between a Left Wing Authoritarian and a Right Wing Authoritarian would be where they feel they are in the Grand Narrative. Left wing Authoritarians believe they are at the "Dawn of a New Age" (or beginning) portion of the Grand Narrative, which means thy must tear down everything old to make way for the new. Right Wing Authoritarians believe they are living at "The End of Days" (or end) portion of the Grand Narrative, and feel that everything old must be preserved against the new.


Except, you know for all the exceptions to these rules you laid out. Reagan was huge on the "Dawn of a new age thing", did you forget about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morning_in_America or all of his other stuff? And there's plenty of lefties on the whole end of days thing, as I already mentioned this is very common on the environmental wing.

quote:

I imagine in a vacuum each group functions similarly, just in the US Left Wing Authoritarians have no [power, because the Democrats are not stupid enough to court them. And this I think is a major difference between the two parties right now. The GOP has created a group of Authoritarians (although not deliberately, they were just going for easy votes) over the past five decades with poo poo like the Southern Strategy and incorporating fundie social values into the GOP platform. The Democrats after the sixties severed all ties with their brief flirtation with Left Wing Authoritarians types. (The Weather Underground, various Anarchist groups spring to mind) So there just is no equivalent in the Democratic party for a Ted Cruz coming out against gay marriage in his Presidential Candidacy announcement today. The only thing I can think of that would be equivalent is if Elizabeth Warren came out and said "You know what, Vaccine's are causing autism" which just is not going to happen.

There's plenty of authoritarianism, you just aren't looking for it or have labeled it as something else so your own grand narrative stays whole.

Juvenalian.Satyr posted:

This is really interesting to me because previously if asked I would describe myself as authoritarian despite my progressive leanings, in that I believe in a strong state authority and strongly disagree with most proposed stateless solutions, but I also am very anti-status quo so its probably on me to re-evaluate exactly that authoritarianism means to me.

What's weird is the OP called the anarchists authoritarians, though.

e:

Ron Paul Atreides posted:

That's not why those signs get put up

Regardless, the "anti-gun" wing is certainly authoritarian in nature using the OP's guidelines.

tsa fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 15:05

Sharkie
Feb 4, 2013

Something looks fishy.



tsa posted:

What's weird is the OP called the anarchists authoritarians, though.

That's not weird; "authoritarian" describes a personality or mindset, not a political philosophy.

tsa
Feb 3, 2014


Sharkie posted:

That's not weird; "authoritarian" describes a personality or mindset, not a political philosophy.

So they became anarchists because of how authoritarian they are? What a silly idea, have you met anarchists? If they are the authoritarians in the left I'm not sure what parts of the left would be non-authoritarian.

PupsOfWar
Dec 6, 2013



american libertarianism and anarchism includes a lot of people who would be perfectly fine with authoritarian government if it enforced the things they want (whether that be dark-enlightenment neo-feudalism or biblical law or what) but who adopt libertarian or anarchic rhetoric because they have come to see it as an effective, more socially-acceptable way to pursue their goals.

possibly this is different in europe where left-libertarianism and anarcho-communism have more substantive traditions than they do here, but you can definitely find plenty of people espousing libertarianism or anarcho-syndicalism or anarcho-capitalism who would also establish a theocratic cult state or something if they could.

even among the leftist anarchists you have to admit the similarities between "When The Revolution Comes!" and "When The Rapture Comes!"

PupsOfWar fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 15:45

Ron Paul Atreides
Apr 19, 2012

I hodl at your neck the gox jabbar




tsa posted:

I enjoyed the read too but I have to agree- none of it really seems unique at all to authoritarians. Hell, if you look at the climate change thread you'll see most the same things going on and I wouldn't call the threads demeanor authoritarian at all. You have all the narratives going on, at least.


Hah, there's a lot of this too. Again, this all seem broadly applicable to most groups and hardly limited to the idea of authoritarianism.


I honestly have no idea why you would single out these subgroups more than any other in the democratic party. How are homeopaths more authoritarian than the anti-gun subgroup or any other for that matter? This all just seems very hand-wavey, a neat Just-So story.


Except, you know for all the exceptions to these rules you laid out. Reagan was huge on the "Dawn of a new age thing", did you forget about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morning_in_America or all of his other stuff? And there's plenty of lefties on the whole end of days thing, as I already mentioned this is very common on the environmental wing.


There's plenty of authoritarianism, you just aren't looking for it or have labeled it as something else so your own grand narrative stays whole.


What's weird is the OP called the anarchists authoritarians, though.

e:


Regardless, the "anti-gun" wing is certainly authoritarian in nature using the OP's guidelines.

you keep talking about climate change and the climate change thread, what exactly are you referring to here

e: ditto for 'anti-gun'

Ron Paul Atreides fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 15:47

site
Apr 6, 2007

Check my colors

Trans-pride worldwide

Bitch


tsa posted:

I enjoyed the read too but I have to agree- none of it really seems unique at all to authoritarians. Hell, if you look at the climate change thread you'll see most the same things going on and I wouldn't call the threads demeanor authoritarian at all. You have all the narratives going on, at least.


Hah, there's a lot of this too. Again, this all seem broadly applicable to most groups and hardly limited to the idea of authoritarianism.


I honestly have no idea why you would single out these subgroups more than any other in the democratic party. How are homeopaths more authoritarian than the anti-gun subgroup or any other for that matter? This all just seems very hand-wavey, a neat Just-So story.


Except, you know for all the exceptions to these rules you laid out. Reagan was huge on the "Dawn of a new age thing", did you forget about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morning_in_America or all of his other stuff? And there's plenty of lefties on the whole end of days thing, as I already mentioned this is very common on the environmental wing.


There's plenty of authoritarianism, you just aren't looking for it or have labeled it as something else so your own grand narrative stays whole.


What's weird is the OP called the anarchists authoritarians, though.

e:


Regardless, the "anti-gun" wing is certainly authoritarian in nature using the OP's guidelines.
Yeah, I'll freely cop to being a socialist totalitarian because at the end of the line everyone is a totalitarian/authoritarian of some sort if they're into politics. All of these narratives apply to every one of us.

And according to my textbooks and Wikipedia, authoritarianism is the base concept from which flows totalitarianism, autocracy, etc. so, yes it is a political philosophy.

E:i get that this thread is supposed to be about the mindset, but even Prester is comparing/displaying how this works in the political realm so i don't see the harm in linking them together.

E2: someone mentioned the fear aspect and even progressive use such tactics when attacking conservatives/their policies/their narratives

site fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 18:05

Job Truniht
Nov 7, 2012

MY POSTS ARE REAL RETARDED, SIR


site posted:

Are we talking about authoritarian as being distinct from totalitarianism for the purposes of this thread? Socialism and communism are totalitarian in nature, but for completely different ideological (and ostensibly more altruistic) reasons. But reading through PS' posts, much could apply just the same to that extreme as well.

Would you care to back this claim up? The only historical precedence for this were Stalinist regimes.

A correct political sliding scale would be something like this: From right wing to left wing, there's a shift from an authoritarian, monarchist, and autocratic perspective to a decentralized, anarcho-syndicalist, communist perspective; which is what the end game of communism was to begin with. People's political views towards authoritarianism are derived entirely on how they perceive social order and the necessity of hierarchy in a society. This is why right wingers almost instantaneously side with cops any debate about police violence, or the military in matters of questionable foreign policy.

Jim Long-un
May 28, 2010

Well the word got around they said this kid is insane, man
Banged in the mouth and now he's got AIDS, man


tsa posted:

I enjoyed the read too but I have to agree- none of it really seems unique at all to authoritarians. Hell, if you look at the climate change thread you'll see most the same things going on and I wouldn't call the threads demeanor authoritarian at all. You have all the narratives going on, at least.

The sign of a type of psychology isn't that it exhibits any of its characteristic traits, but number of them simultaneously, interacting in a certain way. Various individual characteristics may not be exclusive to the mindset; the configuration is.

Prester Jane
Nov 4, 2008
Behold, it is me: Zoltar! Watch me do my Nostradamus impression!


Krotera posted:

Would Scientology be a good example? PJ's thoughts ring pretty true to my experiences.

The marketing material presents it as either a self-help program or a religion and followers talk a lot about how they feel like they've personally experienced a ton of self-improvement -- I'd call it a nebulous Outer Narrative. It's technically consistent with the Inner Narrative, but makes lies of omission. The Inner Narrative is that plus "everyone not in Scientology is crippled and needs our help" to pre-OT-3s -- you know, the "Clear the Planet" pitch. That's too condescending to talk about in public. Post-OT-3 comes the Grand Narrative (the space opera story) "Xenu has used space technology to drive you hopelessly mad and we're on a mission to save the world from the SP hordes."

I think Scientology tries very hard to present itself as coming at the dawn of its story. It's easier to think like that to justify not having really accomplished anything than to lie about that and try not to be caught, even though CoS could probably get away with it. It also tries pretty hard to look new and shiny: of course, a lot of stupid New Agey stuff tries to look shiny/new and time-tested/proven at the same time, but I don't think Sci does.

I think a really important feature is that since the Grand Narrative is crazy, members have limited access to it until they've already confirmed they're into the Inner Narrative by recruiting, running services, taking courses, et cetera. Aren't most cults like that? It's hard to say that the Outer Narrative has to agree with the Grand Narrative when groups like Sci have to hide it so extensively, although I guess they don't really contradict.

I think Scientology is a good example of what I am talking about here and I would agree most cults operate like this. In Scientology's case the real Grand Narrative is not revealed until much later in the process than normal, but the existence of the Grand Narrative is held out as a carrot to entice members to keep spending money so that they can get that special snowflake feeling of "knowing the truth".


Prester Jane fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 21:13

site
Apr 6, 2007

Check my colors

Trans-pride worldwide

Bitch


Job Truniht posted:

Would you care to back this claim up? The only historical precedence for this were Stalinist regimes.

A correct political sliding scale would be something like this: From right wing to left wing, there's a shift from an authoritarian, monarchist, and autocratic perspective to a decentralized, anarcho-syndicalist, communist perspective; which is what the end game of communism was to begin with. People's political views towards authoritarianism are derived entirely on how they perceive social order and the necessity of hierarchy in a society. This is why right wingers almost instantaneously side with cops any debate about police violence, or the military in matters of questionable foreign policy.

No because I'm not about to poo poo up Prester's thread arguing about your commie grand narrative like you want to. It's irrelevant. Dig up that Marx thread to go play in.

Sorry I brought up the c word PJ.

site fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 20:58

Prester Jane
Nov 4, 2008
Behold, it is me: Zoltar! Watch me do my Nostradamus impression!


Shbobdb posted:

Was the "Final battle in the LoTR" a joke comment, since the final battle was a crazy person destroying themselves and the greatest evil that had consumed them?

I was thinking more along the "Battle of Five Armies" thing. Or the "Battle at then Black Gate". i guess was technically wrong though.

Prester Jane
Nov 4, 2008
Behold, it is me: Zoltar! Watch me do my Nostradamus impression!


site posted:

Yeah, I'll freely cop to being a socialist totalitarian because at the end of the line everyone is a totalitarian/authoritarian of some sort if they're into politics. All of these narratives apply to every one of us.

And according to my textbooks and Wikipedia, authoritarianism is the base concept from which flows totalitarianism, autocracy, etc. so, yes it is a political philosophy.

E:i get that this thread is supposed to be about the mindset, but even Prester is comparing/displaying how this works in the political realm so i don't see the harm in linking them together.

E2: someone mentioned the fear aspect and even progressive use such tactics when attacking conservatives/their policies/their narratives

I don't quite agree with your overall thrust tsa, because I think I am describing a specific cluster of behaviors rather than a single defining behavior. However, please keep posting. You are giving me new angles to consider this all from.

Also, thanks to everyone's responses so far.



Edit: tsa Here are some examples of actual material from the curriculum system the cult I was raised in used.

Firstly, this is an actual promotional video. This is what they think will convince people to put their children into one of their schools.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBUw4iWepk0


Here are some examples of my actual workbooks from the cult school. I think these demonstrate the overall thrust of the program as well as the "Church-Birch Nexus", or the intersection between Authoritarians, Wealthy Conspiracy minded Conservatives, and Christian Fundamentalists.




















I think there is clearly a big difference between this and advocating that vaccines should be mandatory.

Prester Jane fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 21:24

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN
Jun 26, 2009





Ron Paul Atreides posted:

you keep talking about climate change and the climate change thread, what exactly are you referring to here

e: ditto for 'anti-gun'

Seconding this. What are you talking about? It's difficult to understand with the examples you're referring to.

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 21:28

site
Apr 6, 2007

Check my colors

Trans-pride worldwide

Bitch


You quoted me but addressed tsa so I'm not sure who you're talking to, but thanks for putting those up

Job Truniht
Nov 7, 2012

MY POSTS ARE REAL RETARDED, SIR


site posted:

No because I'm not about to poo poo up Prester's thread arguing about your commie grand narrative like you want to. It's irrelevant. Dig up that Marx thread to go play in.

Sorry I brought up the c word PJ.

Don't be intellectually lazy. You're the one who brought up that authoritarianism isn't unique to the right, and you're going to get called out for it. To say authoritarianism isn't exclusively a reactionary ideology or to say ideology doesn't play a role in being authoritarian is empirically incorrect.

Prester Jane
Nov 4, 2008
Behold, it is me: Zoltar! Watch me do my Nostradamus impression!


site posted:

You quoted me but addressed tsa so I'm not sure who you're talking to, but thanks for putting those up

oops, just pretend that oversight did not happen :iamafag:

Series DD Funding
Nov 25, 2014

by exmarx


Job Truniht posted:

Don't be intellectually lazy. You're the one who brought up that authoritarianism isn't unique to the right, and you're going to get called out for it. To say authoritarianism isn't exclusively a reactionary ideology or to say ideology doesn't play a role in being authoritarian is empirically incorrect.

Care to name any socialist/communist governments that didn't become extremely authoritarian?

woke wedding drone
Jun 1, 2003

by exmarx


Fun Shoe

No sorry guys, this only works one way. You can't shoehorn Democratic narratives into the paranoid style. You can't even apply it to liberalism, because at its core liberalism (in both the original and corrupted sense) is about enlightenment values, about critical thinking and evidence. Authoritarianism has no relevance to it.

Do not confuse repeated citing of evidence with the litanies of the paranoid style.

You could apply it to Stalinism but the very idea that Stalinism has anything to do with liberalism is completely a fabrication of the authoritarian right, and should be responded to with a loud, healthy fart.

woke wedding drone fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 21:42

Job Truniht
Nov 7, 2012

MY POSTS ARE REAL RETARDED, SIR


Series DD Funding posted:

Care to name any socialist/communist governments that didn't become extremely authoritarian?

Care to name ones that weren't Stalinist or weren't under the influence of the USSR? Is anyone else going to try at this or are we beyond this "truth is in the middle" and "merit for the moderates" bullshit?

fade5
May 31, 2012

by exmarx


Prester John posted:

Edit: tsa Here are some examples of actual material from the curriculum system the cult I was raised in used.

Firstly, this is an actual promotional video. This is what they think will convince people to put their children into one of their schools.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBUw4iWepk0

Here are some examples of my actual workbooks from the cult school. I think these demonstrate the overall thrust of the program as well as the "Church-Birch Nexus", or the intersection between Authoritarians, Wealthy Conspiracy minded Conservatives, and Christian Fundamentalists.
This reminds me, if any of the thread readers haven't read it already, all of that content is from the "Accelerated Christian Education" school cult Prester John was raised in, and Prester John gave a very thorough and depressing view of the curriculum and everyday life in an ACE school cult, which is better described as "literal hell on earth":
http://forums.somethingawful.com/sh...hreadid=3659026

As a warning, after reading though that thread you may come out feeling very depressed, very angry, or both. Like seriously, ACE is so loving bad that if I was given the choice of raising a child/being raised as a child in an ACE curriculum or in a minority Christian community in Iraq, I'd probably choose Iraq, even with all the anti-Christian discrimination, car bombs, and threats of ISIL beheadings I'd face. ACE is that loving bad.

One incidental question: Prester John, what pronoun would you like me and the rest of the thread to refer to you as? I don't want to be an rear end and accidentally call you something you don't want to be called.

fade5 fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 22:20

Cerebral Bore
Apr 21, 2010

More-than-deserving candidate for a future Stalinist purge



Fun Shoe

Series DD Funding posted:

Care to name any socialist/communist governments that didn't become extremely authoritarian?

Job Truniht posted:

Care to name ones that weren't Stalinist or weren't under the influence of the USSR? Is anyone else going to try at this or are we beyond this "truth is in the middle" and "merit for the moderates" bullshit?

Kerala. Now can we please nip this in the bud?


As for the topic at hand, the theory advanced by Prester John seems consistent enough, though that doesn't mean that it's true. I'd be wary of generalizing too much beyond US religious rightwing authoritarians without some further supporting arguments to extend its applicability, especially if it is mainly based on personal experience.

Prester Jane
Nov 4, 2008
Behold, it is me: Zoltar! Watch me do my Nostradamus impression!


I am putting these videos up as evidence of the developing panic about legalizedmandatory Gay Marriage coming from religious Authoritarians. I think these videos are good examples of where new "Narrative Convergence's" will occur, as these sorts of ideas will eventually make their way into the larger Authoritarian right, and from there into the GOP leadership.

Further, this poo poo is kind of scary, as this is a bunch of Inner Narratives starting to leak out and that is a sign of when Authoritarians are not planning AT ALL for the future anymore. Being honest in public isn't a concern when what the non-believers no longer matters (because they will all soon be dead anyways).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkppobulT_U

This rear end in a top hat is a judge. A loving judge is openly opining on the steps of a State Capital that he might have to die soon because Gay Marriage. (Bonus hilarious speaking in tongues/crazypants rebuking of "unclean spirits" audible in the background)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q-7t26fdfU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhS-YQzcy5I


If you only watch one of these videos, watch this one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6txm8QTtc



Calling it now, by August we will have a "Fundie Freakout" Megathread. Hopefully this all stays at the level of "hilarious idiocy" and does not go beyond that,

fade5 posted:


One incidental question: Prester John, what pronoun would you like me and the rest of the thread to refer to you as? I don't want to be an rear end and accidentally call you something you don't want to be called.

I prefer the feminine, but I am only very recently out and its not a huge deal to me, honestly. My user name is suggestive of being masculine anyways and its not a huge personal concern of mine if someone uses the "wrong" pronouns. Thank you for asking though, and thanks for suggesting the A.C.E thread to people.

Prester Jane fucked around with this message at Mar 25, 2015 around 01:16

site
Apr 6, 2007

Check my colors

Trans-pride worldwide

Bitch


I forgot to address your last sentence pj: I mean that in politics, your goal is to impose your viewpoint onto the rest of society, for good or ill, and to control them through whatever mechanisms are available to you to maintain that control.

Those pages you provided are ludicrous, I agree, but the method is no different than what other schools use. They differ in content and perhaps "severity", but if progressive could push their message that hard in textbooks I've no doubt they would.

I just used vaccines because that was the example you used previously.

E: guess i need to thank you for putting up this thread. So... Thank you

site fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 22:08

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN
Jun 26, 2009





Prester John posted:



Further, this poo poo is kind of scary, as this is a bunch of Inner Narratives starting to leak out and that is a sign of when Authoritarians are not planning AT ALL for the future anymore. Being honest in public isn't a concern when waht the non-deliverers no longer matters (because they will all soon be dead anyways).



I think a cool example of that was Netanyahu having a meltdown on tv, crying, "The Arabs are voting! The Arabs are voting!" during this past Israeli election when he thought he was going to lose.

site posted:

I forgot to address your last sentence pj: I mean that in politics, your goal is to impose your viewpoint onto the rest of society, for good or ill, and to control them through whatever mechanisms are available to you to maintain that control.

Wow that is so not that reason for politics.

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 22:17

Woolie Wool
Jun 2, 2006

by FactsAreUseless


site posted:

Are we talking about authoritarian as being distinct from totalitarianism for the purposes of this thread? Socialism and communism are totalitarian in nature, but for completely different ideological (and ostensibly more altruistic) reasons. But reading through PS' posts, much could apply just the same to that extreme as well.

Totalitarianism is not a distinct form of politics compared to authoritarianism; I am not even certain if it really has a meaning besides an authoritarian regime opposed by the Western liberal consensus as opposed to one that is tolerated. At best it is a rhetorical style and political strategy designed to establish and/or maintain a repressive regime in a country with an educated mass society, by recruiting the masses into the dominant ideology and involving them in their own repression. King Louis XIV did not care very much what you thought of him as long as you remembered your place and didn't cause trouble. Fascism makes recruiting ordinary citizens as fascists or fellow travelers a critical priority. They do this because it takes far more effort to control an urbanized, literate proletariat who can organize than to control a thinly spread peasantry who cannot read and are bound to their land by subsistence agriculture.

Woolie Wool fucked around with this message at Mar 24, 2015 around 22:21

site
Apr 6, 2007

Check my colors

Trans-pride worldwide

Bitch


Woolie Wool posted:

Totalitarianism is not a distinct form of politics compared to authoritarianism; I am not even certain if it really has a meaning besides an authoritarian regime opposed by the Western liberal consensus as opposed to one that is tolerated. At best it is a rhetorical style and political strategy designed to establish and/or maintain a repressive regime in a country with an educated mass society, by recruiting the masses into the dominant ideology and involving them in their own repression. King Louis XIV did not care very much what you thought of him as long as you remembered your place and didn't cause trouble. Fascism makes recruiting ordinary citizens as fascists or fellow travelers a critical priority.
All reasons why I associate it with both left and right extremes. Both sides want this.
Here's a book I've been reading that gets into it, if anyone else has read it and can call bullshit please do so.
http://www.amazon.com/Marxism-Fasci...totalitarianism

Woolie Wool
Jun 2, 2006

by FactsAreUseless


Shbobdb posted:

Was the "Final battle in the LoTR" a joke comment, since the final battle was a crazy person destroying themselves and the greatest evil that had consumed them?

Helms Deep sort of fits what with the last stand of the brave fair-haired Rohirrim against hordes of vaguely Asiatic Uruk-hai but Tolkien does not fit reactionary narratives as well as the oceans of dogshit high fantasy authors who imitate him.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp


Woolie Wool posted:

Helms Deep sort of fits what with the last stand of the brave fair-haired Rohirrim against hordes of vaguely Asiatic Uruk-hai but Tolkien does not fit reactionary narratives as well as the oceans of dogshit high fantasy authors who imitate him.

Barely characterized dark complected people who are savage and ride elephants.

Prester Jane
Nov 4, 2008
Behold, it is me: Zoltar! Watch me do my Nostradamus impression!


katlington posted:

I think a cool example of that was Netanyahu having a meltdown on tv, crying, "The Arabs are voting! The Arabs are voting!" during this past Israeli election when he thought he was going to lose.

I agree. Speaking of netanyahu, I think his recent speech is a good example of a couple of things I am trying to describe here, let me just pick one for the moment though.


Recall that National Review (when it was under Bill Buckley's control) was once an arm against the Authoritarian takeover of the GOP. Now however as a result of the "Compaction Cycle" they have become overtly Authoritarian, to the point where they attacked Rand Paul for not clapping enthusiastically enough during Netanyahu's speech. Further, the very act of scrutinizing each other so closely as to attack someone for simply not looking enthusiastic enough during a prolonged standing ovation is quite reminiscent of how North Koreans are scrutinized when they cheer for the Dear Leader. I think this could be interpreted as the Compaction Cycle functioning very actively at even the highest levels of the GOP at this point in time.

Certainly at least there was a Narrative Convergence around the idea that Bibi is the "True Leader of the Free world".

woke wedding drone
Jun 1, 2003

by exmarx


Fun Shoe

Woolie Wool posted:

Helms Deep sort of fits what with the last stand of the brave fair-haired Rohirrim against hordes of vaguely Asiatic Uruk-hai but Tolkien does not fit reactionary narratives as well as the oceans of dogshit high fantasy authors who imitate him.

Well if you read his letters, it kind of does. But he was more reactionary against modernism and industrialization than against any particular race or creed. He was basically Ignatius J. Reilly except for Anglo-Saxon culture instead of medieval.

Prester Jane
Nov 4, 2008
Behold, it is me: Zoltar! Watch me do my Nostradamus impression!


AmiYumi posted:

I know it's a bit early, but can someone set up a mirror of PJ's posts so I can link non-SA people?

I missed this earlier, but I will port them over to my blog later tonight and put the link up here.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Mandy Thompson
Dec 26, 2014

by zen death robot


AmiYumi posted:

I know it's a bit early, but can someone set up a mirror of PJ's posts so I can link non-SA people?

I agree. This is a wonderful thread and Prester John but an awesome amount of effort into this for it to be relegated to being a post on an internet forum

  • Locked thread
«158 »