Fascism, a different take...and Lack of Empathy

[Cooky]

It never ceases to amaze me how two people could be from the same town, or the same neighborhood, or even the same family with the same parents and come to two opposing political opinions... And according to the way political radicals on this website talk, it would be as if they were from opposite ends of the world with nothing in common... But realistically, they would have so much more in common than not.

...And these same radicals might even oppose racism, homophobia, Islamophobia... But then they fail with another phobia... Phobia of the right. This is why they'll rightfully be called hypocrits and bigots.

And I stress the left, because you're the majority here. But the right is also guilty.

 

[Heyo]

...The people of the future, IMO, will know us as a bigoted and hypocritical generation. I'm not talking about the right or the left, I'm talking about both.

Yep. And they may find that language was a part of that division.

 

[Cooky]

Yep. And they may find that language was a part of that division.

Yes. targeted language, and division.

 

[exchemist]

Hannah Arendt, after observing Adolf Eichmann at his 1961 trial, came up with the phrase "banality of evil."

The Banality of Evil: Hannah Arendt on the Normalization of Human Wickedness and Our Only Effective Antidote to It

Excerpt [Edit to clarify--this quote is from the above article, not from Arendt herself]: "The essence of totalitarian government, and perhaps the nature of every bureaucracy, is to make functionaries and mere cogs in the administrative machinery out of men, and thus to dehumanize them.

It is through this lens of bureaucracy (which she calls “the rule of Nobody”) as a weapon of totalitarianism that Arendt arrives at her notion of “the banality of evil” — a banality reflected in Eichmann himself, who embodied “the dilemma between the unspeakable horror of the deeds and the undeniable ludicrousness of the man who perpetrated them.”

And Arendt does agree, Eichmann showed no empathy for those affected by his implementation of policies. He like many others, offered the "It was legal and I was only following orders and procedures" defense, which the Tribunal at Nuremberg utterly rejected.

I think this is profound insight. It applies not only to politics but to all sorts of other collective activities that end in disaster. Something as mundane as the Volkswagen emissions scandal can be put down to an organisation blindly following a corporate course of action, without anyone standing back and asking, "What the hell are we doing, here?".

 

[Cooky]

I think this is profound insight. It applies not only to politics but to all sorts of other collective activities that end in disaster. Something as mundane as the Volkswagen emissions scandal can be put down to an organisation blindly following a corporate course of action, without anyone standing back and asking, "What the hell are we doing, here?".

Be careful though... You might get charged with "false equivilences"...

 

[exchemist]

Be careful though... You might get charged with "false equivilences"...

What are you talking about? For false equivalence, you need to be presenting two opposing things are if they are equivalent, when they are not.

What two things do you have in mind?

 

[Cooky]

What are you talking about? For false equivalence, you need to be presenting two opposing things are if they are equivalent, when they are not.

What two things do you have in mind?

Corporations (Volkswagen) and governments.

...But know that I'm not charging you with false equivalencies... I liked the comparison, and I've experienced it, personally, at work.

 

[exchemist]

Corporations (Volkswagen) and governments.

...But know that I'm not charging you with false equivalencies... I liked the comparison, and I've experienced it, personally, at work.

As corporations are not in any sense the opposite of governments, the issue of false equivalence does not arise.

 

[Cooky]

As corporations are not in any sense the opposite of governments, the issue of false equivalence does not arise.

I was just joking, but since you want to be a literalist, being "opposite" actually isn't a qualifier for something to be a false equivilence... It only needs to be a false equivilence to any degree, between any two things that are not the same.

False equivalence - Wikipedia

 

[Heyo]

As corporations are not in any sense the opposite of governments, the issue of false equivalence does not arise.

You didn't catch the conversation I had with @Cooky. It was a side blow at me. (Well played, Cooky.)

 

[exchemist]

I was just joking, but since you want to be a literalist, being "opposite" actually isn't a qualifier for something to be a false equivilence... It only needs to be a false equivilence to any degree, between any two things that are not the same.

False equivalence - Wikipedia

OK fair enough.

 

[Revoltingest]

And how is a surfeit of evil different than narcissism?

Narcissism is about obsession with oneself.
It doesn't prevent one from having good morals.
Intentions with evil consequences are the real
problem, whether one is selfish or altruistic.

 

[Secret Chief]

The obvious reference to cite here is the Milgram experiment. He was directly concerned with the fascists success in perpetrating genocide.

"The experiments began in July 1961, in the basement of Linsly-Chittenden Hall at Yale University, three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised his psychological study to explain the psychology of genocide and answer the popular contemporary question: "Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?"The experiment was repeated many times around the globe, with fairly consistent results."

- Milgram experiment - Wikipedia

 

[Twilight Hue]

Rather than a lack of empathy,
it's a surfeit of evil.

Just as it is with Marxism and Communism.

 

[Revoltingest]

Just as it is with Marxism and Communism.

So many good intentions.
So many disastrous results.

 

[JoshuaTree]

Narcissism is about obsession with oneself.
It doesn't prevent one from having good morals.
Intentions with evil consequences are the real
problem, whether one is selfish or altruistic.

I don't know any fascists first hand, but I know quite a few narcissists. Good thread, I need to reread all and ponder. Thanks.

 

[JoshuaTree]

That's pretty irrelevant. The focus is on being part of the group, the tribe and the tribe being more important than the individual.
It's about being a cog in a machine and feeling great about it.

The collective lack of empathy suggests to me that fascism is a good fit for narcissists at least in leadership and activists, true some people would go along with fascism just not to rock the boat but that's not what makes the group facist. I will reread, good thread. Thanks.

 

[Revoltingest]

The collective lack of empathy suggests to me that fascism is a good fit for narcissists at least in leadership and activists, true some people would go along with fascism just not to rock the boat but that's not what makes the group facist. I will reread, good thread. Thanks.

Democracy is pretty attractive to narcissists.
The lure of power...the pontificating during campaigns.