So, in my previous post on how I feel about the Russian people, I kind of noted a lot of similarities between Russians and a lot of conservative jingoistic sentiments expressed in the US. And how I don't really hate the Russian people because they're mostly subject to propaganda that cause them to think as they do. And how the same thing can happen here, and in some ways often does happen here. So I just wanted to express some pointers on how to avoid this kind of thinking and how to ensure that you're not one of the people who push comes to shove would unwittingly support literal nazis.
1) Question everything
I mean, this sub is called "out of plato's cave", Plato's cave being an allegory of being chained up by some authority and fed a diet of BS that causes you to view the world, not as it really is, but as someone wants you to see it. In order to break free of this, you need a free thinking mind. And this means you need to question everything. No authority should be above question. Not the state, and not even God. My trial by fire actually came when I ended up questioning my religion, and ended up deconverting from Christianity and becoming an atheist. And for a while there, I questioned God. I questioned his morality in the Bible. I questioned divine command theory. The euthyphro dilemma, and I kind of realized that yeah, god as portrayed by religion is a cosmic dictator, and this doesnt represent the pinnacle of human morality, but just the many failings of it and its authoritarian thinking. So yes, you should question religion and question God even.
You should also question your government. When I was in political science classes, we were trained to spot fake democracies. And Russia, for example, is the epitome of one. I mean, people can vote, but then the opponents of the guy in charge are jailed. And the same guy always wins, and they stuff the ballot boxes. And his opponents mysteriously end up dead. But hey, there's voting, it's a democracy right? Wrong. It's a fake democracy. it looks like a democracy but it's really a dictatorship.
But let's go further and question our system. Our political system has two parties. And they're the only ones that can win. And they bully people into supporting them, claiming they have to or the other side will win and it's their fault. But in voting for one of the two, we are expressing our voice, but we're also using it in a way that props up this system. Alternative viewpoints are suppressed.
Consider Chomsky's propaganda model with the media. We dont have strict state controlled media, but most media on TV is owned by a handful of companies. ANd they are subject to the owners whims, and have relationships with advertisers and even people in the political sphere itself. And they dont dare rock the boat as that could cause them sponsorships, money, and access to politicians. So they play ball.
Consider how the democratic primaries and the media seem to collude. How they tend to elevate some candidates like Clinton, Biden, and Harris, while suppressing others like Bernie or Yang.Consider how the influence of such propaganda outlets might influence elections. maybe even compare it to what happens in Russia.
Speaking of Russia, consider how Russia leaked some info in 2016 that implicated the democrats in engaging in the above behavior. While the propagandists and the tribalists might act like you can't accept both that the dems had their finger on the scale in choosing candidates and that the russians leaked info of it, both are actually true and should both be acknowledged. Democrats might think you're a russian stooge for believing the collusion narrative. And bernie or busters might think you're brainwashed by corporate media if you believe Russia leaked the info. You should be aware of manipulation both ways and call that crap out. Don't be anyone's puppet. Again, question EVERYTHING.
Question this blog even. I sure as fudge have my own biases.
Which brings us to point #2
2) Who does X benefit?
When looking at ANYTHING in politics, you should always look at it through a lens of who benefits. While it's possible to do this too much (see: leftists such as marxists or critical theorists), in moderation it's perfectly valid. Does the idea that wealth trickles down actually benefit people? Or does it just benefit the rich? What is the benefit of framing rich people as "job creators"? Who does "vote blue no matter who" benefit? What about invading a certain country?
The more you look at politics through a lens of who benefits, rather than just a list of solid principles, the more you realize that a lot of politics tends to favor certain groups over other groups. And this should be called out and corrected.
Also, just to throw a bone to leftists. Yes, leftism shows how the rich run the world. Critical theory can point to systemic advantages that whites and males get over others. These theories absolutely have legitimacy in the real world. And again, while we should be able to maintain perspective, is it valuable to be able to look at things through a lens of who benefits to see if a policy is a good idea. Because often times, flowery moral justifications and ethical arguments surround political actions, but under the surface is a very real current of some policy benefiting one group at the expense of another. Educate yourself and be aware.
Russia isn't denazifying Ukraine. Russia is interested in territorial expansion for geopolitical reasons and access to natural resources.
3) Develop your own system of morality and ethics
If you question stuff enough, you'll eventually find enough faults in everything to the point that you break down your current belief system. From there, you need to build it up into something else. Think about ethics on a meta level. What is the purpose of morality and ethics? What are the goals of whatever morality and ethics you develop? Who does this serve? Study different theories of ethics. Look at consequentualism. Look at deontology. Look at Kant's categorical imperative. Utilitarian ethics. Natural rights theory. Contract theory. Ethical egoism, etc. Weigh the pros. Weigh the cons. What are you for? Don't be afraid to mix and match systems for your own special form of ethics. I mean, my own system (which informs my political views) isn't a pure system itself. I base it in a combination of secular humanism, utilitarianism, and libertarianism.
For many people this is scary. Religious thinkers dislike this kind of thinking, equating it to Adam and Eve's original sin of thinking about morality themselves rather than doing what doing what God told them to do. BUT, I like to look at it this way. If you just do what others tell you to do, are you not running the risk of becoming a follower of someone like Hitler or Putin? Keep in mind, the nazis were "only following orders". And I hear a lot of people in Russia who were captured saying similar things when grilled over their war crimes. I saw a video of a Russian pilot captured and they said "we were just told to bomb those coordinates". At those coordinates was a hospital or something. Oops. The fact is, a lot of people say it's a sin to disobey authorities. Sometimes it can be. Sometimes rules are in place for good reason. But sometimes you're being asked to kill at the order of another.
4) Recognize the limits of your own system and improve it along the way
Okay, so you're starting to develop your own system. Cool. But don't be afraid to be self aware of your weaknesses when doing this. Building your own ethical system can take months or years, and require tons of research. While my core political system has been in place since around 2014ish, I'm still not afraid to course correct when necessary. For example in 2014 I'd be a lot more positive to much of the left than I am now. I learn through reaction to others. Watch them make mistakes and then I course correct.
Honestly, one lens that I would encourage everyone to learn is the structural functionalist lens of "does this work"? In step 2 I introduced conflict theory in terms of "who benefits", but as I kind of implied, the left tends to do this a lot, but gets overzealous about it. This is how you get SJWs, who on social policy start seeing the patriarchy or racism in literally everything, to the point that things that are intended to be quite benign suddenly come off as racist or sexist. This is how you get, for example, calls to abolish the police, or say all cops are bad (ACAB). People see the systemic violence in everything, some of which is legit, but then they go too far.
Or take the Marxists. They see capitalism as so evil that they start advocating for socialism. And socialism has little real positive data suggesting it "works". I mean, even if it does, it has some major drawbacks compared to capitalism like inefficiencies, the threat of authoritarianism, etc.
Or take foreign policy. Some people have become so anti US imperialism they start sympathizing with and defending Russia and China.
It's dumb. Like, okay. Some levels of criticizing things as they are is fine, and building up your own alternative belief system can be difficult, but try to avoid making the basic mistakes of those who have come before us. If those ideas don't work, or aren't helpful, or are applied overzealously, that can do more damage than the status quo. Sometimes things are the way they are to benefit one group of people over another. But sometimes they're that way because it works. And sometimes, like in the case of the police, both can be simultaneously true at the same time. Yes, police seem to spend a lot of attention defending a system designed by rich people. But we also need police to do things to keep law and order. We can criticize them being militarized and repressive against peaceful protesters, while understanding they also serve legitimate purposes like responding to things like violent people or drunk drivers. You know? So don't overextent. And don't become so high on your own brand you lose touch with reality.
5) Don't be afraid to follow your own path
If you break down your own system, and build it back up again, don't be afraid to follow your own path in doing so. One thing I notice when a lot of people leave one belief system for another, they end up just unqustioningly accepting their new system. A lot of former conservatives who become liberals end up adopting strong "blue no matter who" mentalities. Atheists end up never really expanding their horizons after becoming atheists. Liberals who move further left often fall into the pitfall of Marxism and stay there.
No. Don't just question your old system, question your new one too. And don't be afraid to choose forge paths people haven't made before. As I said, my belief system isn't really a commonly accepted one. In a lot of ways, it's one I made myself. This is why, when I keep bringing up Yang and his human centered capitalism, I keep talking about how I was advocating for some of this stuff five years before I started becoming a fan of his. Because i WAS. I WAS advocating for yang in 2014, and while I wouldnt have called my political ideology human centered capitalism at the time, it's influenced by the same influences that later influenced Yang. And our resulting systems aren't QUITE the same, but they're SIMILAR. Very similar. I've discussed some differences I have with my strongest influences in other articles, but I'm not afraid to diverge at times, whether it be in the details or major doctrines or dogmas.
People often don't do this. They just leave one tribe, to join another tribe. But if you do that, are you really not being subject to some level of authoritarian thinking? Are you in control of your own belief system or are simply having it be dictated by others? For a lot of people, it IS the latter. Which is how so many people seem to fall into the pitfalls of stupidity I've mentioned above in both 4 and 5 here.
No system is perfect. I try to make mine as perfect as possible, and I see it as defensible from my perspective, but others can just disagree on the basis of different ethics. We can critique each others' ethics, but ultimately, you have to choose what you stand for. So choose wisely. Make sure it works, but don't be afraid to experiment. Experimentation is how we eventually get new ideas. Like human centered capitalism.
Heck that's what scholars did. Precursors of mine like Phillipe Van Parijs and Karl Widerquist, who made works my own system is loosely based off of, themselves experimented and branched out from other prior ideologies. Van Parijs seemed to want a leftist response to neoliberalism and the failures of the old pre 1980s "left", something I see common in anti work/UBI oriented left libertarian leaning literature. Karl Widerquist designed his own system in a similar vein of Van Parijs but decided to create his system under different principles. And my own system I would say is slightly more conservative than Widerquist's at times, but more progressive at times than say, Yang's version of human centered capitalism.
6) Prioritize your preferences, and seek common ground
One downside to doing the above is that in doing so, you're going to be rather lonely in practice. When you question everything, break down your own belief system, and build up your own in its place, you may be able to resist a lot of authoritarian BS others seek to impose on you since you're a free thinker and your views are your own, but you'll still have to make compromises and ally with others to get something done at this point. You might not agree with people on everything, but you need to work with others for common goals. For me, the pecking order looks a bit like this.
Forward party/UBI advocates- Since UBI is the defining policy of my specific political ideology, and tends to take priority over others, people who seek similar policies under similar ideological banners tend to take precedence for me. It should be noted simply being a UBI supporter in any form doesn't mean i'll support you, as there are bad implementations of UBI I'll disagree with (see my UBI metric for details), but generally speaking I'm inclined to seek out likeminded political groups such as the forward party.
Progressives- If I can't find a viable pro UBI alternative like the forward party, I tend to align with progressives. I don't agree with progressives on everything, with the UBI vs green new deal type divide being the biggest schism between my views and theirs, but I believe progressives do want to do good things, and I'm willing to accept we just have differences of how to get there.
Centrist liberals- Generally by the time I get down to this group, I'm kind of scraping the bottom of the barrel. As I see it the centrist wing of the democratic party sucks. But still, there are worse alternatives out there. Like Trumpers. Or even hardcore tankie leftists who I see as a particularly dangerous version of progressives.
Generally speaking, ultimately, I try to find people who conform to me, rather than the other way around though. Some groups like centrist libs seem to want it the other way around, with them wielding the power and me just following. But just following mindlessly is authoritarian thinking that I reject. And honestly if a group is sufficiently different than me or goes against my morals in a significant way, I'm just not going to support them. That said:
7) Always remain in charge of your beliefs
You are a moral agent, and only you can decide when someone is sufficient enough to accept as your leader when you need to follow another group. Someone like yang, I'm not making a lot of compromises. Progressives I tend to make more but I deem it worth it. Centrist democrats love to try to bully people and frame the issue on their terms. Don't let them. In a democracy, you're not beholden to anyone, they're beholden to YOU. This is why I take such a hard line against blue no matter who rhetoric for example. If you just cave to them, you're not using your power to hold them accountable. And no accountability is a problem. In order to stop evil, good people need to not support said evil. Of course, if push comes to shove and you must yield to force, then yield to force. I'm not going to ask anyone to sacrifice themselves for their beliefs (although some would demand that of people). But if you're able, resist authoritarian efforts to corner you and get you to do something you're not comfortable with. Don't vote for democrats when they do nothing for you and try to bully you.
And as far as the Trumpers go, don't support them at all. Seriously, the trumper mindset is the same mindset as those who live in Russia and support Putin. It's the mindless jingoistic "support our troops unquestioningly" mentality that we see there. As I said in my previous article, when Russia held a "Z" rally, it just reminded me of the parts of a football game where they aren't actually playing football but are singing patriotic songs and doing vapid pro American virtue signalling. Same crap, different country. And if you followed the steps above, odds are you think blind nationalism is a bad thing by now, so you won't fall for it.
Conclusion
While I did not intend to do so when I started this article, I ended up describing step by step by deconversion from Christianity and shift away from conservatism around 2012. I basically described how I left plato's cave. And now you know. You essentially break down your belief system, question everything, build it back up, and then remain firm in your newly held convictions. That's the TLDR version. But in doing so, it will make you resistant to authoritarianism. The key to avoiding such thinking is to be an autonomous moral agent that thinks for themself and isn't afraid to go against the grain. So feel free to not support that war if you don't want to support that war. Feel free to not vote for that political party if you don't want to. You do you. Don't let other people tell you what to think, decide from yourself what you think. Eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Don't be afraid to deny anyone, including "god" if you have religious convictions.
People who are authoritarian might view this path as a dangerous one, one that leads to lawlessness, nihilism, and amorality. These are seen to be avoided at all costs by those with pro authoritarian mindsets. but it's only in embracing such things that you can really find yourself, and find out what you stand for and what you support. Otherwise, you're just someone else's puppet. In America, you might be the puppet of your favorite political party. In Russia or China, you might be your favorite dictator's puppet. In religion, you might be the puppet of those who run and control the religion.
But here's the thing. That kind of thinking, is exactly how you get fascism and other authoritarian ideologies to thrive. You get a bunch of people who don't question their beliefs and view their leaders uncritically and just do what they say. What happened in Nazi Germany CAN happen here. What is happening in Russia can too. It's up to you to do the work to make yourself resistant of these efforts.
No comments:
Post a Comment