I’m not sure it is great, to me it seems to handily encapsulate the bad parts of authoritarian ideologies. It’s a demand to follow the will of the group, and to prioritize your group identity in order to accumulate power for that group. Whether that group is race, nationality, or economic class, to think of yourself primarily as an instrumental component of it is an abdication of responsibility to have and apply your own unique perspective and thoughts, and leads naturally to abuses by whoever happens to be doing the thinking for all these people who have chosen loyalty over agency.
Which isn’t to say that cooperation isn’t important and necessary to accomplishing any goal, but if this sort of group unity is the core idea it seems extremely dangerous and malignant.
I’m not sure it is great, to me it seems to handily encapsulate the bad parts of authoritarian ideologies.
What’s authoritarian about strength in numbers?
It’s a demand to follow the will of the group, and to prioritize your group identity in order to accumulate power for that group.
Um… is it?
Whether that group is race, nationality, or economic class, to think of yourself primarily as an instrumental component of it is an abdication of responsibility to have and apply your own unique perspective and thoughts, and leads naturally to abuses by whoever happens to be doing the thinking for all these people who have chosen loyalty over agency.
Yeah, you just made all that up.
Which isn’t to say that cooperation isn’t important and necessary to accomplishing any goal, but if this sort of group unity is the core idea it seems extremely dangerous and malignant.
You are adding “group unity” yourself. “Ape together strong” just means groups are stronger than individuals.
So what? What I’m saying is that it’s toxic to make that power itself the core message (I have already explained why), and anyone would be right to deeply distrust someone using that sort of iconography as such in a political context. As a metaphor it is very directly evocative of falling into line for instrumental strength.
No, that’s specifically the fascist interpretation, and is a false collectivism. Fascism is individualism dressed up in collectivism.
Fascists say the individual is the core of society, and has its place only to serve the “collective” (the state).
True collectivism says the collective should serve every individual.
The difference may sound subtle, but trust me, it really isn’t.
Saying groups are stronger than individuals is a reminder that those in power only have power because we let them, and we can easily remove them if we work together. That is not the message of fascism.
Of the stick metaphor? Please keep in mind that I am talking about the stick metaphor, and not a broader concept like collectivism. I’m not sure you understand that what I am saying is that the stick metaphor is bad.
It’s a metaphor for fascism. Not sure why people think it can be removed from that context and be made a positive message. Anyway I think something happened to the comment at the top of the chain here as I can’t find the context for this anymore.
I’m not sure it is great, to me it seems to handily encapsulate the bad parts of authoritarian ideologies. It’s a demand to follow the will of the group, and to prioritize your group identity in order to accumulate power for that group. Whether that group is race, nationality, or economic class, to think of yourself primarily as an instrumental component of it is an abdication of responsibility to have and apply your own unique perspective and thoughts, and leads naturally to abuses by whoever happens to be doing the thinking for all these people who have chosen loyalty over agency.
Which isn’t to say that cooperation isn’t important and necessary to accomplishing any goal, but if this sort of group unity is the core idea it seems extremely dangerous and malignant.
What’s authoritarian about strength in numbers?
Um… is it?
Yeah, you just made all that up.
You are adding “group unity” yourself. “Ape together strong” just means groups are stronger than individuals.
I’m talking more about the bundle of sticks metaphor than the apes thing
Yes, groups are stronger than individuals
So what? What I’m saying is that it’s toxic to make that power itself the core message (I have already explained why), and anyone would be right to deeply distrust someone using that sort of iconography as such in a political context. As a metaphor it is very directly evocative of falling into line for instrumental strength.
No, that’s specifically the fascist interpretation, and is a false collectivism. Fascism is individualism dressed up in collectivism.
Fascists say the individual is the core of society, and has its place only to serve the “collective” (the state).
True collectivism says the collective should serve every individual.
The difference may sound subtle, but trust me, it really isn’t.
Saying groups are stronger than individuals is a reminder that those in power only have power because we let them, and we can easily remove them if we work together. That is not the message of fascism.
Of the stick metaphor? Please keep in mind that I am talking about the stick metaphor, and not a broader concept like collectivism. I’m not sure you understand that what I am saying is that the stick metaphor is bad.
…yes. Remember what the stick metaphor is a metaphor for!
It’s a metaphor for fascism. Not sure why people think it can be removed from that context and be made a positive message. Anyway I think something happened to the comment at the top of the chain here as I can’t find the context for this anymore.