The Fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist State – a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values – interprets, develops, and potentiates the whole life of a people.
Or more succinctly, from his speech on 26 May 1927:
Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.
Well done for reading this Tablet of Posers.... how did you get past the selectorate guard rails?
The whole Human Rights fairytale was, in essence, written by Rousseau. It would have been better if the UDHR had been strangled at birth (in the 1940s I think?) and replaced with a Universal Declaration of Human Responsibilities. That would have been a useless bit of paper too but at least its heart would have been in a more realistic and grown up place.
Reminds me of Rousseau's "Social Contract": "Those who will not be free, will be forced to be free."
This way of seeing things seems hardwired into leadership itself, as you've pointed out before, David. Alexander the Great had the same vision: uniting the world by creating a homogeneous humanity. It's also a fundamental vision to most religions, the proselytising ones. If only we all believed the One True Thing, we'd all get along fine. The idea of enslavement to some idea in order to be truly free isn't new of course. The metaphors of Christian mystics expressed this idea. Famously, John Donne wrote "Batter my heart, three-person'd God," saying, "That I may rise and stand, o'erthrow me, and bend /
Your force to break, blow, burn, and make me new." Because this instinct seems common to all religions and ideologies, including science, I have come up with the notion of the "will to incorporation" whereby any given movement seeks to include (incorporate) all of humanity in one body. The only way this can happen of course is by force, including a purge of those who would disagree and bring corruption to the pure body of participants in the new (and final) revelation.
Aye, this is what I have called at times 'zombie rights' - the spirit of Kant's rightful condition (Recht) that gave us the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has died, and is now reanimated by a ghoulish inversion of what was supposed to be a strict and principled limit upon state power. But the challenge now is: how to break the spell of those who still think 'human rights' means 'everything fuzzy I can think of'...? I fear, as I think you do too, that it would take yet another disaster to get us back to anything like the promises we previously made...
The Law of Unintended Consequences is likely to come to our rescue long before Disaster does!
And human nature, along with God himself (who probably laughs at all this bureaucratic-utopian nonsense) will stop all of this anyway. The United Nations, since its inception, has, in my view, been characterised by almost complete failure. That is unlikely to change any time soon. Thank goodness.
All will be for the best, in the best of all possible worlds, as we face homogenisation, anomie and increasingly intrusive managerialism,complete with an array of handsomely remunerated stakeholders.
So universal human rights predicated upon right speech, right think and right actions.
Where do invidual loyalties, convictions, attachments and responsibilities fit in to this UNtopia?
As to shared values, how will the UN cadres bring the likes of Hamas, the Taliban, Al Shabbab ,Hezbollah and various other cuddly misunderstood types into the fold?
Finally, this link would do the job just as well-if bland verbal porridge is employed to manage the plebs:
On how "Liberal democracy" contains the seeds of totalitarianism. Published in 2016, this is even more pertinent now. I read it not longer after originally published, and reread it last week.
It is even more pertinent now as we see the post-Covid all out assault on the freedom of the individual.
The demon in democracy : totalitarian temptations in free societies
Author: Legutko, Ryszard, 1949
ISBN: 9781594039911
"Abstract: Ryszard Legutko lived and suffered under communism for decades?and he fought with the Polish ant-communist movement to abolish it. Having lived for two decades under a liberal democracy, however, he has discovered that these two political systems have a lot more in common than one might think. They both stem from the same historical roots in early modernity, and accept similar presuppositions about history, society, religion, politics, culture, and human nature. InThe Demon in Democracy, Legutko explores the shared objectives between these two political systems, and explains how liberal democracy has over time lurched towards the same goals as communism, albeit without Soviet style brutalality. Both systems, says Legutko, reduce human nature to that of the common man, who is led to believe himself liberated from the obligations of the past. Both the communist man and the liberal democratic man refuse to admit that there exists anything of value outside the political systems to which they pledged their loyalty. And both systems refuse to undertake any critical examination of their ideological prejudices."
I'm trying to imagine which countries would fall for this and sadly conclude it would be Western democracies. Can you imagine Iran, China, Russia, India, Indonesia etc etc etc falling for this clap trap?
When the government makes everyone equal, some always become more equal than others. What the UN calls human rights are in fact human wrongs. How else do you explain Saudi Arabia has chair of the women's rights commission? Best to start with a return to first principles: https://mikebond.substack.com/p/human-rights-can-we-return-to-first
"And it is important to make clear that it is an ideology; these people are true believers. They are not conspirators - they are (though they would obviously not describe themselves with this word) disciples."
I think this is a mistake and thus your conclusion is also incorrect.
This is a conspiracy, and these people are conspirators even though they are, in many cases, unaware of the goal to which their labors are directed. They are also dupes, and that is the purpose of the ideology which has been cynically created by the dupers who are well aware of what they are conspiring toward. This is a time honored system employed by occult societies which have long been the tool of tyrants and aspiring tyrants.
The goal is indeed an absolute and ruthless tyranny which is planned to emerge from the chaos which will result from the current policies. But the "useful idiots" currently laboring toward an end they do not understand will be put up against a wall and shot on the way to that goal - and my guess is not too far in the future.
Great piece again - under the U.N. we will have the right to do as we are told !😀
From Mussolini's 1932 Doctrine of Fascism:
The Fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist State – a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values – interprets, develops, and potentiates the whole life of a people.
Or more succinctly, from his speech on 26 May 1927:
Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.
How do 'they' not see it ?
Well done for reading this Tablet of Posers.... how did you get past the selectorate guard rails?
The whole Human Rights fairytale was, in essence, written by Rousseau. It would have been better if the UDHR had been strangled at birth (in the 1940s I think?) and replaced with a Universal Declaration of Human Responsibilities. That would have been a useless bit of paper too but at least its heart would have been in a more realistic and grown up place.
Reminds me of Rousseau's "Social Contract": "Those who will not be free, will be forced to be free."
This way of seeing things seems hardwired into leadership itself, as you've pointed out before, David. Alexander the Great had the same vision: uniting the world by creating a homogeneous humanity. It's also a fundamental vision to most religions, the proselytising ones. If only we all believed the One True Thing, we'd all get along fine. The idea of enslavement to some idea in order to be truly free isn't new of course. The metaphors of Christian mystics expressed this idea. Famously, John Donne wrote "Batter my heart, three-person'd God," saying, "That I may rise and stand, o'erthrow me, and bend /
Your force to break, blow, burn, and make me new." Because this instinct seems common to all religions and ideologies, including science, I have come up with the notion of the "will to incorporation" whereby any given movement seeks to include (incorporate) all of humanity in one body. The only way this can happen of course is by force, including a purge of those who would disagree and bring corruption to the pure body of participants in the new (and final) revelation.
Aye, this is what I have called at times 'zombie rights' - the spirit of Kant's rightful condition (Recht) that gave us the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has died, and is now reanimated by a ghoulish inversion of what was supposed to be a strict and principled limit upon state power. But the challenge now is: how to break the spell of those who still think 'human rights' means 'everything fuzzy I can think of'...? I fear, as I think you do too, that it would take yet another disaster to get us back to anything like the promises we previously made...
Universal Declaration of Human Duties. UN High Commissioner for Human Duties. Doesn't sound so warm and friendly does it?
Plus if we are all swept up into a perfectible state there will obviously be no need for democracy because we will all want the same thing...
The Law of Unintended Consequences is likely to come to our rescue long before Disaster does!
And human nature, along with God himself (who probably laughs at all this bureaucratic-utopian nonsense) will stop all of this anyway. The United Nations, since its inception, has, in my view, been characterised by almost complete failure. That is unlikely to change any time soon. Thank goodness.
All will be for the best, in the best of all possible worlds, as we face homogenisation, anomie and increasingly intrusive managerialism,complete with an array of handsomely remunerated stakeholders.
So universal human rights predicated upon right speech, right think and right actions.
Where do invidual loyalties, convictions, attachments and responsibilities fit in to this UNtopia?
As to shared values, how will the UN cadres bring the likes of Hamas, the Taliban, Al Shabbab ,Hezbollah and various other cuddly misunderstood types into the fold?
Finally, this link would do the job just as well-if bland verbal porridge is employed to manage the plebs:
https://www.fortypoundhead.com/tools_bullshit_generator.asp
Anyone who has seen the UN in operation on the ground will be confident that none of their fantasies will come to fruition.
On how "Liberal democracy" contains the seeds of totalitarianism. Published in 2016, this is even more pertinent now. I read it not longer after originally published, and reread it last week.
It is even more pertinent now as we see the post-Covid all out assault on the freedom of the individual.
The demon in democracy : totalitarian temptations in free societies
Author: Legutko, Ryszard, 1949
ISBN: 9781594039911
"Abstract: Ryszard Legutko lived and suffered under communism for decades?and he fought with the Polish ant-communist movement to abolish it. Having lived for two decades under a liberal democracy, however, he has discovered that these two political systems have a lot more in common than one might think. They both stem from the same historical roots in early modernity, and accept similar presuppositions about history, society, religion, politics, culture, and human nature. InThe Demon in Democracy, Legutko explores the shared objectives between these two political systems, and explains how liberal democracy has over time lurched towards the same goals as communism, albeit without Soviet style brutalality. Both systems, says Legutko, reduce human nature to that of the common man, who is led to believe himself liberated from the obligations of the past. Both the communist man and the liberal democratic man refuse to admit that there exists anything of value outside the political systems to which they pledged their loyalty. And both systems refuse to undertake any critical examination of their ideological prejudices."
I'm trying to imagine which countries would fall for this and sadly conclude it would be Western democracies. Can you imagine Iran, China, Russia, India, Indonesia etc etc etc falling for this clap trap?
When the government makes everyone equal, some always become more equal than others. What the UN calls human rights are in fact human wrongs. How else do you explain Saudi Arabia has chair of the women's rights commission? Best to start with a return to first principles: https://mikebond.substack.com/p/human-rights-can-we-return-to-first
Thank you for bringing this to our attention - a wonderful example of the hypnotic powers of abstraction - cf. my publications elsewhere...
Maybe Tolken thinks that Huxleys Brave New World is an instruction manual?
"And it is important to make clear that it is an ideology; these people are true believers. They are not conspirators - they are (though they would obviously not describe themselves with this word) disciples."
I think this is a mistake and thus your conclusion is also incorrect.
This is a conspiracy, and these people are conspirators even though they are, in many cases, unaware of the goal to which their labors are directed. They are also dupes, and that is the purpose of the ideology which has been cynically created by the dupers who are well aware of what they are conspiring toward. This is a time honored system employed by occult societies which have long been the tool of tyrants and aspiring tyrants.
The goal is indeed an absolute and ruthless tyranny which is planned to emerge from the chaos which will result from the current policies. But the "useful idiots" currently laboring toward an end they do not understand will be put up against a wall and shot on the way to that goal - and my guess is not too far in the future.