3 ms·
This is an interesting cryptofascist argument: The world has meaning, and denying that meaning is an artifice which leads to alienation and atomization. A coun
by boapnuaput 7y ago
This is an interesting cryptofascist argument: The world has meaning, and denying that meaning is an artifice which leads to alienation and atomization.
A counterpoint: There is obviously no such thing as meaning in the traditional/religious/corporatist sense. Chomsky, Wittgenstein, Gödel, Tarski, etc. hammered this particular peg into the ground last century.[0] Additionally, the natural/artificial divide doesn't matter; there is no such thing as an artificial society.[1] Therefore this "return to organic hierarchical structures" is a fascist resurrection myth, and "eliminating threats to a meaningful existence" is fascist fear of the Other.[2]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski's_undefinability_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski's_undefinability_theore... is a reasonable entrypoint to these concepts.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism#Umberto_Eco https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism#Umberto...
- antepodius 7y agoDifferent societies can be more or less functional with respect to a given set of values. And besides, if someone complains about something being artificial, I'm not sure what matters is the appeal to nature so much as complaining about the thing being rigid and insufficient. The word 'fascist' in your post doesn't seem to mean much. I can replace it with 'bad' and it doesn't seem the change the meaning. "this [...] is a bad resurrection myth, and [...] is a bad fear of the Other."
- CrowFly 7y ago@DANG please ban this fascist user