Do We Inherently Crave Authority? - Those who would trade essential freedoms, and so forth

KidKitty

Official Junior Shitposter
kiwifarms.net
This comes from a rather thoughtful conversation I had with a close friend. Without going into too much detail regarding the full context; the basic gist is that we fundamentally disagree on the level in which society and its people ought to be steered. His belief being that - not merely social media - but discourse and free propagation of ideas prove that people are too tribalistic, too easily radicalized, and too lacking in foresight for the long term consequences of their decisions. Democracy as it exists is to him a corruption of its original intent, and the only way to fix things is to either sacrifice the freedom of potentially harmful or dangerous ideas/ideologies or tear down the whole system as it exists for something better.

In a less detailed way, I see this same sentiment shared very openly these days by both left and right leaning individuals. Sometimes subjectively leaning towards their territory - of course - but more often then not, by people of the whole spectrum who insist that shit isn't getting better the more we choose to ignore and enable the ills of our society. Less out of hubris, more out of nihilistic impulse or depression.

As we move further into an age where we continue to allow the distinction of 'acceptable speech' to restrain our ability to discourse, I have to wonder if this is - collectively - what we really want.

Do we really crave guidance enough to prefer it rather than fight the war of ideas anymore, or are people just failing to come to terms with another big hurdle in the stretch between generations?
 

Itu aru kamusu tugeza

Ohmori-san? Do it.
kiwifarms.net
The human population isn't infinitely sustainable. Humans need a proper government, and with government comes authority. No one can be expected to function sufficiently on their own.

If you want my take, it's primitive organization/tribalism from years and years of adaptation given form. Since humans are unquestionably apex predators, they haven't had to adapt on the terms of natural selection aside from developing a competent level of intelligence over all these years.
 
Reactions: Eltotsira
I don't think 'craving' authority is the right way to look at it but I think most would fair better with a strict authority dictating their professional/social lives.

The amount of people that would benefit from authority would probably be along Pareto principle 80% would be happier with strong authority whereas 20% would find if stifling and despise it.
 

Tasty Tatty

kiwifarms.net
Humans are often described as creatures of habits, meaning, we need structure to function. Our society has managed to create a pattern for us: born in a family, get educated, get a job, build a family, repeat. This is not something that someone just made up and forced it on us, but something that has evolved along with humanity as the best way for us to survive. Even hippies realised living in collectives are better than just be on your own. Those anti-family liberals are deluding themselves. Authority doesn't mean being told what to do: it's just that you rely certain duties to another person while you focus on others: for example, I vote for a street representative so he or she can deal with the street light problems and, if he takes a decision, I would likely follow. Also, my parents provide me with food and protection while I educate myself and all I have to do is follow their rules. It's a social arrangement that works for everybody.

Now, normal people create their own rules to follow those patterns. Say, you don't need to go to college to get an education, but you definitely need to learn something before trying so you can actually make money from it and you can survive whenever you don't rely on your parents anymore and can provide for your own family. Weaklings, on the other hand, need to be ordered around what to do and that's why they need not just collectives (as religion, social groups, families) but extreme collective groups that remove your own individuality (cults).

The vast majority of human society and human history is not libertarian.
Libertarianism is as naive as Communism.
 

Hortator

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Let’s not forget about 9,800 of the 10,000 years of human history (I’m rounding) were ruled by kings, warlords, pharaohs, chieftains, generals, khalifs, emperors, despots, tyrants, dictators, so many that we had to make up synonyms just to break up the monotony for “ruler”.

It wasn’t until the American Experiment that we tried having people be their own rulers. So far, it’s done pretty well, and most of the world tried to copy it.

Our major “default setting” is to get behind and support strong people, for various reasons. Safety, favors, and maybe the possibility of becoming the new boss hog, who knows.
 

Lemmingwise

Men with wombs
kiwifarms.net
Democracy as it exists is to him a corruption of its original intent, and the only way to fix things is to either sacrifice the freedom of potentially harmful or dangerous ideas/ideologies or tear down the whole system as it exists for something better.
I think he's right democracy as it currently exists is a corruption, as democracy requires a demos, and that has been undermined persistently.

694974


We're devolving into tribalism because we are throwing all tribes together, something that colonialists used to do to conquered people, which means by extension we're probably becoming conquered people.

The suppression of free speech is just a side-effect.

Though the dichotomy of "war of ideas" vs. "authoritarianism" is a false one. You can have hierarchies and authorities AND a war of ideas. What you can't have is the slow gradual disenfranchisement/ethnic cleansing of a people AND open discourse.
 

KidKitty

Official Junior Shitposter
kiwifarms.net
I should elaborate further given the chance.

What I mean specifically are people who unironically believe there should be a level of collective manipulation via a higher system - not necessarily a person or individual - to steer and direct people to what is logically in their own best interest.

This obviously entails a measure of suppression, whether it's of 'dangerous' ideas or ideologies, restricted access, enforced boundaries. Basically, the idea that we've failed, our experiment failed, and the only way to preserve the future is lock it down and hamfist a stable outcome.

What interests me is not the people who seek specifically to themselves control this system, but crave the stability it promises at the cost of their own personal freedoms.
 
Reactions: Cool kitties club

Cool kitties club

Kiwi Farms unofficial pet cat
kiwifarms.net
This is discussed in "The Grand Inquisitor" by Dostoevsky. There also is an X-Files version of the story. This is also discussed with tech in the final Mgs2 codec call
I mean specifically are people who unironically believe there should be a level of collective manipulation via a higher system - not necessarily a person or individual - to steer and direct people to what is logically in their own best interest.
The problem with stability is that is impossible to keep. Ideas and madness spread like viruses always threatening the status quo. This has been around for a while it is just that the Internet has exacerbated it. Censorship can only slow this process. Also its all fun and games until the censors (being human) make a mistake or endorse a bad ideology.
 
Reactions: KidKitty

Lemmingwise

Men with wombs
kiwifarms.net
What interests me is not the people who seek specifically to themselves control this system, but crave the stability it promises at the cost of their own personal freedoms
The footpatsies of authoritarianism if you will.

I get the impression you're walking into this discussion with the presumption that those who desire order necessarily infringe on freedom, but you're speaking of it in such hypothetical hands off way, that you can only find reinforcement of your presupposed notions, as you're not either putting forward tangible concepts, like the definable morality or real world examples.
 

Krokodil Overdose

[|][||][||][|_]
kiwifarms.net
I think he's right democracy as it currently exists is a corruption, as democracy requires a demos, and that has been undermined persistently.

View attachment 694974

We're devolving into tribalism because we are throwing all tribes together, something that colonialists used to do to conquered people, which means by extension we're probably becoming conquered people.

The suppression of free speech is just a side-effect.

Though the dichotomy of "war of ideas" vs. "authoritarianism" is a false one. You can have hierarchies and authorities AND a war of ideas. What you can't have is the slow gradual disenfranchisement/ethnic cleansing of a people AND open discourse.
Democracy as currently practiced is basically Goodhart's Law in action. The idea was to measure which was the best idea by seeing what got the most support, then the measure became a target...
 

KidKitty

Official Junior Shitposter
kiwifarms.net
The footpatsies of authoritarianism if you will.

I get the impression you're walking into this discussion with the presumption that those who desire order necessarily infringe on freedom, but you're speaking of it in such hypothetical hands off way, that you can only find reinforcement of your presupposed notions, as you're not either putting forward tangible concepts, like the definable morality or real world examples.
I suppose it's seeing how long I can go without marking the authoritarian left, where the bulk of these people seem to come from. You know the ones; people who may not necessarily originate from a purely leftist ideology, but believe in strangling speech and crippling undesirable ideologies under the PRESUMPTION that they're tearing out the roots of fascism or fighting back against future injustice.

Basically everybody who half-quotes Karl Poppler constantly, you know the quote.

It would be extremely easy to dismiss those kinds of people, but I don't seek reassurance that they're all too fucking crazy and hyped up on their own censor erections for their goals to become a reality. I'm trying to understand the people who know what they're asking for, but prefer to make the sacrifice anyways. Are they complacent? Are they just cowards? Or is it just nihilism?
 

Lemmingwise

Men with wombs
kiwifarms.net
It would be extremely easy to dismiss those kinds of people, but I don't seek reassurance that they're all too fucking crazy and hyped up on their own censor erections for their goals to become a reality. I'm trying to understand the people who know what they're asking for, but prefer to make the sacrifice anyways. Are they complacent? Are they just cowards? Or is it just nihilism?
I wouldn't know, but I do know it isn't easy to challenge those more powerful.

I was watching just before this a thoughtful video by Michael Jones, who makes an argument that "Truth is what those in power say". It contradicts his personal beliefs in regarding to truth (or logos or natural order), but in practice we collectively agree that truth is what power says. First five minutes of this video. Interesting thoughts:

 
Reactions: KidKitty

Eltotsira

kiwifarms.net
I have to agree more with your friend here.

We do crave authority, because we crave an orderly existence, a society of order. People will say "but that's not how we evolved", but do we really want to go back thousands of years in evolution? Why not base our views on society on what we could be, rather than what we have been?

A society this big, advanced, complex, and diverse cannot just be left to every individual's devices. You're right that various tribes are starting to want to shove each other down(right getting authoritarian against leftism and left getting authoritarian against rightism), but there are also other things, like school shootings, opiate overdoses, and pedophilia cover ups, that we can all agree should be stopped. Any social ecosystem left to it's own devices, at a certain height of advancement, complexity, size, and diversity, will succumb to entropy and fall into chaos. We need a strong authority to prevent that. I don't know how that would or should work, but we have been waiting for humanity to find it's collective mind, and it hasn't happened.
 
Reactions: KidKitty

Yandere Science

kiwifarms.net
Our "Fundamental Liberties" are so enshrined in the US because how easy it is to want to take them away:
"But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." -James Madison, Federalist 51

I think he's right democracy as it currently exists is a corruption, as democracy requires a demos, and that has been undermined persistently.

View attachment 694974

We're devolving into tribalism because we are throwing all tribes together, something that colonialists used to do to conquered people, which means by extension we're probably becoming conquered people.

The suppression of free speech is just a side-effect.

Though the dichotomy of "war of ideas" vs. "authoritarianism" is a false one. You can have hierarchies and authorities AND a war of ideas. What you can't have is the slow gradual disenfranchisement/ethnic cleansing of a people AND open discourse.
That has actually been America's default for most our history, the 90s were an aberration brought about directly by a collective sigh of relief following the fall of the Soviet Union which lifted the threat of nuke-induced doom. It's literally why we have so many checks & balances.
 
Reactions: Chexxchunk

Apoth42

Hehe xd
kiwifarms.net
I think humans naturally crave a paternal figure.

Most crime is caused by the children of single mothers and most national responses to desperate situations have been messianic saviors and paternal autocrats.

At the end of the day, only a strong male hero deserving of respect can save the world.
 
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1EiZnCKCb6Dc4biuto2gJyivwgPRM2YMEQ
BTC+SW: bc1qwv5fzv9u6arksw6ytf79gfvce078vprtc0m55s
ETH: 0xc1071c60ae27c8cc3c834e11289205f8f9c78ca5
LTC: LcDkAj4XxtoPWP5ucw75JadMcDfurwupet
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino