![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
Fascism In One Person
Dismantling the Democratic Mind
The United States of America will never become a fascist or authoritarian nation. Or at least not openly. Because to “come out of the closet” so to speak would destroy one of the most useful inventions of the modern age: the democratic mind.
And this is not going to be my typical rant about how voting is a mental trick (meaningless in the real world) designed to make you put your seal of approval on a system you can’t realistically impact and to prevent you from wanting to take real control over your government. This is going to be something else entirely. Because the trick of democracy runs far deeper than that. And I don’t expect that I will win any friends or receive a lot of agreement by pointing out what I see. Nevertheless, I will continue.
My argument, at its core, is that democracy is not just a system of government. It may have been that in Ancient Greece or something, but today democracy is a system of mind. It is a method of organizing consciousness. As proof of this we could look at the absurdly low percentage of people in our nation (arguably a democratic republic, of course) who actually go out and vote. They are a minority, and yet all of us pride ourselves on living in a “free and democratic” country where we are allowed to do whatever we want and make the decisions that seem best to us.
I would characterize democratic consciousness, then, as a system of mind in which focus and decision-making are split up among competing interests. One part of your mind insists you take a certain course of action. Another part of you worries that may be the wrong thing to do. Other parts of you say your parents wouldn’t approve or your friends wouldn’t. Somewhere else worries about money. Another part strives to increase your social status and your sex appeal. Under the rulership of a democratic mind, we unwittingly believe that all of these competing interests need to have a say in the running of our lives. Every decision is debated on the floor of the mind. Every impulse gets a vote. As a result, it’s rare that we make moves in our lives with any certainty. It’s difficult to achieve a majority opinion. A real consensus is next to impossible. Plurality almost always wins the day. Twenty five percent of you wants to take a new job, and since no other internal faction can muster the “votes” to beat that, you take it despite great internal conflict and the intuitive knowledge that you probably should not take it.
There is such a thing as weighing your options and making a decision based upon careful consideration and then sticking with it and being happy about it afterwards. But how often does that realistically happen to you? Don’t lie to yourself simply because I am criticizing a concept which you hold dear to your self-identity. How often are you completely certain of yourself and of your decisions? If your life has gone anything like my life, then that percentage is going to be scarily low. And knowing that, admitting that to ourselves, well - it’s a wonder any of us get out of bed in the morning because of how filled with uncertainty and anxiety we are.
In fact, I might go so far as to argue that the “slacker” lifestyle - which so many people my age not only fall into, but pride ourselves on - is the ultimate expression of this crippling caused by the excessive internalization of the democratic process. We become so accustomed to being uncertain that we simply choose to do nothing at all instead. It’s an attempt to circumvent the problem by making a conscious decision to sit the game out. We sit around, drink beer, work jobs we know are beneath us - all so we don’t have to feel conflicted by uncertainty. Because we’ve intentionally chosen a course and are sticking to it at all costs and regardless of all criticism. But we are our own worst critics at the end of the day. We’ll chastise ourselves and beat ourselves up over what we have done and what we have failed to do and behind the cool veneer of slacker distance and irony lays the same uncertainty, eating away at us like a plague.
Fascism, authoritarianism, on the other hand is the mortal enemy of democracy. Or so we’re told. We see these things as the ultimate evil in the world because someone else would dare to tell you what to do in them. Because these systems have the audacity to eliminate the element of democratic uncertainty from the mind - an uncertainty which we all secretly suffer because of, but still treasure and cling to. I have, of course, never lived under a regime which operates according to fascist or authoritarian principles. Or rather, I should say, that I have never lived under one which openly operated that way. So my speculations as to what it must feel like inside one’s own mind to internalize fascism come only from observation at a distance and projection. Anyone who has first-hand experience in these things who is reading this, I would appreciate hearing more about it.
Put aside for a minute the fear we’ve been taught to have since we were children of authoritarian systems. What would it really be like to live under a system of government which offered clearly defined social expectations, roles and value systems? A system, in other words, where you didn’t feel like you were simply making it up yourself as you go along, re-inventing the wheel at every step of the way. Most people would probably imagine some kind of Nazi, Communist or Fundamentalist Muslim society as an illustration of such a thing. And we have such negative cultural associations of each (many of which are well-deserved) that we are tempted to throw the baby out with the bath water. But try projecting yourself into an Amish society, for example (or maybe even some kind of romanticized tribal society). What would that be like: to grow your own food, work the land, to live according to God’s word, to marry and raise children and never question the fundamental underpinnings of your society? The good democratic freedom-loving consciousness rebels at the mention of such an idea. But I would like to speculate that living a simpler life such as this would be very satisfying - at least on some level (as long as you weren’t slaughtering dissenters, of course). You could spend your time living and actually experiencing your life instead of endlessly questioning yourself and others.
At this point, I am certain that I have turned off a huge percentage of people who typically read this site. “Is he saying we would be happier living under the Nazis? I don’t want to be Amish! I don’t want somebody telling me what to do with my life! I’m free dammit! This guy has finally lost it…” If such is your reaction to what I’ve been outlining here, I commend you for it. You have so thoroughly internalized your nation’s system of government that you have become indivisible from it. Congratulations. No one can fault you for not being a good American.
But am I still a good American for wanting to throw off uncertainty? Am I some kind of seditionist for suggesting that the terms “uncertainty” and “freedom” are actually synonymous? We think that we are free because we are allowed to do anything that we want. But do most of us actually do what we want?
HA! HA! HA! Hahahaha. Ha. ha… ha?
No. We have the supposed freedom to do anything we want. But what we do instead is what we think other people want us to do: friends, family, lovers, bosses, professors. We try to fulfill expectations. We supposedly have limitless choices ahead of us, but we take only one road. We want only one road. If we have too many choices, we balk and step back from the void. We do nothing. We settle into a meaningless routine simply to keep uncertainty and true freedom at bay. Saying we want freedom makes us feel strong, noble and heroic. Actually having it makes us into terrified animals hiding under our beds in a thunderstorm. We fear what we desire and desire what we fear - just like all things in our society and maybe in life. The double bind at its finest.
But by backing away slowly to enlarge our perspective, we can begin to untie ourselves, can begin to unite ourselves. Literally: our selves - our splintered democratic consciousness, divisive and recursively critical of itself at all times. If we have the power of choice (the only thing we truly have in a democracy) we can make the decision to blast away the bullshit, the endless dithering and debating. We can become fascists in ourselves. We can become the authoritarian dictators of our own lives. Where our word is law. Where we act without hesitation or regret. Where uncertainty is swept away and the mind becomes united. Fascism in one person. The trains run on time. Your mind and your life are your own.
“I knew it! I knew it! He does think we should become a fascist society! He actually supports the freedom haters!”
Listen to me carefully: democracy is a system of government. And our system of government was designed with checks and balances so that no one group would gain ultimate power. The government was designed to be crippled and ineffectual from the start so that it would not grow too powerful. It should not be used as a model for how you live your internal life, or else you too will become crippled and ineffectual and unable to make decisions or grow too powerful. But just as decades of rampant corruption in the American government has shown us, these restrictions and limitations can be shed. You can change the rules of how your mind works. It’s your mind, after all. It’s up to you. It’s your choice how you live your life. You can still be an internal fascist and an external democrat. In fact, maybe you should be, because then you can really throw your full weight behind the causes you support in this society, instead of this half-assed anxious uncertain support that we’re used to giving to causes.
Or maybe I really have finally lost it. Only one way to find out…
- No More Media
- More, more, Moore!
- Highlights from PKD Interview
- The Tyranny of Choice
- Do You Still Use Checks?
- Prev: Words Fail
- Next: Engineering Out Human Error
August 17th, 2006 at 3:52 pm
I can see you’ve been doing some heavy introspection!
This is the argument of the Traditionalists, if you replace “government” with “world”, since the apparatus of state is always subordinate to spirit. In olden times, every object of life had symbolic resonance recalling the Source, which has been largely lost or sublimated.
Traditional governments were equally symbolic, with positions and functions reflecting spiritual ideas. I have seen charts detailing the correspondances of positions on the Tree of Life with the feudal hierarchy, in pre-medieval times, the correspondances are greater.
August 17th, 2006 at 4:18 pm
great article
August 17th, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Many modern day adults are not even succumbing to a “slacker” lifestyle in order to shed their fears. They are turning back into children (rejuveniles). At least if they were “slackers” they would have the potential to realize what exactly is going on; but children are not equipped with the proper intellectual tools to figure this mess out.
August 17th, 2006 at 4:29 pm
Most adults arent either i dont think
August 17th, 2006 at 4:29 pm
Interesting post- I use to have a fantasy about each person having their own inward parliment built upon their inner chaotic landscapes. I always thought it was important to visualize voting for teenage cavemen then (warlike) geriatric time travelers to control my consciousness- I want peace and trade with all the dreamlands not war! If you had to visualize your inner world as being a two party state what would they be?
It is common wisdom that all of us are unconscious of the many influences which effect the external and internal. And in order to find convenient explanations one has to suppress that chaos bubbling in us. Convenient explanations sometimes is not good for the imagination- and perhaps explains why conservatives more or less have an easier time accepting authority- and have a more difficult time recognizing the infinite complexity of things- from God, to their understanding of the media or terrorism. because they need easy explanations.
I think often of old people. You don’t mention people in their 70’s and 80’s and 90’s and 100’s. I sure wouldn’t want to have a system of rule by the elders. The body and mind are in decay, physical freedom is very much limited, and there is a lack of energy. I know very few old people who deeply enjoy beauty, most of them are preoccupied with health care and doctor visits.
Obviously, the ageing process is cruel, even the buddhists recogonize old age as being one of the main causes of suffering. SO at the end of the day- I think governmental consciousness wants stability, security, and social security checks.
August 17th, 2006 at 4:46 pm
So we can count on you not voting in November?
August 17th, 2006 at 4:49 pm
Ha ha ha!
August 17th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
Well, I would vote if I was Tim Boucher on election day 2006. Seattle Rep Jim McDermott is an unusual congressman, I mean he was in a Michael Moore film!!!!! And Maria Cantwell is simply stunningly beautiful for a senator. Not voting is what the terrorists want. Do you support terrorism
Actually, according to Cheney you support terrorism by voting for Democrats. Sorry about that.
August 17th, 2006 at 5:45 pm
I think I get what you’re trying to say, I’m not sure.
I think everybody at some point has some romantic idea about how life should be. No rules, living for yourself, being in touch with nature, being spiritual and in touch with the community.
The problem is, I can’t think of one civilization on earth that ever had all those elements constantly, without fault violence or problem.
I think the important thing at this stage is to think of what you think is wrong with they system. Is it fixable?
And most importantly, how do you go about attempting to fix said problems? What can you do to make people get in touch with their world, make them vote, make them be optomistic and loving? What can you do? Then you try to do it.
We will never live in a perfect world. Man is imperfect. We can only balance the good and the bad by feeding them through various social systems, whether they be official or very grassroots. Even if the government did not exist, if we were cavemen and nomadic, these systems would still be in place informally. They will not go away. If a man kills he is gone after by the government, or by any group of people seeking justice (in the case of a world with no unified government).
We can’t escape government. The fact is that to me, it seems easier to make these systems offical. To feed people through the system in an organized way. Wouldn’t you agree people (everyday people) are less barbaric than in some other stages of history?
Back to my point though. I do think we can make a difference. But the way to make a difference is not by being pessimistic. It’s by actually thinking of a plan to help the broken parts of our society rather than ranting about things that annoy you.
And it’s about exucting that plan. Isn’t that all we can do? Try our best to make a positive impact? Somehow I think spreading negative thoughts about a government without suggesting means for remedying the problems is sort of… hopeless. And I don’t think we should have to be.
August 17th, 2006 at 5:46 pm
(Sorry for double post I just have an example)
It’s like the voting situation. If you think voting doesn’t actually give people a say, then what would give people a say? Or what would remedy the voting situation?
Basically, what can we do to help solve the problems that you present?
August 17th, 2006 at 7:13 pm
Welcome to the gates of the ubermensch.
And I love problem-solvers. Problem-solvers make the world go round. They seem to miss the fact that for every “problem” you solve you simply create a hundred more “problems.” In fact, what we call progress is nothing more than exchanging one set of problems for another. “Problems” are just an aspect of relative reality. Solving problems is like a gerbil running in his wheel…
Solid post, Tim, I’m curious to see where this goes…
Ronin
August 17th, 2006 at 9:06 pm
To be your own authoritarian is not the same as being in total control of your life. Your life is always influenced by the creation that surrounds you and the divine will of the creator. The dream of empowering the will above the other aspects of the tree of life is to become subject to Set who resides below the lowest sphere or Geb. This is the goal of the Satanic. Tim, be careful of the seemingly seductive power that this path seem to offers you for in following it and attempting to annoint yourself with Godhead you actually end up submitting yourself to lowest aspects of existence and inevitably madness.
August 17th, 2006 at 9:31 pm
Yes, I understand that people have a lot of fear associated with the language I have used in this article. Thank you for your thoughtful cautions regardless.
August 17th, 2006 at 9:35 pm
Thanks for writing this. If Plato is to be believed (and the more I reflect on this, the more I believe it), the structure of a city-state (or any political organization) finds its analogue in the individual soul of the citizen. So there is such a thing as a democratic soul, an oligarchic soul, a tyrannical soul–which kind of covers the fascistic soul, as well. If you think about the U.S. Constitution and the founding of this country, the American soul was doomed to internal division by the very political structures that were put in place to surround it.
Of course, if the political organization becomes fascistic, the soul will be as well. If democracy must go by the wayside, let’s hope for a benignant monarchy, instead.
August 17th, 2006 at 9:41 pm
Riiiiiight.
Flip switch -
- enable will -
- which is magic(k)ally directionless of course and will (ha) obliterate all conscience the will-enabler ever had -
- and which “Satan” (the real dude, not the archetype) will take enough of an interest in co-opting to work serious evil to and through a person.
If people weren’t so un-together–I might refer to them as divided tri-partite, having conflicting thoughts, feelings, and bodily sensations–this MIGHT be a danger.
As it is, merging the three parts is difficult enough to begin with, and “will” seldom even comes into play.
“Anointing yourself with the Godhead” seems pretty rich when we’re virtually grains of turd on any appreciable scale. “God” takes no notice of us until we take a hell of a lot of strenuous steps in that direction, and possibly not even then.
But of course it’s very attractive to imagine otherwise.
August 17th, 2006 at 9:48 pm
We have no greater enemies than ourselves, as far as I’m concerned. With the unraveling of that comes the realization that everyone and everything is an ally (even Satan) and that we are all in this together. At least, that’s the best I’ve been able to come up with so far…
August 17th, 2006 at 10:36 pm
everything you look at is a mirror. you can`t make your mind work differently. merely realise how it works and it`s effects on your experiences. imagine what your life would be like if, all of a sudden, you didn`t have mass media any longer. no t.v. or newspapers…….no relentless demand for you to decide, to have a god-damn opinion.
what you expose yourself to becomes your reality.
August 17th, 2006 at 10:54 pm
Great question. This is very much at the heart of what I’m getting at here and is a bigger part of what I have been thinking lately. I am turning this into its own post…
August 18th, 2006 at 4:43 am
Now we are getting somewhere (or are we already there) . An ideal fascist system would give the illusion of choice, meanwhile controlling all the options. Whether there is a single controlling entity or a pantheon of debating deities subjecting a mind or government, the outcome is channelled the same way. If we install a dictator to ban opposing ideologies our energies are more efficiently directed, but only to the point where an underground is able to muster up enough revolutionary fervor to create opposition. If we, on the other hand script a constitution that insists on adversarial debate we are given the illusion of freedom at the cost of scatterring our energies. Either way the world is split and a duality is created.
The formation of any government institutionalises duality in that it assumes a division between the controlled and the controller. Once this process is internalized it prevents knowledge of who we actually are, as a true unity is subverted. The internalization of government is the solidification of ego. Fascism is this process taken to its extreme. Only a being that feels separate from its own life would feel the urge to take control. These very words further that duality, not in their content but in their unfounded assumption that me and you are separate entities. From that limited perspective words and actions become halh-truths and propaganda.
August 18th, 2006 at 8:42 am
Exactly. Then there’s the variation of that thought which I am so fond of: lie with pigs, stink like shit.
Tim, this post really got my cerebral gears turning when I read the MySpace preview version… it addresses many similar thoughts I have had of late. I wouldn’t say I have been struggling with them, per se, but I have been trying to reconcile something of a Taoist outlook on life with a healthy integration of the Will…. or is that just completely stupid?
August 18th, 2006 at 8:50 am
[…] I am not all that learned when it comes to Mr. Burroughs’ life & works… however, faced with a quote like that, I feel compelled to pay him a measure of respect. I came across that quote in a round-about manner, clicking on the profile of an individual who commented on Pop Occulture’s Fascism In One Person discussion (which is well worth your time to read & contemplate… I will post more of my thoughts regarding that subject when I have a bit more time in which to articulate them). […]
August 18th, 2006 at 9:39 am
Sadly enough, when I said children in that case, I meant adults…
August 18th, 2006 at 10:06 am
You should check out the conclusions drawn in The Tyranny of Choice The author discusses that essentially we are all becoming overwhelmed by choice– he speaks mostly about consumer choice, but it is easily applied to lifestyle, career, politics…
August 18th, 2006 at 11:56 am
Dude, you just summed up my whole life.
August 18th, 2006 at 3:48 pm
But you have to admit, you’d rather have some problems than others. I’d rather have the problem of obesity than starvation: Obesity I can find a way to control through my will: Starvation, I generally start eating my neighbors.
I’d rather have the war we have now than a nuclear conflagration. I’d rather have the EU instead of Grossedeutschland. I’d rather have the USA than the Union and the Confederacy. Yes, they all come with problems, but if we didn’t have problems, what would we bitch about?
We talk alot about the racism and xenophobia in the U.S., but for all that we don’t get Rwandas or Darfurs: we get Rodney King. Yes, it’s a problem, but on the scale of things…
August 18th, 2006 at 11:36 pm
we have tremendous choice regarding breakfast cereals, dog food, dogs, hair products and alternate therapies…..but try to get a different i.r.s. or bank services or a different court to hear your case…….or a different political party.
August 20th, 2006 at 2:18 am
I think, after reading the main post and all the various comments, that I prefer some kind of authoritarian society to a democracy, especially the American implementation. I would prefer Castro’s Cuba, because it is based on a single lie, which everyone can see through, so it’s not so much a lie as a fig-leaf.
In American society however (not just America but it leads the world in this) the ideals of freedom and democracy breed such pervasive lies that it is very hard to eliminate them from your life.
The competing hair products and dog foods which Alistair refers to combine to create the lie that such stuff matters. It matters to the suppliers not to the customers. In the same way the competing political parties present to the electorate choices which they consider of importance and not choices which are important to the voter.
As for freedom, it seems that the one thing you must not do in America is be Unamerican, and everyone watches themselves to make sure that no one would mistake what they have just said in case it sounds as though they are a Communist, or these days, a supporter of terrorists (as if terrorism were a world-view, rather than a method of waging war for those who have no other options available).
A free democracy in which almost everyone is deluded is not a form of society to recommend.
The wider world’s objection to America’s democracy is that it has played no part in it. Mr Bush was elected by Americans only, but his policies have huge effect elsewhere. In the absence of a world voting system, bombs are threatened or used. This is not evidence of “evil” but of opposition: by means more imperfect but often more effective than those of democracy.
August 21st, 2006 at 12:02 am
Experiencing your life is great, but I thought that questioning was a good thing too. Or am I just too much of a “good American”? I don’t know. Thanks, Tim — now I have one more thing to feel guilty about. Or is feeling guilty an extension of questioning? And if we don’t question ourselves, how would we figure out how to dissent against the American ideal of freedom? And if it’s better not to question your society’s values, then what are you doing questioning your society’s values of questioning? I’m not picking on you, Tim, I’m just tying my own brain in a knot. Which might be your point, that we shouldn’t do that. But if not, then why did you bring it up? Arrgh. I’m going to bed like a good Amishman.
August 21st, 2006 at 12:08 am
By the way, the post I left on Aug. 18th accidentally had the address wrong, which wouldn’t be a problem except that (get this!) I accidentally typed an address that actually was someone else’s address. The August 18th comment on this thread leads you to a blog that I have nothing at all to do with. Its address is the exact same as mine, only missing one numeral. Whoa…
The link where my name is above this comment should lead you to my real blog.
August 21st, 2006 at 12:19 am
Or maybe my point is that you *should* tie your brain into a knot, but I disguised it so that it seemed like I was telling you that’s a bad thing to do, because I knew that you wouldn’t listen to me and would want to rebel against me, so I gave you something to rebel against and which would tie you more effectively into a mental knot than anything which I could just come right out and say….?