cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/17079522

To keep it short the reason why some people are ok with authoritarianism is because most structures that we deal with on a daily basis are authoritarian.

Here is evidence that shows a significant amount of people are ok with authoritarianism:

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/02/28/who-likes-authoritarianism-and-how-do-they-want-to-change-their-government/sr_24-02-28_authoritarianism_1/

This should be concerning.

And the thing is that it makes sense once you look at what are the most common systems that people interact with the most.

A clear example would be the Boss-Worker relationship. The boss creates a set of objectives/tasks for the worker and the worker sees them out. Rarely does the worker get the chance to set the higher level direction of what they are supposed to be doing with their time leaving them obedient to the boss and their demands.

Another example would be some Parent-Child relationships. Some parents treat their children as people that should show absolute respect towards them just because they are the parents not because they have something that is of value to the child (experience).

Even in the places where we do make democratic decisions those are usually made in ways that are supposed to be supplemental to authoritative decision making. An example would be how we don’t vote on decisions but instead how we vote on others to make decisions for us.

Once you add up all the experiences that someone has throughout their whole life you will see that most of them come into direct contact with authoritarian systems which means it makes that kind of way of thinking familiar and therefore acceptable.

Unlike democracy which is an abstract concept and something we only really experience from time to time.

If we want people to actually stop thinking authoritarianism is ok then we as a society are gonna have to stop using these kinds of systems / ways of thinking in our daily lives.

  •  millie   ( @millie@beehaw.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    33 months ago

    Nothing about the division of labor into planning and operation requires any form of authority over the worker outside of the workplace. And yet, it’s common for employers to exert control over things like when they work (regardless of the work’s time sensitivity), whether a medical professional’s opinion is adequate to merit accommodations, and the amount of created labor value that’s extracted from the worker versus what they’re paid.

    That all, to me, seems quieter inherently authoritarian. It rests on the premise that the planning folks need to be able to control the working folks’ lives, and that they deserve a much greater cut of the profits for their trouble.

    To me it seems that such a system that props up authority as absolutely necessary, justified, and desirable can reasonably be labeled as authoritarian. I’d argue that it’s also necessarily exploitative in such a case, but that’s neither here nor there.

    What is relevant though is that simply saying ‘it’s not always like that’ while decrying every example as not representative doesn’t really get us far. Whether authoritarianism is ‘good’ sometimes is immaterial to whether it trains people to be ready to accept tin pot strong man dictators and politicians who emulate them.

    High fructose corn syrup can taste just fine and be ‘good’ in some recipes, but if it’s also giving us all diabetes it’s probably better to stop using it. Likewise, let’s not ignore roads that lead to fascism. I’d really rather not have to flee the country or die in a concentration camp.