Redefining Political Evil

A quick note for the weekend, and some recommended stacks

Watch out! There be fascists…

A couple weeks ago, some speeches by Italian politician Giorgia Meloni made the rounds on social media. She’s projected to become Italy’s next PM. Oh, and she’s leader of a “far-right, Italian nationalist” party. Her motto, “God, fatherland, family,” apparently bears all “the hallmarks of Italian fascism,” at least according to Western mainstream media.

Ian Miles Cheong @stillgray

They’re afraid. They’re all afraid.

Let me start out by saying that, who knows, it could be true that the Italian fascists used the slogan. I don’t really care enough to find out for sure. But there’s no mention of “God” or “family” on Wikipedia’s Glossary of Fascist Italy.

My point in bringing this up is simple: we have collectively grabbed the ass-end of the definition of political evil. That people can hear the slogan, “God, fatherland, family,” and conjure up images of the worst sorts of evil imaginable is a strange state of affairs. As a reminder, here’s Shafarevich’s summary of the main tenets of socialism (by far the worst political evil of the past 150 years):

1. abolition of private property

2. abolition of the family

3. abolition of religion

4. communality/equality

To be pro-family and pro-religion isn’t evil, it’s basic human. That’s not to say that evil people can’t run a such a platform—evil people can run on any platform. It’s just that the reason they might do so is because these are such basic, near-universal values held by actual humans. Sheep’s clothing does not make wool wolfish.

When it comes to making snap judgments on the nature of political evil, we’re pretty terrible. Maybe that’s why we always fall for it, while believing we’re doing just the opposite.

The same goes for our understanding of wider political systems. Here’s how the stereotypical Western liberal views political systems:

• Liberal democracy like me, good; everyone else not like me, bad.

That’s pretty much it. This cartoon view of history, politics, and basic human nature would be pretty laughable if it wasn’t so dumb. As if with the passing of the monarchy into obsolescence and the rise of liberal democracy as the benchmark for not being evil, political evil were destroyed once and for ever.

A better distinction—at least when it comes to political evil—is the division proposed by Lobaczewski. There’s pathocracy (a sociopolitical disease, not a form of government per se) and then there’s everything else: systems of normal man, as he called them.

And just in case you feel compelled to be basically-human and project your own political preferences onto these words, let me be explicit. Lobaczewski includes practically all forms of political organization imaginable in that category: monarchies, democracies, oligarchies, and whatever else you can come up with. (The only exception would be 20th century totalitarianism—pathocracy in its mature form.)

Yes, each type of system can become pathocratic. Some may even lend themselves more easily to pathocracy. But none are essentially so.

You may prefer one over the others. And each may be objectively worse (or better) than the others on various metrics. But to conflate all other forms of government as inherently evil—the worst of evils, in fact—is just wrong. No, authoritarian Russia isn’t as bad as communist Russia. “Undemocratic” Hungary isn’t as bad as Nazi Germany.

That’s arguably the main reason we fall for it every time: we’re blind to the essential feature that makes pathocracy what it is, and is present to various degrees in all political systems. Psychopathy. Not ideology. Not conservatism. Not “rightwing authoritarianism.” Not even socialism (though it probably comes closest).

ZUBY: @ZubyMusic

The mainstream media uses the term 'far right' all the time, but almost never use the term 'far left'. That says a lot.

Meanwhile, as Western commentators signal their virtue publicly for all to see by sanctimoniously berating such countries,¹ Western nations are falling into pathocracy at breakneck speed.

So let me offer this small bit of advice to the wilderness: if you’re worried about political evil, start with yourself—and your own party or ideology. Physician, heal thyself. Next, get your priorities straight. Don’t like conservatives? Accept them for who they are (i.e. normal people, for the most part, who disagree with you about some of the things you find most important), and focus on the specifically pathocratic features or tendencies you are worried about. Don’t tilt at windmills and simply see conservatives as the be-all-end-all of bad persons.

Don’t like liberals? Do the same.

Liberals and conservatives (and [insert your preferred political pronouns here]) aren’t the problem. Pathocratic liberals are the problem, and pathocratic conservatives are the problem. Or at least, they’re the main problem. Focus on them and the lesser problems will become easier to deal with.

Speaking of twisted priorities, here’s another example:

Titania McGrath @TitaniaMcGrath

Thank you @sussex_police for protecting this child rapist from the trauma of being misgendered. ✊

And on that note, because this is a short one and I’ve been swamped with not-fun stuff this week, here are some things to tide you over for the weekend. I mentioned Shafarevich above.² Well, Winston Smith has just started a series on his excellent book here:

The Socialist Phenomenon 1.1

And wait, that’s not all. Winston also started another series on another topic close to my heart-brain:

A Strong Delusion 1.0

Read both, subscribe, and keep reading. They promise to be enlightening and engaging series, and you’ll probably find me in the comments along the way.

And check out this episode of Disaffected for a breakdown of Cluster B tactics.

1. Lobaczewski has a phrase for that tendency too: egotism of the natural worldview.

2. And I strip-mined it for all the gems I could find in a series of posts (here and here, for instance).