New metaphors are often good ways of getting traction on difficult issues. But the problem in this case is that the path to depower passes through those with power. They have proven rather reluctant to give it up. 😂
Way to ruin my day with a bitter pill. You're not wrong. I'm dedicated to the idea that the path to depower flows through the masses, too, but there will have to be an inflection point or phase.
Poltiical Power, crucial topic Max, thanks for the stimulating article.
I invite all valuers of responsible freedom to question WHY persons are attracted to political power.
What is it in a person's character that motivates them to want to control others?
This quote by Thomas Szasz provides a station for the beginning journey to understand this Why?
“There is only one political sin: independence; and only one political virtue: obedience. To put it differently, there is only one offense against authority: self-control; and only one obeisance to it: submission to control by authority. Self-control and self-esteem vary directly: the more self-esteem a person has, the greater, as a rule, is his desire, and his ability, to control himself. The desire to control others and self-esteem vary inversely: the less self-esteem a person has, the greater, as a rule, is his desire, and his ability, to control others.” Thomas Szasz
I consider we need to go the farthest upstream to discover why so few, unfortunately, do not have the necessary self-esteem and are driven to obtain it through politics with the devastating consequences of the Murderous Madmen of History such as Stalin, Mao and Hitler.
This need for other-validation and power over others expresses itself in human violence including wars and I am convinced this destructive need originates in Child Abuse and Neglect, that is, Non-Peaceful Parenting.
Study Lloyd deMause and Psychohistory (and the ACE studies Felitti, et al.) and you will find overwhelming evidence that as the title of Lloyd’s last book puts it:
I hope I can interest the freedom valuers here to attend our Free Friends Forum—Abandoned To Ourselves on the weekends as it will be good to get some Voluntaryist voices there besides mine.
This was clarifying for me. I'm writing something about 'soft totalitarianism.' The things that strikes me about modern political power is the way that it seeks to constantly expand its reach, while avoiding (as much as possible) any hint of coercion or domination. I'm also struck by the way that it seeks to control the minds and values of its vassals, rather than just their wallets and behaviors. I've called this the 'paradox of progressivism'-they pretend that taxes and regulations and programs don't entail losses of freedom and expansions of the threat of force (and punishment). Often, they try to reconcile this inconsistency by pivoting towards moral language (which is a bit odd for people who claim to be relativists): helping, fairness, equity, hurt, etc. If you want to help someone, help them. If you promote an expansion of the state then you are expanding the state and you are expanding its authority and its power to punish people and take their resources. There are no exceptions.
Yeah, I would drop your use of the word 'power' in any kind of negative context if I were you Max. I think the better word would be 'authority' or perhaps 'external authority'. I view Power as an inherent property of the *individual conscious being*, and we would be better to emphasize that. So-called "lord" Acton was absolutely wrong.... Weakness corrupts, and absolute weakness corrupts absolutely.
I like Nietzsche as much as the next guy, but I'm talking specifically about political power, which I pretty clearly defined. Personal power -- self-sovereignty -- is hugely important and requires an anti-victimhood mentality to be sure. But power, as in political power, works nicely with pathology for alliteration. (I do use political authority, as well, but authority can be used with other connotations, too, such as *she is an authority on early filmmaking*. Anyway, we agree about this: No weakness. Instead: counterpower.
Hey Max,
New metaphors are often good ways of getting traction on difficult issues. But the problem in this case is that the path to depower passes through those with power. They have proven rather reluctant to give it up. 😂
Stay wonderful,
Chris.
Way to ruin my day with a bitter pill. You're not wrong. I'm dedicated to the idea that the path to depower flows through the masses, too, but there will have to be an inflection point or phase.
This is a plausible strategy, but it is a generational strategy, I suspect. Change of this kind comes slowly... but it can still come. 🙂
I am playing around with benchmarks for a 100-year plan.
We need to be patient and dogged. And we need to accept that we may carry the torch without ever getting to see the bonfire.
I defintely want to see this. I wonder if you made it ten decadal steps... It could be a 10-step listicle.
What I have in mind is somewhat complicated, and right now, it's all just in my head. Hopefully, I can start putting pen to paper in a few months…
We call that one 'the long game'. 😉
🔥
Poltiical Power, crucial topic Max, thanks for the stimulating article.
I invite all valuers of responsible freedom to question WHY persons are attracted to political power.
What is it in a person's character that motivates them to want to control others?
This quote by Thomas Szasz provides a station for the beginning journey to understand this Why?
“There is only one political sin: independence; and only one political virtue: obedience. To put it differently, there is only one offense against authority: self-control; and only one obeisance to it: submission to control by authority. Self-control and self-esteem vary directly: the more self-esteem a person has, the greater, as a rule, is his desire, and his ability, to control himself. The desire to control others and self-esteem vary inversely: the less self-esteem a person has, the greater, as a rule, is his desire, and his ability, to control others.” Thomas Szasz
I consider we need to go the farthest upstream to discover why so few, unfortunately, do not have the necessary self-esteem and are driven to obtain it through politics with the devastating consequences of the Murderous Madmen of History such as Stalin, Mao and Hitler.
This need for other-validation and power over others expresses itself in human violence including wars and I am convinced this destructive need originates in Child Abuse and Neglect, that is, Non-Peaceful Parenting.
Study Lloyd deMause and Psychohistory (and the ACE studies Felitti, et al.) and you will find overwhelming evidence that as the title of Lloyd’s last book puts it:
The Origins of War In Child Abuse
https://psychohistory.com/books/the-origins-of-war-in-child-abuse/
It comes up to Peaceful Parenting and down to Parentarchy
https://responsiblyfree.substack.com/p/parentarchy-free-friends-forum-27
I hope I can interest the freedom valuers here to attend our Free Friends Forum—Abandoned To Ourselves on the weekends as it will be good to get some Voluntaryist voices there besides mine.
Here for details and Zoom URL
https://responsiblyfree.substack.com/p/free-friends-abandoned-to-ourselves
Get free, stay free.
This was clarifying for me. I'm writing something about 'soft totalitarianism.' The things that strikes me about modern political power is the way that it seeks to constantly expand its reach, while avoiding (as much as possible) any hint of coercion or domination. I'm also struck by the way that it seeks to control the minds and values of its vassals, rather than just their wallets and behaviors. I've called this the 'paradox of progressivism'-they pretend that taxes and regulations and programs don't entail losses of freedom and expansions of the threat of force (and punishment). Often, they try to reconcile this inconsistency by pivoting towards moral language (which is a bit odd for people who claim to be relativists): helping, fairness, equity, hurt, etc. If you want to help someone, help them. If you promote an expansion of the state then you are expanding the state and you are expanding its authority and its power to punish people and take their resources. There are no exceptions.
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/the-paradox-of-progressivism
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/leviathan
Yeah, I would drop your use of the word 'power' in any kind of negative context if I were you Max. I think the better word would be 'authority' or perhaps 'external authority'. I view Power as an inherent property of the *individual conscious being*, and we would be better to emphasize that. So-called "lord" Acton was absolutely wrong.... Weakness corrupts, and absolute weakness corrupts absolutely.
I like Nietzsche as much as the next guy, but I'm talking specifically about political power, which I pretty clearly defined. Personal power -- self-sovereignty -- is hugely important and requires an anti-victimhood mentality to be sure. But power, as in political power, works nicely with pathology for alliteration. (I do use political authority, as well, but authority can be used with other connotations, too, such as *she is an authority on early filmmaking*. Anyway, we agree about this: No weakness. Instead: counterpower.