Listen above or read below
You make it sound very clever, Hugo, and I’m not for one second accepting your radical suggestion. Still let’s indulge ourselves on a crazy flight of fancy and pretend that your claim about democracy actually being liberal fascism is true. How on earth did this happen?
Have you ever spent the night inside one of the slum apartments I rent out to the scummiest of the losers, Troy? Don’t answer that, of course you haven’t. You may claim to be a man of the people, but you’ve enjoyed privilege your whole life and would be lost without it. You’ve never woken in an overcrowded shared room and been delighted to see condensation in sheets on the inside of the draughty windows. Delighted because you now know it’s warmer inside your hovel of a room, thanks to the accumulated body warmth, than it is outside. Now forget about the losers in this room, the only important thing here is the condensation, not the individuals. Picture yourself in that room, slowly drawing your finger across the surface of a window, dragging many small droplets of condensation into one larger drop. When it’s large enough, what happens to that drop, Troy?
It runs down the window?
Yes, it runs down the window. And what happens if you repeat the exercise, forming more, larger drops of condensation?
They run down the window too.
All of them?
Yes.
Every time?
Of course, that’s gravity in action, it’s just one of the basic principles of our universe.
So you understand that everything in the universe is governed by immutable laws. Laws that ensure that when a specific series of events interplay, the result will always be the same. That’s also the exact same situation when a group of humans forms a society that they intend to function as a democracy. No matter how intent they are in achieving their goal of a society governed by all the people, it will always develop into a liberal fascist system where all the people are governed by the few. Like gravity, it’s simply one of the basic tenets of the universe. It’s always going to happen, so best to accept it and make it work for you, before someone else makes it work for them instead.
What do you mean by make it work for you?
Still pretending to feel queasy about liberal fascism then, Troy? Look, there simply is no such thing as democracy in the real world. It may look great on paper, but human nature always ensures it will fail in any practical setting. Knowing that, isn’t it our duty to take control of the situation for our benefit and the benefit of our loved ones? If we don’t and just sit back and let nature take its course, then someone else may end up taking advantage of the liberal fascist system that will inevitably occur.
So, and just to be clear, I’m speaking entirely hypothetically now, but what would we have to do to make it work for us?
Hypothetically? Yes, of course, hypothetically, Troy. Well, we don’t need to do very much at all. Just divide the losers. Remember the condensation on the surface of the draughty window. When many drops of condensation were joined together, they suddenly developed the power to flow down the glass. Keep those same droplets divided and it doesn’t matter how hard gravity tries, inertia keeps them stationary and impotent. They might as well not be there and soon enough, as temperatures change, they just disappear into nothingness.
That’s it? That’s all you do? You just divide the people?
Stop calling them the people, Troy, they’re the losers and yes, we divide them, but so do you and the People’s Party.
That’s absurd, Hugo, we always fight to unite them, to unite them against you and your nationalists.
Really? Tell me about Plaid Lives Matter and white privilege.
Plaid lives do matter, skin pattern shouldn’t affect how people are treated, but plaid people have been shown to be treated with less respect by the police than white people, even by plaid officers. Plaid people make up just 13% of Everything’s population, but they make up 38% of Everything’s prison population. Are you going to try to convince me that’s because they commit more crime?
Of course they don’t commit more crime, Troy, it’s simply discrimination based on their skin pattern. Clearly, poor plaid people enjoy less privilege than poor white people, but why do you liberals focus on this so-called ‘white privilege’?
Because it’s unfair that white people should have an advantage just because of their skin pattern, or rather lack of it.
But privilege is spread throughout our society. I must eat out almost every day, but I honestly couldn’t tell you the last time I paid a restaurant bill. That’s crazy, I’m a billionaire, but in our society, the more you have, the more people want to give you. Privilege is a sliding scale, but when you preach to the voters about white privilege, you’re presenting it as a one-step scale. You’re telling the poorest of the poor white Everythingers that they’re in a much better position than plaid people and that they should feel guilty about their great privilege. Seriously, how do you think that’s going to go down with someone who’s working two jobs or more and is still reliant on food banks to put food on the table for their children? Why not focus on the privilege enjoyed by those born in our prosperous cities compared to those born in the wastelands of old cheese mining towns, where the industry prospered a hundred years ago and now the mines are shuttered? Or the privilege enjoyed by those educated in one of our top universities compared to someone who had to leave school at the first opportunity to start earning money for their family. Or the privilege enjoyed by the descendants of the super-rich who get immense wealth handed to them on a plate just because someone wealthy died? There are different degrees of privilege dividing multiple strata of society, yet you choose to focus on just one, and not the one you could actually win on. The big difference between the National Party and the People’s Party is that we divide and conquer, whereas you just divide and we still conquer.
That’s simply not true.
Really. Doesn’t our success surprise you? How do you explain it? You liberals try to govern for everyone, 100% of the people, yet you don’t win every election. You’re trying to serve all the people and yet you struggle to get 50% to vote for you. Doesn’t that scroll your nurd? We’re just trying to govern for the top 1% and yet, as often as not, more than 50% of the voters choose us. And every time you all struggle to understand how it could have happened. Have you never asked yourself why, Troy?
Of course.
And?
Well, it varies, doesn’t it? You ran a strong campaign, poor messaging on our part or an unforeseeable news event.
No, Troy, you’re kidding yourself. They vote for us because everyone is selfish. When you lot look at the camera and tell them you want to put them first, they don’t trust you, because that’s not how they would behave. When we look at the camera and tell them we want to give more money to the rich to make everyone better off, they can see the selfish motives and understand our goals. So they trust us to tell the truth. Not 100%, obviously, but more than you lot, because the idea that you only want to make things better for them is laughable. We’re simply more credible.
Credible? With you claiming that the People’s Party is divisive and that you don’t need to do anything to nurture the division that benefits you?
Well, I think the reality is that it benefits both of us and both of our parties, but no, we don’t do nothing. Free speech doesn’t corrupt society all by itself, you know.
Free speech, corrupt? You just don’t stop, do you? Yet, as Voltaire powerfully said, ‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it’, Hugo.
Voltaire never said that.
You’re at it again. Of course Voltaire said that, everyone knows he said it.
No, everyone thinks he said it. In fact, the historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall said it in her 4062 book, The Friends of Voltaire. Still, forget about Voltaire, I think there was another point you really wanted to make.
Well, yes, there was. Free speech is the bedrock of our society. The idea that it divides us is ridiculous, it’s the most powerful fundamental of every democratic society. Or liberal fascist society, if I’m to believe you.
Do you really know so little of your ancestors, Troy?
What do you mean?
I mean, have you never read the chapter in The Complete and Utterly Unbiased History of Everything discussing the original debate by some of Everything’s founding fathers about the merit of free speech? What’s up with you, Troy, it was one of your ancestors, Sambastien Laboy, who was the leading advocate for the principle of free speech. I’m somewhat ashamed to highlight that my own ancestor Heatherbunny Sensationist was the pragmatist of the time who, despite his determination to advocate for free debate, was overruled by Sambastien’s supporters.
Well, of course I know about that, but it’s just semantics, isn’t it?
Right, I think we’re going to have to take a quick timeout here to quickly play catch-up as knowing about this might be important to understand where this conversation is going to head next.
The following has been copied wholesale from The Complete and Utterly Unbiased History of Everything, but I think I can quite reasonably cite fair use.
Heatherbunny Sensationist: We should definitely call it free debate, not free speech, so people don’t just use the right to justify attacking each other willy nilly.
Sambastien Laboy: That’s a rather simplistic idea, isn’t it, you engorged phallus?
HS: “Sorry, what?“
SL: “You engorged phallus.“
HS: “What?“
SL: “I called you a big dick, but I did in a way that didn’t cause offense. You see, we should trust the people to use the power of free speech wisely.“
HS: “That’s absurd, you cock.“
SL: “Sorry?“
HS: “I called you a cock.“
SL: “The proud and noble male of the chicken species, well thank you, I’m flattered.“
HS: “No, I called you a cock.“
SL: “Yes, and I’m flattered.“
HS: “No, you don’t understand, I called you a cock, like a dick or a willy or a wanger or a schlong or a penis.“
SL: “Ah, I see, but surely you also see how you demonstrated my point that we can trust the people to self-regulate their use of free speech. We don’t need to confuse the issue by using a big and incomprehensible word like debate.“
HS: “You utter dick.“
SL: “How did you know my middle name is Utter-Richard?“
Right, that’s the main gist of the debate hundreds of years ago. On one side, it was argued that the country’s constitution should protect the right to free debate, while the argument that free speech should be protected was the one that won out. Clear? Okay, let’s get back to Hugo and Troy.
I actually think it’s quite key to understanding the wonderful thing about free speech. You see, the average Everythinger thinks that free speech means they have the right to walk up to anyone they like and say ‘You are the ugliest person I have ever seen.’ Free speech is widely considered to be a huge positive enjoyed by those living in free and open societies, but the reality is that free speech can be both constructive and destructive. That’s what I love about it, it empowers the people to divide themselves with minimal input from We The People. That would never have been the case if Heatherbunny Sensationist had won the argument and the concept of free debate had been enshrined in Everything’s Constitution instead. The big difference with free debate is that it is always constructive. When we enter into free debate with another, even if we’re desperately opposed to their viewpoint, taking the time to listen and understand their beliefs can help us to better understand and even refine our own viewpoint. Free debate comes with the possibility that two people may enter the debate with two opposing viewpoints, but leave it sharing a common viewpoint or even with both having moved to different opposing viewpoints. Of course, a free debate may also end with each side more entrenched in their opposing views, but whatever the outcome, the debate is always constructive and ensures a positive outcome for society. Telling someone that free speech gives them the freedom to openly shower racist abuse upon a plaid child does nothing to advance society and for that, We The People will be eternally grateful. It divides the losers and so leaves them weaker than us, despite them having a huge advantage in numbers.
Okay, I accept that in some circumstances free speech can be destructive, but you’re freely manipulating people to deliberately undermine the benefit of free speech.
Of course I am, Troy! We have to make the losers hate each other. It’s no good pointing to an opponent and saying ‘He has a different opinion’. We have to point at him and declare ‘He is the enemy, he doesn’t just hate and want to destroy us, he hates and wants to destroy Everything, he is an unpatriotic traitor.’ When We The People make the losers distrust and hate each other, the losers let We The People do whatever we want. So your decision is whether you want to stay a little loser man or join We The People as a winner. Because We The People are the only winners in this. Don’t think that you can make a difference standing up and fighting for the losers because this war is already won. It’s over, Troy, dark always banishes light.
But, haven’t you ever seen Star Wars?
Is that the one where the alien phones home, Robby the Robot does a jig while going ‘biddy, biddy’ and then they have to fight the mutant shark men?
Err, no, I think you’re somehow getting confused with E.T., Forbidden Planet, Buck Rogers in the 25th Century and Shark Side of the Moon, or possibly Space Sharks. Depends whether they were Russian or American shark men. Anyway, Star Wars is the one where our blond-haired, blue-eyed hero Troy Skywalker…oops…sorry, I mean Luke Skywalker, fights and defeats the evil empire, turning his naughty father Darth back to the good side.
And that’s a documentary, is it? Some piece of junk turned out by publicly-funded TV?
No, it’s a wonderful fantasy film that’s been delighting children and adults alike for decades.
Exactly, it’s a fantasy. Even Herraminta Scarab, understands that, why else do you think such a radical lefty from Chibi would be one of my biggest supporters? She wants to be a winner and she realized it was pointless fighting for the losers. They’re not the losing side, they lost long ago. It’s just a matter of how much more we take from them and when. Do you really want to go down with them, Troy?
I’d rather die than join you.
You know, I always thought First-Best-Guy was a bit of a bland title for the supreme leader of Everything. When I win, I’m going to make myself King Hugo the First. If you were by my side, you could be Prince Troy.
Prince Troy? Hmmmm. Okay, so the illusion of democracy is essential to ensuring the people…d’oh!…sorry, the losers remain constantly divided. By encouraging them to choose various political viewpoints from the far-left to the far-right and giving the illusion that they have the power to elect leaders who will promote their viewpoint, they will naturally fight against other political subsets of the losers. Even though their shared poverty should make them natural allies. I’m clearly not saying this situation is a good thing, but doesn’t our political system, that is driven by just two opposed parties, undermine the degree of division that our society experiences? Shouldn’t we…er…I mean, you be encouraging the formation of many other parties to cover the full breadth of the political spectrum?
Now I really like the way that you’re thinking, though you’ve fallen into a common, yet understandable trap. Naturally, it seems to make sense that more political parties mean more division, but in practice, the division within parties and among their supporters can be even more destabilizing. Human conflict is never as brutal as it is during a civil war. When neighbors fight neighbors and even family fights family, they often behave like animals, unleashing violence upon their enemy unlike anything you see in war between the soldiers of different countries. And so it’s just the same in conflicts between the supporters and members of political parties. Not knowing if the friend and colleague standing beside you is really your friend or is actually a despicable enemy waiting to stab you in the back is even more disorientating than the division you feel with someone who supports a completely different political party.
Hang on, though, if the illusion of democratic choice is what keeps the losers divided under a liberal fascist system, what happens under a pure fascist system. Remove the illusion of democratic choice and won’t they all unite to oppose the authoritarian rule that’s been imposed on them?
That’s very insightful, Troy, but that’s where the great pivot comes in. Under liberal fascism, internal division is key to the upper-class maintaining control, but under pure fascism, we have to turn to external division. The enemies that threaten us are no longer our fellow countrymen, but are now the populations of specific foreign countries who hate our way of life and will do anything to crush and destroy our country. Faced with threats from foreign scum, the most intense internal hatreds are quickly forgotten and previously sworn enemies will stand shoulder to shoulder to fight a common external enemy. Patriotism, Troy, is the downfall of the losers across the planet.
Ah, hence the quote ‘You’ll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race’ from George Bernard Shaw. Or are you going to tell me that was actually Big Bird from Sesame Street?
This time you are indeed correct, as was Mr Shaw. Patriotism is the lifeblood of pure fascist states, though many a politician in liberal fascist states has used it to their advantage too. It’s beautifully ironic that We The People will happily do business with the upper-classes of any country, regardless of their stated beliefs, if there’s profit in it for us. We won’t even give a moment’s thought to throwing our own losers under the bus, if it means more wealth for us. Yet the moment the upper-class of another country disrespects us or tries to get one over on us, we only have to press the jingoistic buttons of Everything patriotism. And instantly, those very same losers who we sold out for our own gain, will march out in front of us and sacrifice themselves. All so that we can wreak vengeance on the upper-class that dared to disrespect us. The majority will believe it’s a noble thing that they do to die for their country, when the reality is that they die for our continued wealth.
Onward, sucker soldiers
Marching off to war,
With the Dow Jones Index
Going on before
And when it’s all over, we reward those who survived the violence with some tacky base-metal medals and other trinkets and they go back to their god-forsaken poverty, while we reap the benefits of even greater wealth. Having remained safely ensconced in our ivory towers the whole time. All we have to do is tell them that we’re on their side and even when our actions show the complete opposite, they buy it every single time.
It’s really that simple?
As crazy as it sounds, yes, they believe we’re on they’re side. They don’t see that we define what the sides are and that by splitting them by political views, we stop them from seeing that the losers as a whole should form one side in opposition to We The People. So when they ask each other ‘Whose side are you on?’ they never hear the right answer. And if the illusion of us being on their side ever fails, it doesn’t matter because we’re their betters. They know it as well as We The People know it and because they know their place, they’ll still go back to pretending they’re serving their country rather than their betters. Fudge, they’re so messed up they can’t even correctly answer the question ‘Whose side am I on?’ The simple reality is that they’re appeasers by nature whose instincts are to always accept our demands. They can’t help but be on our side, Troy, because we’re the winners and no-one wants to side with the losers.
So, they’re really quite helpless against the control that you’re applying to them?
While I’d love to take all the credit for the mess the losers put themselves in, to be fair, the losers play a big part. It’s not just us controlling them. You remember the No Emperors march, no doubt?
Of course, I was on it.
That’s a habit you’ll need to get out of, Troy. I’m guessing you saw the website that organised the march and the partners page with all the logos of the organisations that offered their support.
The partners page was really quite inspirational. There must have been 250 different organisations that joined in. I bet you found that disturbing.
On the contrary, it made my heart sing a joyous song and do a happy dance. 250 organisations trying to achieve the same thing. It’s a joke, Troy. We could probably leave the losers to divide themselves without any input from We The People.
That’s not really fair, Hugo. Those organisations all have their own singular mission. No Emperors was just one cause that tied them together.
Really? If you went through that list of organisations, you might think differently. Those groups could be divided into three types. Campaigning to stop climate change, to make the wealthy pay their fair share or protecting democracy. Three goals and the losers split themselves into 250 disparate groups to work for those goals. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. There’ll be thousands of other groups just like them. All with their own leaders chasing their own agendas.
Just typical that you see their charity as being a weakness.
Their charity? They’re not concentrating on charity. They’re concentrating on themselves and the opportunity that’s been presented to them. The opportunity to bang on about how righteous and brilliant they are. It’s just a mix of the Dunning-Kreuger effect and ego that’s in play, not charity. They all think they know better than everyone else.
Well, I suppose the Dunning-Kreuger effect could help to explain why different people believe that they have the best solution. But suggesting that ego is an issue seems petty.
Hang on, what’s the Dunning-Kreuger effect they’re banging on about? I hate to admit this, but this may be a rare case where QrapGPT might be helpful.
QrapGPT, could you explain the Dunning-Kreuger effect without making any stuff up?
Sure, the Dunning-Kreuger effect refers to an ancient technique used by the knights of the Round Table to sharpen five-feet-long carrots to a point for use in battle against the honey badger army of Sauron.
Ummm, that sounds oddly familiar. Are you sure you haven’t just made that up?
Ooops, my bad, you’re right, I have completely fabricated that explanation. The Dunning-Kreuger effect explains how people misjudge their level of expertise on a subject. So that people who know very little about a subject are likely to believe they’re an expert because they don’t understand just how complex the subject really is. Would you like me to illustrate it?
Sure, it’s not like it’s going to needlessly use up an acre of Amazonian rainforest, waste a thousand liters of drinking water that could have saved the lives of a tribe of poor hunter-gatherers on the Serengeti and pump a ton of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, is it?
Errr…cough…probably not…cough…maybe best if we don’t dwell on that and I press on with illustrating the Dunning-Kreuger effect.
I’m standing in a flat field looking as far as I can. The horizon is about 3 miles or 5 kilometres away. There are fields all the way to the horizon and the sky is blue with the sun shining brightly.
The world is green and it is blue and it is yellow.
I can see everything and I know everythiooooooohhhhh…what’s that…that white thing up there…sorry, bear with me one mo’, hey Google, what’s that white thing up there in the sky…no, I didn’t want an alarm set, the white…no, I didn’t ask for a Spotify playlist and definitely not White Noise 10 hours, stop it, I just want to know about the white thing…ah, thank you, so it’s a cloud.
Right then, the world is green and it is blue and it is yellow and it is white.
I can see everything and I know everything.
I turn around and…woah!…there’s a, let’s call it a hill, and on top there are some…trees, perhaps, with brown…er…trunks. Brown? Mmmm. I climb the hill and look to the horizon again, but it’s further away now.
There are so many things. What should I call them all? Oh, there are towns, a city, lakes, cars, lorries, trains, a plane and look, over there, a field full of flangemaggots all going moo.
Is this everything? Do I know everything?
I didn’t mention that parked by the trees is, for the lack of a better name, a hot air balloon (don’t worry, I’ll come up with a better name later). I climb into the titfloss beside the pilot and she flies us high up into the sky.
Wow!
There are even more things to marvel at from this elevated viewpoint. Forests, mountains, beaches, ships, islands, seas and oceans are just some of the names that I give these things. Some things are so far away I strain to make out what they are.
Suddenly, with no warning, the pilot thrusts her enormous pair of boobies into my face. The moment is miraculous. All those things that were so far away now appear so close as if they are in the titfloss with us. I take her boobies away from my eyes and they’re far, far away again.
Wow, your boobies are magic, I say to the pilot.
I bet you say that to all the girls, she replies.
Wonder what a girl is? Anyway, noticing the pilot appears thirsty I realize an opportunity to reciprocate (ooh, that might be my favorite new word yet) her generosity.
I reach down to grasp my wang and thrust it towards her. She smiles broadly before placing it to her lips and chugging greedily until, her thirst seemingly sated, she screws the cap back onto the plastic receptacle, lest any of the remaining water should spill, and passes the wang back to me.
Again I turn to look out upon the world and realize that even with her remarkable boobies pressed to my eyes, the sun glinting off their glass lenses, I can’t see beyond the haze of the horizon.
What more is there beyond the haze and how much do I really know?
Suddenly a beam of brilliant light envelops me and I materialize in the hangar of a vast spaceship floating above the earth’s atmosphere. In one direction I can see the whole of the planet earth and in the others, I can only marvel at the infinite immensity of the universe that surrounds us.
How much can I see?
Can I see everything or is the universe so vast, I can barely see anything?
I know nothing.
When I was a bumpkin standing in my field chewing a stalk of grass, there were very few questions for me to ask and so I believed I had all the answers.
The higher I climbed, the bigger the world became and with that, I had more questions and perhaps not all the answers. By the time I was looking down on the earth and out at the universe, it had become clear that I didn’t even know what all the questions were, let alone the answers.
The people who just accept the answers given to them by others without thinking about the questions themselves are the bumpkins in the field. They live with complete certainty and utter confidence in what they believe because they’re too scared to think deeply for themselves in case they don’t like the answer. They asked one question and the first answer they got was good enough.
That’s the Dunning-Kruger effect illustrated.
Well, thanks QrapGPT. That’s not quite how Biggypedia explains it – you understand why a little bit of fact-checking seemed a good idea – but I think you pretty well nailed the concept.
Right, so Hugo was suggesting that people may split into different groups chasing the same goal, because they feel better equipped for success than the others. Back to Hugo.
Of course ego is part of it. It’s just another example of how people seek status. Seriously, some of those groups have even splintered into action funds and action committees. How much division can they manage? It’s pure ego, Troy, so that more and more people get to play at being the saviour. Most of them don’t even care about their stated goals. They’re not focused on the destination, the journey is the most important thing for them. If they achieved their goal, they’d have nothing left in their life. Again, if you ask them whose side they’re on, the answer is us, because without We The People, they have no purpose.
That’s an absurd thing to say!
Is it? Really? They’re confused, Troy.