Sorry if the premise is inflammatory, but I’ve been stymied by this for a while. How did we go from something like 1940s era collectivism or 1960s era leftism to the current bizarro political machine that seems to have hypnotized a large portion (if not majority) of the country? I get it - not everything is bad now, and not everything was good then. FDR’s internment camps, etc.

That said - our country seems to be at a low point in intellectualism and accountability. The DHHS head is an antivaxxer, the deputy chief of the DOJ is a far-right podcast nutball, etc. Their supporters seem to have no nuance to their opinion beyond “well, Trump said he’d fix the economy and I don’t like woke.”

Have people always been this unserious and unquestioning, or are we watching the public’s sanity unravel in real time? Or am I just imagining some idealistic version of the past that never existed, where politicians acted in good faith and people cared about the social order?

  • Prime_Minister_Keyes@lemm.ee
    0·
    8 days ago

    In authoritarian societies, restricting education serves a purpose as a sort of anesthesia for the minds of the people. Solzhenitsyn, describing the few years just before the Great Terror of 1937 started in the Soviet Union, mostly from the perspective of a political prisoner (from Volume II, Chapter 4 of the “Gulag Archipelago” which can be found in its entirety on the web, in The Archive):

    And the clock of history was striking. […] The Great Leader (having already in mind, no doubt, how many he would soon have to do away with) declared that the withering away of the state (which had been awaited virtually from 1920 on) would arrive via, believe it or not, the maximum intensification of state power! This was so unexpectedly brilliant that it was not given to every little mind to grasp it, but Vyshinsky, ever the loyal apprentice, immediately picked it up: “And this means the maximum strengthening of corrective-labor institutions.” […] And this was not some satirical magazine cracking a joke either, but was said by the Prosecutor General. […] All this was printed in black on white, but we still didn’t know how to read.¹ The year 1937 was publicly predicted and provided with a foundation.
    And the hairy hand² tossed out all the frills and gewgaws too. Labor collectives? Prohibited! […] Professional and technical courses for prisoners? Dissolve them! […] Graphs, diagrams? Tear them off the wall and whitewash the walls.

    1 My take: The author and his peers most definitely knew how to read, but they could not fully comprehend what was being published because of its, at that time, unparalleled egregiousness.
    2 Certainly the one of Stalin.

    • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
      0·
      8 days ago

      Stalin wiped out the officers in the Red Army because he perceived anyone with any authority to be a potential threat. Anyone who had been around for too long was a threat. This set the stage for the Germans to steamroll them in the opening of Operation Barbarossa because you had a Red Army that was completely dysfunctional due to the slaughter of its leadership. He probably would’ve turned on Beria (NKVD) too if he had the chance.

      The Great Leader (having already in mind, no doubt, how many he would soon have to do away with) declared that the withering away of the state (which had been awaited virtually from 1920 on) would arrive via, believe it or not, the maximum intensification of state power

      Yah, you don’t need a state if you have a nation of graves.