Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Fishermans_Worf t1_jau9tv2 wrote

>But now I am curious, do you think the individuals inside Nazi Germany are "selfless" then?

Fascism is an ideology that does not respect the individual self in favour of the group. It's brutally selfish towards outsiders, and brutally selfless within.

A biologist will say a cell has a goal—but they don't mean it in the same way that a person has a goal nor do they mean it in the way an organization has a goal.

If this is applicable, translating concepts from one culture to another is incredibly difficult because so much of the context is lost. if you're putting an argument forwards, it's valuable to try and define every important term you use. Doubly so if you're translating ideas across cultures. The more central a concept is to your essay, the more of the essay I'd spend defining exactly what you're talking about.

8

waytogoal OP t1_jazyj03 wrote

I think I start to see where the problem might have arisen. Let's focus back into the "individuals" inside Nazis and forget about whether "Fascism" as an ideology is respecting selfs.

Hitler is a self-conscious individual who did a lot of thinkings himself and thus cannot be described as "selfless", agree? The next guy, let's name him Joe, confidently believes in Nazi ideology or the bollock from Hitler and had thought about it thoroughly. Is he selfless?...

I think the problem is that you implicitly assumed an ideology (e.g., fascism, communism) not respecting "individual rights" would eliminate the "self" in its part. (I know sociology texts made a lot subtle statements that groupist equate no self and might have subtly influenced in how we communicate)

Now, read your own statement again "It's brutally selfish towards outsiders, and brutally selfless within." and apply it to you. Your cells are brutally selfless within (the requirement of developing you, the yourself), but it might or might not be selfless towards the outside, agree?

1