Post by irishconfederate on May 10, 2016 20:39:38 GMT
Been thinking on 'Gramscian Hegemony' -thanks for that Hibernicus. I thought the comparison to penal times was very revealing also.
Thinking of 'Gramscian Hegemony' as a sub-type of authoritarianism.....I think it needs to be adjusted a bit......just some thoughts:
I think the system we are living in is very different to other authoritarian systems because of its all-encompassing action, that teaches us what to do from even what couples do in the intimacy of their bedrooms- as Fennell put it.
A term for the system I think would have to point to this aspect.
Here are some quotes on totalitarianism that might point towards the direction:
'A distinctive feature of totalitarian governments is an "elaborate ideology, a set of ideas that gives meaning and direction to the whole society.'
'Compared to totalitarianism, "the authoritarian state still maintains a certain distinction between state and society. It is only concerned with political power and as long as that is not contested it gives society a certain degree of liberty. Totalitarianism, on the other hand, invades private life and asphyxiates it."[20] Another distinction is that "authoritarianism is not animated by utopian ideals in the way totalitarianism is. It does not attempt to change the world and human nature."[20]
Interestingly though, as Hibernicus mentioned him, a good expression I found recently that came close to an adequate name of the system was Alexis de Tocqueville's Soft Despotism (he uses democratic despotism too).
Here are some quotes:
'Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people.'
'Soft despotism gives people the illusion that they are in control, when in fact they have very little influence over their government. Soft despotism breeds fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the general populace.'
I found it interesting that here the use of soft was used, contrasted to hard, like in 'soft totalitarianism'.
Soft Despotism seems agreeable to more people then Soft-Totalitarianism.
Tocqueville was wrestling with the all-encompassing action on people's lives. How to include that aspect into the Gramscian Hegemony, a sub-type of Authoritarianism?
Also....... Tocqueville and writers on totalitarianism write a lot about the state being the shepherd of the system but in our system International business plays a great role.
Couldn't 'Gramscian Hegemony' be applied to any of the sub-types of authoritarianism:
1.Traditional authoritarian regimes
2.Bureacratic-military authoritarian regimes
3.Corporatist authoritarian regimes
4.Racial and ethnic "democracies"
5.Post-totalitarian authoritarian regimes
But we need some term that distinguishes ours from amongst them?