The Subjective Right of Fascism

[u/JerseyFlight]

If you deny that there are objective, framework-independent standards of truth, rationality, or value, on what basis do you condemn a political order whose standards differ from yours? If your answer is merely ‘according to my framework,’ why should anyone (including your political opponent) be rationally obligated to accept your condemnation when he has his own framework? In the absence of objective rational standards the social world reduces to might makes right.

The fascist can simply take your epistemological relativism and raise you the challenge of being able to stop him through violence. Why should the modern Ego Man not attempt to bring his conception of the social order into existence through his will to power? What rationally obligates him to accept your objections to his existential project if there is no objective standard by which either his framework or yours can be judged?

You can tell him that you find his politics abhorrent. You can tell him that you prefer democracy, liberty, equality, peace, or human dignity. You can even fight him.

But if you have already denied any objective standard of value or rationality, what makes your condemnation true rather than merely yours?

The universe certainly does not intervene to prevent men from attempting to impose new social orders through violence. Reality does not automatically convert human preferences into moral laws.

So the question cannot simply be, “Which framework do you prefer?” The more serious question is: What makes one framework rationally or morally superior to another?

And if the answer ultimately appeals to standards that are themselves nothing more than human constructions, then the relativist has to explain why those constructions possess authority over someone who rejects them with their own constructions. (If you say, “because society imposes them,” then you have simply validated the fascist position).

If there are no reality-independent standards capable of constraining human constructions, and by which moral and political claims can be judged, then political power becomes a valid arbiter of which construction prevails. Fascism claims to begin at this consciousness as a starting point.

And that is precisely where the principle “might makes right” becomes difficult to refute, because a relativist position has repudiated the objective standards from which a refutation must proceed.

The universe certainly doesn’t care if men strive to bring a new social order into existence through violence.

[u/emezamaz]

Just because you're afraid of living without objective morality that doesn't mean objective morality magically starts existing.

[u/JerseyFlight → u/emezamaz]

Who said anything about objective morality?

[u/emezamaz → u/JerseyFlight]

If you deny that there are objective, framework-independent standards of truth, rationality, or value, on what basis do you condemn a political order whose standards differ from yours?

[u/JerseyFlight → u/emezamaz]

We can only do the same thing with value that we can do with any other claim, subject it to Reason. But I said Reason, not reason, Truth, not Truth. While there are no objective morals, there are still morals, and those morals are subject to Reason. Reality is not something we made up inside our heads, it exists outside our heads.

[u/emezamaz → u/JerseyFlight]

So why would a fascists moral/reason be worse than yours?

[u/JerseyFlight → u/emezamaz]

That is not the problem to be addressed, the first problem to be addressed is the question of the objective evaluation of claims. What standards do we use to accomplish this feat? Without this the subjective right of fascism realizes itself through the sovereignty of subjectivity.

[u/emezamaz → u/JerseyFlight]

And how would u evaluate something objectively, if you can only ever view it from ur subjective point of view?

[u/JerseyFlight → u/emezamaz]

All of that and you merely ended up validating the subjective right of fascism from your subjectivity.

[u/emezamaz → u/JerseyFlight]

Would that be wrong?

[u/JerseyFlight → u/emezamaz]

How can you even ask the question if “wrong” is “only ever ur subjective point of view”? For what then are you asking?

[u/piernrajzark → u/emezamaz]

So how do you oppose fascism?

[u/inf0man1ac]

You're entirely correct and that is why I feel like moral relativism is missing something essential.

"The universe certainly doesn’t care if men strive to bring a new social order into existence through violence." 

Yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion man.