Populism and Nazism

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Any motive is, by definition, psychological, like I said previously, economy works on our perception of money or resources which is in turn symbolic and relative. If I give you a million £ in a briefcase on a desert island with no hope of human contact ever again, all you have is firewood and several thousand bits of paper. Need/want, the rest of it... all psychological... the fact that our needs and wants differ in the same situation from person to person proves that any difference lies in our minds... psychology in other words.

In the case of your argument you are implying that people become nationalistic because of psychological reasons other than economical reasons. I say this has more to do with political economic reasons and not so much to do with psychology. Humans are very rational even when they get emotional. Emotional reactions rarely come at the expense of rationality.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by BeBro


Why do you think that?

Observing human behavior. People talk alot about their values and such but when it comes right down to their actions, their actions are always simly in their own interest.

[Whaleboy]

In the case of your argument you are implying that people become nationalistic because of psychological reasons other than economical reasons.

Well no in the text you quoted I was reasoning that any economic incentive is first predicated by ones relative psychology, in this case, symbolic logic (Wittgenstein stylee) which is influenced by any number of other psychological factors... upbringing, obedience, trauma, the list goes on.

Emotional reactions rarely come at the expense of rationality

I gotta tell you I think that's absurd. Emotions are, fundamentally, logic, but are they logical in a given context? Fear of harmless spiders? Sexual attraction to one of the same sex? Preference for fast food over healthy food? All of these are basic human tenets governed by our emotions and not pure rationality... we're not Vulcans.

[Whaleboy]

Observing human behavior. People talk alot about their values and such but when it comes right down to their actions, their actions are always simly in their own interest.

Glad to see I've inspired you re. altruism vs. egoism .

But psychology is not about actions per se, we can take egoism as given if you like but I think it's a different and mostly irrelevant debate. On the other hand, psychology is also not about "values" and "ethics". Your argument would hold, however, for discussions about morality and ethical considerations.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Well no in the text you quoted I was reasoning that any economic incentive is first predicated by ones relative psychology, in this case, symbolic logic (Wittgenstein stylee) which is influenced by any number of other psychological factors... upbringing, obedience, trauma, the list goes on.

There are economic reasons for the way people are raised. People teach hatred to their children becuase they perceive enemies to their economic wellbeing.

I gotta tell you I think that's absurd. Emotions are, fundamentally, logic, but are they logical in a given context? Fear of harmless spiders? Sexual attraction to one of the same sex? Preference for fast food over healthy food? All of these are basic human tenets governed by our emotions and not pure rationality... we're not Vulcans.

When people form polical opinions they have a long time to come to a rational decision. Emotions dictate people's actions only for a relatively short time in dealing with their problems of political nature.

Glad to see I've inspired you re. altruism vs. egoism .

You haven't at all. Just because I believe that people act in their self-interest doesn't mean that I think they should be given incentive to do so in a way that is not in societies best interest.

But psychology is not about actions per se, we can take egoism as given if you like but I think it's a different and mostly irrelevant debate. On the other hand, psychology is also not about "values" and "ethics". Your argument would hold, however, for discussions about morality and ethical considerations.

Psychology is about ethics. We use mental processes to evaluate ethics. It's just as much about ethics as it is about economics. We use mental process to evaluate our economic needs and wants also.

[Ned]

Whaleboy, I was just reading thru your diatribe and thought it aptly describe 1) the far left; and 2) radical Islam. I don't think you intended that, but the left and the radicals are certainly "populists" and are certainly vehemently anti-Semitic (at least hear in the US).

What you intended was to smear the nationlist party in Britain. Howver, you linked populism with nationalism be nothing more than stating that conclusion. That populist socialist movements are not typically nationalist seems to belie that conclusion.

But, the bottom line is this: The far left and radical Islamists are in fact Nazi's except to the extent that they are not nationalists. But is that difference critical?

[Odin]

Ned, It is the Republicans who have been the populists lately, which is why they have been winning, they are sucking in the votes of the uneducated, the ignorant, the racists, the bigots, the puritanical evangalist nuts, and the gun-toting freaks. They are using demogougery as a diversion so they can keep on whoring America out to the rich. Unfortunately, the US electorate has degenerated to the point that the only way to win an election is by being a populist demogouge.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Odin
"the uneducated, the ignorant, the racists, the bigots, the puritanical evangalist nuts, and the gun-toting freaks."

The former core constituency of the Democrat Party. It does look, doesn't it, that the Dems have lost touch with the common man, the very people it claims to represent. This is illustrated best by the recent snear we heard from liberals that WalMart shoppers, who are amongst the poorest in the US, are Republican voters.