No, my friend. That’s not the point. I try to carefully avoid mass analyses, especially analytical ones. However, if there’s an analysis and it has managed to become the dominant discourse for the masses, then that discourse or analysis deserves to be analyzed. What’s the dominant discourse right now? “The world is becoming authoritarian.” Let’s analyze this discourse first.
The world has always been authoritarian anyway. Wow, isn’t that surprising? You’ll say, “We didn’t perceive it that way.” Yes, that’s exactly the problem. Now go outside and shout, “Guys, calm down, the world has always been authoritarian.” But I don’t think you should, it’s hard to reverse the dominant discourse. That’s not the intention here anyway.
If you read F. Nietzsche, you’ll understand what I mean better. You can’t think of what you call modernity (civilization) as independent of authority. It starts with toilet training and extends to the impulse that makes you stop at a red light while driving. Modernity is a kind of open zoo. You’re born, you go through hundreds of authorities until you’re sculpted into being civilized, and you end up like this. I don’t know if you’re happy with the state you’re in. You believe you’re free as long as you’re civilized. But since you’ve internalized civilization, it doesn’t even occur to you to question the super-ego, the civilization that restricts you (S. Freud-Civilization and Its Discontents ).
Power relations aren’t as simple as the story that liberal democrats fed you. Being free doesn’t mean you’re free if there’s no authoritarian person. Modernity spreads authority into life through rules and norms. You can’t find a specific figure, and of course, it’s easier to believe you’re free when you don’t have an object to rebel against.
If you ask what’s happening now, what these tremors are, civilization is in trouble and power relations are reshaping. We’ll see together how and where it evolves. If you ask whether the reactions to this are unjust, I don’t know about the masses’ reactions. Because there, the dominant discourse is still addressed through the system. Democracy, regime, “freedoms” as long as you’re civilized, etc. These are also concepts of modernity, my dear friend, don’t forget.
My criterion is High Morality. Being civilized doesn’t guarantee being moral. You’re just civilized. And only if you’re civilized, you try to explain and understand everything that’s happening with the concepts presented by modernity. Your objections also remain at this level, and you complain that the world is becoming authoritarian.
I’ll conclude with an example. My endless respect for M.K. Atatürk isn’t because he was a civilized person. Or for his contribution to the modernization of his country. There are very few places in the world that haven’t modernized. You don’t need great figures like Atatürk for that. Capitalism and capital eventually modernize everywhere one way or another. What makes Atatürk unique is his high moral qualities, which are hard to achieve. When necessary, he was also authoritarian. But his ability to maintain his moral qualities despite the power he had takes him to a unique, unattainable point.
The most burning problem the world is facing today is not so much authoritarianism, but rather the lack of high moral qualities in modern world leaders and those around them. Again, if we return to Nietzsche, there’s nothing much to be surprised about in this. Only such unqualified, sloppy “authoritarians” can arise from such sluggish modern masses. So what happens then? Let’s analyze that later.