America is a Social Tyranny

Post Reply New Topic

Alexis de Tocqueville said "The majority has enclosed thought within a formidable fence. A writer is free inside that area, but woe to the man who goes beyond it, not that he stands in fear of an inquisition, but he must face all kinds of unpleasantness in every day persecution. A career in politics is closed to him for he has offended the only power that holds the keys." This describes the United States of America today and I as an Aspergers person agree with what he says here. American society has a set of social standards and within these standards one is free to do as he wishes. We will describe it as a formidable fence as Tocqueville says.

What happens if one goes outside of these social standards and one questions the standards? He will not face an inquisition, prison, gulag, or any execution but what he will face is "all kinds unpleasantness in everyday persecution." What happens if one questions the entire rubric and one questions society itself including the modern day workplace and it's structure? More than likely if one does not accept and go with the social standard it will be difficult for one to obtain a job. Other people in one's neighborhood can make living difficult for you. If one does not do his body language right or make eye contact right life will be difficult for you. What we have here is a social tyranny in which the indivdual has to follow the social conventions whether he agrees with them or not and they're not open to question and examination. In fact, one has to carry his jacket in a particular way or he is seen as ret*d. Are we really free in America and is the USA free as is claimed if we have to remain in a formidable fence that is never open to question and examination? Can one refuse to shake a potential employer's hand and still be able to get a job? Can he shake another employer's hand no matter the strength of his grip and still be able obtain a job? Maybe, but it will be very difficult due to social convention which in my opinion is a form of social tyranny.

Basically, every society exhibits "social tyranny" to some extent.

America isn't perfect--it has glaring holes in its perfection.

But I'd take America over most of the alternatives in this world.

I think you are largely correct, but I don't think it's a problem inherent in America society; rather it's inherent in human beings in general. There will always be a large compulsion to act in specific ways, follow codes of conduct, and "fit in" to society. Those who try to sidestep the rules will always get a hard time from those who embrace the herd mentality.

The only real course for those of us who are a different is to strive to build the most independent life possible with less need for others' approval -- especially in the choice of career.

As others have commented, all human societies have this kind of social tyranny--it's not an American phenomenon.

Again with the jacket comment! How in the world are you toting your jacket around that looks so weird?

I tend to agree with you and the notion that other citizens are free to criticize fairly and even avoid others legally.

I agree with the idea that U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Louis Brandeis described as "the right to be let alone" in his dissenting opinion about the case Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olmstead_ ... e_Brandeis , and more recently, the idea that an individual has "the right to be forgotten" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten .

But, there should be a balance. Absent an individual's legal effort to protect his or her rights "to be let alone" and/or "to be forgotten," others also retain the free-speech rights to criticize the individual. To me, the matter boils down to what governments, corporations and certain individuals are expected to do or say in the public square of life. While they are free to criticize the individual, they should, under carefully crafted laws and policies, be expected to respect the individual's publicly claimed privacy.

Still, certain points of friction will continue to make some individuals feel cheated. But, I suspect that would be many fewer than if nothing is done at all.

Even in Plato's philosophical kingdom (as portrayed in his "Republic"), I would bet there would be irritation with somebody who ascends to the highest place in that kingdom, even if the people vying for that position used entirely virtuous methods throughout the "campaign."

I need to read "Republic."

...Well , you started out wit' Al D' T , so I don't gotta !

At least in other societies, I know it is there. One has to conform to a set of social standards and it is in one's face. Here, the problem is what is promoted does not correspond to what actually is. It's promoted as though one is free, one can be himself and one has free expression but by the time one has to go through all of the social standards, rules and regulations and hearing that one is free one begins to question this.



I do not know.

Huh, I didn't encounter all the freedom-promoting you apparently did. I remember even as a child in elementary school being taught that "free speech" only referred to political speech, and certainly didn't get any lessons about "being oneself". It was made pretty clear that behaving with disregard to social standards would get you undesirable social outcomes, just as much as behaving without regard to laws would result in undesirable legal consequences.

You and De Touceville are talking about two different things. He was saying that a politician cant get elected if he is against God, motherhood, and apple pie. Your talking about a regular person not being able to get a job if they have a limp hand shake. you're talking about things that are true in every society-the unwritten rules. They may not be the same rules in every culture, but they have some equivalent set of unwritten rules that have to be observed. So the USA is no more "socially tyrannical" that way than is any other society.

So, you don't hear people saying we're free, we must protect our freedoms, etc, etc? Have you not heard this as well? http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/darrylwo ... otten.html

So, you've never heard "be yourself, be true to yourself" as you were growing up?

Yes, there are social standards that are necessary and I agree with like one shouldn't call his grandmother a b***h or something like that or wait his turn in line. That's fine.

How many social standards are out there that one must follow in the USA and what about 1000s of laws on the books. If we're free as colonial traditionalist types claim then why do all of these standards, laws and regulations exist? Of course we're not North Korea or old communist Soviet Union but to claim that we're free and have all of these social standards and 1000s of laws one must follow is contradictory to each other especially if these things especially the unwritten rules as Natural Plastic calls them are not open to question and examination.

Based upon reality and I will quote Fnord as well. He said and I'm paraphrasing that "one must conform." If one must conform to all of this with no questioning and no say in them then I have to question the idea that we're free.

I will say that we're less unfree than a place like North Korea. Most definitely. To make a claim that we're free when reality and the facts state otherwise is false or it is only as true as the metaphorical iron fence allows.




NaturalPlastic, maybe so but I believe we can take the idea of De Touceville and expand it outside of the political realm and into the social realm as well which he did briefly touch upon. If you disagree that we can extend the idea, then I would ask why? Why can't one do this and apply his concept to other contexts as well?

If one has to follow an huge amount of social standards and laws that one can't say no to, one has no other alternative except to leave then while living in the given area is the person truthfully free? In fact, is freedom nothing but a myth and we as humanity simply choose our tyranny and the amount we as a species we shall put upon ourselves? How are we free exactly except for freedom from being killed, tortured, etc and the freedom to leave or is this what is meant by freedom?

Another, are we really free or are we metaphorical machines following a pre-determined narrative set forth by others centuries and millennia ago?

Probably a little bit of both.