That is already enough of a reason for a distinguished study. If a populist leader wants to force their core leaders and fellow party members into going along completely with them, that’s already reason enough for a deep cut in morality, ethics and integrity.
I have no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t think I’ve ever seen the situation you’re describing and I don’t know why that would “force” anyone else to do the same and I don’t know what a “distinguished study” is and what you’d “study” here and why any of that is “reason for a deep cut in morality” and what that means.
Maybe try to explain again, differently, with examples?
Thankfully, the literature on it is quite extense. I have prepared some books to read on the “Authoritarian Personality” and on the “Sociology of Power”. It is just a shower thought after all.
Luckily I’ll be able to make sense of this and produce something that will make it able for people to understand it as well.
A blog post, a Lemmy comment, something like that.
The idea is that in a populist scenario the command chain of a dictator-like government has to repeat exactly what the leader says. And that would come from the responsible authoritarian leaders being representatives for the people. But in a way that they are the people. And that comes from a strong “I am you” image projected by the authoritarian leader.
I will elaborate more on this later as it interests me profoundly.
And then what?
That is already enough of a reason for a distinguished study. If a populist leader wants to force their core leaders and fellow party members into going along completely with them, that’s already reason enough for a deep cut in morality, ethics and integrity.
I have no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t think I’ve ever seen the situation you’re describing and I don’t know why that would “force” anyone else to do the same and I don’t know what a “distinguished study” is and what you’d “study” here and why any of that is “reason for a deep cut in morality” and what that means.
Maybe try to explain again, differently, with examples?
I’d rather not.
k.
do you think this is interesting? people clearly have a strong opinion about it given the downvotes.
I don’t know if it’s interesting because I don’t know what it even is.
Thankfully, the literature on it is quite extense. I have prepared some books to read on the “Authoritarian Personality” and on the “Sociology of Power”. It is just a shower thought after all.
Luckily I’ll be able to make sense of this and produce something that will make it able for people to understand it as well.
A blog post, a Lemmy comment, something like that.
You’re getting down voted because no one knows what you mean, not because they have an opinion on… whatever this topic is.
The idea is that in a populist scenario the command chain of a dictator-like government has to repeat exactly what the leader says. And that would come from the responsible authoritarian leaders being representatives for the people. But in a way that they are the people. And that comes from a strong “I am you” image projected by the authoritarian leader.
I will elaborate more on this later as it interests me profoundly.
I can’t tell if this is a language translation problem, or if you’re on mushrooms. But that wasn’t coherent I’m afraid.
As someone who downvoted, yes, what @surewhynotlem said is exactly why I downvoted.
And given that OP is unwilling to elaborate any, this whole thread seems like just a frustrating waste of time.