Den auktoritetsbundne producerar två kön, menar Erich Fromm: De med makt och de utan makt. Denna heterorelation blir det normala. Som varandras motsatser genererar dominans och underordning attraktion. Den auktoritetsbundne attraheras av de med makt.
Flykt från befrielse
Innehåll
I några fristående texter tar jag upp socialpsykologen Erich Fromms analys om varför organisationer och personer flyr befrielse och går in i laglydigt engagemang och aktivism. Fromm menar att rebellen och den underdånige båda dras mot ”makt”. Båda producerar attraktion till makt. Det blir deras läggning.
Den auktoritetsbundne anstränger sig för att få uppmärksamhet från parlament och regering, eller från chef och styrelse. Dessa ledare borde ta hand om oss. De borde lösa våra problem. Detta skapar en riktning. Den lydige vänder sig inte i andra riktningar. Den lydige avviker inte. Den vägrar att själva börja regera. Otänkbart! Det vore onormalt! Nej, makten ska ta hand om oss.
”For the authoritarian character there exist, so to speak, two sexes: the powerful ones and the powerless ones. His love, admiration and readiness for submission are automatically aroused by power, whether of a person or of an institution. Power fascinates him not for any values for which a specific power may stand, but just because it is power.” (Escape from freedom, 1941, p 144)
Rebeller underordnar sig
Heteromatrisen ger två riktningar. Den auktoritetsbundne behöver inte alls bli lydig ja-sägare. Hen kan lika gärna bli nej-sägare. Och därmed ständigt säga nej till auktoriteter. Trotsa. Avfärda. Aldrig lyda. Aldrig följa. Enligt Fromm blir detta en variant av underordning.
Rebeller blir inte revolutionärer.
”There is one feature of the authoritarian character which has misled many observers: a tendency to defy authority and to resent any kind of influence from ”above”. Sometimes this defiance overshadows the whole picture and the submissive tendencies are in the background. This type of person will constantly rebel against any kind of authority, … However, the authoritarian character’s fight against authority is essentially defiance. It is an attempt to assert himself and to overcome his own feeling of powerlessness by fighting authority, although the longing for submission remains present, whether consciously or unconsciously. The authoritarian character is never a ”revolutionary”; I should like to call him a ”rebel”. (Escape p 145)
Maktkritik blir underordning och flykt
De politiska rörelser som ständigt kritiserar ”makten” är alltför ofta auktoritära rörelser. De är fixerade av ”makten”. De bygger inte befriande samhällen. Maktkritik blir flykt från befrielse. Maktkritik genererar i så fall lydnad istället för olydnad.
”There are many … political movements that are puzzling to the superficial observer because of what seems to be an inexplicable change from ”radicalism” to extreme authoritarianism. Psychologically, those people are the typical ”rebels”.” (Escape p145-146)
Per Herngren
2013 08 24, version 0.1
Referens
Erich Fromm, Escape From Freedom, New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1994, först publicerad 1941.
Erich Fromm om rebellen
”There is one feature of the authoritarian character which has misled many observers: a tendency to defy authority and to resent any kind of influence from ”above”. Sometimes this defiance overshadows the whole picture and the submissive tendencies are in the background. This type of person will constantly rebel against any kind of authority, even one that actually furthers his interests and has no elements of suppression. … In persons of the first type in whom the rebellious attitude is in the centre of the picture, one is easily led to believe that their character structure is just the opposite to that of the submissive masochistic type. It appears as if they are persons who oppose every authority on the basis of an extreme degree of independence. They look like persons who, on the basis of their inner strength and integrity, fight those forces that block their freedom and independence. However, the authoritarian character’s fight against authority is essentially defiance. It is an attempt to assert himself and to overcome his own feeling of powerlessness by fighting authority, although the longing for submission remains present, whether consciously or unconsciously. The authoritarian character is never a ”revolutionary”; I should like to call him a ”rebel”. (Escape p 145)