小说与文学2020sciphijournal.org
生活与文学中的横向极权主义
Horizontal totalitarianism in life and literature
导读
文章试图用“横向极权主义”这一新概念，描述社会群体如何借助舆论压力维护共识、压制异见。评论区普遍质疑这是给“同辈压力”“社会控制”等旧概念套新词，并指出文中举例自相矛盾、选择性明显。对写作者来说，这是一则关于术语创新、论证严谨与举例均衡的反面教材。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
提新术语前先确认已有概念是否够用——同辈压力、社会控制、认知失调可能已经覆盖了你想要表达的现象。
- 02
举例必须经得起反例检验：如果论点说“横向”，却拿 Facebook、社会信用体系这类庞大机构作例子，论证就会不攻自破。
- 03
解释抽象机制时用“传话游戏”式的小模型（几个人发起→理想主义者→愤怒的执行者→发美德信号者→沉默的大多数），比堆术语更清楚。
- 04
选例要均衡，别只挑符合自己立场的案例（例如只批 MeToo，却忽略更普遍的邻里同辈压力），否则读者会看出预设结论。
HN 评论精选
批评作者新瓶装旧酒、术语冗余，且所谓“横向”的例子恰恰依赖庞大机构，自相矛盾。
真是一团糟。在小部落里，社会控制可以直接维持，因为成员对彼此的名声了如指掌；这种机制无法扩展到几百人以上，于是人们发明了等级化的宗教等制度。我们已经有“压迫”这样的词和“社会控制”这样的行话。作者只是给旧概念披上新术语的外衣，冒充原创思想。文中提到的每个压迫实例（除了原住民那个例子）都涉及庞大而必要的制度成分。荒唐的是，罗德里格斯把两个由计算机中介的社会控制当作“横向极权主义”的例子，显然没注意到 Facebook 和中国社会信用官僚体系各自都是庞大而昂贵的机构。
spanktheuser查看英文原文
What a mess. In small tribes social control can be directly maintained as members have perfect knowledge of any individual’s reputation. This mechanism doesn’t scale beyond a few hundred individuals so institutions such as hierarchical organized religion were invented. We have established words (oppression) and jargon (social control) for this already. The author has decorated an old concept with new jargon and is passes it off as original thinking. Notably, every instance of oppression mentioned (beyond the Aboriginal example) involve large and necessary institutional components. Insanely, Rodriguez points to two computer-mediated social control as examples of “horizontal totalitarianism” apparently not noticing that Facebook and China’s Social Credit bureaucracy are each enormous and expensive institutions. One wonders why Rodriguez is even bothering. Thankfully he answers this question for us near the end of his piece: > This phenomenon can be observed in the actions of existing successful public silencing initiatives, which confront questions and divergent opinions with insults, as seen in the unfortunate social media lynchings perpetrated in recent years by fanaticised supporters of MeToo or Black Lives Matter, or by similar movements with equally extreme ideologies. Ah. Rodriguez resents progressive movements that seek to upend the current social hierarchy (presumably because Rodriguez enjoys exerting social control far more than experiencing it) and has coined this new jargon to associate movements he dislikes with a reviled term (totalitarianism) Rodriguez begins with an intellectual lie, then uses it to advance the idea that anti-racist and anti-misogynist movements are the actual oppressors. And not the misogynists and racists themselves. What motivation might Rodriguez have for asserting such a thing?
用“传话游戏”模型说明观念如何被层层扭曲放大，是解释抽象机制的好方法。
这不是多数的问题，而是等级的问题。人类会在网络成员之间自组织成等级，微妙之处在于网络的规模。只要几个人把一个有希望的想法“模因”出来；然后出现理想主义者，也许占 0.1%；接着 1% 的愤怒者抓住它充当执行者；再是 10% 寻求接纳的人发出赞同的美德信号；剩下的人里一半出于冷漠而附和，其余出于恐惧保持沉默。这是一场传话游戏，最终形态可能和最初的理想毫无关系。
jl2718查看英文原文
It’s not a majority, it’s a hierarchy. Humans self-organize into hierarchy amongst members of a network. The nuance is the size of the network. Just a few people meme a hopeful idea into existence. Then you get the idealists, maybe 0.1%. Then the 1% of angry people latch onto it as enforcers. Then the 10% of people looking for acceptance send virtue signals of agreement. Half the rest agree out of apathy, and the remains keep quiet out of fear. This is a game of telephone. The final form may be nothing like the ideal.
质疑新术语的必要性：现象平凡普遍，认知失调等既有概念已经能够解释。
我认为僵化的极权主义长期来看根本不是稳定方案：一个没有弹性的社会不可能克服前所未有的挑战，注定会分崩离析。尽管中国的社会信用体系看起来像奥威尔式的绝望之作，但我相信其设计者清楚，有缺陷的设计可能反而让中国变得脆弱。……我还感到有点惊讶，这篇文章的作者居然要发明“横向极权主义”这个新词来描述社会群体如何维护自己的世界观。这其实非常平凡明显——完全相同的现象在个人层面也会发生：当信念直接冲突时会产生认知失调，我们捍卫自己世界观的顽强程度……
SurfingToad查看英文原文
I don't think rigid totalitarianism is a stable solution at all, long term. A society that isn't somewhat elastic has no hopes of overcoming unprecedented challenges; it's bound to fall apart. And even though China's social credit system seems hopelessly Orwellian, I'm confident that its architects are aware that faulty design might inadvertently render China fragile. Tanner Greer at The Scholar's Stage has written about Xi Jinping's apparent belief in the "tides of history". It's a very Taoistic notion. History flows and develops and all we can do is try to swim along with its currents. The only other option is to get crushed. So there's not really much hope in trying to control it. At least that seems to be Jinping's philosophical position. Deng Xioping started the trend with "pragmatic experiments" to test solutions on a small scale before implementing them wholesale. Stability is the goal. And if that means letting go of the reins, that's just what they're going to have to do. Robustness requires flexibility, and you don't get that with simple-minded rigidity. I'm also a bit surprised the author of this essay chose to invent a new term--horizontal totalitarianism--to describe how social groups protect their worldviews. It's just ... a very mundane and obvious thing. The exact same phenomenon occurs at an individual level; cognitive dissonance results when our beliefs are in direct conflict. We tend to reject threats to our worldviews with the tenacity we defend ourselves against physical harm; it's more powerful at a group level, but it's the same thing. When people spend time together, they become more similar. Is that "horizontal totalitarianism"? Or is that just a very obvious observation of human behavior?
批评举例存在选择性偏差，并指出“同辈压力”已是现成术语。
有趣的是，MeToo 或 Black Lives Matter 被视为这种横向极权的施害者，而郊区邻里动态却被忽略——在我看来后者要普遍得多，而且更少是个人选择。这里要用的词也许就是“同辈压力”，没必要发明新词。我也深切怀念通常无处不在的福柯引用。
mxfh查看英文原文
Interesting how MeToo or Black Lives Matter are seen as purpetrators of this, but not suburbian neighborhood dynamics[1][2], which are seem much more pervasive to me and are less of a choice. Peer Pressure might be the term in question here, no real need for inventing a new one. I also dearly miss the usual ubiquitous Foucault reference. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalization_(sociology) [1] https://www.popsci.com/story/environment/american-lawns-grass-peer-pressure/ [2] https://www.newsweek.com/woman-threatens-sue-neighbor-over-biden-yard-sign-ring-doorbell-video-1538523
同类还值得读
乔治·奥威尔1940年对《我的奋斗》的书评
George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf
这是奥威尔 1940 年对《我的奋斗》的书评，他没有简单谴责，而是认真分析希特勒的宣传手法为何奏效、又暴露了哪些思维特征。
小说与文学2022 · 499 分 · 545 评4 条写作要点编辑精选我们都是极客：尼尔·斯蒂芬森的文学作品
We are all nerds: The literary works of Neal Stephenson
这是一篇讨论 Neal Stephenson 科幻小说的文章，评论区读者围绕《Anathem》《钻石年代》《Snow Crash》等作品，聊世界构建、结尾处理和写作风格的变化。
小说与文学2022 · 307 分 · 220 评4 条写作要点编辑精选又一部我不会再去写的小说
Yet another novel I will no longer write
科幻作家 Charles Stross 讲述自己为何放弃一部已经构思好的小说：COVID-19 疫情让他的病毒灾难设定显得多余，现实给所有人上了一堂生动的疫情应对课。
小说与文学2020 · 304 分 · 169 评4 条写作要点编辑精选用图画写作：理查德·斯卡里与儿童文学的艺术
Writing in Pictures: Richard Scarry and the art of children's literature
这是《耶鲁评论》上漫画家 Chris Ware 写的文章，分析童书作家 Richard Scarry 如何用图画而不是文字来讲故事。
小说与文学2024 · 297 分 · 131 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何写一部小说
How to Write a Novel
这篇来自 The Millions 的文章讨论写小说的两种路径——“计划派”（planners）与“即兴派”（pantsers，即“跟着感觉走、边写边编”）。
小说与文学2016 · 238 分 · 112 评4 条写作要点编辑精选