Charny, I. W. Fascism and Democracy in the Human Mind: A Bridge between Mind and Society

International Social Science Review, Spring-Summer, 2007 by David B. Broad

Charny, I. W. Fascism and Democracy in the Human Mind: A Bridge between Mind and Society. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2006. xvii + 471 pages. Cloth, $49.95.

The constructs of mind and society have been written into book titles before. Much of the thought of George Herbert Mead, a social psychologist and pioneer of symbolic interactionism, is contained in a volume compiled by his students, titled Mind, Self, and Society (1959). The collected essays of Russian psychologist Lev S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society (1978), outline a theory of cognitive development based on human use of the symbol and technology. Charny's work is an attempt to integrate the constructs of mind and society by focusing on ideal-typical patterns of behavior that have been labeled fascist and democratic.

The challenge of building such a bridge is akin to the challenge of creating unified field theory in physics: The units, mechanisms, and models of Einstein's relativity and quantum mechanics have thus far resisted attempts at unification, except for a few glimpses at the possibilities afforded by Stephen Hawking. Likewise, the construct of mind, which we conceive of as being located at least primarily in the individual, and the construct of society, which we conceive of as located primarily outside the individual, seem to occupy unique and separate dimensions. Sigmund Freud attempted to build this bridge in Civilization and Its Discontents (1961). Sociobiology or evolutionary psychology is an attempt to build that bridge by substituting brain and physiology for mind.

The present volume seeks to construct a unity-of-science model of psychological process by explaining the complex patterns of behavior referred to as fascist and democratic as having arisen out of basic human needs at two very different stages of development. "... [T]he fascist paradigm," according to Charny, "is a model for attempting to solve existential anxieties that trouble all human beings" (p. 17). Democratic mind, by contrast, "recognizes that what life is all about, first of all, is the sanctity of human life. [It] takes an overriding position of caring for life and the opportunity for life as the definitive prime principle ..." (p. 136). Charny argues that therapy is an effective vehicle for the support of clients lifting themselves out of existential insecurity and into the ability to enjoy criticism, avoid groupthink, and correct for fascist-type rigidities.

The author's analysis is interwoven around case studies from his therapeutic career. The dialectic created between the analytical thought and the empirical content of the case studies in this volume is dynamic. Whether one is convinced by Charny's argument that therapy is the bridge from fascism to democracy ultimately hinges on the effectiveness of therapists. If a society were blessed with a sufficient number of therapists as gifted as Charny, one could envision a critical mass of democratic minds being produced. Short of that blessing, it is difficult to imagine how Charney's vision for a society led by a collective democratic mind can come into existence.

Studies by Stanley Milgram, Anthony G. Greenwald, Philip G. Zimbardo, Bruno Bettelheim, and R. D. Laing are all cited in this work as possible building blocks in the creation of the bridge (p. 308). The familiarity of students of psychology with these researches make them useful as such building material. This may be the opportunity that awaits Charny or whoever is ambitious enough to continue with this theoretical unification project.

David B. Broad, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

North Georgia College & State University

Dahlonega, Georgia