- cross-posted to:
- theonion@midwest.social
- cross-posted to:
- theonion@midwest.social
What could be more indicative of a thirst for power and control than a perfectly level, uniform expanse of grass? Clearly, only someone with fascist tendencies would aspire to such impeccable orderliness, attempting to impose their oppressive standards on nature itself. Because nothing says “I want to dominate the world” quite like the pursuit of a weed-free lawn.
Consider the process of maintaining a lawn. It’s essentially an exercise in subjugation. Mowing down innocent blades of grass week after week, enforcing a uniform height – it’s like a tiny dictatorship being played out in your front yard. And let’s not even mention the chemical warfare that goes on behind the scenes – those pesticides and fertilizers are the secret tools of aspiring autocrats, seeking to eliminate any form of diversity (read: weeds) in their quest for homogeneity.
But the plot thickens when we consider the boundary lines. The quintessential white picket fence, meticulously aligned with the driveway, serves as a clear metaphor for the barriers these so-called “lawn fascists” wish to erect between themselves and the rest of the world. Heaven forbid a dandelion or, heaven forbid, a clover should breach these sacred borders! It’s not just a lawn, it’s a fortified buffer zone against any hint of dissenting plant life.
And let’s talk about the water consumption. While the rest of us worry about global water shortages and environmental sustainability, these lawn-loving authoritarians are apparently convinced that the well-being of their turf is of paramount importance. Are they hoarding water to fuel their nefarious plans for world domination? It wouldn’t be surprising – every power-hungry despot needs a well-hydrated base of operations.
In conclusion, the evidence is irrefutable: anyone with a lawn is a fascist. The quest for a pristine lawn represents a disturbing desire for control, uniformity, and domination over the natural world. So, the next time you see a neatly trimmed yard, just remember – behind that innocent facade of green lies a potential dictator in the making, plotting to impose their authoritarian rule, one well-timed sprinkler cycle at a time.
There has been a lot of serious political analysis done about the connection between human domination of each other and human domination over nature. I agree with the thesis that these are interrelated, but that doesn’t mean everyone who adopts these ideas or practices is a fascist.
Okay. Let’s go through Umberto Eco’s checklist for recognizing fascism.
True for lawn maintenance. Home Owner Associations often rigorously pin down the expected state of lawns and do not allow changes to procedure. Lawns derive from English manor houses and colonial homesteading. NIMBY-ism, grandfathered-in rights, always looking back to what people have earned because of how things used to be.
True for lawn maintenance. Modern concepts like biodiversity, mulching, avoiding soil pollution, etc. are woke disruptions to the right to have an English manor-style grassy desert. Superficial technological advancement in the form of lawn robots and high-tech mowers is allowed.
True for lawn maintenance. Mowing the lawn is treated like an inherent virtue and privilege. Hiring people to spend their entire lives making lawns boring environmental catastrophes is considered a reasonable way to spend time. And again, scientific concepts like biodiversity, water shortages, and avoiding soil pollution are hated because it interferes with the right to have a pointless symbol of pointless labor.
True for lawn maintenance. Whether through HOAs or through simple social pressure from neighbors, it is considered treason against the neighborhood not to make your lawn look dead. With regards to the lawn itself, people are willing to spend a lot of money to hammer their soil into submission.
True for lawn maintenance. On top of viewing it as social treason, those with lawns will typically be terrified that an unkempt plot of land will harbor all manner of dangerous pests that could spread across the neighborhood. Every infestation will be blamed on the non-lawn, regardless of justification. With regards to the lawn itself, it is always made homogeneous both internally and with respect to the neighborhood.
True for lawn maintenance. Unkempt lawns will be seen as a blight on the neighborhood, lowering property values, and being a signal of incoming undesirables. With regards to the lawn itself, weeds and most animals are treated like a dangerous infectant to be removed out of fear.
True for lawn maintenance. Unkempt lawns are often tied to ideological threats - hippies, commies, woke liberals, etc. - and folded into general conservative xenophobia. With regards to the lawn itself, obsession with weeds that are hard to root out.
True for lawn maintenance. Those with unkempt lawns are simultaneously lazy and attempting to destroy the fiber of the neighborhood. Weeds are simultaneously unfit for keeping the lawn healthy and so suited for the environment that they’re a constant threat.
True for lawn maintenance. Lawns as a concept exist for the sake of fighting weeds forever. Giving gardens any shape that doesn’t involve constant maintenance is frowned upon.
True for lawn maintenance. Those who can’t maintain their lawns are treated with contempt, regardless of why. They should hire a gardener if they can’t do it themselves, and if they can’t afford it then they are gross and lower class. With regard to the lawn itself, nature is subjugated even as that subjugation causes ecocide and tremendous long-term damage to society. Anything that could live on the lawn is beneath notice even if it costs us.
I honestly think Eco is being a bit sexist here with his use of “everybody”. In fascism, women are not educated to become heroes and die, they are trained to be heroes by producing many sons, metaphorically ‘dying’ by subjugating themselves to their husband, their culture, and their state. Likewise, in lawn maintenance, people aren’t trained to die per se, but to treat their unpaid pointless labor as a necessary submission to the public good. Thus, gardeners also “die” metaphorically for the sake of their neighborhood, their culture, and their state.
This is a specific expression of fascism in the field of sexuality, just like lawns are a specific expression of fascism in the field of gardening. Sometimes a hoe is just a hoe.
True for lawn maintenance. Lawns are treated as inherently American, regardless of the individual opinions of those who would rather have unkempt lawns. With regards to lawn maintenance, someone who mows the lawn will typically conceive of a lawn as “healthy” if it meets the predefined standard, regardless of the actual health of the plants or the environment.
A fait accompli in lawn maintenance. Before the industrial revolution, home gardens used to be a lot better understood and a lot better kept by the general population. Gardeners had tons of knowledge - almanacs, oral traditions, hands-on experience, etc. Over the course of the 20th century, the rise of lawns and the commodification of nutrition lead to garden maintenance simplifying to “eliminate everything that isn’t grass”.
So yeah, the cultural concept of lawn maintenance is fascist, both with regards to society and with regards to nature.
Well done. Thank you for this detailed analysis.
Let us not forget also the role of grass in enabling the herding culture.
Social ecology baybeee