Welcome to our journey into the guts of The Walking Dead. What kind of journey? A philosophical, psychoanalytical, and political kind. What I would like to do over the next couple months is dig thought The Walking Dead episode by episode to see what it can teach us. Thank you for following me on this journey. I look forward to reading your comments. Be forewarned: There are spoilers everywhere.
Don’t forget to check out my previous article in the Philosophizing TWD series: [Philosophizing The Walking Dead S2E11 Judge, Jury, Executioner, Torturer and Euthanasia-er]
What the Hell is Dale's Way? Neo-liberalism and the Survival Economy
What the hell is Dale's way? Neo-liberalism.
In the context of the farm, Dale's role was to be a persistent, questioning authority, spreading dissidence at critical moments. In any other system—a thriving company, a university, or a stable democracy—ruthless dissidence is often what systems require to course-correct and grow. But, in The Walking Dead, where time and attention are the only fungible economic assets, Dale's decision-making only spread doubt and uncertainty. It is one thing to have a heated, time-bound democratic discussion; it’s wholly another thing to rabble-rouse in such a way that the group flips into nihilistic doubt and delays essential, immediate action.
The Death of the Market and False Equivalence
But doesn't Neo-Liberalism have to do with national economy? Yes, but here we see its most destructive micro-political iteration.
What Dale brought to the table was an open market of ideas that sought to devalue the group’s pragmatic decision (executing the hostage) while simultaneously seeking to raise his dissenting opinion as if it were an equivalent choice. The fundamental problem of this moderate respect for political ideas is the establishment of a false equivalence: bad ideas are given the equal credence as good ideas, purely because they were articulated in a democratic forum.
The end of the world brought the death of the traditional market; during the apocalypse, every decision takes upon a direct, unfetishized political and economic value. The danger here is the same as arguing that creationism should be taught alongside evolution: doing so gives credence to a deeply flawed idea and devalues the robust, survival-critical idea at the same time. Ideas and the actions based upon them are international to the group's survival. A day's worth of Dale investing the group with doubt in their leader wastes precious time—time that could have been spent securing the perimeter, hunting, or tending to the group’s livelihood. When democracy and capitalism bump dirties, neo-liberals are born: ideologues who value the process of debate over the necessary outcome.
The Tyranny of the Powerless
The danger of this infinite deliberation is painfully evident in the Occupy Wall Street analogy. From what I hear, Occupy had a painful decision-making process where one dissenter out of 100 could block consensus, pushing the decision into the purgatory of a working group. This created the tyranny of the powerless over the powerful (and not in a good way). Dale acted as this perpetual block—his power derived solely from his ability to halt the movement of the group's will. With Dale eliminated by a chaotic, external force, the greatest source of internal political resistance is violently neutralized.
Rick’s Crisis of Confidence: The Dialectic of Doubt
Between "Judge, Jury and Executioner" (Dale) and "Better Angels" (Shane), the two main blockers and doubters to the Ricktocracy are eliminated. You'd think that this would free Rick up to have a newfound self-confidence in his leadership, but this is not the case.
Rick's self-confidence was rooted in two highly unstable sources:
Lori's Approval: The symbolic sanction of his family and domestic morality.
Minority Dissent (Dale/Shane): The opposition provided a clear boundary against which Rick could measure his own authority.
Both sources spun upon his neurosis a painful (to watch) dialectic of self-doubt and self-confidence. With the two extremes of dissent—the moralist (Dale) and the pragmatist (Shane)—gone, the external source of his tension collapses. Rick is no longer defined by his reaction to dissent; he must now become his own source of authority and, terrifyingly, his own internal opposition. This forces him into a true crisis of identity as a leader.
The Hypocrisy of Legacy and the Ultimate Dissident
After Dale's funeral, another level of collective neurosis comes into play. Rick argues that in commemoration of Dale being eaten by a lip-less zombie, they should now live their lives like Dale—as Socratic troublemakers who hold firm to their ideals. This is a profound moment of performative bad faith, where they vow allegiance to the politics of stasis at the very moment decisive action is most needed.
The hypocrisy is immediate: As Rick and Hershel are walking away from the funeral, Rick counters Hershel's claims that Shane isn't really that bad of a guy and that he has him under control. Hershel turns to Rick, gives him one of those 'you must be crazy' looks, and continues walking. The group has just dedicated itself to a man who always spoke his mind, yet here is Hershel holding his tongue, refusing to unleash the destructive flow of truth because the political moment demands stability, not chaos. He has learned the lesson of the survival economy: silence can be more valuable than honesty.
Lori: The Emotional Dale
Of course, the other moment of radical truth-telling that lives up to Dale's legacy is Lori telling Shane that she really was in love with him when they were "bumping dirties." Lori's emotional offloading on Shane was just the kind of emotionally raw and tactically stupid conversation that Dale would have had.
Lori is the ultimate Dale: a figure who bears her mind regardless of the obvious, fatal political consequences. She introduces a purely subjective, emotional variable into an already volatile political equation. This confession refortifies Shane's desire to kill Rick, proving that in this environment, emotional truth-production can be far more dangerous than any reasoned political argument, as it leads directly to irreversible violence.
Check out the next article in this series: Philosophizing The Walking Dead S2E13 Besides The Dying Fire or Why Are Daryl and Merle in the TV Show But Not The Comic?
Comments
Post a Comment