6 ms·

> Authoritarians Why do you think they are authoritarians. I don't get this. The right in the US is about freedom. The left is the part of authoritarianism. T

> Authoritarians Why do you think they are authoritarians. I don't get this. The right in the US is about freedom. The left is the part of authoritarianism. The progressive left especially has incredibly tight control of freedom of speech. Everything they don't like is called hate speech, all discussions are shut down, and PC terminology means that it doesn't matter what you say anymore, if you accidentally choose the wrong words, you are finished.

linkregister 10y ago
What legal/government-imposed consequences have arisen from the type of speech you are talking about?
- masondixon 10y ago
  The left physically prevents speakers at right-wing events. Protests blocking highways and roads to right-wing events. During the campaign name a single time when Trump supporters tried to prevent a left-wing speaking event happening? The right is like "hey i think you are wrong, here is why". The left is like "hey i think you are wrong, don't talk to me".
nostrademons 10y ago
I think it's more accurate that both the extreme right and extreme left are the parties of authoritarianism, and the center is about freedom. Leftists want to police what you say, what you think, how you earn your living, and who you associate with. Rightists want to police what you believe, what you do with your body, what substances you inhale, and how you travel. Both sides would do well with a chill pill and the idea that people could be or believe differently than you without being a threat.
- timthelion 10y ago
  I begg to differ, the tumbler crowd really doesn't define the extreme left very well at all. The real extreme left, like the black panther types and the revolutionary leftist street gang types ect are mostly in prison and therefore don't have much oppinion being heard in public discourse at all. Many of them also don't speak mainstream dialects of English and are therefore rather hard for us white folks to understand.
- masondixon 10y ago
  I hope someday we can return to a world with more people thinking like you.
pm90 10y ago
Definition: favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom. I'm specifically referring to the current WH. It's authoritarian because it refuses to accept facts and wants to distort them to fit its own narrative. It will discredit the press if it does not "fall in line".
- masondixon 10y ago
  > It's authoritarian because it refuses to accept facts and wants to distort them to fit its own narrative. It will discredit the press if it does not "fall in line". And on the right, its the press who is distorting facts for their own narrative. The press being discredited is justified. And there is no problem with this. Imagine if all the MSM press was like Fox News? What would you say then? Your argument would flip around 180 degrees and you would be fine with news being discredited. The press are just people. Look at how hard it is to have a debate with a liberal these days - do you think newsrooms would enjoy having Trump supporters as co-workers. Nope. They like having people around them with the same opinions, so we get the liberal MSM echo-chamber.
  - pm90 10y ago
    > And on the right, its the press who is distorting facts for their own narrative. > The press being discredited is justified. Its not simple being discredited, its being regarded as unnecessary. Sure you can discredit the press they're not perfect. But you cannot attempt to discard them or regard any criticism as fake. > And there is no problem with this. Imagine if all the MSM press was like Fox News? What would you say then? Your argument would flip around 180 degrees and you would be fine with news being discredited. Excuse me? Do you have a point here? Sure if all the food I ever ate started smelling bad, I would say all food in the world smells bad. What is your point? > The press are just people. Look at how hard it is to have a debate with a liberal these days - do you think newsrooms would enjoy having Trump supporters as co-workers. Nope. They like having people around them with the same opinions, so we get the liberal MSM echo-chamber. Bullshit. The reason they have Trump supporters is because a lot of American people are Trump supporters. And their willingness to work with people with different beliefs shows that they are willing to debate with them. You are contradicting yourself. All of this is, again, besides the point that the current WH is authoritarian.
justin66 10y ago
> The right in the US is about freedom. Except when it comes to a woman's right to choose, the freedom to assemble and protest, freedom from religion, freedom of the press, freedom of movement, freedom to use the bathroom associated with your gender, freedom to use drugs recreationally, or any other area of personal freedoms you'd care to name wherein - to be really, really generous - the right doesn't perform any better than the left.
- masondixon 10y ago
  Free exchange of ideas. This is by far the most important right. You must imagine that someone in power has enacted harsh laws that you oppose. These laws should never prevent your ability from finding other people who oppose these laws and having a means to democratically over turn them. This is the most important part of freedom. Everything else you mentioned can be democratically overturned if enough people support it. > woman's right to choose I consider myself on the right, but I support women's right to choose. The religious right is on the way out. Yes, it use to be a big issue, but its not anymore. It was not a campaign issue, and Trump says he will "leave it to the states". > freedom to assemble and protest Can I have examples of this? We 100% support your right to peaceful protest and assembly. Can you provide some examples of ways Trump's administration is cracking down on this? If you are talking about non-peaceful protests like blocking highways, preventing people from getting to work, ANTIFA wearing masks and attacking people at rallies then this is not acceptable and I support laws to crack down on this more. > freedom from religion Tick. > freedom of the press Examples that are not fake news please? > freedom of movement What do you mean here? US citizens who are not under parole or incarcerated can move freely anywhere inside the US. > freedom to use the bathroom associated with your gender What about freedom to use the bathroom associated with your own sex (physical M/F)? Two sides to every "freedom" issue. > freedom to use drugs recreationally You want crack made legal? Weed legalisation is non-partisan now. > personal freedoms If these personal freedoms you talk of prevent you from being able to assemble and vote, then I support them. Otherwise, laws should be enacted based on debate and democratic processes.
wyldfire 10y ago
IMO boiling down the complexity of politics to a single axis is deceptive. Sure it makes it easy to find yourself on the map, but it really lends itself to a narrative of "ok here's US on the map. Over there is THEM." IMO authoritarianism is totally orthogonal to right/left. It's clearly the case that members of both espouse changes that would limit our freedoms.
- masondixon 10y ago
  Right now I see plenty of examples on the left. Especially physically preventing speakers at right-wing events. But I do not see the same kind of stuff from the right. I'm not saying its always like this, but right now, this is how it is. I mean give me an example where someone's free speech on the left was prevented?
redditmigrant 10y ago
Im curious, what is PC terminology? - Is it the act of calling a homosexual person, gay instead of fag? - Is it referring to black people as african-americans and not niggers? - Is it referring to Muslim people as muslim people and not ragheads? - Is it referring to people of east asian heritage as Asian and not chinks? Its 2017, so if we have to watch our words so that we dont disrespect people who have been humiliated for years, its not much to ask for. Unless you put up everyday with something that offends you, you have no idea how much your "PC terminology" helps a disadvantaged person feel comfortable in their own skin.
- masondixon 10y ago
  > Is it the act of calling a homosexual person, gay instead of fag? Using the term 'homosexual person' is not PC. Are you a homophobe or what? :P http://americablog.com/2007/07/dear-washington-post-please-stop-calling-me-a-homosexual.html http://americablog.com/2007/07/dear-washington-post-please-s... https://www.quora.com/Which-is-more-appropriate-homosexual-or-gay-%E2%80%9D https://www.quora.com/Which-is-more-appropriate-homosexual-o... If I was on the left, I could make a big deal out of your incorrect use of the word homosexual, and I could make it look like you are as bad as someone calling someone a fag in an intentionally derogative way. > Is it referring to black people as african-americans and not niggers? Black people is not PC. Dude, are you a racist or what? The correct term is person-of-color. But do not say "colored person" or you will receive a massive social media outcry. "But I am not a racist you say?". Doesn't matter, once you say the wrong word, you are already one of them. > Is it referring to Muslim people as muslim people and not ragheads? > Is it referring to people of east asian heritage as Asian and not chinks? 2017 PC is not about using derrogatory terms. > In 2017...its not much to ask for. It seems like it is for you, because in your post you have used the incorrect terms. Now, are you a racist and a homophobe? The right would assume you are not. The left will be keeping their eye on you, and now have material to take you down in the future if they want to.
pharrlax 10y ago
>The progressive left especially has incredibly tight control of freedom of speech. Everything they don't like is called hate speech, all discussions are shut down, and PC terminology means that it doesn't matter what you say anymore, if you accidentally choose the wrong words, you are finished. "Freedom of speech" has nothing to do with social opprobrium. Freedom of speech means the government is not going to step in and silence you for failing to use "PC terminology". It does not mean you should be immune from other people deciding you said something distasteful enough that they no longer want to employ you or associate with you.
- masondixon 10y ago
  The left blockades right-wing events to prevent people speaking. They physically try to prevent speech. I think a lot of democrats don't see what is happening in the progressive left. I use to identify as a democrat, but after seeing this stuff, I no longer can. You can associate with whoever you like. 100% agree. Re: employment. So if you accidentally referred to someone as "colored" instead of "person-of-color", and you get fired for it...you are happy about this? You want to live in this kind of society?

linkregister 10y ago

What legal/government-imposed consequences have arisen from the type of speech you are talking about?

masondixon 10y ago
The left physically prevents speakers at right-wing events. Protests blocking highways and roads to right-wing events. During the campaign name a single time when Trump supporters tried to prevent a left-wing speaking event happening? The right is like "hey i think you are wrong, here is why". The left is like "hey i think you are wrong, don't talk to me".

nostrademons 10y ago

I think it's more accurate that both the extreme right and extreme left are the parties of authoritarianism, and the center is about freedom. Leftists want to police what you say, what you think, how you earn your living, and who you associate with. Rightists want to police what you believe, what you do with your body, what substances you inhale, and how you travel. Both sides would do well with a chill pill and the idea that people could be or believe differently than you without being a threat.

timthelion 10y ago
I begg to differ, the tumbler crowd really doesn't define the extreme left very well at all. The real extreme left, like the black panther types and the revolutionary leftist street gang types ect are mostly in prison and therefore don't have much oppinion being heard in public discourse at all. Many of them also don't speak mainstream dialects of English and are therefore rather hard for us white folks to understand.
masondixon 10y ago
I hope someday we can return to a world with more people thinking like you.

pm90 10y ago

Definition: favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom. I'm specifically referring to the current WH. It's authoritarian because it refuses to accept facts and wants to distort them to fit its own narrative. It will discredit the press if it does not "fall in line".

masondixon 10y ago
> It's authoritarian because it refuses to accept facts and wants to distort them to fit its own narrative. It will discredit the press if it does not "fall in line". And on the right, its the press who is distorting facts for their own narrative. The press being discredited is justified. And there is no problem with this. Imagine if all the MSM press was like Fox News? What would you say then? Your argument would flip around 180 degrees and you would be fine with news being discredited. The press are just people. Look at how hard it is to have a debate with a liberal these days - do you think newsrooms would enjoy having Trump supporters as co-workers. Nope. They like having people around them with the same opinions, so we get the liberal MSM echo-chamber.
- pm90 10y ago
  > And on the right, its the press who is distorting facts for their own narrative. > The press being discredited is justified. Its not simple being discredited, its being regarded as unnecessary. Sure you can discredit the press they're not perfect. But you cannot attempt to discard them or regard any criticism as fake. > And there is no problem with this. Imagine if all the MSM press was like Fox News? What would you say then? Your argument would flip around 180 degrees and you would be fine with news being discredited. Excuse me? Do you have a point here? Sure if all the food I ever ate started smelling bad, I would say all food in the world smells bad. What is your point? > The press are just people. Look at how hard it is to have a debate with a liberal these days - do you think newsrooms would enjoy having Trump supporters as co-workers. Nope. They like having people around them with the same opinions, so we get the liberal MSM echo-chamber. Bullshit. The reason they have Trump supporters is because a lot of American people are Trump supporters. And their willingness to work with people with different beliefs shows that they are willing to debate with them. You are contradicting yourself. All of this is, again, besides the point that the current WH is authoritarian.

justin66 10y ago

> The right in the US is about freedom. Except when it comes to a woman's right to choose, the freedom to assemble and protest, freedom from religion, freedom of the press, freedom of movement, freedom to use the bathroom associated with your gender, freedom to use drugs recreationally, or any other area of personal freedoms you'd care to name wherein - to be really, really generous - the right doesn't perform any better than the left.

masondixon 10y ago
Free exchange of ideas. This is by far the most important right. You must imagine that someone in power has enacted harsh laws that you oppose. These laws should never prevent your ability from finding other people who oppose these laws and having a means to democratically over turn them. This is the most important part of freedom. Everything else you mentioned can be democratically overturned if enough people support it. > woman's right to choose I consider myself on the right, but I support women's right to choose. The religious right is on the way out. Yes, it use to be a big issue, but its not anymore. It was not a campaign issue, and Trump says he will "leave it to the states". > freedom to assemble and protest Can I have examples of this? We 100% support your right to peaceful protest and assembly. Can you provide some examples of ways Trump's administration is cracking down on this? If you are talking about non-peaceful protests like blocking highways, preventing people from getting to work, ANTIFA wearing masks and attacking people at rallies then this is not acceptable and I support laws to crack down on this more. > freedom from religion Tick. > freedom of the press Examples that are not fake news please? > freedom of movement What do you mean here? US citizens who are not under parole or incarcerated can move freely anywhere inside the US. > freedom to use the bathroom associated with your gender What about freedom to use the bathroom associated with your own sex (physical M/F)? Two sides to every "freedom" issue. > freedom to use drugs recreationally You want crack made legal? Weed legalisation is non-partisan now. > personal freedoms If these personal freedoms you talk of prevent you from being able to assemble and vote, then I support them. Otherwise, laws should be enacted based on debate and democratic processes.

wyldfire 10y ago

IMO boiling down the complexity of politics to a single axis is deceptive. Sure it makes it easy to find yourself on the map, but it really lends itself to a narrative of "ok here's US on the map. Over there is THEM." IMO authoritarianism is totally orthogonal to right/left. It's clearly the case that members of both espouse changes that would limit our freedoms.

masondixon 10y ago
Right now I see plenty of examples on the left. Especially physically preventing speakers at right-wing events. But I do not see the same kind of stuff from the right. I'm not saying its always like this, but right now, this is how it is. I mean give me an example where someone's free speech on the left was prevented?

redditmigrant 10y ago

Im curious, what is PC terminology? - Is it the act of calling a homosexual person, gay instead of fag? - Is it referring to black people as african-americans and not niggers? - Is it referring to Muslim people as muslim people and not ragheads? - Is it referring to people of east asian heritage as Asian and not chinks? Its 2017, so if we have to watch our words so that we dont disrespect people who have been humiliated for years, its not much to ask for. Unless you put up everyday with something that offends you, you have no idea how much your "PC terminology" helps a disadvantaged person feel comfortable in their own skin.

masondixon 10y ago
> Is it the act of calling a homosexual person, gay instead of fag? Using the term 'homosexual person' is not PC. Are you a homophobe or what? :P http://americablog.com/2007/07/dear-washington-post-please-stop-calling-me-a-homosexual.html http://americablog.com/2007/07/dear-washington-post-please-s... https://www.quora.com/Which-is-more-appropriate-homosexual-or-gay-%E2%80%9D https://www.quora.com/Which-is-more-appropriate-homosexual-o... If I was on the left, I could make a big deal out of your incorrect use of the word homosexual, and I could make it look like you are as bad as someone calling someone a fag in an intentionally derogative way. > Is it referring to black people as african-americans and not niggers? Black people is not PC. Dude, are you a racist or what? The correct term is person-of-color. But do not say "colored person" or you will receive a massive social media outcry. "But I am not a racist you say?". Doesn't matter, once you say the wrong word, you are already one of them. > Is it referring to Muslim people as muslim people and not ragheads? > Is it referring to people of east asian heritage as Asian and not chinks? 2017 PC is not about using derrogatory terms. > In 2017...its not much to ask for. It seems like it is for you, because in your post you have used the incorrect terms. Now, are you a racist and a homophobe? The right would assume you are not. The left will be keeping their eye on you, and now have material to take you down in the future if they want to.

pharrlax 10y ago

>The progressive left especially has incredibly tight control of freedom of speech. Everything they don't like is called hate speech, all discussions are shut down, and PC terminology means that it doesn't matter what you say anymore, if you accidentally choose the wrong words, you are finished. "Freedom of speech" has nothing to do with social opprobrium. Freedom of speech means the government is not going to step in and silence you for failing to use "PC terminology". It does not mean you should be immune from other people deciding you said something distasteful enough that they no longer want to employ you or associate with you.

masondixon 10y ago
The left blockades right-wing events to prevent people speaking. They physically try to prevent speech. I think a lot of democrats don't see what is happening in the progressive left. I use to identify as a democrat, but after seeing this stuff, I no longer can. You can associate with whoever you like. 100% agree. Re: employment. So if you accidentally referred to someone as "colored" instead of "person-of-color", and you get fired for it...you are happy about this? You want to live in this kind of society?