3 ms·
I disagree. An ineffective totalitarian system is not totalitarian. A totalitarian system is only totalitarian insofar as it can effect fear on the part of thos
by Jd 16y ago
I disagree. An ineffective totalitarian system is not totalitarian. A totalitarian system is only totalitarian insofar as it can effect fear on the part of those subjected to it. If the US government (or any other government) were able to suppress the output of media that criticized it by its intelligence services such that ordinary people would not dare reporting what was happening in their communities, this indeed would be totalitarian. The trend, however, is mostly to ignore problematic areas in favor of ones that make one happy. For instance, focusing on the bright side rather than the dark side of mass immigration with a few selected pieces of anecdotal evidence. One can almost always spot this selective highlighting at the expense of the larger dataset by the departure from math and "feel good" (or, conversely, "shock") stories. Since in general people prefer to feel good about themselves, they are either drawn to news which invalidates other parties (other races, members of other political parties) or to fluffy Hollywood productions (there is immense feel good value in watching things blow up on screen, esp. when the other side is ascribed to be "evil").
That said, I have no doubt that there are many who would wish to see the United States (or other places) become more totalitiarian than in fact they are. The free market system we are in has reduced virtually everything to economic motives, which are good about preserving certain information channels at the expense of others.
- mikecane 16y ago>>>A totalitarian system is only totalitarian insofar as it can effect fear on the part of those subjected to it. Not being snarky, but have you ever had a run in with a cop lately? Especially when the issue is legal and the cop is ignorant or thinks it's illegal? You'll know the imposition of state-sanctioned fear then.
- tome 16y agoIs that really state-sanctioned fear? Or is it arbitrary, and at the discretion of an individual cop?
- kenjackson 16y agoThe cop has the power of the state in their hands. If it was an arbitrary individual, I wouldn't care. But a cop can do nearly anything they like to you, and unless you have a video, you're likely out of luck. The state and courts will generally side with the cop. There are some things the state can do to make the encounter better, such as _requiring_ that all police/citizen interactions be required, except in cases that would put the police in harms way (like getting caught in the middle of a shoot out).
- Jd 16y agoWould you argue that this is worse than the historical or societal norm? If not, it is a mere property of policing actions, not an indication of "totalitarianism" unless you would argue that virtually all societies are "totalitarianism," in which case your definition of "totalitarianism" is virtually worthless. I know that there are abuses of policing power but have no indication that they are, today, any worse than the American norm.