5 ms·

One of the deepest ironies of our current situation is that the modes of communication that enable today’s authoritarians were first dreamed up to defeat them

One of the deepest ironies of our current situation is that the modes of communication that enable today’s authoritarians were first dreamed up to defeat them If you want to find corruption, then "Follow the money." If you want to find authoritarians, you can follow the flow of fundamental things in much the same way: - Who is doing the silencing? - Who is engaging in coercion? - Who wishes for the power to coerce? - Who is using violence? - Who is distorts the truth to push agendas? - Who eschews the universal for the momentarily convenient? The answer nowadays is the same answer as in other times and places: angry, toxic parties who tend towards the far ends of the political spectrum, both left and right. It's the fringes that want discourse to end and take normal people for an excursion into chaos. It's the fringes that want to roll the dice for their chance at power. The best thing to do is to let people have their voice. There's no authoritarian nonsense, no matter how virulent, which lasts forever and is immune to general good sense. It might take awhile, but people eventually come around. A note of caution: there are a lot of villains who thought they were on the side of good, who turned out to be the opposite. When you've given up on convincing, and you're starting to shout, to hate, and to want to coerce people, you're probably on the wrong side of history.

empath75 8y ago
> There's no authoritarian nonsense, no matter how virulent, which lasts forever and is immune to general good sense. Hitler was only in power for a decade or so and did a lot of damage to say the least.
- roenxi 8y ago
  wades in When Hitler battled to power the Weimar Republic was experiencing hyperinflation and the economy had just shut down. I don't think Hitler's ideology was the biggest problem the Germans were facing. As the communist regimes like China and the Soviets demonstrated again after the war, a mismanaged economy is literally worse than Hitler for the people involved. So I'll admit the situation is too complicated for me to really say this honestly, but the real issue the Germans faced was that they had lost WWI and a bunch of foreign powers were extracting large amounts of wealth from them. They eventually snapped and responded with violence. The fact that the focus when they snapped was Nazi ideology was unfortunate, but the problem wasn't the ideology - it was that foreigners were taking their wealth and the government failed to keep people fed, sheltered and employed.
  - speedplane 8y ago
    > the real issue the Germans faced was that they had lost WWI and a bunch of foreign powers were extracting large amounts of wealth ... the problem wasn't the ideology - it was that foreigners were taking their wealth and the government failed to keep people fed, sheltered and employed. This is pretty blatant Nazi apologist rhetoric. Many groups have been wronged by foreign and domestic powers for decades, and they did not all respond with large-scale mechanized genocide. The buildup and virulent spread of focused hate in Nazi Germany was unique and can't be explained by a simple external geo-political power struggle.
    - roenxi 8y ago
      No, that was pretty blatant Keynesianism [0]. Although I suppose if it is possible to be a Nazi apologist in 1919 then maybe I can be one too. I did admit it was complicated. But the state of the economy was clearly a contributer to the rise of the Nazi party. It isn't like Hitler got in because the Germans just went crazy one day and thought the dude was a great guy to lead. He got in because the country was collapsing anyway. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economic_Consequences_of_the_Peace https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economic_Consequences_of_t...
      - speedplane 8y ago
        The Roman empire collapsed, the Soviet union collapsed, numerous South American, Eastern European countries collapsed, the US economy crashed in the great depression. None of them resulted in anything remotely resembling Hitler's Germany. Hate is an emotion. It can be stoked by class resentment and injustice, but it's quite a different thing. Hitler harnessed hate like few societies have seen before or since.
        DuskStar 8y ago
        Did any of those have some other country sitting just outside of their borders demanding that they hand over more wealth while they starved? Unlike most other countries in collapse, Germany had a nearby enemy that really was the active, willful cause of their suffering.
sayno3 8y ago
Are there any groups pushing their agenda with strong information campaigns as opposed to resorting to coercion? Isn't a problem of everyone being able to vote a problem of people mostly being vulnerable to coercion as opposed to being open to quality information?
- buboard 8y ago
  Yes. E.g. libertarians
- stcredzero 8y ago
  Are there any groups pushing their agenda with strong information campaigns as opposed to resorting to coercion? Yes. In addition to libertarians, there are also center-left classical liberals and scientists who are concerned about politically motivated science denial.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
KozmoNau7 8y ago
Just a friendly reminder: no one on the left (the actual left, not the soft-right mainstream American left) wants authoritarianism. That's a decidedly right-wing power fantasy. The people on the left using violence are using it to fight the extreme right directly. E: for clarity, I am speaking from a modern left-wing position, specifically the libertarian left, which is the strongest left-wing current today. Unfortunately the so-called "left"-wing in many Western countries has drifted to the right, which is absolutely deleterious.
- fsloth 8y ago
  Um, I'm pretty sure my coyntry has had it's share of socialists who were also stalinists. Not sure of the context you meant, but in the general context left can be bullish on authoritarianism.
  - fsloth 8y ago
    So I see downvotes. I think it's a pretty dangerous delusion to think that the side one politically sides with: a) would not have authoritarians b) hence could not implement authoritarian power structure if it became prominent History has shown that authoritarianism can rise in what ever political ideology. Pretending that ones political collaborators did not include at least some potential authoritarians (even if not vocal) is politically quite naive, despite what the common accepted mainstream position in ones party is.
  - KozmoNau7 8y ago
    Fair point, stalinists are authoritarian. They're also a relatively tiny group of ridiculous LARPers that no one takes seriously.
    - someguydave 8y ago
      Except for that time in Russia when they murdered millions of people because those people were trying to normalize fascist speech.
- PedroBatista 8y ago
fringegringe 8y ago
Sometimes, it seems, the best outcome would be to let the fringes secede into their "dystopia" small states and allow them to re-create their hells on earth. The escapees could vaccinate society for another generation.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  Sometimes, it seems, the best outcome would be to let the fringes secede into their "dystopia" small states and allow them to re-create their hells on earth. The escapees could vaccinate society for another generation. There are those who say this is precisely what is happening with California.

empath75 8y ago

> There's no authoritarian nonsense, no matter how virulent, which lasts forever and is immune to general good sense. Hitler was only in power for a decade or so and did a lot of damage to say the least.

roenxi 8y ago
wades in When Hitler battled to power the Weimar Republic was experiencing hyperinflation and the economy had just shut down. I don't think Hitler's ideology was the biggest problem the Germans were facing. As the communist regimes like China and the Soviets demonstrated again after the war, a mismanaged economy is literally worse than Hitler for the people involved. So I'll admit the situation is too complicated for me to really say this honestly, but the real issue the Germans faced was that they had lost WWI and a bunch of foreign powers were extracting large amounts of wealth from them. They eventually snapped and responded with violence. The fact that the focus when they snapped was Nazi ideology was unfortunate, but the problem wasn't the ideology - it was that foreigners were taking their wealth and the government failed to keep people fed, sheltered and employed.
- speedplane 8y ago
  > the real issue the Germans faced was that they had lost WWI and a bunch of foreign powers were extracting large amounts of wealth ... the problem wasn't the ideology - it was that foreigners were taking their wealth and the government failed to keep people fed, sheltered and employed. This is pretty blatant Nazi apologist rhetoric. Many groups have been wronged by foreign and domestic powers for decades, and they did not all respond with large-scale mechanized genocide. The buildup and virulent spread of focused hate in Nazi Germany was unique and can't be explained by a simple external geo-political power struggle.
  - roenxi 8y ago
    No, that was pretty blatant Keynesianism [0]. Although I suppose if it is possible to be a Nazi apologist in 1919 then maybe I can be one too. I did admit it was complicated. But the state of the economy was clearly a contributer to the rise of the Nazi party. It isn't like Hitler got in because the Germans just went crazy one day and thought the dude was a great guy to lead. He got in because the country was collapsing anyway. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economic_Consequences_of_the_Peace https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economic_Consequences_of_t...
    - speedplane 8y ago
      The Roman empire collapsed, the Soviet union collapsed, numerous South American, Eastern European countries collapsed, the US economy crashed in the great depression. None of them resulted in anything remotely resembling Hitler's Germany. Hate is an emotion. It can be stoked by class resentment and injustice, but it's quite a different thing. Hitler harnessed hate like few societies have seen before or since.
      - DuskStar 8y ago
        Did any of those have some other country sitting just outside of their borders demanding that they hand over more wealth while they starved? Unlike most other countries in collapse, Germany had a nearby enemy that really was the active, willful cause of their suffering.

sayno3 8y ago

Are there any groups pushing their agenda with strong information campaigns as opposed to resorting to coercion? Isn't a problem of everyone being able to vote a problem of people mostly being vulnerable to coercion as opposed to being open to quality information?

buboard 8y ago
Yes. E.g. libertarians
stcredzero 8y ago
Are there any groups pushing their agenda with strong information campaigns as opposed to resorting to coercion? Yes. In addition to libertarians, there are also center-left classical liberals and scientists who are concerned about politically motivated science denial.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

KozmoNau7 8y ago

Just a friendly reminder: no one on the left (the actual left, not the soft-right mainstream American left) wants authoritarianism. That's a decidedly right-wing power fantasy. The people on the left using violence are using it to fight the extreme right directly. E: for clarity, I am speaking from a modern left-wing position, specifically the libertarian left, which is the strongest left-wing current today. Unfortunately the so-called "left"-wing in many Western countries has drifted to the right, which is absolutely deleterious.

fsloth 8y ago
Um, I'm pretty sure my coyntry has had it's share of socialists who were also stalinists. Not sure of the context you meant, but in the general context left can be bullish on authoritarianism.
- fsloth 8y ago
  So I see downvotes. I think it's a pretty dangerous delusion to think that the side one politically sides with: a) would not have authoritarians b) hence could not implement authoritarian power structure if it became prominent History has shown that authoritarianism can rise in what ever political ideology. Pretending that ones political collaborators did not include at least some potential authoritarians (even if not vocal) is politically quite naive, despite what the common accepted mainstream position in ones party is.
- KozmoNau7 8y ago
  Fair point, stalinists are authoritarian. They're also a relatively tiny group of ridiculous LARPers that no one takes seriously.
  - someguydave 8y ago
    Except for that time in Russia when they murdered millions of people because those people were trying to normalize fascist speech.
PedroBatista 8y ago

fringegringe 8y ago

Sometimes, it seems, the best outcome would be to let the fringes secede into their "dystopia" small states and allow them to re-create their hells on earth. The escapees could vaccinate society for another generation.

stcredzero 8y ago
Sometimes, it seems, the best outcome would be to let the fringes secede into their "dystopia" small states and allow them to re-create their hells on earth. The escapees could vaccinate society for another generation. There are those who say this is precisely what is happening with California.