12 ms·

I find in America too I run into people who are casually ok with authoritarian ideas. I don't know why that is, or if it's more or less common now. I suspect t

I find in America too I run into people who are casually ok with authoritarian ideas. I don't know why that is, or if it's more or less common now. I suspect this issue extends far outside Australia and the US though.

goatcode 5y ago
I suspect it's a combination of fear and normalization of acceptance of absolute authority in government.
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
Not that I agree with this but we have a massive problem with trolls, shills, agitators, and foreign intelligence running hog wild because they are anonymous online. Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized and used against the west.
- nradov 5y ago
  Is that a real problem? Foreign intelligence services are certainly doing a lot of crap online but it's not clear whether they've actually accomplished anything. Maybe they're just wasting resources?
  - rini17 5y ago
    Trump? Brexit? Antivax hysteria? Homophobia? Of course it isn't direct accomplishment of any one actor, but each case there was traced undeniable contribution of foreign agencies. And in all cases, freedom of speech was abused to spread lies easily.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
      It's been shown that foreign intelligence adds fuel to already divisive topics. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-Russia%E2%80%99s-Disinformation-and-Propaganda-Ecosystem_08-04-20.pdf https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-... > The media multiplier effect can, at times, create disinformation storms with potentially dangerous effects for those Russia perceives as adversaries at the international, national, and local level. In the past, Russia has leveraged this dynamic to shield itself from criticism for its involvement in malign activity. This approach also allows Russia to be opportunistic, such as with COVID-19, where it has used the global pandemic as a hook to push longstanding disinformation and propaganda narratives.
    - jtbayly 5y ago
      A certain dossier?
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ICA-declass-16MAR21.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ICA-dec... > A key element of Moscow's strategy this election cycle was its use of proxies linked to Russian intelligence to push influence narratives- including misleading or unsubstantiated allegations against president Biden- to US media organizations, US officials, and prominent US individuals, including some close to former President Trump and his administration. > Throughout the election cycle, Russia's online influence actors sought to affect US public perceptions of the candidates, as well as advance Moscow's long-standing goals of undermining confidence in US election processes and increasing sociopolitical divisions among the American people.
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      How is that a response to > Foreign intelligence services are certainly doing a lot of crap online but it's not clear whether they've actually accomplished anything. ?
      - rini17 5y ago
        If they actually accomplished nothing, then why Russia keeps doing it? It seriously damages their international relations, and it's all for nothing?
        nradov 5y ago
        Most of our own CIA's efforts have resulted in abject failure. They failed to properly predict or influence most of the major world events for decades now (disintegration of the USSR, Balkan wars, 9/11 attacks, increased authoritarianism in China, rise of ISIL, collapse of Afghan government, etc). And yet we keep increasing their funding. Well maybe if we give them another billion they'll eventually get it right? Government resource allocation is seldom based on a rational cost / benefit analysis.
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
        How would you measure accomplishment? It works for the same reason that advertising works.
  - imbnwa 5y ago
    > Foreign intelligence services are certainly doing a lot of crap online but it's not clear whether they've actually accomplished anything. Isn't this just the ol' "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" problem? Hundreds of years of ago we couldn't see germs with a microscope doesn't mean they weren't effective in our lives.
    - idle_zealot 5y ago
      > we couldn't see germs with a microscope doesn't mean they weren't effective in our lives. And because we couldn’t see them we misattributed their effects and treated people with bloodletting. Confidently declaring your understanding of an unseen enemy and applying seemingly-appropriate countermeasures is likely to be harmful.
  - oefrha 5y ago
    Humans fundamentally need some out-group to blame all their in-group's problems on. Now that overt racism against another racial group within your own society has mostly fallen out of fashion at least in "the West", foreign intelligence becomes the easiest target to pin blame on.
  - mellavora 5y ago
    Seems to me they've accomplished quite a lot. I think you are assuming their idea of a goal matches your idea of an accomplishment (get a law supporting X passed/repealed). It isn't. Their goal is to make our system dysfunctional by destroying people's trust in the information presented them. It is what the Rand institute calls the "firehose of falsehood" https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html And they have been very successful at it.
- dudul 5y ago
  We've been hearing this claim since the 2016 election, and I am pretty sure these people/efforts exist, but it's still unclear to me what they've actually achieved. Do you have a good source explaining concretely how a handful of people, even sponsored by enemy states, can cause such harm? It's hard to imagine that they would have such influence without the general population being more than receptive to it.
  - pfisch 5y ago
    Qanon is just a few people...
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-Russia%E2%80%99s-Disinformation-and-Propaganda-Ecosystem_08-04-20.pdf https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-...
- JackFr 5y ago
  "Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. I think the trolls, shills and agitators are a symptom of dysfunction rather than the cause. And I think the idea that more authoritarian states are stronger/more stable/better because they don't suffer this is deeply misguided. In the United States, our political class is deeply and fundamentally unserious. Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-election, and not the work they were elected to do.
  - OrvalWintermute 5y ago
    > Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-election, and not the work they were elected to do. Going to attempt a fix Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-education, and not the work they were elected to do.
    - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
      At least in the US we do seem to be electing a lot of folks who appear to be grifters riding on the mob, rather than statesmen with any kind of coherent political philosophy or policy suggestions. It wouldn’t surprise me that this is just the extension of social media into government. It’s getting hard for me to see anything good coming out of social media.
  - mschuster91 5y ago
    > "Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. To quote chief Nazi propagandist Goebbels from 1928: We enter the Reichstag to arm ourselves with democracy’s weapons. If democracy is foolish enough to give us free railway passes and salaries, that is its problem… We are coming neither as friends or neutrals. We come as enemies! As the wolf attacks the sheep, so come we. The modern-day far right is following exactly the same almost-100-years-old playbook, and there are still people who don't recognize that we are letting history repeat itself. What would your (great-)grandparents have thought if you told them that there would be open marches of swastika flag-bearing people in the US?
- mrkstu 5y ago
  This isn't new. The USSR was doing this in various mediums from it's founding in the 1920s to when it became defunct. Returning to the Red Scare and the equivalent of the Hollywood Blacklist for current authoritarian sympathizers/cronies is not the way to battle this issue.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    This is getting off topic. Foreign intelligence is just one party. I was also thinking of every fake review on Amazon or products endorsed by shills on reddit. These problems all stem from anonymity.
    - jtbayly 5y ago
      Fake product reviews aren’t solved by making sure they are written by real people.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    - mrkstu 5y ago
      But you then ignore the problems created by stripping the anonymity away, especially in the political sphere. Just like multitudes of writers/actors/directors had to either hide their political beliefs or just not get hired due to their political beliefs in Hollywood (though, ironically, that is happening now, along different axes.)
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
        I'm not suggesting stripping anonymity or free speech, I'm just pointing out the problem with anonymity online.
        throwdecro 5y ago
        The problems you've described are very minor relative to how much more difficult dissent and whistle-blowing become if your statements can be connected to your true identity basically everywhere. "Better Amazon reviews" and "fewer Reddit shills" aren't worth much. > I'm not suggesting stripping anonymity or free speech, I'm just pointing out the problem with anonymity online. In the context of an article about removing anonymity, I don't think it's possible to set "removing anonymity" aside.
- mhuffman 5y ago
  >Not that I agree with this but we have a massive problem with trolls, shills, agitators, and foreign intelligence running hog wild because they are anonymous online. Do say, 2OEH8eoCRo0!
  - bryan_w 5y ago
    Are you calling him "trolls, shills, agitators, and foreign intelligence" thereby proving him right?
    - mhuffman 5y ago
      Nope, just calling out their utter disdain for anonymity (for "those people") ... while being anonymous!
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
        I don't have disdain for anonymity.
- fallingknife 5y ago
  Yes, all those people who disagree with you online are trolls, shills, agitators, and foreign intelligence. That must be it.
  - wavefunction 5y ago
    Does it have to be "all?" "All" seems unlikely. "Some" seems very likely.
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  >Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized THAT is one of the most authoritarian things I've ever read. You're full on down the fascist road once you start believing things like that.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  If you are subjected to propaganda, chances are high it is from your own government or companies operating on the domestic market. The net certainly increased possibilities for foreign actors to reach domestic audiences, but claims of such cases are vastly exaggerated in my opinion. That said, troll, shills, agitators and propagandists might have a good understanding of peoples fears and desires and will use that against you. More effective the more you know about the target. This is why surveillance is dangerous.
themodelplumber 5y ago
Do those people define those ideas as authoritarian, or does that seem to fit more based on your definition?
neom 5y ago
I'm not sure it's an "issue". People just think differently. I'm Canadian and I'm probably way more comfortable with what would be described as authoritarian ideologies than you folks. I'm relatively well educated, I'm not ignorant to history etc etc - but there are aspects of authoritarian ideas that I don't outright object to, central planning per the CPC, as one example. I have a lot of reasons, and I've thought about this deeply over years, I don't particularly care to write an essay on my views for this thread as it's not really the point, the point is people can just think differently, have a different perspective on these things without a direct reason.
- the_third_wave 5y ago
  > ...there are aspects of authoritarian ideas that I don't outright object to... First they came for the maskless, and I did not speak out— Because I wore a mask. Then they came for the unvaccinated, and I did not speak out— Because I was vaccinated. Then they came for the contrarians, and I did not speak out— Because I toed the party line. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. > ...the point is people can just think differently, have a different perspective on these things What use is a different perspective when you're unable to voice it? [1] Careful what you wish for, especially when it concerns giving more authority to the government. It is easy to give away but very hard to get back. [1] https://movie-sounds.org/sci-fi-movie-samples/quotes-with-sound-clips-from-the-matrix/what-good-is-a-phone-call-if-you-re-unable-to-speak https://movie-sounds.org/sci-fi-movie-samples/quotes-with-so...
  - junon 5y ago
    Being vaccinated and wearing a mask, both of which are scientifically corroborated actions in the midst of a global pandemic, are not politics or toeing party lines or any other insinuation you're trying to make.
    - imnotreallynew 5y ago
      > are not politics or toeing party lines or any other insinuation As much as many of us would prefer this to be the case, this is clearly false. Newsom’s anti-recall ad is entirely about mask and vaccine mandates. In fact, I believe it mentions no other topic.
baybal2 5y ago
> I find in America too I run into people who are casually ok with authoritarian ideas. If you are an IT professional, and earning 100k+ a years, there is no wonder you didn't meet much of these before. There is simply not a lot of opportunity for social classes to cross in daily life today. We, rich people, learned it the hard way in Russia 20 years ago. I call it a "revenge voting": https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/10/elections-representation-liberal-democracy https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/10/electi... I really believe the West needs to learn from how the early modern Russia unravelled, and how it came to 1991 being undone through effectively a democratic process.
- fallingknife 5y ago
  But the authoritarians I run into in the US are usually IT professionals earning 100k+ a year.
  - jacobr1 5y ago
    I think it always was a "my team" thing. It is just that the "conservative team" of the past had "anti-authoritarianism" as one of the team virtues, even if it was hypocritical at times. There is a still a vague notion of freedom, but there is not an intellectual anchor for what that means relative to other objectives, like some Buckley-esque defense of free-enterprise vs the USSR.
    - nradov 5y ago
      The principled intellectual wing of the US conservative movement has virtually disappeared. Even those who disagreed with their positions should lament this as a net loss for society as a whole.
      - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
        Anti-intellectualism is part of populism, I would guess, and currently the Republican Party has been overrun with populists. There are certainly never trumpers talking about the older conservative values, but they are in the minority. Things will change. They always do.
dqpb 5y ago
If you work for a company, then you spend the majority of your time operating under an authoritarian government.
- LegitShady 5y ago
  It more likely seems you don't understand the difference between an employer and the government.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - dqpb 5y ago
    It more likely seems you don't understand how to think abstractly.
    - Sargos 5y ago
      You can change employers but you can't (practically for most people) change your government. That's the big difference and why the comparison isn't very useful.
      - dqpb_2 5y ago
        Yes, practically speaking, having an escape hatch makes a big difference when you work for a bad employer. But I’m not talking about quality of life. I’m talking about the model of decision making and how distributed it is. That is fundamentally more important. Ironically, HN is throttling my account for talking about this.
        psyc 5y ago
        HN is throttling your account because it’s 15 minutes old.
        dqpb_2 5y ago
JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> I don't know why that is, or if it's more or less common now. Curious if we saw a similar trend in pre-WWII America. The point being, maybe banding together and tolerating more-authoritarian tendencies is a natural human response to perceived threat. For Australia, this comes from China. For America...I don't know.
- foobarian 5y ago
  For America, it depends. If you are a liberal, it comes from the conservatives, and vice versa.
- nonameiguess 5y ago
  Yes, obviously. We interned Japanese-Americans during WWII. During the Civil War, habeas corpus was suspended. There's the PATRIOT Act for GWOT, but a lot of people don't seem to realize it didn't actually give law enforcement new powers. It extended powers they already had for drug and organized crime cases and let them apply to terrorism cases. We had already accepted an erosion of due process and civil liberties in order to defeat the Mafia and fight the War on Drugs. This absolutely happens as a response to the perception of threat. In fairness, it's not always clear this is universally wrong. The only reason the US has a federal government and a permanent standing military at all, which were not always givens, is in response to the threat that European colonial powers would have retaken all the land if we didn't, and this was probably a correct assessment.
  - mc32 5y ago
    I think it's one thing to have these measures during an actual hot war with the destiny of the world in the balance or during a declaration of martial law. But WTF, when we're otherwise enjoying peace as never before?
    - courtf 5y ago
      It is tragic how we seem to be unable to enjoy peace and prosperity. Blame it on politics, or the media, or perhaps just the national character, but Americans are a restless bunch. Prone to paranoia and rebellion, our reflex is to respond aggressively to perceived threats, and we can be tricked into rattling our sabres over any old thing these days. Maybe rising authoritarianism is simply the natural outgrowth of overusing this impulse. The population, exhausted by the constant blaring of sirens over increasingly esoteric threats, would rather hand over the task of vigilance to some authority so they can finally catch some shut-eye.
rectang 5y ago
American authoritarians are generally partisan hypocrites – approving of authoritarianism by their own tribe, aghast at authoritarianism by the other tribe.
- Mountain_Skies 5y ago
  Plus a deluded belief that the authoritarian tools being handed to their ideological leaders will forever be in those hands and never used against them in the future by their ideological foes.
- stephen_g 5y ago
  Yeah, that’s basically the same in Australia. The ones who claim to be small-Government free market types or pretend to be libertarians seem to be the most authoritarian of all… For example, the ruling party has strong links into coal, oil and gas companies (big political donations going one way, much bigger grants and subsidies going the other). They cut subsidies for renewables because they “always let the market decide”, and now when older coal power stations are increasingly uneconomic they’re literally bringing in a forced subsidy to keep them going (sold as a “capacity payment” to “ensure reliability of the grid” - even though the clunkers are increasingly unreliable). It’s going to cost somewhere between $150 and $400 a year per-household on our power bills if they get it through. Other things are like trying to come up with some kind of way to fine or sanction banks who refuse to lend to fossil fuel companies, or stop activist investors trying to force companies to go green. This is all by the side of politics who claim the utmost commitment to free markets and small Government! Same party pushing all these authoritarian surveillance laws too…
- prions 5y ago
  It's really easy to take a both-sides stance here, but the last presidency (ending in that same president causing an insurrection attempt at our capital) shows that one side is clearly more dedicated to authoritarianism than the other - socially, politically, and legally. People really seem to be hung up on equivocating a sitting president attempting to overturn an election with people on twitter saying mean things.
  - 5y ago
intothev01d 5y ago
In America, it's been a persistent psyop campaign under the guise of fighting terrorism for the last 20 years. Trading freedom for security. People are more and more conditioned that control and authority in their lives is there to keep them safe. Whether or not they consciously believe it, subconsciously these ideas still permeate our everyday lives and now we just sort of accept it. Governments and powerful people have, and always will, push these boundaries, since it's essentially the quest for power (control). I don't know what the solution is, because more or less I feel everyone is so divided (and in that sense, conquered). There's an undercurrent of distrust (albeit mostly aimed in the wrong directions) but it hasn't really boiled over enough yet. More and more I think this is just an inevitable outcome to where we are as a society. I'm not trying to doom and gloom but it feels like the writing is on the wall. These things have happened before. Seems to be human nature in that we tend to repeat the same mistakes and it looks like we're currently doing that now.
- mostertoaster 5y ago
  Ironically it is the “right wing” who was all for this war on terror that traded security for freedom, and now they are reaping what they’ve sown, and desperately screaming how dare they make me wear a mask, and get vaccinated. The other wing of that same shit bird, was opposed before, and now embraces more government power. Two wings, one bird.
  - nekt 5y ago
    This is hyper partisan bullshit. The democrats have 100% always been in total support of trading security for freedom. https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313 https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_... Republicans have only recently woken up from this due to the absolute madness coming out of the left. I was a democrat who voted for Biden and has only donated to democrats though I likely never will again.
    - zeruch 5y ago
      Nah.
traceroute66 5y ago
I thought Americans were fine with anything as long as you didn't threaten to take their guns away. :)
ballenf 5y ago
Prosperity. It's more painful and fear-inducing to lose something you have, so the more you have the stronger the allure of laws that are sold as reducing your risk of loss.
- toyg 5y ago
  Coupled with rising inequality and pressure on the working class. The distance between rich and poor is now so big, both in economic and cultural terms, that anyone with even a modicum of wealth is obsessed with "not becoming one of Them", and will accept any rule as long as "it keeps Them in their place".
mfer 5y ago
> I find in America too I run into people who are casually ok with authoritarian ideas. I find they are if the discussion is within 140 characters or less. When the conversation turns long form with details of what's going on and the implications folks tend to get a bit shocked and don't like it. Long form discussions sharing details are something we need more of. Short form opinions aren't helping us. Many people are just unaware.
ryandrake 5y ago
The definition of "authoritarian ideas" has recently inflated to meaninglessness. Depending on who you talk to, authoritarian includes basically anything that isn't total anarchy. Whenever the government puts any constraint at all on what you can do or can't do, there's someone who disagrees and will (now) call it authoritarian overreach. The word is so overused now, it's getting hard to take it seriously. That and "tyranny". Whenever the government does anything you don't like anymore, it's tyranny. These words which used to describe significant problems have been watered down and are now being used to describe mask mandates and high taxes.
gr1zzlybe4r 5y ago
Fear, thinking that authoritarianism won't ever hurt them, groupthink, human desire to fit in with the zeitgeist. I honestly don't know but I've had lots of debates with people about forced vaccination (I'm vaccinated myself) and I didn't realize how big the threat of authoritarianism was in the US until I did.

goatcode 5y ago

I suspect it's a combination of fear and normalization of acceptance of absolute authority in government.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

Not that I agree with this but we have a massive problem with trolls, shills, agitators, and foreign intelligence running hog wild because they are anonymous online. Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized and used against the west.

nradov 5y ago
Is that a real problem? Foreign intelligence services are certainly doing a lot of crap online but it's not clear whether they've actually accomplished anything. Maybe they're just wasting resources?
- rini17 5y ago
  Trump? Brexit? Antivax hysteria? Homophobia? Of course it isn't direct accomplishment of any one actor, but each case there was traced undeniable contribution of foreign agencies. And in all cases, freedom of speech was abused to spread lies easily.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    It's been shown that foreign intelligence adds fuel to already divisive topics. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-Russia%E2%80%99s-Disinformation-and-Propaganda-Ecosystem_08-04-20.pdf https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-... > The media multiplier effect can, at times, create disinformation storms with potentially dangerous effects for those Russia perceives as adversaries at the international, national, and local level. In the past, Russia has leveraged this dynamic to shield itself from criticism for its involvement in malign activity. This approach also allows Russia to be opportunistic, such as with COVID-19, where it has used the global pandemic as a hook to push longstanding disinformation and propaganda narratives.
  - jtbayly 5y ago
    A certain dossier?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ICA-declass-16MAR21.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ICA-dec... > A key element of Moscow's strategy this election cycle was its use of proxies linked to Russian intelligence to push influence narratives- including misleading or unsubstantiated allegations against president Biden- to US media organizations, US officials, and prominent US individuals, including some close to former President Trump and his administration. > Throughout the election cycle, Russia's online influence actors sought to affect US public perceptions of the candidates, as well as advance Moscow's long-standing goals of undermining confidence in US election processes and increasing sociopolitical divisions among the American people.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    How is that a response to > Foreign intelligence services are certainly doing a lot of crap online but it's not clear whether they've actually accomplished anything. ?
    - rini17 5y ago
      If they actually accomplished nothing, then why Russia keeps doing it? It seriously damages their international relations, and it's all for nothing?
      - nradov 5y ago
        Most of our own CIA's efforts have resulted in abject failure. They failed to properly predict or influence most of the major world events for decades now (disintegration of the USSR, Balkan wars, 9/11 attacks, increased authoritarianism in China, rise of ISIL, collapse of Afghan government, etc). And yet we keep increasing their funding. Well maybe if we give them another billion they'll eventually get it right? Government resource allocation is seldom based on a rational cost / benefit analysis.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
      How would you measure accomplishment? It works for the same reason that advertising works.
- imbnwa 5y ago
  > Foreign intelligence services are certainly doing a lot of crap online but it's not clear whether they've actually accomplished anything. Isn't this just the ol' "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" problem? Hundreds of years of ago we couldn't see germs with a microscope doesn't mean they weren't effective in our lives.
  - idle_zealot 5y ago
    > we couldn't see germs with a microscope doesn't mean they weren't effective in our lives. And because we couldn’t see them we misattributed their effects and treated people with bloodletting. Confidently declaring your understanding of an unseen enemy and applying seemingly-appropriate countermeasures is likely to be harmful.
- oefrha 5y ago
  Humans fundamentally need some out-group to blame all their in-group's problems on. Now that overt racism against another racial group within your own society has mostly fallen out of fashion at least in "the West", foreign intelligence becomes the easiest target to pin blame on.
- mellavora 5y ago
  Seems to me they've accomplished quite a lot. I think you are assuming their idea of a goal matches your idea of an accomplishment (get a law supporting X passed/repealed). It isn't. Their goal is to make our system dysfunctional by destroying people's trust in the information presented them. It is what the Rand institute calls the "firehose of falsehood" https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html And they have been very successful at it.
dudul 5y ago
We've been hearing this claim since the 2016 election, and I am pretty sure these people/efforts exist, but it's still unclear to me what they've actually achieved. Do you have a good source explaining concretely how a handful of people, even sponsored by enemy states, can cause such harm? It's hard to imagine that they would have such influence without the general population being more than receptive to it.
- pfisch 5y ago
  Qanon is just a few people...
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-Russia%E2%80%99s-Disinformation-and-Propaganda-Ecosystem_08-04-20.pdf https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-...
JackFr 5y ago
"Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. I think the trolls, shills and agitators are a symptom of dysfunction rather than the cause. And I think the idea that more authoritarian states are stronger/more stable/better because they don't suffer this is deeply misguided. In the United States, our political class is deeply and fundamentally unserious. Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-election, and not the work they were elected to do.
- OrvalWintermute 5y ago
  > Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-election, and not the work they were elected to do. Going to attempt a fix Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-education, and not the work they were elected to do.
  - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    At least in the US we do seem to be electing a lot of folks who appear to be grifters riding on the mob, rather than statesmen with any kind of coherent political philosophy or policy suggestions. It wouldn’t surprise me that this is just the extension of social media into government. It’s getting hard for me to see anything good coming out of social media.
- mschuster91 5y ago
  > "Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. To quote chief Nazi propagandist Goebbels from 1928: We enter the Reichstag to arm ourselves with democracy’s weapons. If democracy is foolish enough to give us free railway passes and salaries, that is its problem… We are coming neither as friends or neutrals. We come as enemies! As the wolf attacks the sheep, so come we. The modern-day far right is following exactly the same almost-100-years-old playbook, and there are still people who don't recognize that we are letting history repeat itself. What would your (great-)grandparents have thought if you told them that there would be open marches of swastika flag-bearing people in the US?
mrkstu 5y ago
This isn't new. The USSR was doing this in various mediums from it's founding in the 1920s to when it became defunct. Returning to the Red Scare and the equivalent of the Hollywood Blacklist for current authoritarian sympathizers/cronies is not the way to battle this issue.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  This is getting off topic. Foreign intelligence is just one party. I was also thinking of every fake review on Amazon or products endorsed by shills on reddit. These problems all stem from anonymity.
  - jtbayly 5y ago
    Fake product reviews aren’t solved by making sure they are written by real people.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - mrkstu 5y ago
    But you then ignore the problems created by stripping the anonymity away, especially in the political sphere. Just like multitudes of writers/actors/directors had to either hide their political beliefs or just not get hired due to their political beliefs in Hollywood (though, ironically, that is happening now, along different axes.)
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
      I'm not suggesting stripping anonymity or free speech, I'm just pointing out the problem with anonymity online.
      - throwdecro 5y ago
        The problems you've described are very minor relative to how much more difficult dissent and whistle-blowing become if your statements can be connected to your true identity basically everywhere. "Better Amazon reviews" and "fewer Reddit shills" aren't worth much. > I'm not suggesting stripping anonymity or free speech, I'm just pointing out the problem with anonymity online. In the context of an article about removing anonymity, I don't think it's possible to set "removing anonymity" aside.
mhuffman 5y ago
>Not that I agree with this but we have a massive problem with trolls, shills, agitators, and foreign intelligence running hog wild because they are anonymous online. Do say, 2OEH8eoCRo0!
- bryan_w 5y ago
  Are you calling him "trolls, shills, agitators, and foreign intelligence" thereby proving him right?
  - mhuffman 5y ago
    Nope, just calling out their utter disdain for anonymity (for "those people") ... while being anonymous!
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
      I don't have disdain for anonymity.
fallingknife 5y ago
Yes, all those people who disagree with you online are trolls, shills, agitators, and foreign intelligence. That must be it.
- wavefunction 5y ago
  Does it have to be "all?" "All" seems unlikely. "Some" seems very likely.
CountDrewku 5y ago
>Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized THAT is one of the most authoritarian things I've ever read. You're full on down the fascist road once you start believing things like that.
raxxorrax 5y ago
If you are subjected to propaganda, chances are high it is from your own government or companies operating on the domestic market. The net certainly increased possibilities for foreign actors to reach domestic audiences, but claims of such cases are vastly exaggerated in my opinion. That said, troll, shills, agitators and propagandists might have a good understanding of peoples fears and desires and will use that against you. More effective the more you know about the target. This is why surveillance is dangerous.

themodelplumber 5y ago

Do those people define those ideas as authoritarian, or does that seem to fit more based on your definition?

neom 5y ago

I'm not sure it's an "issue". People just think differently. I'm Canadian and I'm probably way more comfortable with what would be described as authoritarian ideologies than you folks. I'm relatively well educated, I'm not ignorant to history etc etc - but there are aspects of authoritarian ideas that I don't outright object to, central planning per the CPC, as one example. I have a lot of reasons, and I've thought about this deeply over years, I don't particularly care to write an essay on my views for this thread as it's not really the point, the point is people can just think differently, have a different perspective on these things without a direct reason.

the_third_wave 5y ago
> ...there are aspects of authoritarian ideas that I don't outright object to... First they came for the maskless, and I did not speak out— Because I wore a mask. Then they came for the unvaccinated, and I did not speak out— Because I was vaccinated. Then they came for the contrarians, and I did not speak out— Because I toed the party line. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. > ...the point is people can just think differently, have a different perspective on these things What use is a different perspective when you're unable to voice it? [1] Careful what you wish for, especially when it concerns giving more authority to the government. It is easy to give away but very hard to get back. [1] https://movie-sounds.org/sci-fi-movie-samples/quotes-with-sound-clips-from-the-matrix/what-good-is-a-phone-call-if-you-re-unable-to-speak https://movie-sounds.org/sci-fi-movie-samples/quotes-with-so...
- junon 5y ago
  Being vaccinated and wearing a mask, both of which are scientifically corroborated actions in the midst of a global pandemic, are not politics or toeing party lines or any other insinuation you're trying to make.
  - imnotreallynew 5y ago
    > are not politics or toeing party lines or any other insinuation As much as many of us would prefer this to be the case, this is clearly false. Newsom’s anti-recall ad is entirely about mask and vaccine mandates. In fact, I believe it mentions no other topic.

baybal2 5y ago

> I find in America too I run into people who are casually ok with authoritarian ideas. If you are an IT professional, and earning 100k+ a years, there is no wonder you didn't meet much of these before. There is simply not a lot of opportunity for social classes to cross in daily life today. We, rich people, learned it the hard way in Russia 20 years ago. I call it a "revenge voting": https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/10/elections-representation-liberal-democracy https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/10/electi... I really believe the West needs to learn from how the early modern Russia unravelled, and how it came to 1991 being undone through effectively a democratic process.

fallingknife 5y ago
But the authoritarians I run into in the US are usually IT professionals earning 100k+ a year.
- jacobr1 5y ago
  I think it always was a "my team" thing. It is just that the "conservative team" of the past had "anti-authoritarianism" as one of the team virtues, even if it was hypocritical at times. There is a still a vague notion of freedom, but there is not an intellectual anchor for what that means relative to other objectives, like some Buckley-esque defense of free-enterprise vs the USSR.
  - nradov 5y ago
    The principled intellectual wing of the US conservative movement has virtually disappeared. Even those who disagreed with their positions should lament this as a net loss for society as a whole.
    - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
      Anti-intellectualism is part of populism, I would guess, and currently the Republican Party has been overrun with populists. There are certainly never trumpers talking about the older conservative values, but they are in the minority. Things will change. They always do.

dqpb 5y ago

If you work for a company, then you spend the majority of your time operating under an authoritarian government.

LegitShady 5y ago
It more likely seems you don't understand the difference between an employer and the government.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dqpb 5y ago
  It more likely seems you don't understand how to think abstractly.
  - Sargos 5y ago
    You can change employers but you can't (practically for most people) change your government. That's the big difference and why the comparison isn't very useful.
    - dqpb_2 5y ago
      Yes, practically speaking, having an escape hatch makes a big difference when you work for a bad employer. But I’m not talking about quality of life. I’m talking about the model of decision making and how distributed it is. That is fundamentally more important. Ironically, HN is throttling my account for talking about this.
      - psyc 5y ago
        HN is throttling your account because it’s 15 minutes old.
        dqpb_2 5y ago

JumpCrisscross 5y ago

> I don't know why that is, or if it's more or less common now. Curious if we saw a similar trend in pre-WWII America. The point being, maybe banding together and tolerating more-authoritarian tendencies is a natural human response to perceived threat. For Australia, this comes from China. For America...I don't know.

foobarian 5y ago
For America, it depends. If you are a liberal, it comes from the conservatives, and vice versa.
nonameiguess 5y ago
Yes, obviously. We interned Japanese-Americans during WWII. During the Civil War, habeas corpus was suspended. There's the PATRIOT Act for GWOT, but a lot of people don't seem to realize it didn't actually give law enforcement new powers. It extended powers they already had for drug and organized crime cases and let them apply to terrorism cases. We had already accepted an erosion of due process and civil liberties in order to defeat the Mafia and fight the War on Drugs. This absolutely happens as a response to the perception of threat. In fairness, it's not always clear this is universally wrong. The only reason the US has a federal government and a permanent standing military at all, which were not always givens, is in response to the threat that European colonial powers would have retaken all the land if we didn't, and this was probably a correct assessment.
- mc32 5y ago
  I think it's one thing to have these measures during an actual hot war with the destiny of the world in the balance or during a declaration of martial law. But WTF, when we're otherwise enjoying peace as never before?
  - courtf 5y ago
    It is tragic how we seem to be unable to enjoy peace and prosperity. Blame it on politics, or the media, or perhaps just the national character, but Americans are a restless bunch. Prone to paranoia and rebellion, our reflex is to respond aggressively to perceived threats, and we can be tricked into rattling our sabres over any old thing these days. Maybe rising authoritarianism is simply the natural outgrowth of overusing this impulse. The population, exhausted by the constant blaring of sirens over increasingly esoteric threats, would rather hand over the task of vigilance to some authority so they can finally catch some shut-eye.

rectang 5y ago

American authoritarians are generally partisan hypocrites – approving of authoritarianism by their own tribe, aghast at authoritarianism by the other tribe.

Mountain_Skies 5y ago
Plus a deluded belief that the authoritarian tools being handed to their ideological leaders will forever be in those hands and never used against them in the future by their ideological foes.
stephen_g 5y ago
Yeah, that’s basically the same in Australia. The ones who claim to be small-Government free market types or pretend to be libertarians seem to be the most authoritarian of all… For example, the ruling party has strong links into coal, oil and gas companies (big political donations going one way, much bigger grants and subsidies going the other). They cut subsidies for renewables because they “always let the market decide”, and now when older coal power stations are increasingly uneconomic they’re literally bringing in a forced subsidy to keep them going (sold as a “capacity payment” to “ensure reliability of the grid” - even though the clunkers are increasingly unreliable). It’s going to cost somewhere between $150 and $400 a year per-household on our power bills if they get it through. Other things are like trying to come up with some kind of way to fine or sanction banks who refuse to lend to fossil fuel companies, or stop activist investors trying to force companies to go green. This is all by the side of politics who claim the utmost commitment to free markets and small Government! Same party pushing all these authoritarian surveillance laws too…
prions 5y ago
It's really easy to take a both-sides stance here, but the last presidency (ending in that same president causing an insurrection attempt at our capital) shows that one side is clearly more dedicated to authoritarianism than the other - socially, politically, and legally. People really seem to be hung up on equivocating a sitting president attempting to overturn an election with people on twitter saying mean things.
- 5y ago

intothev01d 5y ago

In America, it's been a persistent psyop campaign under the guise of fighting terrorism for the last 20 years. Trading freedom for security. People are more and more conditioned that control and authority in their lives is there to keep them safe. Whether or not they consciously believe it, subconsciously these ideas still permeate our everyday lives and now we just sort of accept it. Governments and powerful people have, and always will, push these boundaries, since it's essentially the quest for power (control). I don't know what the solution is, because more or less I feel everyone is so divided (and in that sense, conquered). There's an undercurrent of distrust (albeit mostly aimed in the wrong directions) but it hasn't really boiled over enough yet. More and more I think this is just an inevitable outcome to where we are as a society. I'm not trying to doom and gloom but it feels like the writing is on the wall. These things have happened before. Seems to be human nature in that we tend to repeat the same mistakes and it looks like we're currently doing that now.

mostertoaster 5y ago
Ironically it is the “right wing” who was all for this war on terror that traded security for freedom, and now they are reaping what they’ve sown, and desperately screaming how dare they make me wear a mask, and get vaccinated. The other wing of that same shit bird, was opposed before, and now embraces more government power. Two wings, one bird.
- nekt 5y ago
  This is hyper partisan bullshit. The democrats have 100% always been in total support of trading security for freedom. https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313 https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_... Republicans have only recently woken up from this due to the absolute madness coming out of the left. I was a democrat who voted for Biden and has only donated to democrats though I likely never will again.
  - zeruch 5y ago
    Nah.

traceroute66 5y ago

I thought Americans were fine with anything as long as you didn't threaten to take their guns away. :)

ballenf 5y ago

Prosperity. It's more painful and fear-inducing to lose something you have, so the more you have the stronger the allure of laws that are sold as reducing your risk of loss.

toyg 5y ago
Coupled with rising inequality and pressure on the working class. The distance between rich and poor is now so big, both in economic and cultural terms, that anyone with even a modicum of wealth is obsessed with "not becoming one of Them", and will accept any rule as long as "it keeps Them in their place".

mfer 5y ago

> I find in America too I run into people who are casually ok with authoritarian ideas. I find they are if the discussion is within 140 characters or less. When the conversation turns long form with details of what's going on and the implications folks tend to get a bit shocked and don't like it. Long form discussions sharing details are something we need more of. Short form opinions aren't helping us. Many people are just unaware.

ryandrake 5y ago

The definition of "authoritarian ideas" has recently inflated to meaninglessness. Depending on who you talk to, authoritarian includes basically anything that isn't total anarchy. Whenever the government puts any constraint at all on what you can do or can't do, there's someone who disagrees and will (now) call it authoritarian overreach. The word is so overused now, it's getting hard to take it seriously. That and "tyranny". Whenever the government does anything you don't like anymore, it's tyranny. These words which used to describe significant problems have been watered down and are now being used to describe mask mandates and high taxes.

gr1zzlybe4r 5y ago

Fear, thinking that authoritarianism won't ever hurt them, groupthink, human desire to fit in with the zeitgeist. I honestly don't know but I've had lots of debates with people about forced vaccination (I'm vaccinated myself) and I didn't realize how big the threat of authoritarianism was in the US until I did.