5 ms·

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 id

by 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.
  - ghoward 5y ago
    > wearing a mask,[...] which [is] scientifically corroborated actions in the midst of a global pandemic Sure, it supposedly is, but there is also evidence saying it's bad. [1] As for vaccination, it should be a risk-based analysis, but instead, we are simply told to get it, no exceptions. That doesn't sound very scientific to me. [1]: https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/02/a-look-at-scientific-evidence-suggesting-face-masks-damage-your-health/ https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/02/a-look-at-scientific-ev...
  - all2 5y ago
    But that's what they've been made into. Vaccines, like everything else in the American news cycle, are a point of division. Once you see the news/media is peddling fear-porn for the express purpose of dividing the American people it is rather hard to unsee.
- evgen 5y ago
  Trying to re-purpose an anti-Nazi quote from someone who spent seven years in a concentration camp and equate it with being asked to perform basic public health and safety measures in the midst of a global pandemic? Seriously? I hope you eventually get the help that you so desperately need.
  - OrvalWintermute 5y ago
    dissent is a virtue. We're lucky we live in a society where we can dissent without undue risk, at least, to some extent.
    - Nursie 5y ago
      Dissent against well-evidenced public health measures really isn’t a virtue. We are lucky we live in such a society. We are not lucky that so many people use their right to dissent for such idiotic ends. Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t doing it is automatically praiseworthy.
      - the_third_wave 5y ago
        I live in Sweden where nobody wears masks. We have not been locked down in any real sense. Primary schools have not been closed, some high schools were but this was mostly left to the schools themselves. Those who want to be vaccinated can get vaccinated, most adults are (myself included). Most children are not vaccinated, they go to school, catch SARS2 and... nothing happens. Not a single teacher was infected in either of my daughter's schools during the whole time. Why can we live mostly normal lives while you seem to be unable to do so? What is the difference between Sweden and wherever it is you live? Also, what happened to personal choice and personal responsibility? By now it is clear that the vaccines do not seem to prevent you from infecting others so the argument for getting vaccinated so as not to infect others has been made moot. This leaves masks - which have been proven (yes, proven) not to work unless N95 or better types are used and crowding avoidance. In other words, get vaccinated to avoid personal risk of a severe infection. If you decide not to get vaccinated for whatever reason you'll have to accept the possibility of a more severe infection. Keep your distance from others if you want, do not force yourself upon others who have not made clear to be OK with it. All of these are personal choices which you'll just have to accept if you want to continue living in a free society. It sounds like you are willing to give up those freedoms for a misplaced sense of protection? In 1775 Benjamin Franklin had the following to say: ‘They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.’. He seems to have said it in the context of some people considering a compromise with the Crown over the stationing of British troops in the colonies. His stance was that giving in to these demands would mean the end of any real hope of freedom.
- stephen_g 5y ago
  In an Australian context at least, COVID has absolutely nothing to do with this. The Federal Government in Australia has passed more surveillance and ostensibly “anti-terrorism” laws (funnily enough they’re mostly used on whistleblowers) since 9/11 than any other country, despite basically never having a “real” terrorist attack on our soil. The laws started getting worse and the bills more frequent when a certain politician was given a cabinet portfolio with massive power a few years pre-COVID (Home Affairs, a cobbled together super-department with little oversight that is incompetently run). On the other hand, COVID related restrictions are directives that only have authority all under a temporary declared ‘state of emergency’ in each state, by the State Governments. They literally have no on-going effect once those state of emergencies end, unlike the 86 or so permanent surveillance/ “anti-terror” laws the Federal Governments have passed over the last 20 years (which is why I’m really hoping to get the opposition into minority Government next election so the minor parties can push for repeals and reworking of the whole mess).
  - nradov 5y ago
    Temporary states of emergency have a way of becoming permanent. In the US we are currently under 38 active states of emergency, one of which goes back to 1979. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_i...
Buttons840 5y ago
This comment bothers me. It's points are: (1) People think differently. (2) Authoritarian ideologies have some good aspects, like central planning. (3) I am smart and my ideas well thought out. (4) I will not participate in a detailed discussion. Have I missed any? The first two points are fine, obvious even. Although they are not a satisfying answers to the questions "Why are authoritarian ideologies becoming more popular?" These answers seem equivalent to answering a physics question with "we live in a strange world" and then just leaving it at that. The latter 2 points are bothersome. I much prefer the default "social contract" implied by most messages: "These are my thoughts. I welcome further thoughts or counter arguments. I may or may not participate in further discussion." That goes without saying and seems much nicer than "I'm smart and my arguments are sound, but don't expect further discussion, see ya". There's an interesting discussion to be had around point 2 and the pros and cons of different ideologies. All of that was buried beneath points 3 and 4, asserting your intelligence and discouraging further discussion.
- neom 5y ago
  I agree, was a hurried comment on the way out the door to the office, my bad. I read OP as basically saying authoritarianism is wrong. What I was trying to say is, the world is a complex place, reasonable people can disagree. I wasn't trying to say I'm particularly smart, only that I don't think I'm totally ignorant, and also that I realize that it's complex and there is further discussion to be had (although it's not for me).
  - raxxorrax 5y ago
    The difference is that authoritarian measures also affect those with different opinions. That isn't reciprocated by more liberal ideas. Especially when people are more safe than ever before, the measures proposed here merit some pushback.

by neom 5y ago

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.
- ghoward 5y ago
  > wearing a mask,[...] which [is] scientifically corroborated actions in the midst of a global pandemic Sure, it supposedly is, but there is also evidence saying it's bad. [1] As for vaccination, it should be a risk-based analysis, but instead, we are simply told to get it, no exceptions. That doesn't sound very scientific to me. [1]: https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/02/a-look-at-scientific-evidence-suggesting-face-masks-damage-your-health/ https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/02/a-look-at-scientific-ev...
- all2 5y ago
  But that's what they've been made into. Vaccines, like everything else in the American news cycle, are a point of division. Once you see the news/media is peddling fear-porn for the express purpose of dividing the American people it is rather hard to unsee.
evgen 5y ago
Trying to re-purpose an anti-Nazi quote from someone who spent seven years in a concentration camp and equate it with being asked to perform basic public health and safety measures in the midst of a global pandemic? Seriously? I hope you eventually get the help that you so desperately need.
- OrvalWintermute 5y ago
  dissent is a virtue. We're lucky we live in a society where we can dissent without undue risk, at least, to some extent.
  - Nursie 5y ago
    Dissent against well-evidenced public health measures really isn’t a virtue. We are lucky we live in such a society. We are not lucky that so many people use their right to dissent for such idiotic ends. Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t doing it is automatically praiseworthy.
    - the_third_wave 5y ago
      I live in Sweden where nobody wears masks. We have not been locked down in any real sense. Primary schools have not been closed, some high schools were but this was mostly left to the schools themselves. Those who want to be vaccinated can get vaccinated, most adults are (myself included). Most children are not vaccinated, they go to school, catch SARS2 and... nothing happens. Not a single teacher was infected in either of my daughter's schools during the whole time. Why can we live mostly normal lives while you seem to be unable to do so? What is the difference between Sweden and wherever it is you live? Also, what happened to personal choice and personal responsibility? By now it is clear that the vaccines do not seem to prevent you from infecting others so the argument for getting vaccinated so as not to infect others has been made moot. This leaves masks - which have been proven (yes, proven) not to work unless N95 or better types are used and crowding avoidance. In other words, get vaccinated to avoid personal risk of a severe infection. If you decide not to get vaccinated for whatever reason you'll have to accept the possibility of a more severe infection. Keep your distance from others if you want, do not force yourself upon others who have not made clear to be OK with it. All of these are personal choices which you'll just have to accept if you want to continue living in a free society. It sounds like you are willing to give up those freedoms for a misplaced sense of protection? In 1775 Benjamin Franklin had the following to say: ‘They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.’. He seems to have said it in the context of some people considering a compromise with the Crown over the stationing of British troops in the colonies. His stance was that giving in to these demands would mean the end of any real hope of freedom.
stephen_g 5y ago
In an Australian context at least, COVID has absolutely nothing to do with this. The Federal Government in Australia has passed more surveillance and ostensibly “anti-terrorism” laws (funnily enough they’re mostly used on whistleblowers) since 9/11 than any other country, despite basically never having a “real” terrorist attack on our soil. The laws started getting worse and the bills more frequent when a certain politician was given a cabinet portfolio with massive power a few years pre-COVID (Home Affairs, a cobbled together super-department with little oversight that is incompetently run). On the other hand, COVID related restrictions are directives that only have authority all under a temporary declared ‘state of emergency’ in each state, by the State Governments. They literally have no on-going effect once those state of emergencies end, unlike the 86 or so permanent surveillance/ “anti-terror” laws the Federal Governments have passed over the last 20 years (which is why I’m really hoping to get the opposition into minority Government next election so the minor parties can push for repeals and reworking of the whole mess).
- nradov 5y ago
  Temporary states of emergency have a way of becoming permanent. In the US we are currently under 38 active states of emergency, one of which goes back to 1979. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_i...

Buttons840 5y ago

This comment bothers me. It's points are: (1) People think differently. (2) Authoritarian ideologies have some good aspects, like central planning. (3) I am smart and my ideas well thought out. (4) I will not participate in a detailed discussion. Have I missed any? The first two points are fine, obvious even. Although they are not a satisfying answers to the questions "Why are authoritarian ideologies becoming more popular?" These answers seem equivalent to answering a physics question with "we live in a strange world" and then just leaving it at that. The latter 2 points are bothersome. I much prefer the default "social contract" implied by most messages: "These are my thoughts. I welcome further thoughts or counter arguments. I may or may not participate in further discussion." That goes without saying and seems much nicer than "I'm smart and my arguments are sound, but don't expect further discussion, see ya". There's an interesting discussion to be had around point 2 and the pros and cons of different ideologies. All of that was buried beneath points 3 and 4, asserting your intelligence and discouraging further discussion.

neom 5y ago
I agree, was a hurried comment on the way out the door to the office, my bad. I read OP as basically saying authoritarianism is wrong. What I was trying to say is, the world is a complex place, reasonable people can disagree. I wasn't trying to say I'm particularly smart, only that I don't think I'm totally ignorant, and also that I realize that it's complex and there is further discussion to be had (although it's not for me).
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  The difference is that authoritarian measures also affect those with different opinions. That isn't reciprocated by more liberal ideas. Especially when people are more safe than ever before, the measures proposed here merit some pushback.