5 ms·

Maybe I would have been better avoiding the "F word" and just calling it very illiberal? :shrugs:

lapcat 4y ago
I don't know. It's a spectrum. There are certainly a lot of countries in the world that are a lot worse on that measure.
- grecy 4y ago
  I’m always fascinated when people compare down. Are you proud your sports team isn’t on the bottom of the ladder? Or would it actually be productive and improve things if you compared up?
  - lapcat 4y ago
    This a straw man. The point here is truth and accuracy. Is the US fascist and "very illiberal"? No, I don't think so. Perhaps "moderately illiberal" would be more accurate. Can the US be improved? Of course! My intention is not to defend the US but to accurately describe it. I don't think fascist is accurate. Above all, the US is large, complicated, and conflicted. Non-Americans like to paint America with a broad brush, but Americans are actually in widespread disagreement about a lot of things.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    >Are you proud your sports team isn’t on the bottom of the ladder? Or would it actually be productive and improve things if you compared up? It seems like it would be productive to be grounded in reality and actually know where you sit on the ladder. You can still look at the top teams and want to be better, but lying and telling the team you are at the bottom isn't helpful.
unmole 4y ago
Right, the country with the strongest freedom of speech protections in the world is so illberal.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- LatteLazy 4y ago
  That's sort of my point: Excellent freedom of speech (because someone in 1780 thought of that). But you can be gunned down in the street by the police (because some guy in 1780 forgot to explicitly ban that). It's a weird mix no? And the Liberal bits all date back to way before anyone now alive was born (with a few exceptions like gay marriage)
  - yucky 4y ago
    Every year there are around 1,000 people killed in police interactions. Every year around 25 of those cases were people who were unarmed and/or not actively trying to kill the police officer. Now, that is 25 too many for sure. But in a nation of 350 million people, 25 unarmed people killed by cops is sad but statistically a rounding error. Also, most of the time the cops in those cases are rightfully convicted and sent to prison so qualified immunity isn't relevant. That said, there are far too many other police abuses that need to be addressed which are a more significant issue because they affect far more people.
  - unmole 4y ago
    > But you can be gunned down in the street by the police The statistical likelihood of that happening is approximately zero. Extrapolating from this to Fascism is plainly ridiculous.

I don't know. It's a spectrum. There are certainly a lot of countries in the world that are a lot worse on that measure.

grecy 4y ago
I’m always fascinated when people compare down. Are you proud your sports team isn’t on the bottom of the ladder? Or would it actually be productive and improve things if you compared up?
- lapcat 4y ago
  This a straw man. The point here is truth and accuracy. Is the US fascist and "very illiberal"? No, I don't think so. Perhaps "moderately illiberal" would be more accurate. Can the US be improved? Of course! My intention is not to defend the US but to accurately describe it. I don't think fascist is accurate. Above all, the US is large, complicated, and conflicted. Non-Americans like to paint America with a broad brush, but Americans are actually in widespread disagreement about a lot of things.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  >Are you proud your sports team isn’t on the bottom of the ladder? Or would it actually be productive and improve things if you compared up? It seems like it would be productive to be grounded in reality and actually know where you sit on the ladder. You can still look at the top teams and want to be better, but lying and telling the team you are at the bottom isn't helpful.

unmole 4y ago

Right, the country with the strongest freedom of speech protections in the world is so illberal.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
LatteLazy 4y ago
That's sort of my point: Excellent freedom of speech (because someone in 1780 thought of that). But you can be gunned down in the street by the police (because some guy in 1780 forgot to explicitly ban that). It's a weird mix no? And the Liberal bits all date back to way before anyone now alive was born (with a few exceptions like gay marriage)
- yucky 4y ago
  Every year there are around 1,000 people killed in police interactions. Every year around 25 of those cases were people who were unarmed and/or not actively trying to kill the police officer. Now, that is 25 too many for sure. But in a nation of 350 million people, 25 unarmed people killed by cops is sad but statistically a rounding error. Also, most of the time the cops in those cases are rightfully convicted and sent to prison so qualified immunity isn't relevant. That said, there are far too many other police abuses that need to be addressed which are a more significant issue because they affect far more people.
- unmole 4y ago
  > But you can be gunned down in the street by the police The statistical likelihood of that happening is approximately zero. Extrapolating from this to Fascism is plainly ridiculous.