4 ms·

Could you provide us your definition of "authoritarianism"?

kcplate 3y ago
I think the parent comment I originally quoted and commented on is a fine example of the attitude I am concerned about. “If we can’t pass a carbon tax due to lack of political will, find other points of leverage and exert force.”
- acdha 3y ago
  What is your definition of authoritarianism? It can’t be “if you don’t get immediate consensus for a big change, give up and stop trying to fix the problem”. Just in this context, for example, many Americans have been trained to have a strong negative reaction to the word “tax” which leads to many things being done less efficiently using other mechanisms, but it’s hardly authoritarian to find a compromise position following the democratic process.
- redserk 3y ago
  This isn't authoritarianism. Just to review: In the US, even at the state-level, you elect officials to handle governance on your behalf. You typically elect an official to a lower legislative house, an upper legislative house, and a governor. All 3 must cooperate in some fashion for legislation to become law, unless the state has a stipulation that a threshold of legislative members may override the governor. As a resident you have say in each legislative chamber and for the state-level governor seat. Now, it's the responsibility of a truly functional legislative body to respond to unpopular political objectives by determining if the electorate wants another solution or wants the issue dropped altogether. If the legislative body makes an error, one may vote out their representative via a party primary or via scheduled elections. If they have made a grave error, typically this can be resolved via the courts as a check. While a carbon tax may very well be unpopular due to political will, a bill is proposing an alternative mechanism. This is a legislative body working as designed. So no, this isn't authoritarianism.
  - kcplate 3y ago
    I am well aware of how our government works and am ok with it. My read of the comment I initially responded to was that they were unhappy with the process that you just described and wanted a different process that will impose the change under force without the need to rely on the political mechanism for the change.. I am ok with change that happens via the normal democratic process with all the checks and balances and time it takes to get us there. I am not ok with change against the will of a democratic society under the threat of force out side of the established political process. If you are imposing your will on me and my society against our wishes, that is authoritarianism.

I think the parent comment I originally quoted and commented on is a fine example of the attitude I am concerned about. “If we can’t pass a carbon tax due to lack of political will, find other points of leverage and exert force.”

acdha 3y ago
What is your definition of authoritarianism? It can’t be “if you don’t get immediate consensus for a big change, give up and stop trying to fix the problem”. Just in this context, for example, many Americans have been trained to have a strong negative reaction to the word “tax” which leads to many things being done less efficiently using other mechanisms, but it’s hardly authoritarian to find a compromise position following the democratic process.
redserk 3y ago
This isn't authoritarianism. Just to review: In the US, even at the state-level, you elect officials to handle governance on your behalf. You typically elect an official to a lower legislative house, an upper legislative house, and a governor. All 3 must cooperate in some fashion for legislation to become law, unless the state has a stipulation that a threshold of legislative members may override the governor. As a resident you have say in each legislative chamber and for the state-level governor seat. Now, it's the responsibility of a truly functional legislative body to respond to unpopular political objectives by determining if the electorate wants another solution or wants the issue dropped altogether. If the legislative body makes an error, one may vote out their representative via a party primary or via scheduled elections. If they have made a grave error, typically this can be resolved via the courts as a check. While a carbon tax may very well be unpopular due to political will, a bill is proposing an alternative mechanism. This is a legislative body working as designed. So no, this isn't authoritarianism.
- kcplate 3y ago
  I am well aware of how our government works and am ok with it. My read of the comment I initially responded to was that they were unhappy with the process that you just described and wanted a different process that will impose the change under force without the need to rely on the political mechanism for the change.. I am ok with change that happens via the normal democratic process with all the checks and balances and time it takes to get us there. I am not ok with change against the will of a democratic society under the threat of force out side of the established political process. If you are imposing your will on me and my society against our wishes, that is authoritarianism.