3 ms·

> Is there any regime out there who's not trying to mass-surveil their citizens for one reason or another? Covid authoritarian policies were hugely successful

> Is there any regime out there who's not trying to mass-surveil their citizens for one reason or another? Covid authoritarian policies were hugely successful and supported by mainstream people by and large. Not enough protests. Not enough dissent. Now politicians know they can turn the power knob as high as they want and nothing will happen. Less and less dissent will be allowed, just like during covid. If you fail to learn that and denounce those and reclaim the freedoms for all, you're going to just whine into a smaller and smaller room.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> Covid authoritarian policies were hugely successful and supported by mainstream people by and large. Not enough protests. Not enough dissent America has been trashed not by Covid but by the precedence being set that partisan violence can and will be pardoned.
- isaacremuant 1y ago
  I don't quite understand your point. I also meant covid policies. Not covid itself.
  - Krssst 1y ago
    They probably meant January 6th rebels being pardoned giving the example that extremists that aim at preventing democratic election results from going into effect can do as they want. Which is a much bigger problem than "stay home a bit to avoid unintentionally killing people".
    - s1artibartfast 1y ago
      Many people feel the point of the former was to prevent the latter
    - isaacremuant 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - Krssst 1y ago
        So people should die of pandemix diseases for making sure that personal freedoms are never ever temporarily restricted, got it. One side seems busy with taking democratic institutions down, I wouldn't be surprised if freedom is next anyway. (well freedom of opinion is already disappearing)
        isaacremuant 1y ago
        > So people should die of pandemix diseases for making sure that personal freedoms are never ever temporarily restricted, got it. This is the authoritarian mantra. Accusing others of "harming" so you get to impose your bullshit unquestioned. It's always the same strategy. It's always "temporal" and yet the precedent stays. > One side seems busy with taking democratic institutions down, I wouldn't be surprised if freedom is next anyway. (well freedom of opinion is already disappearing) "One side"? Lol. You're gonna give me that old charade of evil trump and repubs and how it's good when your side does it to stop them? Or is it viceversa. In any case, it's still bullshit and you're the problem.
        Krssst 1y ago
        > Accusing others of "harming" so you get to impose your bullshit unquestioned. It's always the same strategy. Pandemics do harm people and need containment. Virus don't care what we think or want.
        isaacremuant 1y ago
        Yes. Car crashes harm people too. You don't ban cars as a consequence, or ban discussion about cars, or call car proponents "anti science" or "children assassins" because children die in car crashes. You and every authoritarian out there thinks that just by mentioning a threat, then you get to force your "solution". You didn't contain the pandemic, btw. Actions constituted hygiene theater just like the war on terror engages in security theater. You can do more damage with the measures to protect against something but if you don't allow discussion and frame everything as a win of course you'll claim everyone else is just crazy. Bottom line, you're an authoritarian using the same old argument to justify it.
Krssst 1y ago
> Covid authoritarian policies were hugely successful and supported by mainstream people by and large. They were temporary and saved lives. Keyword here is temporary. Of course COVID denialists are angry at it but they won in the USA now so we'll be happy getting more deaths and disabilities now that they are removing our ability to vaccinate ourselves.
- fc417fc802 1y ago
  Being temporary and being authoritarian are entirely orthogonal. In general I would imagine that cultures willing to accept temporary authoritarianism for the "right reasons" are more prone to falling to dictators.
  - Krssst 1y ago
    Most democraties have provisions for times of exceptional needs and counterpowers against that. Of course that's a weakness but a weakness that's judged better than mass deaths or complete fall of the country. Those have to be limited in time and regularly subjected to control by democratically-elected institutions (actually vote to see if extended or not).
    - fc417fc802 1y ago
      I completely agree of course. My reply was simply because I think it's important not to inadvertently conflate things, particularly when the issue is contentious. In this case the concepts of authoritarian and permanency, as well as the concepts of people who deny COVID, people who distrust vaccines, and people who were dissatisfied with the various government mandates. Granted there is quite a bit of overlap among the latter trio.
  - stephen_g 1y ago
    It's a silly hypothetical though - the argument that some emergency measures during an international pandemic emergency are authoritarianism would only make sense if we were all still subject to the measures (like stay at home orders). The problem for your argument is that the temporary emergency measures turned out to actually be temporary. Authoritarian regimes use emergencies (often fake ones) to entrench long-term change, this was a real emergency that had a temporary response...

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> Covid authoritarian policies were hugely successful and supported by mainstream people by and large. Not enough protests. Not enough dissent America has been trashed not by Covid but by the precedence being set that partisan violence can and will be pardoned.

isaacremuant 1y ago
I don't quite understand your point. I also meant covid policies. Not covid itself.
- Krssst 1y ago
  They probably meant January 6th rebels being pardoned giving the example that extremists that aim at preventing democratic election results from going into effect can do as they want. Which is a much bigger problem than "stay home a bit to avoid unintentionally killing people".
  - s1artibartfast 1y ago
    Many people feel the point of the former was to prevent the latter
  - isaacremuant 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - Krssst 1y ago
      So people should die of pandemix diseases for making sure that personal freedoms are never ever temporarily restricted, got it. One side seems busy with taking democratic institutions down, I wouldn't be surprised if freedom is next anyway. (well freedom of opinion is already disappearing)
      - isaacremuant 1y ago
        > So people should die of pandemix diseases for making sure that personal freedoms are never ever temporarily restricted, got it. This is the authoritarian mantra. Accusing others of "harming" so you get to impose your bullshit unquestioned. It's always the same strategy. It's always "temporal" and yet the precedent stays. > One side seems busy with taking democratic institutions down, I wouldn't be surprised if freedom is next anyway. (well freedom of opinion is already disappearing) "One side"? Lol. You're gonna give me that old charade of evil trump and repubs and how it's good when your side does it to stop them? Or is it viceversa. In any case, it's still bullshit and you're the problem.
        Krssst 1y ago
        > Accusing others of "harming" so you get to impose your bullshit unquestioned. It's always the same strategy. Pandemics do harm people and need containment. Virus don't care what we think or want.
        isaacremuant 1y ago
        Yes. Car crashes harm people too. You don't ban cars as a consequence, or ban discussion about cars, or call car proponents "anti science" or "children assassins" because children die in car crashes. You and every authoritarian out there thinks that just by mentioning a threat, then you get to force your "solution". You didn't contain the pandemic, btw. Actions constituted hygiene theater just like the war on terror engages in security theater. You can do more damage with the measures to protect against something but if you don't allow discussion and frame everything as a win of course you'll claim everyone else is just crazy. Bottom line, you're an authoritarian using the same old argument to justify it.

Krssst 1y ago

> Covid authoritarian policies were hugely successful and supported by mainstream people by and large. They were temporary and saved lives. Keyword here is temporary. Of course COVID denialists are angry at it but they won in the USA now so we'll be happy getting more deaths and disabilities now that they are removing our ability to vaccinate ourselves.

fc417fc802 1y ago
Being temporary and being authoritarian are entirely orthogonal. In general I would imagine that cultures willing to accept temporary authoritarianism for the "right reasons" are more prone to falling to dictators.
- Krssst 1y ago
  Most democraties have provisions for times of exceptional needs and counterpowers against that. Of course that's a weakness but a weakness that's judged better than mass deaths or complete fall of the country. Those have to be limited in time and regularly subjected to control by democratically-elected institutions (actually vote to see if extended or not).
  - fc417fc802 1y ago
    I completely agree of course. My reply was simply because I think it's important not to inadvertently conflate things, particularly when the issue is contentious. In this case the concepts of authoritarian and permanency, as well as the concepts of people who deny COVID, people who distrust vaccines, and people who were dissatisfied with the various government mandates. Granted there is quite a bit of overlap among the latter trio.
- stephen_g 1y ago
  It's a silly hypothetical though - the argument that some emergency measures during an international pandemic emergency are authoritarianism would only make sense if we were all still subject to the measures (like stay at home orders). The problem for your argument is that the temporary emergency measures turned out to actually be temporary. Authoritarian regimes use emergencies (often fake ones) to entrench long-term change, this was a real emergency that had a temporary response...