8 ms·

This line of reason is actually becoming more frequently used to justify things. For years, the right wing propaganda machine has been establishing the concept

This line of reason is actually becoming more frequently used to justify things. For years, the right wing propaganda machine has been establishing the concept that conservatism and America as a whole is besieged by authoritarian leftists and their smug out-of-outch enablers the liberals. THEY are the authoritarians and they are seeking to destroy America. WE are its defenders, and in the face of existential threat, our methods are justified. THEY have been doing this to us for years, now this is our chance to fight back.

ethical_source 1y ago
Are you just going to ignore the 2016-2024 state-directed viewpoint censorship on social media?
- bad_haircut72 1y ago
  Now we have 2025-? stare censored social media. Of all the hypocrisies, people screaming "but what about THEM" while ignoring what people in power NOW are doing is the most insufferable
- convolvatron 1y ago
  I think the appropriate response to a lack of due consideration to the bill of rights should be doubling down on the bill of rights. not setting it on fire as show of oneupmanship
brightball 1y ago
Similar to calling everyone Nazi’s and fascists who has an opposing point of view? When you take a step back it becomes very clear that this escalating messaging is being push onto both sides of the political isle to create these feelings. I remember in the span of two weeks seeing almost identical posts urging people to train because you are going to have to fight. The wording was almost identical only one post said “leftists” and the other “fascists”. My only question who is pushing the messaging and who does it benefit?
- AvAn12 1y ago
  In what way are democrats (or, “leftists,” if you must) authoritarian? Requiring face masks in a pandemic (which happened under the trump admin, in case anyone forgot) is not the same as masked goons throwing brown people into vans.
  - mindslight 1y ago
    As a libertarian, I see authoritarianism as the imposition of top-down control, often fine-grained, onto individuals' lives. The reflexive reaching for government/law to solve problems. The war on drugs. Mass surveillance, regardless of its goals or who is in charge. The crushing weight and lack of justice in the criminal justice system. The draconian copyright regime. This makes the Democratic [establishment] bureaucratic authoritarians, while the current Republican [establishment] are autocratic authoritarians. Obviously I would prefer anti-authoritarianism - a goal of reducing government control in our lives (including corporate de facto government). I think so would most people, but for being lured in by partisan messaging. Authoritarian singular-perspective narratives always sound so simplistically compelling. But while the autocratic authoritarians weren't in power, it was all too easy to point to the bureaucratic authoritarians as a creeping problem. So now we have autocratic authoritarianism "good and hard". Between the two, I'd prefer bureaucratic authoritarianism as it at least keeps the worst impulses in check (eg the capricious tariff taxes, the naked corruption/bribes, politicizing departments to go after political enemies, wanton cruelty against immigrants for circenses, etc). The only real question is whether at least some of our institutions will hold out so that we can collectively decide to change course, or if it's just set now. As far as the mask issue, I want to live in a world where they weren't mandated, but yet most everyone wears one out of enlightened self interest. The traditional Republican message would have been "wear a mask to protect yourself". The fact that it was self-harming contrarianism instead has more to do with edgelordism and foreign influence campaigns.
    - ruszki 1y ago
      What you wrote can be even an anarchist view. What’s the difference in your point of view? How should a government solve problems without laws? What other options are there? Besides ignoring, obviously. I’m absolutely not familiar with the tools of an imagined truly libertarian government (AFAIK this never happened).
tobias3 1y ago
Yes, and then they call this openly a Reichstag fire moment and people still don't get the parallels. And back then there was a proper systems conflict. People like Krupp actually had to fear being disowned by communists.
- stevenwoo 1y ago
  The elevation of Charlie Kirk to sainthood rhymes with Horst Wessel’s death being used to make legitimate targets of all enemies of the German state.

ethical_source 1y ago

Are you just going to ignore the 2016-2024 state-directed viewpoint censorship on social media?

bad_haircut72 1y ago
Now we have 2025-? stare censored social media. Of all the hypocrisies, people screaming "but what about THEM" while ignoring what people in power NOW are doing is the most insufferable
convolvatron 1y ago
I think the appropriate response to a lack of due consideration to the bill of rights should be doubling down on the bill of rights. not setting it on fire as show of oneupmanship

brightball 1y ago

Similar to calling everyone Nazi’s and fascists who has an opposing point of view? When you take a step back it becomes very clear that this escalating messaging is being push onto both sides of the political isle to create these feelings. I remember in the span of two weeks seeing almost identical posts urging people to train because you are going to have to fight. The wording was almost identical only one post said “leftists” and the other “fascists”. My only question who is pushing the messaging and who does it benefit?

AvAn12 1y ago
In what way are democrats (or, “leftists,” if you must) authoritarian? Requiring face masks in a pandemic (which happened under the trump admin, in case anyone forgot) is not the same as masked goons throwing brown people into vans.
- mindslight 1y ago
  As a libertarian, I see authoritarianism as the imposition of top-down control, often fine-grained, onto individuals' lives. The reflexive reaching for government/law to solve problems. The war on drugs. Mass surveillance, regardless of its goals or who is in charge. The crushing weight and lack of justice in the criminal justice system. The draconian copyright regime. This makes the Democratic [establishment] bureaucratic authoritarians, while the current Republican [establishment] are autocratic authoritarians. Obviously I would prefer anti-authoritarianism - a goal of reducing government control in our lives (including corporate de facto government). I think so would most people, but for being lured in by partisan messaging. Authoritarian singular-perspective narratives always sound so simplistically compelling. But while the autocratic authoritarians weren't in power, it was all too easy to point to the bureaucratic authoritarians as a creeping problem. So now we have autocratic authoritarianism "good and hard". Between the two, I'd prefer bureaucratic authoritarianism as it at least keeps the worst impulses in check (eg the capricious tariff taxes, the naked corruption/bribes, politicizing departments to go after political enemies, wanton cruelty against immigrants for circenses, etc). The only real question is whether at least some of our institutions will hold out so that we can collectively decide to change course, or if it's just set now. As far as the mask issue, I want to live in a world where they weren't mandated, but yet most everyone wears one out of enlightened self interest. The traditional Republican message would have been "wear a mask to protect yourself". The fact that it was self-harming contrarianism instead has more to do with edgelordism and foreign influence campaigns.
  - ruszki 1y ago
    What you wrote can be even an anarchist view. What’s the difference in your point of view? How should a government solve problems without laws? What other options are there? Besides ignoring, obviously. I’m absolutely not familiar with the tools of an imagined truly libertarian government (AFAIK this never happened).

tobias3 1y ago

Yes, and then they call this openly a Reichstag fire moment and people still don't get the parallels. And back then there was a proper systems conflict. People like Krupp actually had to fear being disowned by communists.

stevenwoo 1y ago
The elevation of Charlie Kirk to sainthood rhymes with Horst Wessel’s death being used to make legitimate targets of all enemies of the German state.