• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Is democracy an open door to totalitarianism?

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
In France, I hear its a bit different, but still, they almost had Marine LePen be elected president of the Republic, so I dunno.

Aside of your libertarian platitudes, now, this is a proof you are trolling.

Marine Le Pen did not pass the first turn, she was ten points behind the second. Aside of that, in Belgium, far right ideas are widely heard, especially in Flanders and Antwerpen (NVA is often considered far right, even if there is worst than it). Less in Wallonia, of course...
 

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Becauase countries like Iraq, Egypt, and Syria are all ravaged by war and their politcal landscape is a total mess. True, you can argue that in the long term it may pay off and the politcal landscape will stabilize, maybe, but whos to say it will, and if it does how long will it take.

Now, that's a second proof you are either:

1/ A troll

or

2/ Very ignorant and uneducated

---

Because:

(A) Iraq was not part of the Arab Spring

(B) There is no war in Egypt

(C) You're forgetting what happened first in Tunisia, in Morocco, in Qatar... etc...

---

If you knew those countries, if you would have lived there a bit, you would immediately understand that things had to change, that the previous Arabian dictatorships were already crumbling from inside. It was in fact, not possible to avoid a revolution to get rid of corruption, of nepotism, of arbitrary decisions.... And people wanted (and still want) that change badly. They want a state of law, where law is the same for all. That's all, but that's an absolute necessity.

You know what I think? That its not democracy itself that brings people a better life, its cultured leaders who can bring life to an otherwise dead poltical system. Political systems are just that, systems. In and of themselves they have no value. Its only the right people that can give them value and make them work, otherwise they dont.

Once again, you should try to live a few years under the rule of a brutal corrupt dictatorship, and then tell me what you think afterwards. You have to live in your flesh what the so-called "system" really means in your daily life.

Maybe it could teach you a lot about your own rights... you know, those rights we take for granted under a democratic system.
 

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Because of Norway's sordid history of Imperialism? :dry:

Of course, but it's not only that.
There are forms of nationalism that can be, indeed, sympathetic when for instance a people ask to be freed, ask to have the right to self-determine its political fate.

In Norway, it's not at all the case. What is really scary there, is the conviction shared by the majority of locals that they are INHERENTLY SUPERIOR to anybody, that Norwegians are the Master Race, the most industrious, the most clever, the richer, the most beautiful people on earth... etc...
And worst, they want to convince you, sometimes very naively that indeed, they are SUPERIOR BEINGS belonging to a SUPERIOR CULTURE. It's their way of welcoming tourists, and they do it with a smile, without meaning any harm.

Of course, not all Norwegians share these cultural traits and, for instance, when I was in Bergen I'd say everything looked almost normal compared to other European states. In Bergen I met normal people who were fully aware how blind and foolish Norwegian nationalism is. It's a local tradition: this city has always been in conflict with mainland Norway, especially because it was founded by foreigners and expanded through immigration. But anywhere else...
 

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
I meant more like religion, or ethics. Yeah really you can't blame europeans for how we treat gypsies, or muslims. I have nothing against muslisms, they don't even live in our country, France has something against them and I disagree with how they try to supress ther religion, beliefs, probihites them to observe their traditions. This is just so wrong, and goes against every humanitarian idea, that has ever been born in Europe. On the other hand, I can understand why France did, what they did. I am not saying it's right, I just say I can understand why an independent country where muslisms started to occupy more and more jobs, schools, started to push their bielf system at the expense of native born French, it's logical that the country stands to side of their own people. Yeah it is patriotism, it is holding us back from seeing all the possibilities, that would came out from cooperations with other nations. It is bad, it is a huge stap back that holding us from progress and the final unity... I didn't try to be patriotic, I just tried to explain prejudices and misunderstandings, with whom the first post was full of. To imigracy issues... yeah you know it sucks. You have your own country, 500 milion people, that need jobs, food, money, living and suddenly other 200 milion people came here and they need the same things, but you even suffer to provide living and food for that 500 milion... So what will you do? You try to protect you own people... That's just how it goes. Any other reasons why to treat immigrants bad called rasism... it exists... in Europe, in U.S, in Africa... It exists all over the world even though we try so hard not to... After all, we just close our eyes and say... Everything is fine, we can't that people are rasists, we love each other... even though everyone knows it is a bullshit...

I fail to understand this half-digested mess. Where are you from, my dear Polly?

Have you ever been in France and read enough before starting to express very strange views about its politics?

France has strictly NOTHING against Muslims. As a matter of fact it's the European country with the largest share of Muslim citizens -between 10 and 12%- (except Bosnia and Albania of course), where you have the highest number of mosques. And France has also a long tradition (for better and for worse sometimes) of dealing with Muslim countries and cultures, contrary to most European countries who see Muslim people as inherently "foreign". What I mean by that, is that in Germany, Netherlands or the UK where you also have sizeable Muslim communities (although not as large as in France), they live there, but the majority of them will never become full citizens with full and equal rights (and this is not what they want anyway).

Anyway, when you go or live in North Africa just like I did, it's obvious to notice how close to France those countries are, culturally speaking. Colonization, I know. But it's a fact: they influenced us in return as much as we influenced them. And as a consequence, a French guy could feel quite at home even in Morocco, and vice-versa. But I don't think such feeling could be possible for an average German or a Brit (for instance).

France, however, has a strong tradition of jacobinism and republicanism. Contrary to other European lands, because of its past prosperity, tolerance, and huge cultural influence, it is an immigration country just like the United States (more than half of current French citizens have foreign roots). It means, for instance, that the state encourages to "integrate" immigrants rather than allowing them to live in a separate community or neighbourhood (separation and segregation being the Anglo-saxon model). Those who seek to belong to the Nation (the majority of French Muslims in fact!), who understand we all share a common political fate and destiny have little or no problem. But those who want to remain separated, isolated, those who want to remain a foreign body forever may indeed face legal issues.
This is what happened, for instance, to the Muslim extremist minority. When they asked a separation between men and women in public buildings or public transports, the French government adamantly refused. When they ask that their women should hide their face, it's against the law : French law requires that in public space, everybody could freely recognize or identify who you are. It's not directed against Muslims per se, this law is much older than that. French law also asks that in public buildings, civil servants should not show obvious signs of the community they belong to, to prevent favoritism. It's Jacobine tradition: all citizens should be equals, and everything has to be made to prevent discrimination. And first and foremost: the state is clearly separated from the church, or from any religion. For a civil servant, wearing a hidjab is forbidden. Wearing ostensibly a crucifix is also forbidden. All religions or communities are treated equally, and there are no exception, no derogatory rules just like the odd system they tested in Canada -with bad results-.

I should also mention that according to many polls and sociologic surveys, French Muslims are the less religious Muslim community in Europe, the less concerned with religion -only barely a fourth of them are "practising Muslims"-. But the radical minority is extremely active and aggressive, and should unfortunately not be underestimated. It is this radical community only that causes this turmoil, because they, in fact, do not accept Western democracy and want to implement Sharia instead, their so-called Divine law.

Now, if you call Jacobinism or Republicanism a kind of racist ideology that goes "against every humanitarian idea, that has ever been born in Europe", it simply means you don't understand history (especially what the Age of enlightenment was), and that you should immediately read Voltaire, Montesquieu and Kant as soon as possible.
 
Last edited:

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Once again, you should try to live a few years under the rule of a brutal corrupt dictatorship, and then tell me what you think afterwards. You have to live in your flesh what the so-called "system" really means in your daily life.

Maybe it could teach you a lot about your own rights... you know, those rights we take for granted under a democratic system.
Hear hear.

Of course, but it's not only that.
Wut? I was being sarcastic. Norway only gained independence at the beginning of the twentieth century. Flag-flying enthusiasm comes with that territory. I expect to see a good many more saltires on display in the coming months.
There are forms of nationalism that can be, indeed, sympathetic when for instance a people ask to be freed, ask to have the right to self-determine its political fate.
Exactly.

In Norway, it's not at all the case. What is really scary there, is the conviction shared by the majority of locals that they are INHERENTLY SUPERIOR to anybody, that Norwegians are the Master Race, the most industrious, the most clever, the richer, the most beautiful people on earth... etc...
And worst, they want to convince you, sometimes very naively that indeed, they are SUPERIOR BEINGS belonging to a SUPERIOR CULTURE. It's their way of welcoming tourists, and they do it with a smile, without meaning any harm.
This is utter nonsense. I lived in Norway for the best part of a year. I have no idea what you are talking about. Nor would Anders Breivik recognise your vision of that country. He waged a one man war on that nation's youth because he was disgusted by the tolerance of his own countrymen. Much like the OP.

It's pretty funny to hear a Frenchman disparage other nations for having a superiority complex...
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
What's meant by totalitarian anyway? How does it differ from authoritarianism?

I read a book once which suggested that totalitarianism differed because it required the population to be in a state of perpetual mobilisation or that the public carry out the mission of social control the state's officers preserved for themselves, in that sense thatcherism or capitalism could be totalitarian, or at least totalising, because they involve populism and grass roots opinion and can successfully co-opt most forms of protest into support of the status quo.

Authoritarianism and totalitarianism are often just discussed as varying degrees of political "badness" and its all vague.
 

Typh0n

clever fool
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
3,497
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Aside of your libertarian platitudes, now, this is a proof you are trolling.

Marine Le Pen did not pass the first turn, she was ten points behind the second. Aside of that, in Belgium, far right ideas are widely heard, especially in Flanders and Antwerpen (NVA is often considered far right, even if there is worst than it). Less in Wallonia, of course...

Im trolling? Either you cannot read, didnt bother to, or dont understand.

I know Lepen didnt make it past the primaries, however she had a disturbing nuumber of votes during those primaries. I think she was third in number of votes after Hollande and Sarkozy, and if it hadnt been for Sarkozy...


Your subtle accusations of me being NVA are pretty presumptous.

Now, that's a second proof you are either:

1/ A troll

or

2/ Very ignorant and uneducated

---

Yeah, Im glad you're taking to attacking me personally, which paints YOU as the troll here.

Because:

(A) Iraq was not part of the Arab Spring

(B) There is no war in Egypt

I didnt say it was or that there is, I was generalizing. Know the context of what Im saying(ie the subject matter at hand) before getting pedantic.

(C) You're forgetting what happened first in Tunisia, in Morocco, in Qatar... etc...

---

If you knew those countries, if you would have lived there a bit, you would immediately understand that things had to change, that the previous Arabian dictatorships were already crumbling from inside. It was in fact, not possible to avoid a revolution to get rid of corruption, of nepotism, of arbitrary decisions.... And people wanted (and still want) that change badly. They want a state of law, where law is the same for all. That's all, but that's an absolute necessity.


No, its not all. People think this is all because populist theories have been hammered into our ears, but you fail to realize two things within the context of this thread that there are two problems or defects that keep many middle eastern countries from being "free". The first is keeping extremist parties out of the elections. This is important because if we do not, and they get elected they will suppress the next election. Hardly a "democratic" move. The second thing is social contract theory(Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau) which is what defines governments in the free world. Social cotract ensures our rights and protection from the government.

If believing that makes me a liberatarian, so be it. Id rather be a liberatrian than an ignoramus.

Once again, you should try to live a few years under the rule of a brutal corrupt dictatorship, and then tell me what you think afterwards. You have to live in your flesh what the so-called "system" really means in your daily life.

Maybe it could teach you a lot about your own rights... you know, those rights we take for granted under a democratic system.

No, thanks for living under a dictator, but, feel free to do so yourself, if it fills your need. They have flights to Saudi Arabia.

I do know about my noggin' rights, and in Belgium, voting is not a right but an obligation.

No, I dont have to live under a dictator to know about my freedoms, which I demonsrate my understanding of better than you.
 

Typh0n

clever fool
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
3,497
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I dont believe there's such thing as too much freedom...

So you beleive people can do whatever they want, without having to think of the consequences whatsoever?



What's meant by totalitarian anyway? How does it differ from authoritarianism?

I read a book once which suggested that totalitarianism differed because it required the population to be in a state of perpetual mobilisation or that the public carry out the mission of social control the state's officers preserved for themselves, in that sense thatcherism or capitalism could be totalitarian, or at least totalising, because they involve populism and grass roots opinion and can successfully co-opt most forms of protest into support of the status quo.

Authoritarianism and totalitarianism are often just discussed as varying degrees of political "badness" and its all vague.

No, totalitarian me means a total removal of any competition/political opppositon by the reigning poltical party.

If you feel that thats a good thing, Lark, you are more corrupt the libertarians you hate.

But Im not saying you do.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
So you beleive people can do whatever they want, without having to think of the consequences whatsoever?





No, totalitarian me means a total removal of any competition/political opppositon by the reigning poltical party.

If you feel that thats a good thing, Lark, you are more corrupt the libertarians you hate.

But Im not saying you do.

Not sure what you're saying, you dont give people consequences, they happen as a matter of course and are unavoidable, you're either aware or not.

I know what totalitarianism is, you're talking about dictatorship, one party in power and the rest in prison.

I dont much care for comparisons with libertarian dogs.
 

Typh0n

clever fool
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
3,497
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Not sure what you're saying, you dont give people consequences, they happen as a matter of course and are unavoidable, you're either aware or not.

I know what totalitarianism is, you're talking about dictatorship, one party in power and the rest in prison.

I dont much care for comparisons with libertarian dogs.

You can give people consequences, for example with civil law and law enforcement, the justice system, is I believe a way of punishing those who offend the law by creating non-natural/man-made consequences to their actions. There are also natural consequences to actions, like for example drinking a poison a dying, but thats not so much what I meant, so to rephrase the quesion: do you beleive in civil law, laws enforcement, and the justice system?

I never saw much of difference between totalitarianism and dictatorship.

Just saying, its morally worse to be a dictator than a friggin libertarian. Not calling you either though.
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
However you look at it extremes never work out, from one degree to another.
 

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
This is utter nonsense. I lived in Norway for the best part of a year. I have no idea what you are talking about. Nor would Anders Breivik recognise your vision of that country. He waged a one man war on that nation's youth because he was disgusted by the tolerance of his own countrymen. Much like the OP.

It's pretty funny to hear a Frenchman disparage other nations for having a superiority complex...

Well, according to many surveys made in Western Europe, the two countries where people are the proudest of their nationality are (1) Norway, and (2) England.

For us, mainland Europeans, those feelings remain a mistery since WWII.
Because on the other hand, the countries where people didn't care much about their nationality were (1) Germany, and (2) France. Almost a third of Germans and French already first identify themselves as "Europeans" rather than "German" or "French".


According to the experience I had in Norway everytime I travelled there, I'd say a lot of Norwegians are typically like the rednecks of Scandinavia, civilized rednecks who would enjoy healthcare and social democracy, and debating during hours about their inherent superiority compared to any other country on earth. And because they would debate with a smile and because they mean no harm, while I would not consider Norwegians to be xenophobic, it's just that this form of happy nationalism and quiet systematic self-satisfaction is sometimes quite tiring to hear and witness days after days, weeks after weeks.

Texans are a bit like this, and it's not only because they too have oil... :D

But I guess that, yes, there may have been a "after Breivik" effect. I should check the next time I go there.
 

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Im trolling? Either you cannot read, didnt bother to, or dont understand.

I know Lepen didnt make it past the primaries, however she had a disturbing nuumber of votes during those primaries. I think she was third in number of votes after Hollande and Sarkozy, and if it hadnt been for Sarkozy...

If you hadn't Sarkozy, then Marine Le Pen would have been beaten in the second turn by an enormous margin, just like her father lost against Chirac (82.2%/17.8%). What else?

Yes you are trolling, because your claims aren't realist enough, because they are a total mess and mix up facts.


Your subtle accusations of me being NVA are pretty presumptous.

I never said that. I only observed that the Flemish far-right was amongst the most powerful in Europe, and that it makes your commentary about Le Pen even odder and difficult to understand.

Yeah, Im glad you're taking to attacking me personally, which paints YOU as the troll here.

Technically, I didn't attack you. I strictly don't care who you are, and I'm not interested to know who you are.
But yes, your ignorant and bigoted views about Le Pen and the Arab world bothered me more.




No, its not all. People think this is all because populist theories have been hammered into our ears, but you fail to realize two things within the context of this thread that there are two problems or defects that keep many middle eastern countries from being "free". The first is keeping extremist parties out of the elections. This is important because if we do not, and they get elected they will suppress the next election. Hardly a "democratic" move. The second thing is social contract theory(Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau) which is what defines governments in the free world. Social cotract ensures our rights and protection from the government.

Sometimes it's more complex than that. The politics and sociology of the Arab world are much more complex than this simplistic analysis, and full of surprises and paradoxes.


No, thanks for living under a dictator, but, feel free to do so yourself, if it fills your need. They have flights to Saudi Arabia.

I'm sure that travelling even a little bit won't do any harm to you. :)

No, I dont have to live under a dictator to know about my freedoms, which I demonsrate my understanding of better than you.

If you say so. :)
 

Typh0n

clever fool
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
3,497
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
If you hadn't Sarkozy, then Marine Le Pen would have been beaten in the second turn by an enormous margin, just like her father lost against Chirac (82.2%/17.8%). What else?

The right were split between Sarkozy and Lepen, if one hadnt been there the other wouldve taken the other's voters. The left, on the other hand, were quiet united, and Hollande was the "best effort" the left could muster up, a united effort. If Sarkozy hadnt been there, all his votes would have gone to Lepen, who wouldve won not only the primaries but also the actual election. Also bear in mind Jean-Marie is not Marine, and Hollande is not Chirac.

Yes you are trolling, because your claims aren't realist enough, because they are a total mess and mix up facts.

I think it could be considered trolling only if I was doing this on purpose. If you feel Im getting my facts wrong, and this irks you, then correct me with better facts.:)




I never said that. I only observed that the Flemish far-right was amongst the most powerful in Europe, and that it makes your commentary about Le Pen even odder and difficult to understand.

Alright, well, I recogize that about the NVA, which is quiet bigoted, (though as you said there is worse) often gets alot of votes in Flanders. And this is a problem, while the Monarchy is strictly opposed to the NVA(as the NVA is anti-Monarchy), as are many Francophone Belgian politicians, such as DiRupo, there isnt a law that can stop them.

Technically, I didn't attack you. I strictly don't care who you are, and I'm not interested to know who you are.
But yes, your ignorant and bigoted views about Le Pen and the Arab world bothered me more.

Ok, well, how were my views about Lepen ignorant and bigoted? Or my views regarding the Arab world, even if I do express negative sentiment, I would blame that on the portrait painted by mainstream media of the Arab World.

Sometimes it's more complex than that. The politics and sociology of the Arab world are much more complex than this simplistic analysis, and full of surprises and paradoxes.

Just to be sure, do you feel it is ok to permit extremist parties at elections? Also, do you feel social contract is important to our freedoms or is this not the root of our freedoms in the Western World? I realize the Western world is not the Arab World. But Im wondering how you at least understand the basis of our freedoms in the West.
 

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
The right were split between Sarkozy and Lepen, if one hadnt been there the other wouldve taken the other's voters. The left, on the other hand, were quiet united, and Hollande was the "best effort" the left could muster up, a united effort. If Sarkozy hadnt been there, all his votes would have gone to Lepen, who wouldve won not only the primaries but also the actual election. Also bear in mind Jean-Marie is not Marine, and Hollande is not Chirac.

Total bullshit.

The vast majority of the French republican right statistically never vote to the far-right.
In every similar scenarii (during important mayoral elections for instance) they would have voted for the republican left.

+ You're forgetting the "centrist" voters, who are also quite important in France. They're the crown-makers, most of the time.

It's obvious you don't know anything about French politics, so please, don't continue to argue if you don't know. It's just getting more and more ridiculous. Can I ask where are your informations coming from? What kind of newspapers or insane tabloid are you reading to jump at these odd conclusions?



I think it could be considered trolling only if I was doing this on purpose. If you feel Im getting my facts wrong, and this irks you, then correct me with better facts.:)

You've already been corrected several times. Yet your pride seem so huge you wouldn't acknowledge it.




Alright, well, I recogize that about the NVA, which is quiet bigoted, (though as you said there is worse) often gets alot of votes in Flanders. And this is a problem, while the Monarchy is strictly opposed to the NVA(as the NVA is anti-Monarchy), as are many Francophone Belgian politicians, such as DiRupo, there isnt a law that can stop them.

The question being: do you think Belgium will eventually survive? Does it have to?


Ok, well, how were my views about Lepen ignorant and bigoted?

They really are.

Or my views regarding the Arab world, even if I do express negative sentiment, I would blame that on the portrait painted by mainstream media of the Arab World.

Once again, it could be interesting for you to pay a visit there, even for a limited amount of time.
You would surely be surprised how strong the civil society is in North Africa.

Plus Moroccans are amongst the friendliest people on Earth.

Moroccans who live outside Morocco, on the other hand, aren't often the best ambassadors of their native country.

Just to be sure, do you feel it is ok to permit extremist parties at elections? Also, do you feel social contract is important to our freedoms or is this not the root of our freedoms in the Western World? I realize the Western world is not the Arab World. But Im wondering how you at least understand the basis of our freedoms in the West.

For obvious reasons, I think the Arab democratic society is more Hobbesian than naively Rousseauist...

They want a state of law, a genuine rule of law first. Inequalities, nepotism and corruption are their main issues.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Wait...
congress.jpg


Now, I'm done.
 
Top