User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 98

  1. #21
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    MBTI
    IxFJ
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Virtual ghost View Post
    1. So you are going to introduce fascism to prevent fascism ?
    Fascism is right-wing totalitarianism, like the Third Reiche. I'm proposing left-wing authoritarianism as the only viable alternative. Sometimes the only way to fight fire is with fire.

    Quote Originally Posted by Virtual ghost View Post
    2. You would give this power to the government even if this same government is full of people which you don't approve ?
    No, I would not support this administration having more authoritarian control than they already do. Hopefully with the help of tech giants like Google, Facebook and Twitter, right-wing extremism will be censored to the point where fascist propaganda will no longer be accessible to the public. Trump is only in office because Russian trolls disseminated disinformation on social media. Informed voters can only make the right decision if they are given honest and accurate information from a well-regulated media apparatus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Virtual ghost View Post
    3. Since when are tech giants progressive ? (obsession with money isn't progressive, it is very very old school idea)
    As private businesses, of course they are self-interested. But they largely support progressive ideals.

    NYT - Silicon Valley’s Politics: Liberal, With One Big Exception



    Quote Originally Posted by Virtual ghost View Post
    4. How will you insure that this system doesn't support exactly what you want to avoid ?

    My country had Communism, Fascism and various endless experiments with "authoritarianism" and therefore I can't see what good can really come out of this kind of leverage. The counter to hate groups is education, common sense and perhaps some empathy, not more of the same old monumental thinking.
    I agree with you that education is vitally important. Children are being taught progressive values in school which will go a long way in preventing a future president Trump. A new Gallup poll found that younger Americans are becoming increasingly optimistic about socialism. Most young Americans prefer socialism to capitalism, new report finds Still, there needs to be other safeguards to prevent vulnerable minds from being exposed to harmful ideas in the form of right-wing propaganda.

  2. #22
    A Bittersweet Symphony... The Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    478 so/sx
    Posts
    14,861

    Default

    Fighting fire with fire only serves to spread the flames.
    I am the Cat who walks by himself; and all places are alike to me...
    Likes Luminous liked this post

  3. #23
    Digital ambition Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honeydew View Post
    Fascism is right-wing totalitarianism, like the Third Reiche. I'm proposing left-wing authoritarianism as the only viable alternative. Sometimes the only way to fight fire is with fire.
    My family went through both I can tell you that in practice the differences are very subtle. Authoritarianism is authoritarianism at the end of the day.


    No, I would not support this administration having more authoritarian control than they already do. Hopefully with the help of tech giants like Google, Facebook and Twitter, right-wing extremism will be censored to the point where fascist propaganda will no longer be accessible to the public. Trump is only in office because Russian trolls disseminated disinformation on social media. Informed voters can only make the right decision if they are given honest and accurate information from a well-regulated media apparatus.

    But who allowed this to the Russians ? The same tech giants you are prizing, which care about nothing but money. Years have passed and we still have the same problems over and over.
    Plus what they are helping China build in social control is basically unforgivable and it isn't progressive at all.




    As private businesses, of course they are self-interested. But they largely support progressive ideals.

    NYT - Silicon Valley’s Politics: Liberal, With One Big Exception

    People need to learn critical thinking instead replacing ideology with another ideology.


    I agree with you that education is vitally important. Children are being taught progressive values in school which will go a long way in preventing a future president Trump. A new Gallup poll found that younger Americans are becoming increasingly optimistic about socialism. Most young Americans prefer socialism to capitalism, new report finds Still, there needs to be other safeguards to prevent vulnerable minds from being exposed to harmful ideas in the form of right-wing propaganda.

    They are perhaps getting more optimistic about socio-democracy, not socialism. Capitalism and socialism aren't the only options on the table.
    I never noticed that American youth truly wants genuine socialistic ideas like nationalizing various big companies, sending pastors into a concentration camps, police state etc. You Americans messed up some definitions from what I see. Just if you are anti-capitalist that doesn't make you automatically a Socialist there is middle ground as well as more out of the box categories.

  4. #24
    Digital ambition Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mysterious Stranger View Post
    Fighting fire with fire only serves to spread the flames.

    I can see what the person is trying to say or achieve but this just isn't thought out.
    Likes Lark liked this post

  5. #25
    A Bittersweet Symphony... The Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    478 so/sx
    Posts
    14,861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Virtual ghost View Post
    I can see what the person is trying to say or achieve but this just isn't thought out.
    Oh really? Dear Virtual Ghost do go on...
    I am the Cat who walks by himself; and all places are alike to me...

  6. #26
    Doot Dat Doot Dat asynartetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    MBTI
    IxxP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    14,224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honeydew View Post
    Fascism is right-wing totalitarianism, like the Third Reiche. I'm proposing left-wing authoritarianism as the only viable alternative. Sometimes the only way to fight fire is with fire.
    The problem here is that the tools they would put into place to fight one type of authoritarianism can then later be used by their ideological opposites to more easily establish their own authoritarian systems. It's so astonishing how the people on the left who support such measures never seem able to grasp this.


    The only cure to authoritarianism is radical centrism. Everyone likes to bash centrists as wishy-washy types who don't hold strong beliefs (quite untrue, they just tend to be less inclined to viewing the world in black and white, choosing the nuanced grey area inbetween). At least they aren't willing to trade one type of authoritarianism for another. Trading freedoms away for a little peace of mind and protection from one type of boogeyman isn't worth it when the ones who would claim to protect you are likely themselves boogeymen seeking to exploit you in some form.

    And regarding socialism...I've got no problem with it, in theory. But for it to work, it needs to be a libertarian form. When you get into a strong, central authority pushing it, you just end up with a lot of the same corrupt opportunists preying upon the weak, as you get in capitalist societies and with fascist governments.

    Libertarian socialism - Wikipedia


    A lot of people don't make the distinctions between authoritarian socialism and the libertarian variety of it, but I have a feeling if those sorts of polls specified that distinction, you'd get most of the supporters choosing the latter over the former.

  7. #27
    Digital ambition Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mysterious Stranger View Post
    Oh really? Dear Virtual Ghost do go on...

    I simply get the sense that the person wants well but isn't too educated on the details of the subject.



    Quote Originally Posted by asynartetic View Post
    The problem here is that the tools they would put into place to fight one type of authoritarianism can then later be used by their ideological opposites to more easily establish their own authoritarian systems. It's so astonishing how the people on the left who support such measures never seem able to grasp this.


    The only cure to authoritarianism is radical centrism. Everyone likes to bash centrists as wishy-washy types who don't hold strong beliefs (quite untrue, they just tend to be less inclined to viewing the world in black and white, choosing the nuanced grey area inbetween). At least they aren't willing to trade one type of authoritarianism for another. Trading freedoms away for a little peace of mind and protection from one type of boogeyman isn't worth it when the ones who would claim to protect you are likely themselves boogeymen seeking to exploit you in some form.

    And regarding socialism...I've got no problem with it, in theory. But for it to work, it needs to be a libertarian form. When you get into a strong, central authority pushing it, you just end up with a lot of the same corrupt opportunists preying upon the weak, as you get in capitalist societies and with fascist governments.

    Libertarian socialism - Wikipedia


    A lot of people don't make the distinctions between authoritarian socialism and the libertarian variety of it, but I have a feeling if those sorts of polls specified that distinction, you'd get most of the supporters choosing the latter over the former.

    I disagree. Plus I find "libertarian socialism" to be too much of a contradiction, or what both have to do with "centrism"?


    The problem with this it is that it is also running away from something to the point that you will get exactly the opposite. Once you take out and really cut government you are basically very vulnerable to invasions by foreign authoritarian power. Native Americans in north America basically fit the profile of libertarian socialist and look what happened to them as soon as they came into the contact with "the system". Even if you make the whole world like this the first warlord that rises will take everything.


    For libertarian ideas it is obvious that isolated nations invented them but pilled up expansionistic nations of the old world just wouldn't let you get away with it, especially in overcrowded globalized world. This is exactly what I am telling people on this forum for quite some time: you want to ride into tank battles on horse. I am from unstable corner of the world and to us functional and capable government is a must. However the future of the world will look more like my part of the world than some open planes of old west some 200 years ago, especially if we don't count space exploration.


    Authoritarianism should be avoided but you need clear social order if you are planing to survive the 21th century or at least play a major role in it.
    Likes The Cat liked this post

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    27,272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asynartetic View Post
    The problem here is that the tools they would put into place to fight one type of authoritarianism can then later be used by their ideological opposites to more easily establish their own authoritarian systems. It's so astonishing how the people on the left who support such measures never seem able to grasp this.


    The only cure to authoritarianism is radical centrism. Everyone likes to bash centrists as wishy-washy types who don't hold strong beliefs (quite untrue, they just tend to be less inclined to viewing the world in black and white, choosing the nuanced grey area inbetween). At least they aren't willing to trade one type of authoritarianism for another. Trading freedoms away for a little peace of mind and protection from one type of boogeyman isn't worth it when the ones who would claim to protect you are likely themselves boogeymen seeking to exploit you in some form.

    And regarding socialism...I've got no problem with it, in theory. But for it to work, it needs to be a libertarian form. When you get into a strong, central authority pushing it, you just end up with a lot of the same corrupt opportunists preying upon the weak, as you get in capitalist societies and with fascist governments.

    Libertarian socialism - Wikipedia


    A lot of people don't make the distinctions between authoritarian socialism and the libertarian variety of it, but I have a feeling if those sorts of polls specified that distinction, you'd get most of the supporters choosing the latter over the former.
    The state cant be used to introduce or further the aims of either capitalism or socialism so much. It'll only ever end up in something crap, usually something authoritarian.

    Culture matters though. I dont mind people being "authoritarian" about some things but opinion beats policy. When its some sort of groupthink things always go south.

    Centrism is liable just to end up privatizing tyranny (which is what authoritarianism is), rather than doing anything about it.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    27,272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Virtual ghost View Post
    I simply get the sense that the person wants well but isn't too educated on the details of the subject.






    I disagree. Plus I find "libertarian socialism" to be too much of a contradiction, or what both have to do with "centrism"?


    The problem with this it is that it is also running away from something to the point that you will get exactly the opposite. Once you take out and really cut government you are basically very vulnerable to invasions by foreign authoritarian power. Native Americans in north America basically fit the profile of libertarian socialist and look what happened to them as soon as they came into the contact with "the system". Even if you make the whole world like this the first warlord that rises will take everything.


    For libertarian ideas it is obvious that isolated nations invented them but pilled up expansionistic nations of the old world just wouldn't let you get away with it, especially in overcrowded globalized world. This is exactly what I am telling people on this forum for quite some time: you want to ride into tank battles on horse. I am from unstable corner of the world and to us functional and capable government is a must. However the future of the world will look more like my part of the world than some open planes of old west some 200 years ago, especially if we don't count space exploration.


    Authoritarianism should be avoided but you need clear social order if you are planing to survive the 21th century or at least play a major role in it.
    Depending on your terrain or tactics tanks are a shit option, Afghanistan is a great guide in that respect, seen more than one film about the Russians out there which gave a strong verdict on that one.

    Also, what about those Finns, eh? What use would tanks have been in the Winter War?

    The Swiss and Swedes both have great examples of decentralized services, even defence in the Swiss example (arent they the nation that makes ownership of automatic weapons for the adult population mandatory? Gee, wonder how they avoid all the spree killings?).

    Not all libertarians who are socialists are a fan of the whole disarmament or volunteer corps ideas of national defence. Characterizing that sort of thinking as something primitivistic or akin to older agrarian or itinerant communities isnt always wrong but its a more diverse scene than all that. I know you disagree and stuff so maybe its a waste of time.

    Anyway, I dont think its necessary to pursue labelling or ideological purity, that's someone else's nightmare and not mine. I dont worry about some sorts of consistency or orthodoxy too much. Life is short. Avoidable suffering and all that.

  10. #30
    Digital ambition Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Depending on your terrain or tactics tanks are a shit option, Afghanistan is a great guide in that respect, seen more than one film about the Russians out there which gave a strong verdict on that one.

    Also, what about those Finns, eh? What use would tanks have been in the Winter War?

    The Swiss and Swedes both have great examples of decentralized services, even defence in the Swiss example (arent they the nation that makes ownership of automatic weapons for the adult population mandatory? Gee, wonder how they avoid all the spree killings?).

    Not all libertarians who are socialists are a fan of the whole disarmament or volunteer corps ideas of national defence. Characterizing that sort of thinking as something primitivistic or akin to older agrarian or itinerant communities isnt always wrong but its a more diverse scene than all that. I know you disagree and stuff so maybe its a waste of time.

    Anyway, I dont think its necessary to pursue labelling or ideological purity, that's someone else's nightmare and not mine. I dont worry about some sorts of consistency or orthodoxy too much. Life is short. Avoidable suffering and all that.

    Well, sloppy tactics can happen but don't make a mistakes that in all those cases the invaded side didn't have loses or large suffering. Not to mention foreign aid factors and they did both have some order. Not to mention that if the Russians just started to drop nukes once invented we wouldn't be having this conversation. Libertarians in general want to remove the rules and that is exactly what would give Russians the edge in Afghanistan. In the world without any rules and influences this war would be over in one afternoon if the Russians decided like this.


    Plus Swiss and Sweden are generally pretty organized countries that aren't really libertarian. I find them more to be more of examples for what I am arguing, balance between authority and libertarian ideas.



    However all of this is past. Technological revolution carries some major changes and that is that specialization carries great advantages and in orderly environment it is easier to create large quantity of experts. Which need protection for a long time until they become real experts. Small group of people took control over this world exactly since they are experts and control information. I don't know how much interest you have in military robotics but that is a game changer. Russians have the whole tank brigades on the remote control and that changes everything. Especially since you need order in order to make sure that someone in hiding isn't making an army of these or that you have one such army on your own. However you will not build this without some top experts that require very strong education and stable living conditions. The era of "improvisations" is over.




    Btw from what I have seen Swiss are the people with most gun death in Europe.
    Likes The Cat liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Silicon Valley and The New Feudalism: Why the 'Internet of Things' Marks a Return...
    By iwakar in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 10-06-2019, 03:25 PM
  2. Silicon Valley
    By CDH15 in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-20-2017, 08:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO