232
'You can't kill all of us': Kenya protesters vow to march again as authorities kill 22
(www.thecanary.co)
this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
232 points (99.6% liked)
World News
32318 readers
832 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Authoritarians: "Bet."
The entire principle of authoritarianism is either public support or public apathy. An authoritarian regime is only as stable as its populace.
A government that butchers its people against the will of the populace cannot survive even if it is democratic. A government that butchers people with the will of the populace will survive regardless of whether or not it's authoritarian.
See: Israel, America, Canada, Australia, UK
There's no fundamental difference between a democratic and authoritarian government in this regard. The primary difference is (and has always been) whether property is managed as a function of the state (monarchies, socialism) or as a function of the individual (democracies, anarchy).
Well, that and the "people" that get killed in democracies are usually of a different skin colour than you, so maybe you just don't care?
"Authoritarian" is connected to horseshoe theory which has holocaust trivialization history, please avoid using it
I'm taking it back.
That was a stretch but do you mean that the theory of totalitarianism was used to conflate Nazi Germany and USSR, and to an extent, justify double genocide theory...?
That being said, I don't see how it relates?
What would you say if I characterized the third reich as authoritarian? Would that make me a Holocaust trivializer?
Why would you call them authoritarian when you can just call them fascist?
It’s a square-rectangle situation in my view. All fascists are authoritarian bit not all authoritarians are fascist
Okay but bow is authoritarian useful? Can you find a definition that applies to Vietnam, Cuba, China, etc, that doesn't also apply to the governments of NATO countries like the US, France, England, etc?
I think Juan Linz created a decent criteria. It’s useful as a descriptor of how much personal liberty a person residing in a particular state can assert and how easily a person can petition their government without fear of reprisal.
Can you post the definition you're citing?
He wrote this in the 1960’s, mainly in reference to Spanish Fascism but not exclusively.
If you're talking about overton window size, this seems to apply more strongly to bourgeois democracy? The difference between fascist and liberal seems a lot smaller than the range of political opinion you'd find within the CPC or the old CCCP. I would recommend watching some translated videos of normal national assembly meetings in socialist countries
Socialist countries base their legitimacy on having more thorough democratic representation than bourgeois democracies. Look up participatory democracy and whole process peoples democracy and compare that to bourgeois theories of democracy. Maybe also look up democratic centralism and the notion of strong vs weak delegates.
There are over 100 million members of the CPC. In Vietnam every couple hundred people have a dedicated party representative that is their designated point of contact with the party. Do you have a designated point of contact for your neighborhood?
Socialist countries, with the exemption of during ww2 when fighting against the nazis, generally have a weaker executive more subject to discipline than capitalist countries.
And when you compare ww2 ussr to ww2 Britain you'll probably see the ussr as more democratic, and that is while 1/6 of their population was being exterminated