It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The rise of American authoritarianism

page: 4
29
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2016 @ 01:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire

And sadly enough, this sounds like one who would be willing to turn his guns on fellow citizens at the behest of an authoritarian.



I can tell you exactly when you will know something like that is going to happen. It will in fact be announced to everyone too. Something like what you describe will begin if and when Trump is president and he makes an announcement to everyone in the nation, "To help him make America Great again." Or something along those lines.

If he addresses the populace with a message of "Help me, Help you. Together we'll all Make America great. That is the moment when everyone needs to watch the f*ck out. Because that is when citizens start taking sides and killing or capturing anyone who they "think" is the problem.


Oh, like hillary's "Stand with me"??




posted on May, 21 2016 @ 01:52 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Sounds really familiar... Barack's speech?


edit on 21-5-2016 by madmac5150 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-5-2016 by madmac5150 because: Hilary paid for this



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 01:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

Btw, Trump is not authoritarian and neither are his supporters, no matter how many times it is said, it doesn't make it true.

He is used to leading, that's what he does, not dictating.


That's what all supporters of Authoritarian leaders say.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

My Belgians both support Donald... good dogs.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 02:03 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Same would apply to any leader in the right environment and extreme nationalism on the rise.

Just look at what the supporters of all three candidates are already doing in support of their would be leader. Do you think if one of them actually told their supporters to "do what needs to be done" that the fit wouldn't hit the shan???

It's like 3 different cults full of loyal members just waiting for their orders to be spoken.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 02:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: madmac5150
My Belgians both support Donald... good dogs.




They just want to chase down his hair.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 02:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: madmac5150

The 2nd Amendment would not stop the takeover by authoritarians. This is what I think a lot of people fail to realize.

Who exactly do you think authoritarians are? Authoritarians can be you, me or any of us. In fact, they are most often perpetrated by supporters of populist movements who are convinced that what they are doing, they do out of necessity and for the good of themselves, their families, their friends and neighbors and their countries.

Are you familiar with the below quote?

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun"

Do you know who said it and in what context? It was Mao Zedong and the context was reinforcing in the minds of the party loyalists that armed conflict was unavoidable if they were to seize political power.

There's a popular myth about authoritarians dictators that they "disarm" the people and then take power. This isn't how things work. In fact, in many cases, authoritarian regimes have in fact relied entirely on armed civilians to seize power from the former government. In other cases, they have come to power through popular vote or through thing like military coups (which also have popular support).

These men more often than not come to power to the cheers of the masses. They're typically viewed initially as revolutionary freedom fighters, patriots and even saviors. You name for me one authoritarian takeover attempt that was ever stopped by an armed citizenry or one successful authoritarian takeover that could have been stopped if citizens had been armed.


I have a 12ga loaded with 00 buckshot and 1oz slugs. I do not mess around.

I also have 2 Belgian Mali's that will happily kill you for beef jerky.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 02:24 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian



He realized that he and a fellow political scientist, the University of North Carolina's Jonathan Weiler, had essentially predicted Trump's rise back in 2009,

Unfortunately they were preceded by a Simpson's episode in 2000 . Or they just borrowed the idea





posted on May, 21 2016 @ 02:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: madmac5150

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: madmac5150

The 2nd Amendment would not stop the takeover by authoritarians. This is what I think a lot of people fail to realize.

Who exactly do you think authoritarians are? Authoritarians can be you, me or any of us. In fact, they are most often perpetrated by supporters of populist movements who are convinced that what they are doing, they do out of necessity and for the good of themselves, their families, their friends and neighbors and their countries.

Are you familiar with the below quote?

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun"

Do you know who said it and in what context? It was Mao Zedong and the context was reinforcing in the minds of the party loyalists that armed conflict was unavoidable if they were to seize political power.

There's a popular myth about authoritarians dictators that they "disarm" the people and then take power. This isn't how things work. In fact, in many cases, authoritarian regimes have in fact relied entirely on armed civilians to seize power from the former government. In other cases, they have come to power through popular vote or through thing like military coups (which also have popular support).

These men more often than not come to power to the cheers of the masses. They're typically viewed initially as revolutionary freedom fighters, patriots and even saviors. You name for me one authoritarian takeover attempt that was ever stopped by an armed citizenry or one successful authoritarian takeover that could have been stopped if citizens had been armed.


I have a 12ga loaded with 00 buckshot and 1oz slugs. I do not mess around.

I also have 2 Belgian Mali's that will happily kill you for beef jerky.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 03:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tiamat384
a reply to: theantediluvian

Go Trump! The rise of authoritarianism in America is based more on Leftist groups which support groups of people of very small count, yet outmatch the majority in power.


*puke*

Might want to get over yourself a bit.

There probably is validity to both sides assertions or concerns, but the hyperbole and exaggeration from both just turn to conflagrate and blur the issues. The sports team mentality doesn't serve anything but itself.

They actually might want to create a sports team, name the respective sides and watch as people funnel in and pay money to see the debate that doesn't matter.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 03:11 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I don't see this as a right or left problem, but the only problem. A wise man once said "when the Government boot is on your neck whether it is a right boot or a left boot is of no consequence". We need to stand up for each others rights regardless of politics and I think that is the gist of what you are saying...correct me if I am wrong.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 03:21 AM
link   
SPAM REMOVED BY ADMIN
edit on May 22nd 2016 by Djarums because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 07:43 AM
link   
I love to see threads like this. It's a chance at an honest discussion if people would be willing to drop the perceived slights.

Authoritarianism is NOT a left or right problem it is a human problem. The article talks about the authoritarian appeal of Trump but that doesn't make it a criticism of Conservatives and even notes that Trump is appealing to centrists and beyond too.

We have become governed by our fears.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Same would apply to any leader in the right environment and extreme nationalism on the rise.

Just look at what the supporters of all three candidates are already doing in support of their would be leader. Do you think if one of them actually told their supporters to "do what needs to be done" that the fit wouldn't hit the shan???

It's like 3 different cults full of loyal members just waiting for their orders to be spoken.



Nope, his supporters are not like that.

Bernie's maybe.

Hillary's supporters would just look at each other wondering wtf she means.




posted on May, 21 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

It really doesn't have much to do with authoritarianism at all, does it.

I am trying to see how one can connect so called "latent authoritarian tendencies" (which is I guess some sort of psychological profile?) to authoritarianism, but I cannot because there is no data, and we have to take a student's word. And given that Vox isn't partisan in the slightest, we might have to simply wait for a Trump presidency to see whether it is proper for the authors to conflate conservatives, republicans and Donald Trump with authoritarianism and extreme views. or whether this piece is more divisive fear-mongering. Personally, it sounds like more fear-mongering, but I suspect that because it is about Republicans, it doesn't count as a latent authoritarian tendency just this once.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You apparently didn't read the article.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Why do you say that?

Oh I see, just an excuse to avoid argument. Yes, I read it.
edit on 21-5-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

That's a silly question.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

That's a silly question.


A silly comment deserves a silly question.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I don't have a problem with people in groups of very small count not being forced to conform. What I object too is when they can use the power of government to force the rest of us to conform to them. That is a form of authoritarianism all its own, and that is the backlash you are seeing ... what you are calling authoritarianism.

Government was never meant to be so big it could both compel me to pay taxes for thing and then tell me it is withholding those same monies because the policy does not conform to it's own authoritarian ideal. And whichever portion of society controls the government controls that authoritarian ideal.

What you are suddenly seeing and not liking is that the government which has been authoritarian for a while is now in danger of slipping away from an agenda of which you approve. Now that you might end up "on the wrong side of history" (a real lie but since the term gets tossed at those of us who don't wish to comply with the current face of authoritarianism, I'll roll with it), you suddenly see what you have helped create and aided and abetted and are now busy chiding us not to fall prey to.

Now that you see that the shoe might end up on the other foot, you are suddenly not liking where things are going.

As it happens, I am not fond of it either, but I have been saying for while that you should think about what you doing. This is the monster you might be creating and when comes back to smack you in the @ss, you won't like it. As you sow, so shall you reap.




top topics



 
29
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join