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: 6
29
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Oh Les - it's no secret you don't always read the material

Give it a rest


It is no secret you lie to prove your arguments.


Up to your old tricks Les

I can prove my comment

:-)


Your infatuation with my post and my posting history means very little to me.




posted on May, 21 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Be that as it may...

:-)

None of us always reads all of the material Les. Just most of us are willing to cop to it - when it happens
edit on 5/21/2016 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Progressives have become as bad as the religious right telling everyone how to think and act

And if you're wrong you're a bigot racist sexism homophobe

Same as heretics sinner going to hell etc

So similar it's funny I call them regressives



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Actually, the point can be made quite clearly in a few words. People of any nation want a strong leader. That leader whether of the local tribe or of the entire nation must be seen as strong otherwise, there is a ripple effect of that weakness down through the structure and to other shores.

Trump is that strong, desired, figure, a bad choice some would say but most Americans made a bad choice of a weak, emasculating president twice priorly and it is not about to happen again.

That is another reason why a woman is not likely to get command this time either as in the back of the mind, a woman is naturally of a soft nature regardless of the fact that plenty of evidence to show that this one wanting the power is a mean and tough XXXXX.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

Nope, his supporters are not like that.



Yes. I'm afraid some of them are exactly like that.

Some Sanders supporters are like that too but Bernie would never ask them to be violent. Trump wouldn't either but he might imply it like he's done in the past by saying stuff like punch them in the face and I'll cover the legal bills.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 04:07 PM
link   
So we are watching the rise of a hitler type leader.
no one will belive this untill its far to late.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: JDmOKI

You own your thoughts. You have a right to believe whatever you want. You also have the right to "free speech" which is in reality, a deceptively simple term for a wide array of related rights and their relationships to the rights of others. In general though, you have a right to express your thoughts to those who wish to listen. This includes thoughts pertaining to how other people should think and act.

Everyone else has those rights too.

Isn't that exactly what is taking place right here in this very thread? Are we not all trying to persuade people to think and act in particular ways that we deem right or appropriate?

Perhaps you'd care to elaborate?



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Ah, but the subject here is authoritarianism.

What we do here is debate. Debate is a form of persuasion where two (or more) sides square off in a sort of war of words where each attempts to either persuade the other or those listening (or reading) that either their side is the correct one or the other side is an invalid position. You cannot have much of a debate in an authoritarian society.

Authoritarians dictate what will be permitted, so debate in those instances, such as it exists, is only allowed inasmuch as they allow it and only over the range of topics that they permit. An example of authoritarianism stifling debate is the instant impulse to paint any and all opposing arguments as "racist," "sexist," "homphobic," "Islamophobic," "motivated by right-wing religious whack-job mentality," etc., no matter what those arguments happen to be.

It is the instant equivalent of telling your opponent, "I have no idea what you just said, and I don't care. You're wrong. I'm right. I don't have to listen. *sticking fingers in ears and chanting LA-LA-LA-LA-LA at top of lungs*"



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

It's an interesting thing - this whole thing

I know all we can do is speculate and opine. So, here is more of that:

Is America’s Democracy Ripe for a Dictatorship?

I don't want to be defeatist. I want to believe we're smarter and better than this - that we won't actually allow this to just happen. I have to admit though - a part of me is starting to understand that Trump might be our future king

I hope I'm wrong - and in November we can look back on this thread and have a good laugh



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun


Actually, the point can be made quite clearly in a few words. People of any nation want a strong leader. That leader whether of the local tribe or of the entire nation must be seen as strong otherwise, there is a ripple effect of that weakness down through the structure and to other shores.


So you are arguing in defense of authoritarianism?

It seems to me that by "strong leader" what you are actually referring to is a person with unilateral decision making power. I think in that case, a more fitting term than leader would be ruler. The principal distinction between a dictator or a king and the leader of a democratic government is this concentration of power in a single person isn't it?



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko


Authoritarians dictate what will be permitted, so debate in those instances, such as it exists, is only allowed inasmuch as they allow it and only over the range of topics that they permit. An example of authoritarianism stifling debate is the instant impulse to paint any and all opposing arguments as "racist," "sexist," "homphobic," "Islamophobic," "motivated by right-wing religious whack-job mentality," etc., no matter what those arguments happen to be.


Is that different than calling people "SJW," "snowflake," "libtard," or accusing them of "pulling the race card" or "wanting free stuff" to dismiss their arguments regardless of substance?

It seems to me that people on the Right gave name to a phenomenon that isn't exclusively left/right and turned that into an overarching strategy for dismissing their opponents and claiming a victim status.

Regardless, I don't see "political correctness" from either side as an example of authoritarianism as there's no authority enforcing it.
edit on 2016-5-21 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

The problem is that progressives don't wanna debate why debate when you're fighting the moral cause of social justice? The other side is ignorant and educated, less enlightened.

The scariest type of person Is someone who thinks they're so morally superior they are so blind to see opposing views and this is running rampant in the west especially places of learning like colleges



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I'll switch back to attacking the conservatives when they force people to live the way they think is superior but right now the left and their mob of thought police is the primary enemy to freedom and free speech



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

If you didn't see it that way, you wouldn't have made an entire thread broadcasting your very fear of it.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 11:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: JDmOKI
a reply to: theantediluvian

I'll switch back to attacking the conservatives when they force people to live the way they think is superior but right now the left and their mob of thought police is the primary enemy to freedom and free speech


Oh really, have you forgotten who gave us the TSA, DHS, the Patriot act? The real enemy to freedom and expanded growth of big government surveillance and snooping into our private lives.
edit on 21-5-2016 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 11:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: theantediluvian

If you didn't see it that way, you wouldn't have made an entire thread broadcasting your very fear of it.


Trump wanting to sue journalists or news organizations for saying mean stuff about him could be considered Authoritarianism enforcing "Political Correctness".



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 11:31 PM
link   
This is why the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution is so critical... and so brilliant. An unarmed populace is nothing but cannon fodder to TPTB. An armed, and pi$$ed off populace will never bow to them. EVER. Mark my words.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 12:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: madmac5150
This is why the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution is so critical... and so brilliant. An unarmed populace is nothing but cannon fodder to TPTB. An armed, and pi$$ed off populace will never bow to them. EVER. Mark my words.


I agree in theory. But the problem in reality is a bit more complicated. An armed populace has strength and power to kill but not the insight or capability to engage or even identify it's target correctly. TPTB aren't going to face off with the people. So what good are your guns when you can't even find your enemy???

They aren't going to just wait around for you to come shoot them. They'll skip off to some tax haven island somewhere with all their tax free cash and be drinking fruity drinks on the beach while you're back here at home surrounded by chaos shooting at other American citizens who also don't know who's they should be aiming for.

Then with our economy trashed and the country in shambles they'll fund some other military invasion while backing that Government and start subverting that Power Structure next.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 12:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: madmac5150
This is why the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution is so critical... and so brilliant. An unarmed populace is nothing but cannon fodder to TPTB. An armed, and pi$$ed off populace will never bow to them. EVER. Mark my words.


I agree in theory. But the problem in reality is a bit more complicated. An armed populace has strength and power to kill but not the insight or capability to engage or even identify it's target correctly. TPTB aren't going to face off with the people. So what good are your guns when you can't even find your enemy???

They aren't going to just wait around for you to come shoot them. They'll skip off to some tax haven island somewhere with all their tax free cash and be drinking fruity drinks on the beach while you're back here at home surrounded by chaos shooting at other American citizens who also don't know who's they should be aiming for.

Then with our economy trashed and the country in shambles they'll fund some other military invasion while backing that Government and start subverting that Power Structure next.


Look at things as the opposition. And think critically... would you ever envision, as a foreign invader, a conquest of millions of gun owning folks? Probably not. THINK and quit being dullards!



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 12:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: madmac5150

Look at things as the opposition. And think critically... would you ever envision, as a foreign invader, a conquest of millions of gun owning folks? Probably not. THINK and quit being dullards!


You said TPTB. They aren't a foreign invader. Some may be foreign but certainly not an invading force. The rest of them also aren't an invading force and they live here with the rest of us only just out of reach so as to not get dirty hanging out with the lower class.

TPTB are small in number but hold the wealth and property of our nation. They won't attack you because they don't have the numbers for one and two they don't have to attack you like that. They simply squeeze some other section of the system to do it for them. They sue you in to debt prison. Get the local police to hunt you down. Or some other LEO agency to do it. In fact you won't even know who was behind the attack because they are all hidden behind mountains of bureaucratic legal entities so deep you'll never figure it out.

Like I said earlier. Do you even know who your enemy is??? Specifically??? Like by name and their location???



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join