“The current process of spiritual demagoguery and rhetorical overkill has transformed the concern for victims into a totalitarian command and a permanent inquisition,” he wrote. Survivors of Communism are saying the same thing: that liberalism’s admirable care for the weak and marginalized is fast turning into a monstrous ideology that, if it is not stopped, will transform liberal democracy into a therapeutic form of totalitarianism."
What muck. Worse, what insulting muck to those who actually experienced real totalitarianism.
Have you experienced real totalitarianism? If so, in what ways? The article cites those who have experienced it and their concern for what they are seeing happening now in America.
Ever hear of the dictatorship of relativism? Did you lambaste Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI for having the temerity to speak that phrase?
No, the article doesn’t cite them. It references some vague generalized group with zero actual sources who lived under totalitarianism. Hint: totalitarian regimes don’t let you start up your own media company when another deplatforms you.
Well said. The only threat of totalitarianism currently facing the US is that narcissistic clown refusing to accept the result of a free and fair election.
Shame on the OP for equating that with the horror faced by people under the Soviet Union and Nazism.
If you read the article critically it says how it differs.
"Unlike in Stalin’s Russia, it does not depend on inflicting pain and terror to eliminate its opponents. Rather, it seeks control by manipulating access to comfort and status. "
So rather than accusing the article of what it clearly does not do, why not argue why the social credit system that we seem to be moving towards where anything outside of the acceptable group-think can mean you lose your job, your social standing etc is ok?
You have absolutely no clue. I have close friends who have experienced totalitarianism, and they all see that its home in the US is on the Left and that it’s a real danger.
A classic tactic is what we see here: fabricated hysteria and lies because someone has the temerity to use the legal process to ensure that the election was legitimate. The only people in this country with a history of refusing to accept the results of a free and fair election are on the Left; we saw it with Bush/Gore we saw it again with Trump/Clinton.
Incrementalism, my brother. Incrementalism. Two steps forward, then when opposition arises, one step back. Repeat as necessary. You see no precedent for this?
Apparently, whistleblowing is now evil.
Yet. For now the big tech companies and corporations seem to be chasing away and censoring any view point that doesn’t meet the group-think standard so they are frozen out of the mainstream. The only reason people are able to create their own media companies (if they even stand a chance against the industry giants in the first place), is because they haven’t been able to turn laws in their favor yet. But with the younger generations buying into the “ruin people’s lives if they don’t think and talk like us” mentality, it’s only a matter of time.
“What we are heading for is an American version of China’s social credit system. In China, the state has mastered a techno-totalitarianism of which Mao Zedong could only have dreamed. The Chinese are using the data-gathering capabilities of smartphones, laptops, and closed-circuit cameras, analyzing patterns with artificial intelligence, and giving each citizen a “social credit score” that determines their access to the economy and society.”
If Google or Facebook or Twitter wants to cancel you, you will be canceled, and probably marked as a purveyor of “hate speech” for deviating from the progressive line.
We have seen the FB and Twitter censorship. YouTube is close behind. Recently, they had a “glitch” which prevented conservative/independent election related vids from loading. How curious!
Watch a vid relating to the election. YouTube has placed a footer on all such vids stating that “the AP has called the election” in favor of Joe Biden. Which certifying agency is the AP? None other than brother leftists. Below that in the footer it states - despite mountains of evidence to the contrary - that “robust” protections are in place to ensure the accuracy of election results.
Where is John Stossel when you need him? “Give me a break!”
But the evils of Nazism and totalitarianism wasn't fostered on the German people, and others, immediately. It was gradual, eventually gaining momentum until the result we know today. Germany was a republic, know as the Weimar Republic since 1919 or so. Hitler just didn't emerge out of the shadows and became an instant dictator. He ran for the office of Chancellor several times, the last in 1943, but lost to Hindenburg, but Hitler still garnered 43% of the German vote. Because he did receive so many votes, and in addition to the Nazi Party majority in the Reichstag, the opposition had no choice to find a place for him in the German gvt, the largely cermonial office of Chancellor. Well, not long after he was elected, the Nazi majority Reichstag, passed the Enabling Act, which basically gave Hitler limitless power, though still not total, yet. And with the death of the elderly Hindenberg, Hitler combined both offices of President and Chanceller into one, with him in charge. There is no need for me to regurgitate German history, particularly that of the Nazi rise to power, but the essential fact that what happened was a gradual, yet eventually rapidly culminating into a totalitarian gvt. Then again, there were divisions with the Nazi gvt.whom Hitler intentionally did not grant any one organization full power, as he did not want a coup against himself, so he played even his allies in the gvt against themselves to foster rivalries and division. Very, very complicated and devious.
On the contrary, I often speak with my friend whose family came to this country from Hungary in 1956. He and his relatives are all terrified that the US may be heading in that direction. When the Common Core State Standards Initiative was introduced, he remarked, “This is communism”. Totalitarianism does not have to come in the form of a Soviet tank. I am not kidding you. You would think that people who lived through what you call “real” totalitarianism would have a higher threshold for defining totalitarianism, but, on the contrary, I think many of them actually have a heightened awareness of how totalitarianism comes in.
No, both Gore and Clinton did concede and the peaceful transfer of power, which had gone seamlessly since Washington retired from office, not trying to be a king, having the first peaceful transfer of power to John Adams. And here we are today, in 2020, when an incumbent President who lost BOTH the popular vote AND the Electoral College by a landslide, and along with his Republican enablers, (fact, as few Republican lawmakers have spoken up to defend the election results), still thinks he won ( fact, in his own statements), refuses to concede, and refuses to assist in the transition to the next Presidency, refusing access to the information the next Presidents needs, thus hobbling the next President, the republic itself, and the American people. NO other American President in nearly 240 years of a democratic republic, has intentionally tried to undermine and sabotage the office of the Presidency and the republic itself. No judgement, but fact in his refusal to concede and to assist in the peaceful transfer of power. This is sabotage and a scorched earth policy, which not only hurts the next President, but the republic, and the American people, as I've already stated. If I have made any unintentional statements regarding the current President and his machinations, then I will publically apologize.
So if a candidate believes that there was widespread fraud and election laws give him legal recourse, why should he concede before looking into the matter? Do we want to ensure we have election integrity in this country or not? If candidates just concede so the boat never gets rocked, then we can find ourselves in hot water if elections are not decided by We The People but by rigging, cheating and back door deals of the elites. I think it’s a dangerous precedent to concede just to not make any waves. It is a service to our Constitutional Republic to make sure we cross all the t’ and dot all the i’s. Full sunlight and transparency will make sure we can keep our republic. There’s no harm in double checking results and when people object it raises suspicions.
Totalitarianism doesn’t have to come from the state. It can come from the private and corporate world. It’s a mistake to believe capitalism can’t be totalitarian.
Market power is an important aspect to this. One doesn’t have to outlaw competition but we have seen how Google has used its dominance to crush smaller competitors and start ups. And it gets worse when we examine how Big Tech (and others) use their money to control the levers of power to prevent new antitrust laws fit for a changed world.
Oh yeah, the Deep State. The JFK conspiracy. Roswell. Satanic cannibalistic pizza parlors. Fusion GPS. Uranium One. The Illuminati. The Rothchilds. Elvis is alive. The New World Order. Alien implants. Mind Control. Aluminum foil hats and rooms papered with aluminium foil will protect us from this vast worldwide, and even extraterrestrial conspiracy trying to influence a Presidential election. Possible. It could be a vast conspiracy spanning centuries, back to 1789 when George Washington was elected President with no contenders. May be on to something there…
So double checking election results when there seems to be anomalies is on par with conspiracy theories? …or because conspiracy theories exist we should just do away with our election laws and processes and take everything at face value? Not really sure what your point is here.
EVERY single lawsuit, scores probably by now, that has been brought to the courts alledging voter fraud have been thrown out, including 9 in ONE day. Multiple election commissions and authorities, too numerous to list here, including those at the Federal gvt. level, have found absolutely NO proof of voter fraud. The courts, election commissions, and numerous officials have found NO fraud. Is this a conspiracy? Oh, but he has his ace in the hole, Rudi Giuliani, who made a public announcement of his promotion in front of a landscaping company and an adult bookstore (not making any judgements), who spouts conspiracy theories and falsehoods, who tucks in his shirt a lot in motels with a woman) whom posed as, and whom he thought was 14 years of age. Fact, on tape, published, and part of a Borat film. Not passing judgment, of course, on an adult man (wanting to be alone with a 14 year old <actually a 25 year old actress> in a sleazy motel room) is in charge of the lawsuits. He hires only the best people, and Giuliani, who is graciously working pro bono, is the creme of the crop of all attorneys whom he could have chosen, or rather, the only individual who desired to be in charge of such an enviable and prestigious position. The best of the best. A person can be judged by the people whom he surrounded himself and with whom he keeps company.