Bø!rge
So, if we mostly can agree on the "paradox of tolerance", that we shouldn't tolerate the intolerant to influence how we operate our society, because they will destroy tolerance…
Then shouldn't we also consider that maybe there's a similar paradox on not using democracy to let anti-democratic forces take over a democratic society, because they will dismantle democracy?
Bø!rge
Are we really sure that the best thing for Germany to do in the 1930s was to respect the democratic outcomes and give power to Hitler, instead of disregarding the votes for that guy and shut him /his party out that one time?
Are we totally sure?
Because I think democracy is incredibly important! Maybe even important enough to save from itself at some very limited instances. But also maybe not "perfect" democracy always is the very most important thing of all? How many should suffer for it?
Bø!rge
You know what all those cool, fun dystopian books and films and series the world has been awash with for the last few decades are all missing?
The fact that if they where anywhere near realistic they would be pretty boring – if they could exist at all. Because even with todays tech, not to mention the superfuturistic tech in these scifis, all resistance can be made impossible. Absolutely impossible.
Well, I guess 1984 did show this, and it was not boring. But that's a much harder story to tell
Bø!rge
I always liked these dystopic fictions. I saw them as a warning
Now I fear that they've rather functioned as numbing and hopewashing
Eh, it's just fiction!
Eh, sure it would be bad, but it wouldn't be that bad – the people would rise up! I would be in a scrappy gang of rebels using cool, high tech equipment to take down the man! And finally my life would have action and purpose!
No you wouldn't! You'd live in fear. A few people would try to resist, and they'd get found and beaten immediately
Urzl
@forteller There's no paradox. We have a social contract that says, mostly, just don't knowingly harm other people.
When they break the agreement with the intention of knowingly harming other people, they waive their protection under the contract.
Killing democracy is squarely in the category of knowingly harming other people so this is already covered.
Bø!rge
@gooba42 Well, I'm not seeing anyone talking about maybe not handing over power to the person telling everyone he's going to be a dictator, and the party that has shown for years that they disdain democracy, so I'm not sure it's as covered as all that, or at least not seen that way by most people.
Bø!rge
What I'm saying is when the worlds most powerful country, with all the tech companies that controls most of the data of a huge % of individuals and governments of the world, and the military power of many of the next largest militaries combined, becomes a dictatorship. There's no going back.
Fascism is a self perpetuating system. Everyone lives in fear and under surveillance. Regular people can't topple it. And neither can anyone in power. They don't control the system, the system controls them
Bø!rge
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – for ever.
Bø!rge
"joke"
https://newrepublic.com/post/188363/donald-trump-joke-power-forever
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.