Now I imagine that there are impressionable people who think this speaks the truth and I’m sad.
What part about it is untrue?
-
That there is a coordinated effort in the USA between police and the wealthy to privatize all land and institutions.
-
That harm reduction causes this.
-
No, I’d say it’s more like this actually…
Those are from the last few days. Let me guess, all of those unarmed students going up against armed cops were a clear and present danger.
I try not to get into debating online. It goes nowhere and ends up with “no you” , name calling, “I thought this was America”, sarcasm, and stereo typing groups of people. I’m tired at this point and I’ll be pushed into whatever corner you want if drawn into one.
Change is inevitable. It’s often not pretty. Freedom and security are always at play. And in the end it’s your point of view that’s going to be what matters, empathy as well, for other peoples hardships. There is not perfect solution to this, we can have perfect goals and Invision a perfect world. And we can try to get there. But calling all cops bad or all group A or B bad is just part of the problem to begin with. So I can’t get behind person or group that pushes that kind of thinking. I have Gay friends, Trans friends, Cop friends, Jewish friends and so on. What I’m not going to do is bandwagon hate any of them. Police have guns because they have to enforce the law. It’s scary as hell to be in large group of emotionally charged people with religion backed group thought and a feelings of injustice. But there you have it. Police have to move the people who don’t want to move.
War is terrible and should be avoided when possible. War for land or power or religion influence is wrong and should be stopped. I think we can agree. I’m just tired of the victim mentality and stereo typing of each other. It will not work that way. And progress is not a straight line.
And… I just did exactly what I said I wouldn’t do.
Has he tried licking the boot yet?
Heard it tastes like pig.
On the topic of boots, one book, The Iron Heel written by Jack London in early 1900s before any of the World Wars, really grabbed my interest in how stark it is in surfacing the early onset of a greed and oppression-riddled social environment of tyrannical government mechanisms.
The book entertains the thought of oligarchical entitied in capitalists economies resorting to the bloody massacres beyond non-violoent oppressions they perpetuate to practically have regular people be worked like slaves or be part of the aware or unaware collaborators in the non-violent oppression, all the while in latter years in reality saw openly tyrannical movements like fascism or Stalin’s communism saw the violent oppressions almost as first maneuvers.
This latter violent-oppression-as-first-moves has become the boogeyman at the door awaiting if the capitalist oligarchs are destabilized in favor of direct governing via means of production being in the hands of workers or workers having a prominent voice in politics directly rather than being “represented” through lobbying elites or monopolized companies having the last say in their own industries and meddling with other industries.
What I want to say is that this earlier dystopian novel may have missed the mark on which countries utilized the shocking violent oppressions, but it is nevertheless very much on point in displaying the police as “pinkertons” or the literal heels or the inquisitors, agent provocateurs that we see news in these “anti-semitic protests being actually cried out by zionist instigators, shown with footages” among peaceful protests, the abyss people already being present as homeless/down-trodden/drug-abusers-as-an-escape/the extreme form of quiet quitters, corporations and billionaires owning monopoly on a starting industry and meddling with others, media being utilized to call anyone raising a hand in defense against genocides as terrorists, rapists, cannibals.and barbarians while demanding support for literal carpet bombing that is only not called as such because it is spread over weeks instead of hours, etc. in all of these so-called democracies in the west.
Any thoughts on these topics and the relevancy of the book, which I’d say in musing hyperbole that it is criminally under-discussed or mentioned?
Haha, yes, clearly it was the monopolies and oligarchies that created the Stallin regime. /sarcasm
I have a theory that what tends to fuel authoritarianism and hierarchy is power being alloted too much in any one sphere. Like if the state becomes the only power over resources the people who are predatory are drawn to positions within it. If business and private ownership is empowered and left unchecked they end up there. It’s easy to forget that predatory expansionism is not simply a feature unique to capitalism. Human greed will adapt to fit whatever system where power is allowed to aggregate making it potentially tip and fall if unbalanced.
That doesn’t explain the many many many dictatorships that started out from the power vacuum caused by armed insurrectionists dismantling the former state.
Generally speaking I think that’s something seperate - opportunism in the face of disaster. What you are describing occurs after power aggregation and human cupidity has tipped everything too far. What I am describing is more towards the aim of prevention measures long before that point. Power consolidation has it’s enemy too which is human misery lowering the barriers to violence. You either rebalance the spinning plate before it destablizes and crashes to the ground or you get stuck with whatever shitty situation ends up as a result. Gluing things back together after the fact rarely is the better solution which is why timing is critical.
If you want a full and complete veiw of my reflectiona on history it’s gunna take more than a quippy summary. Not every short post is indicitive of a full and complete veiw of someone’s full political theory. It’s why people write very chonky books on the subject.
No, it’s not separate, you don’t just get to say the leading cause of authoritarian states is a separate thing from the causes of authoritatian states.
That would be like claiming heart disease isn’t really what kills people, that’s just cholesterol finding opportunities for people to die.
They are different authoritarian states. There isn’t a one size fits all situation. An authoritarian state that comes before a state failure tends to exist using pre-established powers. Either nobility/premogenitor culture, liquid asset wealth, theocracy, assumption and exploitation of the mechanics of statehood - that kind of thing.
Once one of those crashes due to revolt you start dealing with new powers. Cult of personality militias which offer easy solutions to quelling the chaos. Your Napoleons, Cromwells and Stalins who just slip in and recreate old inequities. Or can become a civil war of factions and warlords fighting over scraps. They work on slightly different dynamics.
To my mind hierarchy to a certain extent is desired by a lot of people. There is a comfort knowing where you fit and an alleviation of anxiety in being told by someone you trust what to do and knowing that you have someone below you. Oftentimes when power is in disarray it congregates around people who just talk a good game. The danger I think of spreading power too thin is that if there isn’t some kind of structure people seem to like to default to very basic heirachies based on tribalistic notions and their preconceived notions of what power looks like.
Cope
Fucking gross, Hexbear is leaking again.
