A very important article if you are at all concerned about the soft totalitarianism in America

  • Thread starter Thread starter Elizabeth3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
McCarthy was proved right.
So you think
censoring any view point that doesn’t meet the group-think standard so they are frozen out of the mainstream.
Is a good thing? Quite ironic that some find cancel culture and people being fired for personal social media posts abhorrent, but are quite happy when its their side doing it.

Speaking of irony.
red pilled
It amuses me no end, that social conservatives use that term so frequently. Given that it comes from a progressive text, written by two transwomen, as a metaphor for transitioning. Seems to me to be about a lot of things conservatives really don’t like.
 
Last edited:
Given that it comes from a progressive text, written by two transwomen, as a metaphor for transitioning
That’s what they are saying now, but it sounds more like last minute revisionism like when SpongeBob was suddenly gay. Also the metaphor doesn’t even work properly, at the very least it also supports an anti-trans argument depending on how it is interpreted.
 
Last edited:
“Soft Totalitarianism” is a an oxymoron (but a wicked cool band name).

I’ve been hearing that a Democrat POTUS will have everyone in gulag since I could understand spoken language. That has been many Democrats ago.

This sort of thing does a disservice to those who do suffer under totalitarianism. “Someone fact-checked my facebook post” is not oppression. Talk to our brothers and sisters in North Korea.
 
Calling this “totalitarianism” is a sensationalist titling choice.

Moving past that, this source does raise valid criticisms of tech companies. If a company advertises itself as a neutral place to talk then it’d be wrong to turn around and show bias towards one political faction.

Moreover, the intrusion of politics into the rest of life decreases both health and happiness for people and a lot of people hate it. The amount of people willing to marry across party lines is much smaller than a few decades ago, friendships are being broken off due to politics, and even society’s escapism - watching sports and entertainment - is being tainted by politics.

No matter how important a political issue may be, people still need a break!
 
Last edited:
That’s what they are saying now, but it sounds more like last minute revisionism like when SpongeBob was suddenly gay. Also the metaphor doesn’t even work properly, at the very least it also supports an anti-trans argument depending on how it is interpreted.
Given that Buck Angel outed Lana Wachowski to Rolling Stone in around 2006, I’d say it’s not revisionism, more like authorial intent. However YMMV and once a text is in the public sphere the authorial intent doesn’t really matter, it’s the individual interpretation of the content that applies.

PS, I always thought Spongebob was coded gay, didn’t realise they’d confirmed it.
 
If a company advertises itself as a neutral place to talk then it’d be wrong to turn around and show bias towards one political faction.
I have not observed bias toward any political faction on my social media feeds, in fact, I get a little weary of the constant barrage of conspiracy theory, cries of foul, from a certain political faction, as they flood my feed every day (granted, I only use FB and Twitter, so I am not an authority on all platforms). However, I am one who fact checks everything I care about, so, when I am corrected I am grateful for it.
 
We see a parallel today in a US leader who is despised by a substantial part of the population, but in the final analysis, is proved right on many, if not all points. Q: Who set the standard in rejection of message?

NOT drawing any equals here - only similarities.
 
I just learned about pill colors here. Al Gore’s “red pill” turned out to be a placebo.

But seriously, a fraudulent, collusive attempted coup d’état - the second in as many election cycles - is fine with you? I suggest that you study the history of such movements and reflect on the final state of the “riff-raff” (their term) who helped place them in power.
 
But seriously, a fraudulent, collusive attempted coup d’état - the second in as many election cycles - is fine with you? I suggest that you study the history of such movements and reflect on the final state of the “riff-raff” (their term) who helped place them in power
You mean the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? I agree, he’s going about it badly (couldn’t even manage to book a hotel for a press conference) but he’s trying. I mean, he’s 5 millionish votes behind, and 74 electoral college votes but that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be President for Life, just like his pal Vlad.
 
Well, when you can’t provide any proof, and therefore the courts are throwing out your filings, but you still say “massive fraud!! because I said so!!” – then, yes, it’s on a par with conspiracy theories.
Joe Biden is beating the drum of “reconcilliation” and “We are all in this together”. If he and his handlers wanted a brilliant approach to sorting out matters and defusing the “Us vs Them” the country is in, he should have publicly stated that he bvelieves the counts were fair and square and joined the Republicans in a full audited recount of the swing states.

After all, with all of the rhetoric from the left - including the leftist news media - what did they have to lose?
 
“totalitarian regimes don’t let you start up your own media company when another deplatforms you.”

From Bitchute: " BitChute needs your help! We have been deplatformed by service providers and we are in the process of moving providers. If you experience an issue this is likely the cause. Please consider helping at this critical time. "

Similiarly, Gab was deplatformed of their payment processor.
 
So do you also agree that foreign influence on our election process should be checked and rechecked to make sure everything is on the up and up?

Personally, I believe the American people should keep a close eye on and monitor BOTH the left and the right. Neither side is to be trusted or taken at face value. However, with regard to elections, particularly presidential elections, there comes a point, when credible evidence is lacking, that concession is in order for the good of the country. We have now reached that point, and then some.
 
Last edited:
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.
Wasting court time and resources with poorly-founded and poorly-run cases that were always incredibly likely to get tossed is a different kettle of fish. As are claims about evidence in said cases that then never materialises or is incredbly watered down. Which ckaims appear only to have the purpose of muddying the waters and obscuring the truth.

There are such hings as abuse of process and frivolous and vexatious litigation, and some of these, in this lawyer’s eyes at least, come incredibly close.
 
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.
I personally know a German woman who lived under communism in East Germany and she informs me that former East Germans are much conservative than the westerners because they see the parallels between the progressive (and dominant) ideologies in unified Germany and the old communism they suffered under. We could also observe that other European countries which suffered under communism, such as Poland and Hungary, are more firm in standing against abortion, Same Sex Marriage, unchecked immigration, radical feminism, etc. than the west. They have the courage to say “No” when we just surrender to the endless arguing, especially from the elites, even within nominally conservative sectors and the Church. We wrongly credit their endless concern for “victims” as well-intentioned.
The article cites those who have experienced it and their concern for what they are seeing happening now in America.
👍

As for the article itself, I couldn’t strongly agree with the opening points about the tech giants and suppressing rallies, but apart from that I agreed entirely, and though it well written and supported.
If they decide that you are a deplorable person not worth doing business with, they have the data to prove it, even if you have been careful about your actual words.
Cancel culture is very real, and we’ve seen numerous people shut off from their livelihood because of either one slip or a well argued opposition to the prevailing orthodoxies.

Thanks for posting it.
 
Last edited:
I found helpful insights and information all through the article, which elevated it above many similar articles I’ve read (and don’t always agree with).

Perhaps the most important “new” insight to me was this.
  1. Conservatives were too materialistic.
Reagan-era conservatives, seeing how cynical many 1960s campus radicals became about careers and consumption, assumed that leftist utopianism would not survive the allure of moneymaking. Religious conservatives, in particular, focused their passions on achieving political and legal power, and failed to pass on the faith to the Millennials and Generation Z, who are the most secular generations in American history.

Conservatives did not grasp what Milosz tried to tell us in the 1950s, when he said that Americans misunderstood the appeal of Communism, mistakenly believing that people only turn to it because they are forced to.

“That is wrong,” he wrote. “There is an internal longing for harmony and happiness that lies deeper than ordinary fear or the desire to escape misery or physical destruction.”

The social justice phalanx radicalizing American institutions are taking over in part through force and intimidation. But they are also appealing to the deep desire for a sense of meaning and purpose in the hearts of younger Americans, who have not found it in traditional religion or bourgeois capitalism.
And another…
“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.

OTOH, I have to agree with this…
I’ve been hearing that a Democrat POTUS will have everyone in gulag since I could understand spoken language. That has been many Democrats ago.

… “Someone fact-checked my facebook post” is not oppression. …
I have often departed ways with Conservatives (“C”) when they find liberal plots everywhere.
 
Last edited:
So do you also agree that foreign influence on our election process should be checked and rechecked to make sure everything is on the up and up?

Personally, I believe the American people should keep a close eye on and monitor BOTH the left and the right. Neither side is to be trusted or taken at face value. However, with regard to elections, particularly presidential elections, there comes a point, when credible evidence is lacking, that concession is in order for the good of the country. We have now reached that point, and then some.
Certainly anonymous individuals on CAF threads are not the determiners of when we “now have reached that point.” As if “we” have the information necessary to properly decide such things.

Incidentally, have you read the sworn affidavit filed by the former Venezuelan military officer regarding the development of Smartmatic in Venezuela?

Interesting reading.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top