this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
1102 points (88.2% liked)

Memes

45891 readers
1645 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Alterecho@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I'm sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding here. I think the delineation between authoritarian regimes and non-authoritarian governments is pretty clear - are you implying that all socialist and communist influenced governments are necessarily authoritarian?

[–] JamesConeZone@hexbear.net 26 points 1 year ago (23 children)

No, I'm suggesting that authoritarian is a meaningless term unless defined specifically and was asking what theories of power and authority they had for making the delineation they are.

The derogatory term authoritarian is always leveled at socialist or communist countries, and never capitalist ones even though capitalist countries restrict rights for the majority of their populations by the very nature of the inherent power structure in capitalism. Even though communist countries usually enjoy far more decentralised authority, better voting rights, and higher political involvement in the populace, they are labeled as "authoritarian," the implication being that they need "freedom" aka capitalism

[–] PvtGetSum@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What? The term authoritarian is thrown at non-communist/capitalist nations all the time. Syria, Nazi Germany, Libya, Franco's Spain, Modern Russia, and a million other instances. Authoritarian is a clearly defined term and is in no way exclusively applied to communist nations in almost any circles. It also happens to have been applied to most "communist" countries because most of them have been authoritarian

[–] JamesConeZone@hexbear.net 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

Notice you didn't name the United States which is just as authoritarian as modern Russia by any definition we choose (voting rights? participation in political process? allowed dissent? access to clean water? basic access to healthcare? food desserts? policies meant to keep people in poverty?). That's my point. It's an ethereal term unless properly defined.

We'll have to set Libya aside since after given "freedom," there are now literal slave traders everywhere.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] brain_in_a_box@hexbear.net 16 points 1 year ago (14 children)

It's not clearly defined at all; try to give a definition of authoritarianism that applies to all of the countries frequently described as authoritarian, but not to any of the ones that aren't, and you'll see how vague a term it is.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[–] sooper_dooper_roofer@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I think the delineation between authoritarian regimes and non-authoritarian governments is pretty clear

Why are you unable to explain it then?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I believe they are suggesting that, if "authoritarian" means anything, that every large state that has ever existed was "authoritarian," though some diffuse the authority through things like enclosure of the commons combined with strict property laws or other, older methods like religious law.

[–] Alterecho@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

That's fair- where the line of "authoritarianism" is drawn depends on historic, social, and economic context. I think modern colloquial usage is certainly shaped by western values, simply because America's primary export is culture, and that's what happens when you shout loud enough over enough time.