Democracy vs. Totalitarianism

mafwons

Hi guys
Feb 16, 2014
2,740
169
✟11,177.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I do not see Democracy (or a Democratic Republic for more accuracy) being far removed from one another. Most people I hear talk about this seem to view freedom on a linear continuum with Democracy being most free and Totalitarianism being most opressive. I purpose a circular continuum, wherin anarcy is top dead center and bottom dead center is the thin line seperating Totalitarianism from democracy, and in between we have the various forms of government based on their opressiveness. I am interested in any thoughts on this, agree or disagree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NightHawkeye

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟781,037.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
I find the "liberty" vs "socialism" axes to be meaningful.
political_spectrum.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Avid
Upvote 0

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟781,037.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Wait...why are the independents and centrists put with the secular conservatives and objectivists (the latter certainly don't deserve that gold star put next to them).
Because people who can live with limited government are able to live together in peace despite diversity of opinion and lifestyles. It's not complicated. :thumbsup:

Anyone who can't accept diversity opts for totalitarianism. Good luck finding a perfect fit. ;)

(For some reason totalitarian regimes have this peculiar pattern of literally killing off undesirables and those unable or unwilling to conform.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Avid
Upvote 0
S

Savior2006

Guest
Because people who can live with limited government are able to live together in peace despite diversity of opinion and lifestyles.

Independent just means they don't subscribe to any political party, although they often do when given a chance to explain their beliefs.

I've come across many "independents" who are really just Republicans. Republicans who think that just by criticizing the Republican party for not being Republican enough that they are "independents."

I can probably find Democrats that are the same way.
 
Upvote 0

HammerOfThor

Universalist Pantheist Neopagan
May 5, 2015
163
27
✟15,469.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
I find the "liberty" vs "socialism" axes to be meaningful.
political_spectrum.png

There are so many things wrong with this. One, why is corporatism on the right? Corporatism has been used as a successful left-wing economic model in many European countries. Also, why is capitalism next to the word "anarchy"? How are those two even related?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oafman
Upvote 0

mafwons

Hi guys
Feb 16, 2014
2,740
169
✟11,177.00
Faith
Non-Denom
There are so many things wrong with this. One, why is corporatism on the right? Corporatism has been used as a successful left-wing economic model in many European countries. Also, why is capitalism next to the word "anarchy"? How are those two even related?

In a truly stateless society capitalism in its raw and unadulterated form would flourish, therefore anarchy and capitalism share a tight bond. Check out anarchocapitalism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NightHawkeye
Upvote 0

HammerOfThor

Universalist Pantheist Neopagan
May 5, 2015
163
27
✟15,469.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟781,037.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
There are so many things wrong with this. One, why is corporatism on the right? Corporatism has been used as a successful left-wing economic model in many European countries. Also, why is capitalism next to the word "anarchy"? How are those two even related?
Here's another look ... attaching world leaders in the appropriate places ... with vertical axis reversed.
Political%20Spectrum%201.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Avid
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Avid

A Pilgrim and a Sojourner...
Sep 21, 2013
2,129
753
✟13,263.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
There are so many things wrong with this. One, why is corporatism on the right? Corporatism has been used as a successful left-wing economic model in many European countries. Also, why is capitalism next to the word "anarchy"? How are those two even related?
I had to look at this a while before having a grasp of what you ask. Similar questions came to my mind as I pondered what it was really saying, and I like it more after thinking about it some!

Notice Corporatism is OPPOSITE from Socialism. Certain techniques and methods are used in both (cronyism, etc.,) and that makes them on a par in only one direction. The other direction they are opposite.

Fascism and Communism are perceived to be opposites in certain world view scenarios, but are BOTH Socialist in nature. Corporatism may not be all good, but errs on the side of capitalism. Money, and not idealism, has pushed these to the opposite extreme.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NightHawkeye
Upvote 0

HammerOfThor

Universalist Pantheist Neopagan
May 5, 2015
163
27
✟15,469.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
Certain techniques and methods are used in both (cronyism, etc.,)

I don't see what cronyism has to do with corporatism. Modern corporatist countries are some of the least crony.

Fascism and Communism are perceived to be opposites in certain world view scenarios, but are BOTH Socialist in nature.

Not really. Fascism opposes class warfare.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Avid

A Pilgrim and a Sojourner...
Sep 21, 2013
2,129
753
✟13,263.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I don't see what cronyism has to do with corporatism. Modern corporatist countries are some of the least crony.
Not sure where you are coming from on this. I'll try to give a few examples, and maybe you'll adjust your view.

Crony Capitalism is a common term for when corporations do certain favors, including giving money, to gain favors that help them in the marketplace. Big profits await those who are able to do business with LESS government interference. That often is bought with money to politicians and by acquiescing to "political correctness."

Warren Buffet owes a billion in unpaid taxes, but is not in jail. He states publicly that he thinks his taxes should be higher (intimating everyone else's should be as well.) Says his overall percentage is less than that of his secretary. The difference is his are based largely on rates for "Capital Gains" (money there was taxes a few times already,) and taxes for his secretary are based in straight income tax rates.

Not really. Fascism opposes class warfare.
In Germany, about 80 years ago, we had:
Aryans vs. Jews, etc.

In the Soviet Union (and other similar situations,) we had:
Statists/Communists vs. everyone else

If you were not part of the "IN" crowd, you were to be oppressed, and maybe even killed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NightHawkeye
Upvote 0

HammerOfThor

Universalist Pantheist Neopagan
May 5, 2015
163
27
✟15,469.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
Crony Capitalism is a common term for when corporations do certain favors

And that has nothing to do with modern corporatist economic policy.

If you were not part of the "IN" crowd, you were to be oppressed, and maybe even killed.

That makes them both totalitarian, not necessarly socialist.
 
Upvote 0

Avid

A Pilgrim and a Sojourner...
Sep 21, 2013
2,129
753
✟13,263.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
... That makes them both totalitarian, not necessarly socialist.
NAZI is an acronym for National Socialist Party, or some variation thereof. (National Socialist German Workers Party)

The name of the Communist monstrosity that ran most of the 20th Century was Union of Soviet Socialist Republics or the USSR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NightHawkeye
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I do not see Democracy (or a Democratic Republic for more accuracy) being far removed from one another. Most people I hear talk about this seem to view freedom on a linear continuum with Democracy being most free and Totalitarianism being most opressive. I purpose a circular continuum, wherin anarcy is top dead center and bottom dead center is the thin line seperating Totalitarianism from democracy, and in between we have the various forms of government based on their opressiveness. I am interested in any thoughts on this, agree or disagree.

You're correct--and the point has been made many times before--except that it's libertarianism that's at the opposite point, not anarchism (which is a variety of Socialism).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Avid
Upvote 0

mafwons

Hi guys
Feb 16, 2014
2,740
169
✟11,177.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Not only is that counterintuitive, but it seems to be unhistorical.

I already know what that is and it's ridiculous.

It is both historical and intuitive. If you know what it is and find it ridiculous I can only assume you desire to be opressed by the state or you don't understand, or you are wholly dependent on the state for your subsistence (don't worry we all are, but it does not have to be that way).
 
Upvote 0

mafwons

Hi guys
Feb 16, 2014
2,740
169
✟11,177.00
Faith
Non-Denom
You're correct--and the point has been made many times before--except that it's libertarianism that's at the opposite point, not anarchism (which is a variety of Socialism).

Anarchism is the absence of an imposed state, that does not mean a state cannot exist, simply that participation is voluntary. As for as I can tell no socialist state can exist without a fairly strong central government, ergo socialism and anarchism are not alike. Libertarianism would be very close to the right of anarchism and its offshoots.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

HammerOfThor

Universalist Pantheist Neopagan
May 5, 2015
163
27
✟15,469.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
It is both historical

No it's not historical because capitalism doesn't flourish without the state, it requires it. History contains examples of this.

and intuitive.

I don't see how the claim that getting rid of the state (which enforces private property) will result in private property flourishing is anything but unintuitive.


I can only assume you desire to be opressed by the state

How condescending of you.

or you don't understand

I've read plenty of Rothbard, thank you.

or you are wholly dependent on the state for your subsistence (don't worry we all are, but it does not have to be that way).

Only because capitalism is dependent on it.
 
Upvote 0