How did the Limited Govt party become the Authoritarian party?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP in fairness your line is fairly common on the left these days, so it’s not just you who’s delusional.

Quick flashback to the bad old days: remember when Steve Bannon said his goal was to “the deconstruction of the administrative state”?

I’m a little rusty on my history… but isn’t authoritarianism the opposite of this?

No because you are omitting the second half of Bannon's statement, which was what filled the void after. Go back and read/listen to it in that context.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It all comes down to who benefits from the use of government force. If the government is reinforcing the power of white Christian men with at least some money, it's all good. If it's eroding the authority and/or wealth of these people, it's bad.

The thing is, the bolded isn't true. No one is suggesting taking anything away from White Christian males. It is simply about having the playing field actually level. Since people like Donald Trump were born on third base and deride everyone else for being dumber or less hard working for their failures, it is about letting things be a true merirocracy. If you wanted that, you would be ok with the wealthy being able to leave 20 million dollars tax free and the rest being taxed heavily. But no, the GOP wants an oligarch class of permanent billionaires who buy and sell the government for their own purposes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP in fairness your line is fairly common on the left these days, so it’s not just you who’s delusional.

Quick flashback to the bad old days: remember when Steve Bannon said his goal was to “the deconstruction of the administrative state”?

I’m a little rusty on my history… but isn’t authoritarianism the opposite of this?

OP here and I have been a moderate for decades. Only in the 6 years have I consistently voted Democrat because of everything the Republicans have been throwing at us. There’s a difference between going overboard trying to make sure everyone’s rights are equal, versus going overboard trying to take away the rights of a vast number of American citizens. I don’t trust them anymore, and the Republicans would do well to realize that a lot of swing voters feel the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP in fairness your line is fairly common on the left these days, so it’s not just you who’s delusional.

Quick flashback to the bad old days: remember when Steve Bannon said his goal was to “the deconstruction of the administrative state”?

I’m a little rusty on my history… but isn’t authoritarianism the opposite of this?

OP here and I have been a moderate for decades. Only in the 6 years have I consistently voted Democrat because of everything the Republicans have been throwing at us. There’s a difference between going overboard trying to make sure everyone’s rights are equal, versus going overboard trying to take away the rights of a vast number of American citizens. I don’t trust them anymore, and the Republicans would do well to realize that a lot of swing voters feel the same.

Another thing the Republicans should take a note of. I as a swing voter have voted not FOR the Democrat in the last three elections, but AGAINST the Republican ridiculousness that was the candidate. And I know a lot of swing voters out there are doing the same. If they put the right candidate up that isn’t screeching election denial and taking rights away, Republicans will start winning for a change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP in fairness your line is fairly common on the left these days, so it’s not just you who’s delusional.

Quick flashback to the bad old days: remember when Steve Bannon said his goal was to “the deconstruction of the administrative state”?

I’m a little rusty on my history… but isn’t authoritarianism the opposite of this?

OP here and I have been a moderate for decades. Only in the 6 years have I consistently voted Democrat because of everything the Republicans have been throwing at us. There’s a difference between going overboard trying to make sure everyone’s rights are equal, versus going overboard trying to take away the rights of a vast number of American citizens. I don’t trust them anymore, and the Republicans would do well to realize that a lot of swing voters feel the same.

Another thing the Republicans should take a note of. I as a swing voter have voted not FOR the Democrat in the last three elections, but AGAINST the Republican ridiculousness that was the candidate. And I know a lot of swing voters out there are doing the same. If they put the right candidate up that isn’t screeching election denial and taking rights away, Republicans will start winning for a change.

This. I would have walked through fire to vote for Biden but I would literally not walk down the block to hear him speak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all comes down to who benefits from the use of government force. If the government is reinforcing the power of white Christian men with at least some money, it's all good. If it's eroding the authority and/or wealth of these people, it's bad.

The thing is, the bolded isn't true. No one is suggesting taking anything away from White Christian males. It is simply about having the playing field actually level. Since people like Donald Trump were born on third base and deride everyone else for being dumber or less hard working for their failures, it is about letting things be a true merirocracy. If you wanted that, you would be ok with the wealthy being able to leave 20 million dollars tax free and the rest being taxed heavily. But no, the GOP wants an oligarch class of permanent billionaires who buy and sell the government for their own purposes.

I don't think you can argue that white Christian males have the same kind of authority they had 60 years ago. They are probably even wealthier now than they used to be though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP in fairness your line is fairly common on the left these days, so it’s not just you who’s delusional.

Quick flashback to the bad old days: remember when Steve Bannon said his goal was to “the deconstruction of the administrative state”?

I’m a little rusty on my history… but isn’t authoritarianism the opposite of this?

OP here and I have been a moderate for decades. Only in the 6 years have I consistently voted Democrat because of everything the Republicans have been throwing at us. There’s a difference between going overboard trying to make sure everyone’s rights are equal, versus going overboard trying to take away the rights of a vast number of American citizens. I don’t trust them anymore, and the Republicans would do well to realize that a lot of swing voters feel the same.

Another thing the Republicans should take a note of. I as a swing voter have voted not FOR the Democrat in the last three elections, but AGAINST the Republican ridiculousness that was the candidate. And I know a lot of swing voters out there are doing the same. If they put the right candidate up that isn’t screeching election denial and taking rights away, Republicans will start winning for a change.

Completely agree. I don't like many of the Democratic candidates that I've voted for. But at least I know they are not insane and delusional. That's a very low bar to get over, and Republicans are failing miserably.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP in fairness your line is fairly common on the left these days, so it’s not just you who’s delusional.

Quick flashback to the bad old days: remember when Steve Bannon said his goal was to “the deconstruction of the administrative state”?

I’m a little rusty on my history… but isn’t authoritarianism the opposite of this?

No because you are omitting the second half of Bannon's statement, which was what filled the void after. Go back and read/listen to it in that context.

The economic nationalism part?

[Anonymous]

"Limited government" was always just a slogan. Like "state's rights." Proponents were always very selective about where and when it would apply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Limited government" was always just a slogan. Like "state's rights." Proponents were always very selective about where and when it would apply.

Boy is THAT broadly true these days!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are many people on the liberal side who also disagree with how far the trans activism has gone, and disagree with some of the laws that have been enacted. So yes, there are many examples on the liberal side too. But the Democrats never declared themselves the limited government party. The Republicans did.

The only people making noise about the whole trans thing is the right. They scream about it on Fox news which means it is raised here. No one on the left cares. Who are the social libtertarians here? It sure isn't the right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On some level, I give the opening/closing/masks a slight pass. Covid threw everyone for a loop, worldwide we were scrambling not to die, and there were differing opinions on how not to do that. For that, I truly believe reasonable minds can differ, and that we learned as we went along. But science and vaccines? Give me a break with all the google MDs out there.

But then the Rs took it too far and turned it into an ideology all its own. The whole "my body, my choice" was a deliberate slap in the face to pro-choice folks, but instead of really believing it, it became a battle cry and "we want both sides to be true." My body my choice, but not your body, your choice, You really can't reconcile those two things. Republicans are the biggest bunch of hypocrites.

I saw a posting that really rung true too - Imagine having a history so scary no one wants you to learn about it. Take that. a step further - imagine having a history so scary that you and generations of your family are only just now starting to get a foothold in this country. That's a real thing, but no one wants to confront that. When you see the actual wrath that the Rs are going after the Black, Jewish, Asian, LGBTQ, etc. community, maybe you'd understand DEI a little better.

Agree with PP. Money and power. That's all it is, because there is nothing else reasonable to explain it.

My Body, My Choice doesn't work when its a virus. When people can get pregnant by breathing a virus from someone else, then the conversation would change. that is where the right fell down with their so-called logic on this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

Is it a public or private university? Does said educational establishment take federal dollars and thus need to adhere to federal social justice guidelines?

Generally speaking, why would it be a problem to agree to adhere to anti-racism tenants? I would not want my kids attending a school where being a racist is ok.