Authoritarians are on the march

B

BidenPresident

Verified User
Polarising politicians like Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro, the former presidents of America and Brazil, saw that they could exploit people’s anxieties to mobilise support. Accordingly, they set about warning that their political opponents wanted to destroy their supporters’ way of life and threatened the very survival of their countries. That has, in turn, spread alarm and hostility on the other side. Republicans’ sweeping dismissal of this week’s indictment of Mr Trump contains the threat that countries can slip back into intolerance and tribalism.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2...keting-cloud&utm_term=8/3/2023&utm_id=1711711
 
he fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 held out the promise that the world was about to enter a virtuous circle. Growing prosperity would foster freedom and tolerance, which in turn would create more prosperity. Unfortunately, that hope disappointed. Our analysis this week, based on the definitive global survey of social attitudes, shows just how naive it turned out to be.

Prosperity certainly rose. In the three decades to 2019, global output increased more than four-fold. Roughly 70% of the 2bn people living in extreme poverty escaped it.

Alas, individual freedom and tolerance evolved quite differently. Large numbers of people around the world continue to swear fealty to traditional beliefs, sometimes intolerant ones.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2...keting-cloud&utm_term=8/3/2023&utm_id=1711711
 
floridafan said:
you dont have to pay, cunt. They give you 30 days free, cancel anytime.
Click to expand...

That requires I set up an account to pay them. That's a paywall you retard. Okay, let's say I do so and cancel. What about next time an article gets cited? They aren't going to forget I already got my free trial... Now what? I'm not going through all that shit to read a single article.

Of course, your situation is different. They don't let inmates in your insane asylum have credit cards...
 
BidenPresident said:
Polarising politicians like Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro, the former presidents of America and Brazil, saw that they could exploit people’s anxieties to mobilise support. Accordingly, they set about warning that their political opponents wanted to destroy their supporters’ way of life and threatened the very survival of their countries. That has, in turn, spread alarm and hostility on the other side. Republicans’ sweeping dismissal of this week’s indictment of Mr Trump contains the threat that countries can slip back into intolerance and tribalism.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2...keting-cloud&utm_term=8/3/2023&utm_id=1711711
Click to expand...

All Trump did was to challenge some things in courts, politicians have been challenging election results since we started having elections.

It wasn't that big of a deal.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
politicians have been challenging election results since we started having elections.
Click to expand...

Losing presidential contenders have not been refusing to concede defeat since we started having elections.

In fact Trump is the FIRST (at least he's first at something, lol).

And don't tell me he was defrauded. The only reason you have for saying that is because Trump said so, and he's a liar.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
Losing presidential contenders have not been refusing to concede defeat since we started having elections.

In fact Trump is the FIRST (at least he's first at something, lol).

And don't tell me he was defrauded. The only reason you have for saying that is because Trump said so, and he's a liar.
Click to expand...

He did concede since he was not in power on the scheduled date anymore.

There is nothing saying he has to like it.

How do you feel he didn't concede?
 
Tinkerpeach said:
He did concede since he was not in power on the scheduled date anymore.

There is nothing saying he has to like it.

How do you feel he didn't concede?
Click to expand...

Here's why I feel he didn't concede. Two years after the election he was still claiming to be the rightful winner:

August 30, 2022
"Declare the rightful winner or - and this would be the minimal solution - declare the 2020 Election irreparably compromised and have a new Election, immediately!"
[Trump on Lies Social]
https://people.com/politics/donald-...ul-winner-2020-election-2-years-after-losing/

If you still think he conceded, look up "concede" in a dictionary.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
Here's why I feel he didn't concede. Two years after the election he was still claiming to be the rightful winner:

August 30, 2022
"Declare the rightful winner or - and this would be the minimal solution - declare the 2020 Election irreparably compromised and have a new Election, immediately!"
[Trump on Lies Social]
https://people.com/politics/donald-...ul-winner-2020-election-2-years-after-losing/

If you still think he conceded, look up "concede" in a dictionary.
Click to expand...

He conceded by not remaining in power.

He is free to express his views about the election under his first amendment rights.

Concede means to give up power, not to agree with it.
 
This is not complex.

For last few hundred years white men have largely ruled the world while women and people had little to no rights.

That is shifting and in an attempt to hold on to power and to not allow the transfer of power and privilege, they are attacking everything and anything that can see power shifit so they can preserve their advantages as long as possible.


That is why they focused on Affirmative Action so fiercely while ignoring arguably the biggest hidden AA policies around Legacy Admission and wealthy donor/family admissions. Studies have shown those result in large numbers of almost entirely white people getting in over others with equal and even better grades. that is how you PRESERVE advantage generation to generation once you prior set the stage by ensuring whites started with a massive boost of generational wealth that others did not get (paying slave owners but not slaves reperations).


So TS that is why you see the rise in Authoritarianism. It is a recognition that power will have to be shared, based on changing demographics, within a democracy but DOES NOT have to be shared under an authoritarian system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top