Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by trimethylpurine on Monday September 19, 2022 @04:05AM
(#32895573)
The only difference between us is that I'm aware that we're both victims of marketing. You seem to imagine that it's just me, which suggests to me that it's just you. And that only further makes my point. If you're the egoist, then I'm right. If I'm the egoist, then I'm even more right. At least you acknowledge that you can't sum up someone's opinions based on which party they vote for. The reality is simply that you only get one blanket vote for probably one issue you read about, and thousands you didn't but apparently should be held accountable for.
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by mindslight on Tuesday September 20, 2022 @10:26AM
(#32912079)
I dispute that, having myself passed through the perspective you're arguing. It's easy to dismiss things with relativism, and it is in fact necessary for dealing with the media's endless stream of tempests in teapots, but significant differences can still exist and you need to keep your mind open to them.
For me, the off ramp for my benefit of the doubt was the Republican's Covid response, where political nonsense came up against cold hard non-mediated reality. Let's hamstring federal departments precisely when we need them, 2+2=5, don't bother wearing a respirator to protect your family it's all made up anyhow, all merely to feed egos large and small. The fact the party and its constituents continue to double down on an a President that overtly damaged our country are at least two pillars of fascism - party over country, and cult of personality.
And sure, we can apply similar judgements to help us critique the Democratic party. But there is a stark difference in degree and effect, and it's utterly foolish to ignore that.
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by trimethylpurine on Tuesday September 20, 2022 @04:22PM
(#32917277)
It sounds to me like you're talking about the Republican party that you saw on Democrat TV. Literally a fabricated cliche marketed to the average viewer that describes exactly zero real human beings but has a nice ring to it and allows you to simplify "them" into a nice box that you can label "not me" and feel good about yourself.
You've thrown out "effort to prevent people from saying that which is undesirable" as an example of Democratic authoritarianism. However, this is not a mainstream grassroots view. Rather it's the status quo agglomeration of power by politicians, the government grabbing power while entrenching the big tech oligopoly. Democratic voters in general don't seem to be sitting around going "Biden is going to shut those deplorables up", rather it's more like lament and resignation when the topic of social media censorship does come up.
We can of course point to authoritarian policies enacted by politicians from both parties, because politicians are inherently authoritarian, and enacting authoritarian policies that enrich their sponsors is their bread and butter.
However, the cults of personalities around Republican politicians, the rejection of intellectualism, overtly excepting politicians from the rule of law. These all indicate an authoritarian-flavored organizational structure, supported by the grassroots. If fronting as a strongman and pulling stupid stunts didn't work to get votes and donations, Republican politicians wouldn't do it. And the recent state level pushes to prohibit fundamental medical care (ie straight up individual liberty-destroying dark ages authoritarianism) is policy that doesn't enrich any corporate sponsors (as legislation usually must), but rather seems to be completely at the behest of their perceived constituents.
And so, I no longer consider the two parties symmetric. The Republicans have seemingly made their mainstream platform to dismantle our institutions in favor of regressing to some sort of good-old-days theocracy, while the Democrats still basically represent the corporate/bureaucratic status quo. And while I find that status quo repugnant from a position of wanting to reform it in favor of individual liberty, I'd much rather have the imperfect institutions we've come to take for granted, like the rule of law, than have them destroyed from the top down.