this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2025
110 points (98.2% liked)
politics
22915 readers
173 users here now
Protests, dual power, and even electoralism.
Labour and union posts go to The Labour Community.
Take any slop posts to the slop trough
Main is good for shitposting.
Do not post direct links to reactionary sites.
Off topic posts will be removed.
Follow the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember we're all comrades here.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
From Wikipedia: Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law.
Neoliberal worldview is all about human beings being evil and corrupt. Therefore governments will always be evil and what is the "democratic order of law", exists to keep them in check and rotate them. This is the system.
Anything that seeks to disrupt the -balance- between people and power is Authoritarianism.
A bank taking away your account is not authoritarianism, it's enforcing the law.
But a government taking away the bank and nationalizing it would be authoritarianism. It does not matter what kind of government.
You are not allowed to tell anyone how to live their life in Neoliberalism. That's the idea, you can only change the law that's in theory applied to -everyone- and enforcing the law is therefore not Authoritarianism.
It's a religion. You are a sinner, the law is sacred, the market is god.
I'd like to hear your thoughts on why you chose to react in such a way?
I was simply answering your question. You used quotation marks so I assumed you're using the mainstream definition of Authoritarianism and so I figured you're wondering what would they say if you turned their own critique of socialism against themselves.
If this was confusing I apologize and here's a simplified answer: Authoritarianism is a term used by status quo to describe attempts at combatting the status-quo so no it isn't . This is simply following the rule of law.
My comparison to religion, a religion, not religion = capitalism = religion, is just to show how it has similar patterns of behavior to people who practice it. So you will be unable to effectively use a "gotcha" method like this to achieve any results.
I figured that since this is /c/Politics we're supposed to have more serious discussions in this community, so that's why I'm taking myself seriously. I'm also trying to take you in good faith, but I can't interpret the emote as anything other than you being disappointed in me. That's the most good faith interpretation I am willing to extend to you and I'd appreciate if you treated other people with similar respect.
Nono, your response was great! I was reacting to the paradigm of neoliberalism. Sorry that wasn't clear.
Okay thank you.