Is safety or freedom better?

[Floofybit]

For a small select few while others live in fear of a totalitarian government taking them away by the secret police.

Believe it or not but authoritarian doesn't mean fascist

Fascism is part in part authoritarianism.

and communism, and this is my one and only comment on this, Peace over and out on this.

Communism is not intended to be authoritarian.

Authoritarianism is a stronger and stricter government. Fascism is racist, discriminatory, and only gets people hurt. I am authoritarian, not facist.

[Ryemarch]

Because they are freaks, considered child molesters and groomers, and are generally loners which is unhealthy for them.
(none of this I agree with, but stating a point).

None of this is true

Yet you plan to vote for Trump, when the Republican party is quite open about regarding trans people as freaks, child molesters, and groomers.

[Necroghastia]

Fascism is part in part authoritarianism.



Communism is not intended to be authoritarian.

Authoritarianism is a stronger and stricter government. Fascism is racist, discriminatory, and only gets people hurt. I am authoritarian, not facist.

The War on Drugs is racist, discriminatory, and only gets people hurt, yet you want it to go even further.

[EuroStralia]

Authoritarianism is a stronger and stricter government. Fascism is racist, discriminatory, and only gets people hurt. I am authoritarian, not facist.

The War on Drugs is racist, discriminatory, and only gets people hurt, yet you want it to go even further.

You can want to expand the war on drugs without being in favor of racism.

[Neutraligon]

Fascism is part in part authoritarianism.



Communism is not intended to be authoritarian.

Authoritarianism is a stronger and stricter government. Fascism is racist, discriminatory, and only gets people hurt. I am authoritarian, not facist.

Fascism is a form of authoritarianism the same way a square is a type of rectangle. One can be authoritarian without being fascist, one cannot be fascist without being authoritarian. That said, how are you going to ensure the safety of the people from the police and government you wish to create?

[Western Theram]

You can want to expand the war on drugs without being in favor of racism.

Not consciously anyway. The fact of the matter is the war on drugs was started to target specific demographics of people and still continues to be used as an excuse to let SWAT tear up some random person’s home without any proof

[Floofybit]

Fascism is a form of authoritarianism the same way a square is a type of rectangle. One can be authoritarian without being fascist, one cannot be fascist without being authoritarian.

True, and I only align with the auth part, not the fascism part.

[EuroStralia]

Not consciously anyway. The fact of the matter is the war on drugs was started to target specific demographics of people and still continues to be used as an excuse to let SWAT tear up some random person’s home without any proof

That doesn't change the fact that you can support the war on drugs without being in favor of targeting specific demographics.

[Western Theram]

That doesn't change the fact that you can support the war on drugs without being in favor of targeting specific demographics.

If the result doesn’t change the discriminatory nature of said war on drugs then it might as well be the same as supporting racist legislation. Studies also show that an increase in mental health services and welfare helps people stay sober. Whereas prison can be traumatizing and cause them to turn to more substances.

[Celritannia]

Fascism is part in part authoritarianism.



Communism is not intended to be authoritarian.

Authoritarianism is a stronger and stricter government. Fascism is racist, discriminatory, and only gets people hurt. I am authoritarian, not facist.

Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.[2][3]

You may not wish to support a race over another, but you are proposing your way of life should be dominant over others.

[Celritannia]

Not consciously anyway. The fact of the matter is the war on drugs was started to target specific demographics of people and still continues to be used as an excuse to let SWAT tear up some random person’s home without any proof

That doesn't change the fact that you can support the war on drugs without being in favor of targeting specific demographics.

The war on drugs has been highly ineffective and started off as a way to target black Americans. IT is a huge cost to the tax payer with limited results and wrongful incarcerations.

[HISPIDA]

again, depends on your definitions.

the dictatorship of the proletariat is designed to be "authoritarian". it is design to oppress the bourgeoisie for the benefit of the proletariat. to quote lenin:







to quote mao:





to quote bukharin:



it is necessary for the proletarian dictatorship to use force and authority to protect the interests of the proletariat, i.e., to use a state. communism does not have the material requirement for a state: it is a classless society, a society that is a direct anathema to the state, a society where a state fundamentally cannot exist. but the dictatorship of the proletariat? that's a proletariat state: the oppression of the minority by the majority.

we shall not apologize for the terror. terror will be necessary in the establishment of socialism, marx claims in that statement, and inevitable.

Lenin and Mao did use their influence within their respective communist parties to have the system totalitarian.
Can't say I know much of Bukharin though.

What did Marx and Engles say though?

hardly "totalitarian", but i'll bite.

engels:

Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?

marx:

We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror. But the royal terrorists, the terrorists by the grace of God and the law, are in practice brutal, disdainful, and mean, in theory cowardly, secretive, and deceitful, and in both respects disreputable.

My own contribution was (1) to show that the existence of classes is merely bound up with certain historical phases in the development of production; (2) that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat; [and] (3) that this dictatorship, itself, constitutes no more than a transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society

Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.

[EuroStralia]

That doesn't change the fact that you can support the war on drugs without being in favor of targeting specific demographics.

If the result doesn’t change the discriminatory nature of said war on drugs then it might as well be the same as supporting racist legislation. Studies also show that an increase in mental health services and welfare helps people stay sober. Whereas prison can be traumatizing and cause them to turn to more substances.

Mental health programs may help people, but welfare does more harm than good.

If the result doesn’t change the discriminatory nature of said war on drugs then it might as well be the same as supporting racist legislation.

No it wouldn't, the war on drugs isn't a racist legislation, it's a legislation to protect people from the eviles of drugs.

[Celritannia]

Because they are freaks, considered child molesters and groomers, and are generally loners which is unhealthy for them.
(none of this I agree with, but stating a point).

None of this is true

And neither is alcohol dangerous to everyone or consensual sex outside of marriage causes harm.

[Floofybit]

Authoritarianism is a stronger and stricter government. Fascism is racist, discriminatory, and only gets people hurt. I am authoritarian, not facist.

Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.[2][3]

You may not wish to support a race over another, but you are proposing your way of life should be dominant over others.

I also do NOT support militarism not social hierarchy

[Celritannia]

If the result doesn’t change the discriminatory nature of said war on drugs then it might as well be the same as supporting racist legislation. Studies also show that an increase in mental health services and welfare helps people stay sober. Whereas prison can be traumatizing and cause them to turn to more substances.

Mental health programs may help people, but welfare does more harm than good.

If the result doesn’t change the discriminatory nature of said war on drugs then it might as well be the same as supporting racist legislation.

No it wouldn't, the war on drugs isn't a racist legislation, it's a legislation to protect people from the eviles of drugs.

Two incorrect statements.

[Celritannia]

You may not wish to support a race over another, but you are proposing your way of life should be dominant over others.

I also do NOT support militarism not social hierarchy

You want a police state to enforce your laws for the hierarchy that goes along with your plans.

[EuroStralia]

Mental health programs may help people, but welfare does more harm than good.


No it wouldn't, the war on drugs isn't a racist legislation, it's a legislation to protect people from the eviles of drugs.

Two incorrect statements.

Claiming something doesn't make it true.

[Floofybit]

None of this is true

And neither is alcohol dangerous to everyone or consensual sex outside of marriage causes harm.

Being a furry is much, much less dangerous than those two, however

[Neutraligon]

Two incorrect statements.

Claiming something doesn't make it true.

True, as you so clearly showed when you made your statements.

[HISPIDA]

And neither is alcohol dangerous to everyone or consensual sex outside of marriage causes harm.

Being a furry is much, much less dangerous than those two, however

perhaps alcoholism, but sex before marriage???

[Celritannia]

And neither is alcohol dangerous to everyone or consensual sex outside of marriage causes harm.

Being a furry is much, much less dangerous than those two, however

Being an alcoholic is dangerous, drinking is not.
Consexual sex is not dangerous in any capacity.

Being a furry can lead to ostracisation by your peers leading to mental health concerns.

Basically, anything can be dangerous if there is sound reason.

[Western Theram]

If the result doesn’t change the discriminatory nature of said war on drugs then it might as well be the same as supporting racist legislation. Studies also show that an increase in mental health services and welfare helps people stay sober. Whereas prison can be traumatizing and cause them to turn to more substances.

Mental health programs may help people, but welfare does more harm than good.

If the result doesn’t change the discriminatory nature of said war on drugs then it might as well be the same as supporting racist legislation.

No it wouldn't, the war on drugs isn't a racist legislation, it's a legislation to protect people from the eviles of drugs.

That happened to start off as a plot to criminalize and alienate black Americans and the “hippies” and continues to wrongfully incarcerate people of color to this day. Most of it under the guise of marijuana which isn’t that dangerous of a drug compared to other legal substances like cigarettes or alcohol.
Despite that white and black people smoke at basically the same rate black people are 4 times as likely to be arrested for marijuana

[Floofybit]

I also do NOT support militarism not social hierarchy

You want a police state to enforce your laws for the hierarchy that goes along with your plans.

No one will be physically harmed by the police state, dissenters will be peacefully taken in, and everyone will be viewed equally in the society no matter race, gender, job, etc.

[Celritannia]

Two incorrect statements.

Claiming something doesn't make it true.

And what evidence do you have to support your claims? The burden of proof is on you, my friend.