I'm Pissed
Yeah, I’ve been pretty pissed about this administration that was supposed to be “moderate” and is turning out to be anything but. People are losing their jobs for no good reason. It is turning out that natural immunity works better than the vaccine and prevents spread better than the vaccine. Eddie has already gotten covid so he is now better off than the vaccinated. This isn’t about making people safe, this is about power and control, clear and simple. And that has me really pissed. So, yes, you are not all to blame for this. But the thought process of taking away people’s rights in the name of the “greater good.” It is at the core of the problem. I’m pissed that the left basically called Trump Hitler incarnate for the past 4 years and then voted for someone that is closer to the fascist they claim to be against. So, that has made my discourse more angry than normal. That is actually why I got out of politics for quite some time, because it is all a cesspool. But at the same time I want a good future for my children and I’m pissed that people in America don’t see the path we are going down is authoritarian in nature.
So, let’s define what authoritarian means:
authoritarian (comparative more authoritarian, superlative most authoritarian)
- Of, or relating to, or exhibiting strict obedience to an authority; favoring authoritarianism over civic and individual liberties.
- Demanding obedience to authority; marked by authoritarianism; dictatorial, tyrannical.
The authoritarian government was demanding stricter laws for low-wage peasants. - Tending to impose one’s demands upon others as if one were an authority.
So, even the example used uses, basically, a minimum wage example as one being an authoritarian. I’ve been trying to understand the mind of someone on the left and what has led to the atrocities of the 20th century. And it was a light bulb moment for me when I realized that the definition and the policies that people on the left are authoritarian, by definition. For the greater good people need a minimum wage of $15. Is, by definition, an authoritarian measure. So, why does the left push so much for authoritarianism? Because everything they want they want the government to do and the government by definition is the monopoly of the initiation of force, or the threat thereof. So, the more policies that are passed that push the interventionist/socialist/welfare-state agendas will necessarily be authoritarian in nature. Unless, people use peaceful means instead.
Now, don’t get me wrong, the right can be authoritarian too. In fact, it was not long ago that they were the authoritarians that I disliked more. But the table has switched and now the left is pushing hard left towards Marxist-like ideologies. And that has me even more upset. What’s worse is that the left doesn’t even see it. I was told that BLM Utah is Marxist like the national organization. I went to their website and looked around and read it. They are just as much Marxist as the national organization. People are literally embracing the communists. Have we not learned from the 20th and 21st centuries what Marxims gets us? The pattern is the same over and over again.
I’m also pissed that the left embraced authoritarian lock downs and masks - even though - both measures have been proven not to work before and after the pandemic. What’s more, a free society cannot tolerate such authoritarian abuses on the people without nasty consequences, including social distrust.
Now, I recognize that many people that aren’t over on the far left what they really want is something like Sweden or Denmark - a highly capitalist society with a very generous welfare state, AKA Paternalism, interventionism, etc. What people don’t realize is that the people that are taxed the most are the middle class. And that these policies also act against social cohesion and are anti-family. And, if pushed too far, will also result in scary authoritarian measures.
Also, I’m pretty upset with you about misleading me about Yglesias. I don’t know if you are just lying to yourself or to me. But you said the tweet about force vaccinations was just a joke. But now, I was reading a post of his that said he was for medical apartheid - he said that only vaccinated people should be allowed to eat inside a restaurant. Doesn’t this look familiar? Do we have to repeat the same patterns over and over again? Not only that, but people that have gotten covid actually have better immunity than the people with the vaccine and are less likely to spread covid. I don’t know what the left listens too, but I’ve been hearing some pretty crazy stuff like, “700,000 people have died from covid.” That is complete and utter nonsense. The actual thing is that 700,000 people have been diagnosed with covid before death. If you want actual numbers you would need to look at excess deaths for the 2019-2020 and the 2020-2021 flu seasons compared to previous years. The US has seen a 25% increase in deaths, which is concerning - but actually not that bad. Compared to Sweden they had a very small uptick in deaths. My best guess for this is that the US has a much more unhealthy population than Swedens as we have a much higher rate of obesity. This pandenic is a pandemic of the obese and elderly - yes, some healthy individuals have also died - but the flu does that every year too. Also, the scary stories about youth dying from covid. Most of these youth are obese. You want to help America teach them to be healthy.
I don’t mean to downplay Covid, I just mean to put it in perspective.
I’m also pissed about all the media propaganda on Covid. I have no idea why people pay attention to legacy/establishment media anymore, it is a cesspool that is just intentionally trying to scare people. I think a better name for legacy media is state media as it is clear who they get their marching orders from.
Another incite I had beyond the left being authoritarian by their very nature since they ask the government to do all these authoritarian measures is that of capitalism. You know what capitalism is? It is the most productive people in societies working their butts off for the betterment of everyone else. And their reward? They get a bunch of money that they will never really use but reinvest in businesses. Sure they splurge with some of it, but most of it is used as capital to make society wealthier overall. And I say, good for them, because I really enjoy all the inexpensive stuff they get to me.
One more thing I’m pissed at. I’m pissed at my manager funding Antifa. I’m pissed that he is OK with them throwing bombs at Christian families, yes, kids and all. I used to have really interesting conversations with him. But once I realized what his politics really were I realized, when it comes to politics we share nothing in common. He was a totalitarian society and I want a society based off of the ideas of liberalism - the two societies are diametrically opposed.
OK, rant/discussion over. If there is anything in there that peaks your interest go ahead and reply and we can go over them point by point. I think the parts that interest me the most are authoritarianism and capitalism.
# Collectivism vs Individualism[Collectivism](https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Collectivism)
Collectivism is a philosophical position and political doctrine which maintains that entities such as the state, society, or a nation have an autonomous existence apart from the individuals who compose it.[1] Some extreme forms of collectivism even go as far as denying that individuals have an autonomous existence outside of the collective. A further characteristic of collectivism is the belief that the will or interests of the collective should come before the interests of individuals. Collectivism is a central characteristic of ideologies such as communism, socialism, and fascism and can be seen as the antithesis of the philosophical position of individualism.
[Individualism](https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Individualism)
Individualism is a philosophical or moral position that is based on the belief that individuals should be free to determine their own ends and within limits, act accordingly, rather then being coerced to act in accordance with the ends of other individuals or the supposed ends of a "collective". This position is based on the fact that because individuals' scales of values will undoubtedly differ, and furthermore because no individual can conceive of but a small section of the desires of society, a complete scale of values or set of ends for a society or collective towards which all should act would be impossible. Any set of ends for a collective rather then being a true reflection of the desires of all, which is impossible due to differences between individuals, would instead only be an arbitrary selection of certain ends by those in a position of power or influence. Friedrich Hayek states that the essence of individualism is "this recognition of the individual as the ultimate judge of his ends, the belief that as far as possible his own views ought to govern his actions".[1] While Ludwig von Mises has stated that "individualism is a philosophy of social cooperation and the progressive intensification of the social nexus".
Analysis
So, when you say you care about the collective you would necessarily need to put
the collective over the individual. So, let's say there is a vaccine that has
been proven to be safe and effective at stopping a virus. When you care for the
collective more than the individual you would say everyone must get vaccinated
to eradicate the disease. It is inherently authoritarian.
From an individualist point of view you may care for all these people but you
don't want there to be an authoritarian approach to getting people vaccinated.
So, they will be OK if businesses choose of there own voluntary will to say you
can't come in here if you are not vaccinated. Or if other organizations put
social pressure on individuals. Or if society as a whole puts pressure on people
to get vaccinated. But the moment you use force then you gone over the line. A
collectivist would be fine using force to get people to behave in a way that
they believe is good in the name of the collective.
So, a collectivist would say, "When an old lady is having a heart attack. Is it
the duty of a person nearby to help that person?" A collectivist would say yes.
An individualist would say no. Although it might be a nice thing to help, the
individual has no duty to help. But in an individualist society that person my
be ostracized from society or may be looked down on by individuals in the
community. In a collectivist society they might be tried by the government
because they didn't behave in a way that was expected.