Notice you didn't name the United States which is just as authoritarian as modern Russia by any definition we choose (voting rights? participation in political process? allowed dissent? access to clean water? basic access to healthcare? food desserts? policies meant to keep people in poverty?). That's my point. It's an ethereal term unless properly defined.

We'll have to set Libya aside since after given "freedom," there are now literal slave traders everywhere.

[–] PvtGetSum@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (11 children)

I don't particularly care as that wasn't my point. My point was to disagree with your comment prior which stated that authoritarian as a term was mainly used as a truncheon against communist nations in order to increase support for capitalism, which it isn't.

[–] brain_in_a_box@hexbear.net 18 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Yeah, what they should have said is that authoritarianism as a term is mainly used as a truncheon against non Western countries in order to increase support for Western hegemony, which it absolutely is.

[–] PvtGetSum@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I disagree but that at least would have been a better argument

[–] brain_in_a_box@hexbear.net 1 points 2 years ago

And you disagree why?

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)