Hence it's no wonder that historically it has been the intellectuals that have promoted and believed in authoritarianism (communism, fascism etc), because they haven't seen the negative side of it in their lives. — ssu

And they see that authority protecting their niche in the system.

Is not greed, lust, hedonistic desires and hunger for power intellectual? — synthesis

Make this a sentence that is syntactically sensible. This is nonsense. I am not saying you are speaking nonsense, I am saying the quote is grammatically so out-of-shape that it makes no sense. Please rewrite it in English if you wish me to answer it.

And they see that authority protecting their niche in the system. — synthesis

I am sorry; is English not your native tongue? Another sentence that is awkward to the point of being understood, but not quite correctly written. I am not trying to criticize you, I am saying I can't respond to things that I am not totally sure what they mean.

All that matters is that moral authority comes from a source that cannot be corrupted by man's intellectualism.
— synthesis

What are you thinking of here? — Tom Storm

I was referencing one of the most important reasons that man invented God (if He does not exist). Again, moral authority must come from a source (The Absolute) which cannot be challenged. IOW, God said you should be (fill in the blank).

Are you going to argue with God (in public)?

All that matters is that moral authority comes from a source that cannot be corrupted by man's intellectualism.
— synthesis

Such as? I mean, you're playing coy here - there's an obvious answer, but, knowing this forum as you do, you don't want to give it. — Wayfarer

From God, or The Absolute (whichever you prefer).

Are you going to argue with God (in public)? — synthesis

Many already have, and god has already lost the debate many times over.

From God, or The Absolute (whichever you prefer). — synthesis

It's nice to name a possibly existing, possibly non-existing entity to be the ruler... no risk, he does not make any rules, so YOU make the rules and YOU say that it's from god.

Nice going, but fewer and fewer people believe this.

Make this a sentence that is syntactically sensible. This is nonsense. I am not saying you are speaking nonsense, I am saying the quote is grammatically so out-of-shape that it makes no sense. Please rewrite it in English if you wish me to answer it. — god must be atheist

You would have made a great 8th grade English teacher back in the day, but if you put a comma before the last word, that help you out.

that help you out. — synthesis

... and so help you god.

I am saying I can't respond to things that I am not totally sure what they mean. — god must be atheist

Then , I believe that you should not respond.

Given that intellectuals are intelligent, and nobody but the intellectuals suppor totalitarianism, you are saying that it's the dumbfucks only who oppose totalitarianism. — god must be atheist

I didn't say that only intellectuals support totalitarianism. And do notice that I said "part of the so-called" when referring to the the intellectuals. And who are here these "intellectuals"? Well, they are those who people listen, who journalists interview and ask their views about various issues. It's those who dominate the public discourse and are seen as intellectuals. Usually they have achieved positions in the academia or are successful authors.

Then how do you explain the Trump phenomenon and the storm of the Bastille Capitol? — god must be atheist

Our present society makes it easy to live in your bubble by reinforcing it. And actually there are many reasons for the increasing polarization and populism being so widespread in the US. And of course, if those people have been for many months bombarded with saying that the elections will be stolen and then the sitting President that you support urges you to march on Capitol Hill, what would these people do in a crowd?

It's directly from the authoritarian populists playbook. Gullible people love authoritarianism.

I am not suggesting that people should not have debates but I just don't think that in speaking of the loss of freedom advocated I don't think people are considering fully what it would entail. Different people are currently experiencing different degrees of freedom and I think you do need to consider what dictatorship would mean for us and for future generations.

And they see that authority protecting their niche in the system. — synthesis

Actually, I think they simply want radical change.

When they are young, they want rapid change. When they are older, they have seen how difficult it is for change to happen and thus they are extremely happy and supportive when the next generation wants radical, rapid changes also. Consensus is a cancer for them. And of course, the hate people saying: "Yeah, I see those problems in our society, but still our society is better than the other option...". Down with the old!!!

Different people are currently experiencing different degrees of freedom and I think you do need to consider what dictatorship would mean for us and for future generations. — Jack Cummins

Jack, you are not you thinking I support dictatorship?

Not all moralists are simply “control-freaks”. The ancient ones whose writings have survived were almost always moralizing—not to the many—but to a few. — Todd Martin

Whether you want to control a few, one, or a global population, you are still trying to control. Control, or attempt at control, is done by control freaks, no matter their scope of influence.

Its not so much that I think that you are in favour of it, but I do believe that it is on it's way and I am extremely worried about it because I think it will be a life which will probably make the majority wish that they were dead. I see it as the end of humanity, in any meaningful sense.

And they see that authority protecting their niche in the system.
— synthesis

Actually, I think they simply want radical change.

When they are young, they want rapid change. When they are older, they have seen how difficult it is for change to happen and thus they are extremely happy and supportive when the next generation wants radical, rapid changes too. Consensus is a cancer for them. Down with the old!!! — ssu

I once asked my father why he was a Democrat and he told me that you are whatever the party in power happens to be. I believe this is how the majority of (successful) people see it. They are going to protect what they worked a lifetime to build. Ideology runs very thin when you get out into the real world (except if you're an academic where it apparently doesn't seem to matter very much).

BTW, blink your eyes twice or three times and you'll be old, as well!

I believe in many ways it's already here. I am not sure the full-on Nazi-style totalitarianism would ever be in vogue because you need for the majority of people to desire to be controlled. Cell phones (and data collection) are a perfect example. I think most younger people would give you their left leg rather than giving up their cell phones.

I once asked my father why he was a Democrat and he told me that you are whatever the party in power happens to be. I believe this is how the majority of (successful) people see it. They are going to protect what they worked a lifetime to build. Ideology runs very thin when you get out into the real world (except if you're an academic where it apparently doesn't seem to matter very much). — synthesis

I somewhat disagree. I think those who change wildly the parties they vote are actually a minority (even if they are a very important minority).

Politicians lie so much that you simply cannot bargain on what they promise to do in favor of you.

Are you not worried if you think that totalitarianism is here..? I feel that I am watching it arise and I am wondering if I am imagining it. When I think that it is happening, I start to question if I am buying into conspiracy theory thinking. But, certainly in England, I feel that the majority of people are oblivious to the possible signs. I am not sure how totalitarian it will become ultimately but I do believe that we are at some kind of crossroads, and it is hard to see what is coming next.

I was referencing one of the most important reasons that man invented God (if He does not exist). Again, moral authority must come from a source (The Absolute) which cannot be challenged. IOW, God said you should be (fill in the blank).

Are you going to argue with God (in public)? — synthesis

Thanks for clarifying, I though you must be referring to this. I can't argue with God (not sure what 'in public' refers to) as I haven't heard anything from God.

I somewhat disagree. I think those who change wildly the parties they vote are actually a minority (even if they are a very important minority).

Politicians lie so much that you simply cannot bargain on what they promise to do in favor of you. — ssu

Not too long ago, nobody gave a rat's ass what party you belonged to, so if you wanted to play the game, you did what you had to and one of those things was kissing the ass in power (although you would pay homage to the out-of-power ass, as well).

The swamp (although incredible deep by historical standards) has always been in place.

If you are forking over a great deal of money to a politician, they know EXACTLY what is expected, and if they do not follow-through, then they are through.

I've been watching this slow moving train wreck for fifty years now and thought it was mostly an economic phenomena, but the changes I have seen over the last year have truly amazed me. People are really losing it. Just the reaction to the whole COVID thing, in and of itself, is one for the history books.

There's just too much going on to really get a handle on all the stuff taking place but it will certainly make more sense as events unfold throughout the 20's. Try not to worry too much about it. It is what it is. Take care of yourself and be prepared for the opportunities that arise on the other side.

I was just saying that nobody can argue with God or would, and that one of the most powerful things about religion. And that's why moral authority from a religious perspective has been around for thousands of years. Divorce religious moral authority from your politics and watch your society go down the drain.

Not too long ago, nobody gave a rat's ass what party you belonged to, — synthesis

Not in my country.

In fact, the more you go back in time, the deeper and bitter the divide was. In the US it's a bit different, because you have only a right-wing and a centrist-right party. When you would have real leftist parties in your Congress, you would notice the difference.

The swamp (although incredible deep by historical standards) has always been in place. — synthesis

Some countries do have a problem with corruption, yes.

If you are forking over a great deal of money to a politician, they know EXACTLY what is expected, and if they do not follow-through, then they are through. — synthesis

Well, if you don't get a seat in the elections, the hassle with lobbyists won't happen either.

Indeed. No argument there.

In fact, the more you go back in time, the deeper and bitter the divide was. In the US it's a bit different, because you have only a right-wing and a centrist right party. When you would have real leftist parties in your Congress, you would notice the difference. — ssu

Where do you live?

The swamp (although incredible deep by historical standards) has always been in place.
— synthesis

Some countries do have a problem with corruption, yes. — ssu

Corruption is THE problem everywhere ALL the time. Look at the history of our species!

An observation that may be amusing, or alarming, or both, to some of you...

In the last few days I’ve witnessed a fellow driving a medium-sized pickup going up the road, revving his engine and looking out the window to see who’s watching. In it’s bed he has stationed two flags: one confederate, the other advertising a certain sentiment in these bold white words:

FUCK
BIDEN

Where do you live? — synthesis

Finland.

Corruption is THE problem everywhere ALL the time. Look at the history of our species! — synthesis

Even if corruption does happen, it is in some countries a bigger problem than in others. It actually defines a lot how people behave.

You're just playing coy.

All that matters is that moral authority comes from a source that cannot be corrupted by man's intellectualism. — synthesis

And everyone needs to figure out on their own what that authority is, right.