History shows these are the first 2 things banned.......

[matchingmole]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

We can argue about Jan 6th forever, but several things are clear to me. No one arrested inside the Capitol building on Jan 6th was armed. The only violent death was from a gunshot to the head of an unarmed woman from a capitol police officer. Other deaths that day were from chronic health issues such as heart attacks/strokes and subsequently from mental health issues.

We can argue about whether or not it was a protest or an attack etc, but it was not an "armed insurrection", nor was it bloody or deadly.

Sure, there are plenty of guns out there in Fly-Over land, but they stayed at home. If half of the thousands of folks standing in front of the stage that day had brought weapons of any kind and used them, we would be having a totally different discussion here today.

They didn't and we aren't.

They also shot this dipshit Trumptard in the chest...but she deserved it

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by chefnerd

Some points to consider about dictators and totalitarianism.
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scape-goats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and0 disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.4. The supremacy of the military/ avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.
7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.
9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.


10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.
14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.
Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Hist

wheres the rest of it?

[Pixle]

Your view of history is very limited if you confine "totaliarian governments" as only those where Bibles were/are used. That would iinclude about half the earth and less than half the people.

[Pixle]

OOOOPs. I'm wrong! Only about 1/3 of the people.

[ICU 812]

But now back to the OP and the original topic of this thread:

The OP asserted that the first two things banned by a "dictator" are guns and religeon. Fair enough; I basicly agree. But another victem up high on the list of controlled behaviors is free speech and unfettered access to information.

Napolean managed to control the newspapers in France during the the European wars centered on his aggression in the early years of the 19th Century. The Totalitarian dictators of the 20th Century, both fanciest and communist controlled print and radio outlets. My grandparents were denounced for having a radio hidden in their kitchen stove and were packed off to a camp in 1944.

Today, we are seeing a concerted effort to diminish and obliterate these three aspects of freedom in US society. Seemingly all portions of the Bill of Rights is under attack, not just the First and Second Amendments . . . .it is my perception that all of our Constitutional rights, protections and freedoms are being subverted.

[Jackie S]

Regardless what you call them, Dictatorships and Totalitarian governments are nothing more than Thugocracies.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Regardless what you call them, Dictatorships and Totalitarian governments are nothing more than Thugocracies.

Don't forget theocracies.

[Austin Ellen]

I agree. My mom was from Czechoslovakia in what is now known as Slovakia. She said the Russians were way worse than the Germans. The Russians took everything from my mom's family.
There was no such thing as free speech - they killed you if you didn't kowtow to the party line. If you did not agree with their ideology than you were in the "wrong." And God help you if they said you were in the "wrong."

I see the same thing happening with the Democratic party. And if someone would stop rtming me - that would be great. It's funny - I've been shit talking in here since 2014. And up until this year I was never banned. This year I was banned twice and almost to another ban now. And I said way worse stuff than what I was banned for.

I think someone wants to cancel conservative voices.

Originally Posted by ICU 812

But now back to the OP and the original topic of this thread:

The OP asserted that the first two things banned by a "dictator" are guns and religeon. Fair enough; I basicly agree. But another victem up high on the list of controlled behaviors is free speech and unfettered access to information.

Napolean managed to control the newspapers in France during the the European wars centered on his aggression in the early years of the 19th Century. The Totalitarian dictators of the 20th Century, both fanciest and communist controlled print and radio outlets. My grandparents were denounced for having a radio hidden in their kitchen stove and were packed off to a camp in 1944.

Today, we are seeing a concerted effort to diminish and obliterate these three aspects of freedom in US society. Seemingly all portions of the Bill of Rights is under attack, not just the First and Second Amendments . . . .it is my perception that all of our Constitutional rights, protections and freedoms are being subverted.

[Grace Preston]

Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

I agree. My mom was from Czechoslovakia in what is now known as Slovakia. She said the Russians were way worse than the Germans. The Russians took everything from my mom's family.
There was no such thing as free speech - they killed you if you didn't kowtow to the party line. If you did not agree with their ideology than you were in the "wrong." And God help you if they said you were in the "wrong."

I see the same thing happening with the Democratic party. And if someone would stop rtming me - that would be great. It's funny - I've been shit talking in here since 2014. And up until this year I was never banned. This year I was banned twice and almost to another ban now. And I said way worse stuff than what I was banned for.

I think someone wants to cancel conservative voices.

Point of order...



There have been just as many prog voices banned in the past few months, you aren't unique nor targeted in that regard. This particular section of the board was floating without a mod for a while.. and now the admins are paying much closer attention. Plus-- wasn't one of your other bans not because of this particular forum but because you and another member couldn't stop going after each other in the Austin forum?

[Austin Ellen]

I disagree,Grace. First, I am unique in I am one of the very few female conservative voices on here. Actaully, I think I may be the only one so that really does make me special. And so there were no mods here in awhile - that would mean there were hardly any mods since 2014. I wasn't banned until this year - so they hired a bunch this year? I don't think so - there were alot of mods here in 2014 - 2018. And they didn't say hardly anything to some of the most vile posters posting the most vile things ever written about women. It is what it is but something is going on.

And by all means, I'll be happy to discuss that ban I had with another member but I was told to keep it off the board.

Hope you had a lovely 4th of July.

Originally Posted by Grace Preston

Point of order...



There have been just as many prog voices banned in the past few months, you aren't unique nor targeted in that regard. This particular section of the board was floating without a mod for a while.. and now the admins are paying much closer attention. Plus-- wasn't one of your other bans not because of this particular forum but because you and another member couldn't stop going after each other in the Austin forum?

[Grace Preston]

Sigh--- being banned does not make you unique. Being a conservative female in Texas also doesn't make you unique-- however, most of them don't bother arguing on the political forum (Don't believe me, spend some time on SW Twitter-- there are plenty of conservative female voices). You don't get banned for being a female conservative. You get banned because you don't seem to know when to walk away. Guess what-- some of your detractors have the same issue and have also received bans. A good chunk of this forum seems to wear it as a badge of honor. Being female doesn't magically make the rules apply differently to you.



I didn't say there were new mods.. I said the ones we already have (particularly admins) are paying more attention because there have been more and more complaints about this particular forum-- plus more of the infighting here has spread to other areas of the board... had you folks been able to keep it contained to the designated Kitty Litter box-- you probably wouldn't have gotten as much attention, minus the usual RTM suspects (No, I don't mod in here-- I don't want the headache). This phenomenon happens in other parts of the board as well when there is a sudden uptick in certain violations-- particularly when it spills from forum to forum.


Here's a suggestion. Follow the rules of the board and you won't have a problem. You can argue and debate on this forum all day every day-- to your little hearts content... and never get so much as a point as long as you follow the rules of the board. If you cannot argue without resorting to name calling, perhaps reevaluate the strength of your position.

[Austin Ellen]

Ok back to freedom of speech - Biden had one too.

[Yssup Rider]

Are you saying Hitler and Goebbels had their own?

Also, wasn’t your point that guns and the Bible were the first to go?
You keep contradicting yourself.

Please help us out here. We’re trying to follow your logic.

[matchingmole]

Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

Oh for God's sake - you don't even know the difference between dictatorship and totalitarianism. Let me help this amature out. You're welcome.

Dictatorship- Form of government in which one person or a small group possesses absolute power without effective constitutional limitations. Totalitarianism- Form of government that permits no individual freedom and that seeks to subordinate all aspects of the individual's life to the authority of the government.

Are you an 'amature"? BWAHAHA

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Caesar banned neither when he became dictator of Rome.

Your turn to go feed the lions...