Community >> View Post
·
Post By
The Avenger

Location: New Jersey
Member Since: Thu Dec 02, 2021
In Reply To
Late Great Donald Blake 
Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,563
Subj: Re: Oh I was here responding to a relatively narrow aspect that was mentioned.
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2022 at 09:05:49 pm EDT (Viewed 161 times)
Reply Subj: Oh I was here responding to a relatively narrow aspect that was mentioned.
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2022 at 11:03:19 am EDT (Viewed 159 times)



    Quote:
    That if having a "secret police" is a sign of a tyrannical, authoritarian, etc. regime


- as I contend that it is -



    Quote:
    by the definition given, we have a secret police and the US would qualify as authoritarian.



What secret police operation does the USA have under way today? We can't include the FBI raid of Trump as evidence, because that raid wasn't secret.



    Quote:
    In other words, every major nation by this definition engages in things like espionage, secret investigation, and the use of law enforcement for political purposes.



I don't know that for a fact. Do you?



    Quote:
    The determining factor isn't central planning of an economy. There are plenty of countries that have a primarily "free" market system and engage in this "secret policing" including as I said, the US. In still more words, saying only communist countries have secret police is special pleading.



I never said only Communist countries have secret police. Again, I suggest you read the OP.

You're employing a tactic. You're refusing to engage with the question posed by the thread. Your tactic is to throw up straw men and then knock them down.

But I'll stop trying to get you to play fair, and move on.

I contend that Communist - and also theocratic and fascist - regimes are IMPOSSIBLE without secret police. The fact that no such regime has ever existed WITHOUT secret police is a major piece of evidence in my favor. Common sense provides further support. What do Communism, theocracy, and fascism have in common? They're all single-party systems. What's the significance of that? A single-party system cannot co-exist with opposing parties. The opposing parties must be made to cease to exist. Hence the need for secret police. I conclude, therefore, that single-party systems can never be anything other than evil. Being evil - employing secret police - is a logical necessity for all single-party systems. We are all morally bound, therefore, to oppose single-party systems on principle.



Posted with Google Chrome 104.0.5112.102 on Windows 10
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software