Community >> View Post
·
Post By
Late Great Donald Blake 
Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,563
In Reply To
The Avenger

Location: New Jersey
Member Since: Thu Dec 02, 2021
Subj: Re: Oh I was here responding to a relatively narrow aspect that was mentioned.
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2022 at 10:27:11 pm EDT (Viewed 152 times)
Reply 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)

Previous Post


    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.


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.


LGDB: is this a real question? What SECRET police operation does the USA have underway now? I'll let you consider why I might not be privy to something like that.


And the FBI investigating Trump would hardly count even if it was secret.






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


LGDB: I know it as a basic political truism.




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.



LGDB: I did read the OP. And I am engaging with the argument. And yeah I understand what you're claiming. But I think whether a government NEEDS to have a secret police (as you say communist regime must [which is questionable.]) or HAPPENS to have secret police like with our government makes little difference in the real world.

As far as whether or not a single party system equals automatic tyranny, I think is pretty thin. For my part, I'm not for the exclusion of opposition parties, but they're are historical reasons why Socialist countries have been antagonistic to them, and it's not just because they're power hungry and awful. Furthermore, and I'd say more to the point here, you can easily have a two party system that has a democratically unaccountable security state (like with the US) that operates in the extra legal "secret" way you're describing.


cheers,
--- the late great Donald Blake



Posted with Google Chrome 104.0.0.0 on Linux
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