Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 604004684088213504
What about selling large swaths of land to China?
Airports?
Shipping docs?
Mines?
Please tell me how not looking after national assets help make the country better.
I forgot how that works again
With the free trade and all
I don’t know much about Australia but I do know a fascist government never works for the benefit of the people
It is to suppress the people and help the elite, like Hitler, like Mussolini
A harsh government is not suppression, it's fair
”harsh” isn’t fair,
Taking away the freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press, is not fair
And usually when governments take away freedom of the press, it isn’t true news, take Pravda for example
We don't have free speech here
You can go to prison for blasphemy
Anyway, some basic free speech is a good thing
Then change it, but taking more rights away, is not the fucking answer to a government, it only ends in badly
And People will start to hate the country
And like the romans it will fall
I don't see how having harsh laws and higher standards of morality in the police force will suppress respectable members of society and make the nation an unpleasant place to live in
...
You have explained to me how you don't like authoritarians in general, but you can't protect national interest or the interests of your countrymen without some level of power and authority in society
Laws work because there is a threat of violence or consiquence behind breaking them. Backed up by the police and government
If the laws have been soften to protect the interests of pedophiles, criminals and other unjust elements of society then shouldn't they be made/efforced to do their job??
This is not suppression, police should be nice to the nice people and nasty to the nasty ones.
@Deleted User Yeah. I don't agree with freedom since it pushes conflict of ideas and gets nothing done. It just slows down progress. Maybe abused their power to get something done, but not in the case of corruption.
@Deleted User This can sometimes be true (see Deng Xiaoping and Lee Kuan Yew) but it has a very real possibility of going rogue and killing all the progress (see Mao Zedong and Joseph Stalin).
I'd rather progress slowly but not have all my progress destroyed bc of one idiot
I wouldn't say Stalin and Mao were fascists, it's just that they behaved like fascists. Though you'd be correct in saying that Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were authoritarian dictators.
I don't know Mao's ideas though, I just know he murdered around 20 million people right?
Because I doubt those who are nationalists would be wanting to destroy their nation.
70 million actually
Deadliest tyrant in history
And Mao didn't want to destroy his people. He wanted industrialization but having farmers make metals in their backyard might seem ridiculous today but Mao thought it could work
Holy shit.
@Deleted User they were communists not facists
Yeah. But they behaved like fascists, such as going against freedom of speech and such. Fascists and communists like Stalin and Mao are authoritarian.
So when I mean behave like I mean they were authoritarian.
Yup
@Deleted User communists came first so isn't it facists who emulate them?
Authority doesn't = Communism
Authority = Power more or less