• JohnDClay
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I count authoritarian mostly as little to no way for the citizens to effect policy changes. Plus their very heavy handed on controlling their population.

    Functional liberal democracies are pretty far from that, since people have feedback, and because of that, the population isn’t ruthlessly controlled.

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      But most people have no effect on policy and almost all of society, including every necessary resource, is monopolized by the owning class enforcing its will through state violence and deprivation

      • JohnDClay
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Controlling what they’re allowed to think, say, and do. Much further than is necessary for just protecting people.

    • Clever_Clover [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      so, say, a place like Cuba where citizens do effect policy changes (like when they recently voted on the new constitution that now enshrines lgbtq rights) are not authoritarian, right?

      • JohnDClay
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’d be not very authoritarian then if that’s true. I haven’t looked at that case specifically though. Sometimes the process is pretty rigged to give only the appearance of democracy. But I have no reason to think that’s the case in Cuba.