Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

verfassungsblog.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 140 posts

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#111

Post by hayst4ck »

disqard wrote: post #106
hayst4ck wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CGP Grey did a video on this that is very much worth watching for anyone interested in politics: https://www.cgpgrey.com/blog/rules-for-rulers On youtube there is also another video where he talks about making this video that I found more interesting than the video itself. One of the more interesting points he made is that in order to get into power you generally have to be given that power, but to be given that powe…

> to be given that power, you must show loyalty to the power structure. This is a gem! Thank you for sharing it. It also ties in with Venkatesh's "Gervais Principle", where, as we ascend the corporate hierarchy, we see "losers" --> "clueless" --> "sociopaths". The highest echelons of corporate structure are indeed occupied by the kinds of people who are comfortable swearing allegiance to the corporation itself, not t…

If you like that, you will also like Pournelle's iron law of bureaucracy:

https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#112

Post by red-iron-pine »

disqard wrote: post #106
hayst4ck wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CGP Grey did a video on this that is very much worth watching for anyone interested in politics: https://www.cgpgrey.com/blog/rules-for-rulers On youtube there is also another video where he talks about making this video that I found more interesting than the video itself. One of the more interesting points he made is that in order to get into power you generally have to be given that power, but to be given that powe…

> to be given that power, you must show loyalty to the power structure. This is a gem! Thank you for sharing it. It also ties in with Venkatesh's "Gervais Principle", where, as we ascend the corporate hierarchy, we see "losers" --> "clueless" --> "sociopaths". The highest echelons of corporate structure are indeed occupied by the kinds of people who are comfortable swearing allegiance to the corporation itself, not t…

> The highest echelons of corporate structure are indeed occupied by the kinds of people who are comfortable swearing allegiance to the corporation itself, not to its customers, its employees, its founding values, or some "greater good for society". Thus do we arrive at a world where these corps are headed by people who truly believe in "maximizing shareholder value".

I think you're misreading his interpretation. The Sociopaths enter and exit at will by feigning loyalty and interest to the corporation but ultimately they're not loyal to the corporation -- just loyal enough to maneuver around the power structures. once those structures are no longer useful they either break them, or jump ship, as evidenced by one of the minor-character managers in The Office.

those actually loyal to the company itself are the Clueless, who stick around even when it is clear the company isn't looking out for them, the customers, or much of anything.

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#113

Post by disqard »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #112
disqard wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to be given that power, you must show loyalty to the power structure. This is a gem! Thank you for sharing it. It also ties in with Venkatesh's "Gervais Principle", where, as we ascend the corporate hierarchy, we see "losers" --> "clueless" --> "sociopaths". The highest echelons of corporate structure are indeed occupied by the kinds of people who are comfortable swearing allegiance to the corporation itself, not t…

> The highest echelons of corporate structure are indeed occupied by the kinds of people who are comfortable swearing allegiance to the corporation itself, not to its customers, its employees, its founding values, or some "greater good for society". Thus do we arrive at a world where these corps are headed by people who truly believe in "maximizing shareholder value". I think you're misreading his interpretation. The…

Thank you for adding that nuance.

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#114

Post by EasyMark »

metacritic12 wrote: post #3

Is this really an authoritarian regime survival guide or a not-too-hidden jab at the Trump presidency? Like I don't see too many of the items applying to classically authoritarian regimes like China. Let's apply the guide's own advice: > Always think critically, fact-check and point out the truth, expose ignorance with facts. The guide after all is written by Eastern / Europeans, the people is getting expropriated th…

Why is it a bad thing to get more knowledge about authoritarianism and how it can sneak up on you? If it makes some people uncomfortable, that might should be an indicator that things niggling your mind often matter more than you think.

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#115

Post by EasyMark »

alabastervlog wrote: post #32
outer_web wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that SCOTUS told the administration to pay for completed work. Considering USAID has been essentially dissolved, I wouldn't say they knocked down "the whole USAID thing". Unless I missed some news.

Amazingly, four of five justices said the President should be able to refuse to pay contractors for completed work from funds Congress had already allocated. WTF. Or maybe it’s more amazing it wasn’t six of them saying that. One really lovely part is how this would permanently make every government contract more expensive, if they got their way. Just great.

Right they won't even acknowledge that there was nothing unreasonable about those funds. Already allocated and promised. Why even say it's backed "by the reputation of the United States" if we won't even pay the bills we've already told we were going to pay. If they find fraud then sure cancel the deal. However they are using "abuse and inefficiency" as weasel words to get out of paying our debts and contracts that the current regime doesn't like.

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#116

Post by EasyMark »

rahton wrote: post #31

Why not just leave? I mean for those who can afford. Especially when this is happening in a country with so many firearms. It could quickly be easier to resist from a safe place.

Because I have family here that I love dearly, that's enough reason for me to stay and fight. Why should I leave? I'm not the one trying to set up an authoritarian government.

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#117

Post by EasyMark »

fmnxl wrote: post #17

This worldview where one side is evil/authoritarian and the other is good/free/liberal is the root of a lot of suffering in the world. It's a flawed worldview that made Americans end up with dysfunctional politicians, because you reward ideological rhetoric more than real, pragmatic long-term planing.

I call a duck a duck. I had my criticisms of republicans and democrats in the past, but they generally respected the institutions and took their turns. The current regime is trying to scrap all that and make the President a King (or dictator?), that's why people are fighting back and calling what walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, "why that's a duck, tater!"

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#118

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

skinkestek wrote: post #110
mschuster91 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Exact amount of times it happen doesn't matter as much as the fact that one side tries to pretend it isn't a problem. I'm not saying it is not a problem at all - I am simply saying that it is a nothingburger compared to the amount of "ordinary" rape and violence going on in prisons. Trying to blast on trans people while ignoring the much larger elephant in the room is dishonest and reminds me of a Bible quote: "Why…

I guess this is what is called the strawman argument? Pretending I only care about one thing and then pointing out that it is stupid to only care about one thing?

> one side tries to pretend it isn't a problem

It's referred to as a "strawman argument" because it's like arguing with a person made out of straw (evoking images of a person fighting against a straw man for training); such a person is not a difficult opponent and one is not required to put in effort for a fight against them. One might consider who you are arguing against when you say "one side tries to pretend it isn't a problem".

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#119

Post by hayst4ck »

atoav wrote: post #70

Serious question: Why on earth is this flagged? I thought sharing strategies against authoritarianism would be as free speech, open discourse as it gets. Open discourse as promoted here on this site is among the first targets in any authoritarian society. We tech people should be merit based — vuess which form of society prevents exactly this? Suddenly instead of appointing the manager of a nuclear plant based on mer…

dang wants hacker news to be a curious place and politics is generally not a very curious topic. The first 70% of posts on this thread were anti-intellectual trump supporters.

He's worried HN will become a battlefield, and it will be, just like businesses and universities will also be a battlefield as people are coerced into supporting systems they don't believe in.

Where he's wrong is that once authoritarian regimes are done replacing societies enforcers with loyalists, such as the military and police officers, what comes next is sources that influence disobedient thought, and curiosity is fundamentally disobedient. Curiosity has no meaning without objective truth, and curiosity can't be practiced without questioning authority.

HN is oligarch owned and funded, so neutrality implicitly supports HN's patron.

dang has to make the choice all liberal people have to make (and curiosity is a very very liberal goal), and that's to participate in a system of loyalty towards PG and let HN be a place that implicitly supports this coup through inaction, or to dissent and instead support the value of curiosity in the long term, by letting hacker news be a platform that propagates dissenting news, rather than a platform that limits it and keeps the platforms users inside of the "approved" bubble of thought.

It's always easier to do nothing, and it's always hard to fight for a world you want to live in.

No political system exists without cercion, you just have to make sure the coercion serves a higher purpose, like curiosity, rather than a man.

Re: The Authoritarian Regime Survival Guide

#120

Post by herval »

fcatalan wrote: post #40
metacritic12 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The guide starts with the presumption they gained power through democratic elections. Neither China nor most other historic authoritarian regimes started this way. (Nazi Germany and Putin's Russia being the classical examples of democracies going authoritarian).

Hungary, Turkey, India, Venezuela come to mind. Poland, Brazil are also recent near misses. South Korea also had a recent oops. So a well trodden path.

Many of which (Brazil included) had direct involvement from the masterminds behind Agent Orange top (and they’re of course trying to bring them back https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/23/brazil-bolso... )
Post reply on HN