-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
AOC and the Freedom Caucus agree on something
- Thread starter sun rise
- Start date
Link?
The underlying story Republicans and Democrats agree: it’s time to regulate facial recognition tech
I wonder about the qualifier, "total".
It raises how much surveillance she'd tolerate.
But I'm willing to be encouraged that she'll be an advocate for civil liberty.
Sure, it's good AOC is finding common ground with conservatives and "cough" libertarians....
Well, there's a lot of ground under "total".
We will see.
She strikes me as a left libertarian. Left-libertarianism - Wikipedia
Without a record, it's too early to judge how much of a civil libertarian she is.
But she's been very vocal about the "left" part.
And if she goes full blown socialist, the libertarian part would evaporate.
Nah she's far left Identitarian trash.
AOC: Growing cauliflower is 'colonial approach' to vegetables
Can't even grow the vegetables I like without being called a racist.
Woberts
The Perfumed Seneschal
According to the Scot, that doesn't exist.
It exists in name only.
I've covered it before in the systems analysis of socialism thread.
It requires so much more governmental power over free association
that oppression is an emergent property of socialism. History, both
past & recent bear this out, ie, the more socialism, the more authoritarian
the regime.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Well that puts us off from becoming a modern day Britain for a bit.
Of course the key term is regulate, not eliminate. A bit disturbing still all the same.
It might be more of a socialism from the bottom - up, as opposed to from the top - down. More of a grassroots variety where people can do their own thing with collective ownership. It might be more of a commune, where everyone takes turns to be the sort of executive officer for the week.
Of course, voluntary socialism without government imposition is no problem for me.
But I spoke of a national context, ie, imposed by government upon a whole country.
Yes, although that would probably be a different type of socialism.
But there really isn't anything about socialism that would require government interference in people's private lives. In fact, it would be a waste of time and resources for any socialist government to do that. Their primary concern would be who owns what - which is something only a few bigshots worry about. The common people would be left alone and would be free to do their own thing.
Where oppression comes into play is the necessity of preventing free
economic association, because that would quickly balloon into full blown
capitalism. But a capitalist economy has no need to prevent socialist
enclaves within....they're no threat to capitalism.