Democracy is an illusion.

[emeraldglass]

The actual restrictions on speech are not based on what you're saying. No one is restricted on the basis of what they say. The determining factor isn't the content but impact. An impact is determined by who is listening and how many are listening and how they are responding and how they are reacting to what you're saying. But restrictions on freedom, whether that's freedom of speech, freedom of expression, or freedom of assembly or protest or what have you, restrictions tend to be imposed based on the impact of what you're doing. If there's no impact, then there are no restrictions. And again, this is the same everywhere, whether it's in the west or in the East or whether it's in the global North or in the global south or in a democratic country or an authoritarian country.

The difference, though, is that in the west, it's really important to emphasize repeatedly how free you are. You have to tell yourselves that to make you feel special and unique and superior. But the freedom you have is not special, it's more or less universal all around the world, with only maybe a few exceptions of particularly repressive regimes. And like I've said, the freedom that you have is derived primarily from the fact that your freedom is of no impact. The moment you have an impact, you lose your freedom. Your freedom is contingent upon your irrelevance. And if your freedom in any way, even in a minor way, interferes with the system of power, the full fury of that system will be unleashed against you.

And in that regard, the United States is no different from Iran or Egypt or anywhere else that you like to call autocratic. The only difference is maybe that in the United States or in the west generally, the power structure just has a greater diversity of weapons to use against you. They have the advantage of a more sophisticated arsenal of ways to destroy you. And this is because in the United States or in the west, they, in fact, have an even greater degree of control over their society than exists anywhere else in the world.

So I want to encourage everyone on this forum who believes in 'free will' and/or 'democracy' to awaken from their naivety.

Spoiler

@TRUE_CEL @Xangsane @Qazqa @Wallenberg @Allandro @Lone Wolf @julianchicago @Jungcuck @pardocel @marauder @Tabula Rasa @StrangerDanger

 

[thenewhebbe]

People say things that go against usa intrest all the time in the usa even to many people

 

[Deleted member 41079]

pretty solid input. refreshing to read stuff like this on this forum. and this is coming from a 144 iq lawyer

 

[emeraldglass]

People say things that go against usa intrest all the time in the usa even to many people

You need to differentiate between a group or individual who seems to oppose a specific ideology, movement, or cause, but in truth, they are being influenced or directed by the very forces they profess to oppose. These are referred to as 'controlled opposition.' Powerful entities or governments frequently employ this manipulation tactic to retain control and redirect focus away from authentic dissent or criticism. On the other hand, those who genuinely challenge the state's interests, it ends bad for them.

 

[Gengar]

The actual restrictions on speech are not based on what you're saying. No one is restricted on the basis of what they say. The determining factor isn't the content but impact. An impact is determined by who is listening and how many are listening and how they are responding and how they are reacting to what you're saying. But restrictions on freedom, whether that's freedom of speech, freedom of expression, or freedom of assembly or protest or what have you, restrictions tend to be imposed based on the impact of what you're doing. If there's no impact, then there are no restrictions. And again, this is the same everywhere, whether it's in the west or in the East or whether it's in the global North or in the global south or in a democratic country or an authoritarian country.

The difference, though, is that in the west, it's really important to emphasize repeatedly how free you are. You have to tell yourselves that to make you feel special and unique and superior. But the freedom you have is not special, it's more or less universal all around the world, with only maybe a few exceptions of particularly repressive regimes. And like I've said, the freedom that you have is derived primarily from the fact that your freedom is of no impact. The moment you have an impact, you lose your freedom. Your freedom is contingent upon your irrelevance. And if your freedom in any way, even in a minor way, interferes with the system of power, the full fury of that system will be unleashed against you.

And in that regard, the United States is no different from Iran or Egypt or anywhere else that you like to call autocratic. The only difference is maybe that in the United States or in the west generally, the power structure just has a greater diversity of weapons to use against you. They have the advantage of a more sophisticated arsenal of ways to destroy you. And this is because in the United States or in the west, they, in fact, have an even greater degree of control over their society than exists anywhere else in the world.

So I want to encourage everyone on this forum who believes in 'free will' and/or 'democracy' to awaken from their naivety.

Spoiler

@TRUE_CEL @Xangsane @Qazqa @Wallenberg @Allandro @Lone Wolf @julianchicago @Jungcuck @pardocel @marauder @Tabula Rasa @StrangerDanger

I do not support democracy. I think it’s the stupidest system in the world. I support technocracy: choosing people based on their merit. Only experts in a certain field are chosen to represent / work in those fields. Democracy is dumb because you think of quantity over quality. With technocracy, you choose quality over quantity. Anyone who isn’t retarded will choose technocracy over democracy.