Is there a “non-authoritarian” head of state, in your views? Does it matter at all if said state is capitalist or socialist, or do you see no relevant distinctions between the two modes of production?
Calling a state “authoritarian” is a childish distraction. All states rule through a monopoly on violence and the only difference is which class they’re pointing the guns for. Western “democracies” serve the capital owning class. Meanwhile, so-called “authoritarian” states like China, direct state power toward working-class interests, which is why leaders like Xi actually enjoy popular support instead of mass discontent.
The binary is a fantasy. The only real question is: who does the state work for?
The Authoritarian on the bottom appears to be Chinese, while the Authoritarian on the top appears to be an Oompa Loompa.
Is there a “non-authoritarian” head of state, in your views? Does it matter at all if said state is capitalist or socialist, or do you see no relevant distinctions between the two modes of production?
bedtime is tankie
Calling a state “authoritarian” is a childish distraction. All states rule through a monopoly on violence and the only difference is which class they’re pointing the guns for. Western “democracies” serve the capital owning class. Meanwhile, so-called “authoritarian” states like China, direct state power toward working-class interests, which is why leaders like Xi actually enjoy popular support instead of mass discontent.
The binary is a fantasy. The only real question is: who does the state work for?
I can tell you’re an authoritarian because you don’t believe in the rule of law.
I can tell you have no clue what words mean because you use the term authoritarian.
Rule of law is authoritarian
What part of Yogthos’ comment gave off that impression? They literally stated that the state is a monopoly on violence.
Maybe it’s someone who think that lawful violence, like the holocaust for example, is not violence lol.
May be! Ugh…