Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!
  1. Hi there... Can you please quickly check to make sure your email address is up to date here? Just in case we need to reach out to you or you lose your password. Muchero thanks!

More Evidence that "Centrism" is an Authoritarian Mindset

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by wgbgator, Jun 13, 2023.

  1. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,248
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    This is a pet theory of mine, so indulge me. No Labels doesnt represent all centrists, but it is pretty telling about the centrist mindset in this country, one where order and law matter more than say, democracy.

    No Labels likely to back off third party bid if DeSantis emerges as GOP nominee

     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    8,947
    882
    2,843
    Apr 16, 2007
    Seems like they are more just anti-Trump Republicans, rather than actually “centrists”. Otherwise it obviously wouldn’t make sense to consider backing Trump-lite candidates with similar disregard for democracy and rule of law. Desantis’ position on the debt ceiling and the migrant flight stunts both ought to be disqualifying for any “centrist” to even consider. Imo.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2023
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. shaun10

    shaun10 Senior

    290
    69
    1,828
    Apr 3, 2007
    Can you expand on your comment "one where order and law matter more than say, democracy"?
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2023
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. gatorchamps960608

    gatorchamps960608 GC Hall of Fame

    4,520
    942
    2,463
    Jul 4, 2020
    No Labels exists to elect Trump by siphoning off independents from Biden. Bannon and Roger Stone are all up in No Labels for a reason.
     
  5. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,248
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    I think there is a mindset that prefers stability over the occasional messiness of democracy, and that when push comes to shove, they would align with forces that promised stability and technocratic rule over democracy and mass participation in a time of disorder or uncertainty (or anytime really).
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,248
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    They've been around longer than Trump though, since 2010
     
  7. gatorchamps960608

    gatorchamps960608 GC Hall of Fame

    4,520
    942
    2,463
    Jul 4, 2020
    Irrelevant. They are hijacking it.
     
  8. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,248
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    Same people running it since 2010, this is just what they do
     
  9. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,021
    1,742
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    I disagree with running a third party candidate because such candidate is likely to draw from democrats, and lead to a Republican nutjob winning. However I don’t buy the whole centrism = authoritarianism nonsense.

    You have to have some degree of law and order to have democracy. Law and order doesn’t mean authoritarianism, although sometimes authoritarians will co-opt the concept.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  10. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,248
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    [​IMG]

    I would have to disagree that you need 'law and order' as a precondition for democracy. This seems to be what every military-led coup has argued. Always some kind of "transitional" period, which seems to last indefinitely. Order, yes ... but "law and order" I cant view as anything other than some kind of authoritarian catch phrase where dissent is quashed.
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 3
  11. shaun10

    shaun10 Senior

    290
    69
    1,828
    Apr 3, 2007
    I would say when then the citizenry loses its ability to self-govern, that is when law and order needs to step in to fill the gap. I'm not saying authoritarian rule, but some level of balance between utter chaos due to limited rules and outright authoritarianism. Finding that balance is key. It sounds like your use of the word "order" is based on some random assumption everyone will do what is right. That never works, especially in today's society when we are more selfish than ever before and less disciplined.

    As far as No Labels goes, they have an interesting group of people listed in leadership roles. Joe Lieberman, Benjamin Chavis Jr., John Hope Bryant and Larry Hogan to name a few. I see that as very middle of the road, not authoritarian in any way.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,248
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    There is nothing more authoritarian than this sentiment IMO. Who is judging this after all? In Chile, Pinochet & the military with the help of the CIA said the citizenry lost its ability to self-govern because they elected the socialist Allende in a fair election (who had nationalized some important industries). That's typically how this works, its that someone doesnt like the outcome of democracy, thats when its lost control and needs "order." You could see right-wingers getting ideas here during the protests of 2020 too, and that probably fed into the urgency of Jan 6th.
     
  13. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,021
    1,742
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    Democracy is not junkies living in tents on the street. Democracy is not riots and looters burning cities down. Democracy is not have a city center taken over and occupied by a political group for days or weeks. Democracy is not people invading the capital. These are all things that inhibit democracy.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  14. shaun10

    shaun10 Senior

    290
    69
    1,828
    Apr 3, 2007
    You're talking about "overthrow" and there is no balance, which is what I stated above, in that. To get back to your thread title, I do not see any of the people I mentioned above as participants in any kind of authoritarian organization.
     
  15. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,248
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    This is sort of what I was talking about about some people preferring law & order over all else, lets say Trump did "steal" the election and remained in office imperiling republican government, wouldnt some of those things be acceptable responses in the name of democracy? I totally think there would be people in the center ideologically who'd say let Trump stay over rioting and civil unrest.
     
  16. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,248
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    Do you have to join a club to be authoritarian? I think its just a mentality, personally, with very different preferences and expressions. Someone who thinks experts insulated from accountability should rule is as authoritarian in spirit as the guy who wants president Trump for life.
     
  17. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,021
    1,742
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    No - no that’s not what centrists think

    Mob rule is not democracy.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. shaun10

    shaun10 Senior

    290
    69
    1,828
    Apr 3, 2007
    Rioting and civil unrest, resulting in damage to property and injury or loss of life, is unacceptable whether you lean right or left or sit in the middle. And no, as more of a centrist I would not think it is ok for Trump to stay, if based on the existing laws/rules he lost the election. The rule of law in this case would say he lost the election and must step down. And that should have been accomplished without rioting and civil unrest. Trump created the whole "the election was stolen" narrative. None of it was based on law and order.
     
  19. 92gator

    92gator GC Hall of Fame

    14,519
    14,446
    3,363
    Jun 14, 2007
    You're in one.

    hmr n sikl.png


    Why don't you tell us?
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,248
    1,906
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    I think that's kind of anti-American to be honest, I mean, we'd still be part of the monarchy if the founders had that mentality about resisting tyranny. It would have been nice if the British just said "ok" when we declared independence, but we had to fight a war and destroy property and kill people.