Nope, I simply view Authoritarianism as a solely social descriptor. I would say that I support Collectivism, absolutely, but I don't see that as Authoritarian because it seeks to do away with perceived coercive institutions - as opposed to Authoritarianism, which I see as the active use and reinforcement of coercion.
I don't want to turn this into another my-system-is-better-than-your-system thread so I won't say more.
Rest in Peace TosaInu, the Org will be your legacy
Originally Posted by Leon Blum - For All Mankind
I agree with CountAnarch, and his points.
Read the definition of Libertarian Socialism, it is the most anti-authoritarian realistic system. How in anyway can it be considered Authoritarian.
On the otherhand, having a monarchy, that is an authoritarian aspect to a system.
Days since the Apocalypse began
"We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" | How to spot a Humanist
"Men of Quality do not fear Equality." | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs."
Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar
Bookmarks