of nothing on Nostr: Dugin: >Democracy today cannot be discussed objectively. ... >One who calls it into ...
Dugin:
>Democracy today cannot be discussed objectively. ...
>One who calls it into question falls out of the field of political correctness. Marginal opposition is tolerated; but if it is more than marginal, democracy sets its machines of oppression against its alternatives like any regime, any ideology, and any dominant religion. ...
>I'm against it, but I'm against it only because the West is for it. I'm not prepared to accept anything thoughtlessly or uncritically on faith, even if everyone believes it, and all the more so if this is accompanied by a concealed (or clear) threat. ...
>Not to believe in democracy does not mean to be its opponent. It means not to be its captive, not to be under its hypnosis and its suggestion. Starting from such unbelief and doubt, it is entirely possible that we'll conclude that democracy is something valuable or acceptable, or we might not. ...
>Elevating it into a dogma and denying its alternatives close the very possibility of free philosophical discourse.
You can see here that Dugin is a very polite person, using so many words just to say "I am going to talk about democracy in a less than fervent manner." Meanwhile Hoppe gives zero warning and has a title like "Democracy: The God that Failed".
These are also arguments that I used, as a teenager, to explain to my mom why I didn't believe in the Holocaust.
This also sounds like concern for free speech. Dugin is an "illiberal" who is "fully opposed to all forms of liberalism" but he sees speech controls as threats to clear thinking, and takes defiant positions against them. Is that weird?
Well, a "liberal" porn shop owner who "is fully opposed to all forms of illiberalism" is reliably a fan of harsh speech controls.
This also sounds like a pretty dated sentiment. It's taking it as a given that the west - ruled currently by election-defying and election-stealing secret cabals, and unelected eurocrats whose only feeling about any contrary vote is that the public needs another chance to make the right decision - is actually in favor of democracy. These days it's very easy to be pro-democracy and anti-western.
>Democracy today cannot be discussed objectively. ...
>One who calls it into question falls out of the field of political correctness. Marginal opposition is tolerated; but if it is more than marginal, democracy sets its machines of oppression against its alternatives like any regime, any ideology, and any dominant religion. ...
>I'm against it, but I'm against it only because the West is for it. I'm not prepared to accept anything thoughtlessly or uncritically on faith, even if everyone believes it, and all the more so if this is accompanied by a concealed (or clear) threat. ...
>Not to believe in democracy does not mean to be its opponent. It means not to be its captive, not to be under its hypnosis and its suggestion. Starting from such unbelief and doubt, it is entirely possible that we'll conclude that democracy is something valuable or acceptable, or we might not. ...
>Elevating it into a dogma and denying its alternatives close the very possibility of free philosophical discourse.
You can see here that Dugin is a very polite person, using so many words just to say "I am going to talk about democracy in a less than fervent manner." Meanwhile Hoppe gives zero warning and has a title like "Democracy: The God that Failed".
These are also arguments that I used, as a teenager, to explain to my mom why I didn't believe in the Holocaust.
This also sounds like concern for free speech. Dugin is an "illiberal" who is "fully opposed to all forms of liberalism" but he sees speech controls as threats to clear thinking, and takes defiant positions against them. Is that weird?
Well, a "liberal" porn shop owner who "is fully opposed to all forms of illiberalism" is reliably a fan of harsh speech controls.
This also sounds like a pretty dated sentiment. It's taking it as a given that the west - ruled currently by election-defying and election-stealing secret cabals, and unelected eurocrats whose only feeling about any contrary vote is that the public needs another chance to make the right decision - is actually in favor of democracy. These days it's very easy to be pro-democracy and anti-western.