Uhm, actually schmooky, I don't see it as a "most liberals" thing, or even a "my viewpoint is the only one that counts" thing, that when you start spouting shit like:
Quote:
|
The fact that people like you have equal rights with intelligent, honest, and mentally healthy citizens is the reason democracy is going to have to change.
|
then you might in fact have something in common with the Nazis.
I can only speculate the way in which he would "change democracy" but the implication is that someone would decide who is intelligent, honest and "mentally healthy" enough to participate--and I can't but assume in his vision it would be someone like him who would decide. Who gets excluded and where does this process of preferential selection stop--when all the power is in the hands of people who think like albed?
For instance he's already made it clear that gay people shouldn't have the right to marry, but why stop there? Let's make them sew little pink triangles to their clothing and deny them a vote too. Or maybe we should administer IQ tests to determine who gets to vote. (Though it remains to be seen if more liberals or conservatives would lose their rights in that scenario.)
Change democracy? Maybe we should let the Iraqis know that while we're busy bringing freedom, liberty and democracy to the whole world, we're also going to
change democracy, train it to ignore certain ideas and to exclude certain people.
Of course in my opinion this is exactly the feeling that all the hype about TERRORISM is designed to engender, and these are exactly the kind of warning signs to be vigilant against: when individuals and their rights are no longer as important as the condition of the state.
The oldest trick in the political book is that a frightened population is a pliant, easily controlled population, a population ready to sacrifice anything to feel more secure, including their rights. Of course as we can see in albed,
other people's rights are usually the first to go.
I think one of the primary differences between "liberals and conservatives" in our current climate is that liberals tenaciously believe that equal rights are not dispensable and may even see that work is still needed to establish that equality, while albed's true colors here show that three million votes is not enough insurance against his fears to keep his party in power, and what better way to increase that power than by simply denying the right of participation to the opposition.
If we
don't recognize that as a fascist trend then obviously history has taught us nothing.