The idea is that in a populist scenario the command chain of a dictator-like government has to repeat exactly what the leader says. And that would come from the responsible authoritarian leaders being representatives for the people. But in a way that they are the people. And that comes from a strong “I am you” image projected by the authoritarian leader.
I will elaborate more on this later as it interests me profoundly.
Thankfully, the literature on it is quite extense. I have prepared some books to read on the “Authoritarian Personality” and on the “Sociology of Power”. It is just a shower thought after all.
Luckily I’ll be able to make sense of this and produce something that will make it able for people to understand it as well.
A blog post, a Lemmy comment, something like that.
do you think this is interesting? people clearly have a strong opinion about it given the downvotes.
That is already enough of a reason for a distinguished study. If a populist leader wants to force their core leaders and fellow party members into going along completely with them, that’s already reason enough for a deep cut in morality, ethics and integrity.
In a populist setting, where the politician says to the people that gather around her/him “I am like you”, they do this for the sole purpose of forcing the other interested members of a party to say “I am like you” as well.
Military? Who would act militarily against a community? How do you figure slums survive? People could act “militarily” against them. Yet they survive and thrive.
I think it’s important to denote that some people categorize anarchism as a distant dream regime, for convenience of course.
You can see anarchism in action in the punk movement or other community efforts. People building bridges on their own, living in a gridless community, sharing art using their own methods like cassette tapes. That’s all anarchism.
I’m not at the heart of anarchism. I’m not occupying an abandoned building to help the poor, for example. But I’ve read a couple of books on it.
Yes, you’re right. Don’t let anyone tell you how you feel. Doesn’t make it exactly scientific though, even if it’s true.
You’re a woman who wants to “NoFap”?
Banks, government apps and main apps (Whatsapp, etc.) are on Google Play. It’s clear governments will stick with Google. What is left to know is how seriously democratic governments take civil liberties.
That’s common culture/knowledge. But I don’t know, seems like rubbish to me. If English colonization has different methods, what can you say about Trinidad & Tobago? And the English Guyana? Let’s not go to Africa and Asia. It doesn’t seem to be their “modus operandi” to me.
I don’t think there is some big extermination plan for America and Australia. I think there’s just something different to those places, but that requires more study. Not of the common knowledge kind. Why would you want some kind of extermination colonization strategy for Australia? It’s weird. It’s more of a “counter-study”, but I believe there are people fighting the good fight out there. I’ll put it on my list and research it.
That’s good. It’s similar to Brazil in the sense of recognizing and preserving tribal cultures. That’s important, but it doesn’t extend to all native people. There are movements here advocating for the recognition of the urban indigenous—people who live in the cities but aren’t officially recognized as having native ancestry.
Even more, it’s increasingly expected that there were big cities in the Amazon, featuring complex trade routes. However, this topic still needs to be studied more profoundly for various reasons.
It all depends on History, specifically how groups like the Aztecs in Mexico and the Inca in Peru dealt with the Spanish. Their elites were often made kings (or viceroys) in the early post-colonization period. That makes a significant difference in the subsequent social structure.
Not children. People of any age. They’re dark skinned, sometimes slightly dark skinned. They look like japanese, sometimes they don’t. Sometimes they’re hispanic without a spanish surname. They’re not told they’re hispanic, they’re just marked as hispanic by the demographics. They don’t need to be told what they are for people to oppress them.
That’s how it works: you mark someone as something and don’t give a shit about what they think about it. Sometimes, the person just thinks: “This is how I look like, and this is what my family looks like, so I’m correct and don’t know anything about this heritage thing.”.
They don’t need to be told anything, that’s how it works.
I think the french are more pasty? Any child of a frenchman had lots of rights. That’s how Haiti got to rebel, no?
Edit: I’m sorry, there seems to be a misunderstanding from my part. Pasty means pale! Now I get it! I think it doesn’t make too much sense because America is a european concept for Americus Vespucius, so it’s more Mexico than latin america. The spanish are kind white, but they are also very african because they were colonized by the Arabs from the Magreb and beyond.
Italians are kind of dark skinned also, maybe because of North Africa? I don’t know. Anyway, the dark skin don’t necessarily means the person is hispanic or a original person.
The problem here is the acculturation. I bet some people mark themselves as white for convenience, and there are all the darkskinned “hispanic” people. I don’t know, seems kind of bogus to me.
Guess I’ll just pull the Terry A. Davis here and say it’s God.
I mean, agentic AIs are getting good at outputting working code. Thousands of lines per minute; talking trash of it won’t work.
However, I agree that losing the human element of writing code is losing a very important element of programming. So, I believe there should exist a strong resistance against this. Don’t feel pressured to answer if you think your plans shouldn’t be revealed, but it would be nice to know if someone is preparing a great resistance out there.
Liquid nitrogen in a pool is “stimulating” and generates an interesting physical effect. However, the point here in relating it to science is that there is some science behind it that gets the attention from people.
My argument is: people are naturally fascinated by this, but they’re put away by the strict laws, mainly mathematical laws, put forward by this.
Not that mathematics isn’t interesting, but you won’t incentivize people to go to a spitting contest by saying how you spit correctly. People want to see the strongest spit.
I think that’s all there is to it. If you can incentivize people into partaking on this endeavour (understanding chemical effects, in this case), you can bring much more value to science and people that are interested in it. You can, for example, explain interesting effects to people even though they’re looking at a clear liquid (most acids).
Coming from my perspective a little. Iran is a part of BRICS now and Lula has defended Iran in latest interviews. Let’s see how things develop and if Iran representatives will come to Rio (for the BRICS Summit). This is troubling.
He is his best fan.