Hacker News Reader

Orban and Erdogan also won the popular vote, that's hardly a get-out-of-authoritarianism free card.

>Orban and Erdogan also won the popular vote, that's hardly a get-out-of-authoritarianism free card.

You should learn more about the electoral system under authoritarianism. In any free election, Orban or Erdogan have no chance.

Their first elections were not under an authoritarian system yet, their actions turned it authoritarian afterwards.

Heck, Orban was already prime minister in 1998 before the current stint, similar to Trump.

You're missing a key point about how modern authoritarian regimes operate. Just because a country holds elections doesn’t mean it’s a democracy. Authoritarian systems like those under Orban or Erdogan often maintain the appearance of democracy free elections, parliaments, courts but in reality, these institutions are hollowed out or heavily controlled.

Orban and Erdogan do win elections, but the playing field is far from level.

In both Hungary and Turkey, the judiciary has been systematically brought under the control of the ruling party. Independent courts are a cornerstone of democracy because they ensure that laws are applied fairly and check the power of the executive. When this independence disappears, so does accountability. Free press is another essential pillar. In these regimes, the government or its allies own or dominate most media outlets. Critical voices are marginalized, harassed etc. As a result, voters are often exposed to only one narrative, the government’s making truly informed choice nearly impossible. NGOs, academic institutions, and opposition are often harassed, defunded, or labeled as enemies of the state. This further reduces checks on power and narrows the public discourse. Gerrymandering, changing election laws, and limiting opposition access to media or funding are common tactics. Even if voting itself is not rigged, the entire process leading up to it is skewed.

So when you say "in any free election, Orban or Erdogan have no chance" you're implying the elections are genuinely free and competitive. They are not. These leaders win not because they represent the will of a fully informed and free electorate, but because they control the information environment, the rules, and institutions that should hold them in check. That’s not democracy, it’s authoritarianism dressed in democratic clothing.

> If anything, what is happening in the US is exactly the opposite: Trump, who won the popular vote, therefore a representative of the oppressed majority, is waging a war against their oppression (as masses seems it) by the authoritarian deep state.

This is an absolutely wild way of framing what's happening. The oppressors trying to paint themselves as the oppressed. Who exactly are "the right" oppressed by, and how exactly are they being oppressed? Immigrants? Gays and Transsexuals? Science researchers? DEI HR departments? Because that's who they seem to be going after. These guys historically have not been oppressors.

What's happening in the US may not be authoritarianism, but it is definitely a powerful group, now that they are in power, inflicting cruelty against many smaller, weaker groups who cannot fight back.

Someday right leaning white men will finally live in a country where they can be elected President and no one will think this unusual. Until then the struggle continues.

> If anything, what is happening in the US is exactly the opposite: Trump, who won the popular vote, therefore a representative of the oppressed majority, is waging a war against their oppression (as masses seems it) by the authoritarian deep state.

Countries have laws that govern how they are nominally meant to operate.

When the ruler of a country breaks the laws that are supposed to constrain his behavior, and faces no consequences, what do you call that?

Governments that were not considered authoritarian have broken laws as well. This didn't start with Trump, I would say Trump is a result of laws being ignored.

For the fight against terrorism or any other shit de jours that caused the current outrage.

So now any reference to laws sound hollow. It doesn't mean anything. What mattered is what governments used their power for.

Authoritarianism means oppressing the masses, having an undemocratic government and acting against the will of the people. It happens in Venezuela. It happens in Turkey. It happens in Hungary. It doesn't happen in the US.

We have an undemocrstic government. Thousands of polling stations have shut down since the gutting of the Voting Rights Act. Voter rolls have been purged in key swing states. As a result of these things millions of people were unable to vote. Trump has unilaterally rescinded monies appropriated by Congress and duly signed into law. That alone is authoritarian.

…therefore a representative of the oppressed majority, is waging a war against their oppression (as masses seems it) by the authoritarian deep state.

Only a delusional person can possibly believe this. There is no oppressed majority in the U.S.

>As a result of these things millions of people were unable to vote.

By similizing the American electoral system to those in authoritarian countries, you trivialize the suffering of people oppressed and often physically exterminated by authoritarian regimes around the world. Millions? Seriously? Try talking to any refugee from an authoritarian country about this. Just please be as polite as possible and choose a smaller person, I'm afraid that because of your extremely offensive position towards their suffering, they may try to cause you physical harm.

>There is no oppressed majority in the U.S.

Of course not, the US seems to be a fairly authoritarian-free country. It's just that if we assume that the US has these tendencies and try to be fair with the terms, it is quite obvious from whom they come, and against which majority the attempts at oppression are directed.

What do you call it when people are rounded up and sent to a gulag in El Salvador without due process? What do you call it when monies appropriated by Congress that literally kept starving people alive in other parts of the world, are unilaterally rescinded by an executive with no legal power to do so? The richest man in the world caused the deaths of some of the poorest in the world, and fulfilled not one of the benefits he promised.

What do you call it when people flood into a country without due process?

Due process is the wrong term. What you describe is called immigration. Sometimes immigration is illegal.

What do you call it when people supporting an authoritarian deflect to their pet issue because they think it owns the libs?

You don't get to ignore due process just because crimes are alleged. That's the whole fucking point of due process - to ascertain exactly what has happened and not just take some thug's word for it when they want to boost their arrest numbers.

By similizing the American electoral system to those in authoritarian countries, you trivialize the suffering of people oppressed and often physically exterminated by authoritarian regimes around the world. Millions? Seriously?

There’s a spectrum of authoritarianism. Not all instantiations involve mass murder or other forms of mass suffering.

Your argument boils down to: others have it worse therefore you have no right to complain.

Consider that if we don’t stand up now and complain now that the foundation will be set for the infliction of mass suffering. Your reasoning is quite bad.

> may not understand what is going on

This much is accurate.

Once again, how would this be described in the press if it were another country:

"Secretary for the Homeland said 'We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country and what they have tried to insert into the city'"

And then had a sitting Senator thrown out of the room and handcuffed.

Yeah, that's authoritarianism.