authoritarians of any side deprecate liberal values (ie, individual liberty) & treat the individual as an expendable means to (rather than the nonexpendable ends of) their illiberal agenda
this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2025
51 points (74.8% liked)
Political Memes
9829 readers
1737 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't understand why freely speaking my mind is necessarily a "democratic right", but I certainly support it. Couldn't an authoritarian leader simply not care and move ahead with his plans if he has enough support?
Meant a right critical for democracy: public oratory & debate of policy to argue policy, change minds, & gather support. Important since the ancient Greeks.
Authoritarians don't need popular support once in power. They usually meet criticism with force.
First of all: thanks for the comprehensive reply. 👌
What if the autocrat wants advice on how to lead the country? I'm sure every wise king in the past looked for some sort of counsel, right? And they need some form of support, or at least the approval by big chunks of the population, else who's putting his ideas into action and who's tacitly accepting of it?
They could, but it's unnecessary to sustain autocratic government. Whereas an autocracy isn't accountable to governed citizens, a liberal democracy by design is.
Authority doesn't require popular support, rule of law, or the recognition of individual liberties. Ideology (such as that the autocrat is divine or has an exclusive right to rule for whatever reason) & a faithful establishment with enough power to compel obedience can displace the need for popular support. When an autocrat's interests conflict with the populace's interests or an individual's freedom, power decides who prevails. Only revolt or overthrow by a stronger power holds an autocrat accountable.
With a liberal democracy, authority is in a government that is accountable to citizens & that rules by laws limited by recognized individual liberties (ie, rule of law & limited government).
Having freedom of speech also gives freedom to organize, and those things are dangerous for dictators as people might be getting some ideas.
Long story short: You can't effect change without organizing, and you can't organize without talking about organizing. And, well, a system where common people can't effect change can't be called a democracy. For liberal democracy specifically, how are you going to campaign and run for office if you can't even talk about your platform?
I'm not sure I understand the question.