If you are looking for one of those water-is-wet, sky-is-blue comparisons, these survey results are for you. Rasmussen asked if you would report your neighbors for holding social gatherings in violation of coronavirus emergency orders.
“There is a huge partisan difference,” Rasmussen said. “By a 44% to 31% margin, a plurality of Democrats would turn in their neighbors. By a 60% to 25% margin, Republicans would not. Independents are evenly divided. Other data I’ve released shows that a plurality of Republicans now believe the worst of the pandemic is behind us. Democrats strongly disagree.”
No one should be surprised by this.
To support Democrats, you need to be either lulled into complacency by the lie of a nurturing maternal State or possessed of a totalitarian itch you can’t wait to scratch.
Humberto Fontova, writing about the results for Townhall.com, notes that this tendency is essential to the police state required to sustain any
Democrat Socialist government.
You see, amigos: When Soviet satraps Fidel Castro and Che Guevara converted Cuba into a Soviet satrapy they installed (as existed in all Soviet satrapies, though most efficiently in East Germany where it was grandfathered from the Nazi Gestapo) neighborhood snitch committees to report any “counter-revolutionary” behavior. These were (are) titled “Committees for the Defense of the Revolution” (CDRs.)
You might think this less likely or complain that it would not be like that here, but you’d be lying to yourself some more. The classless utopia has classes. Two of them. The ruling political/military class and everyone else.
Those at the top have everything, and those at the bottom have the crumbs from the ruling class table. The state’s needs always come first. In such a scheme, the only way to elevate yourself outside your planned subsistence lifestyle is to attract attention from the party and work your way out of the lower class or become successful at circumventing the system and not getting caught until you become valuable to the regime as an asset.
And no, it has nothing to do with a love of the law. Law in this system only applies as a means to suppress dissent at is not applicable to the ruling class as long as your actions defend or protect the regime.
We can find one local example in my written testimony to the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee on Jan Schmidt’s HB1159 – An Act that clearly defines the rights and privileges exception of this two-class system. I observed that,
Free Speech is a threat to the authoritarian tick.
That’s an amalgam of [ Noah Rothman‘s] thesis. He’s referring to a politician’s urge ” to criminalize the forms of expression [they] find distasteful.” What he calls “an old idea…that your freedom of expression is a threat to the public good.”
But HB1159 is more than that. It is a political test for speech defined by partisan lawmakers.
They decide when an interaction with a constituent is offensive to them and when they have had enough. This could be the third interaction or the tenth, the first, or never. The decision to claim you are being bullied stalked, or harassed (and when) is not only entirely subjective and decided by the lawmaker, the potential object of HB1159’s force has no way to know what or when they will have broken the law.
Schmidtler’s bill would activate the ruling class by empowering every public official (elected, appointed, or just hired – and their immediate families) with the power to “snitch” on any expression, public or private, that they claimed made them or someone else fearful.
There is hardly a more totalitarian tick than that, though the urge to snitch on your neighbors comes with an added layer of difficulty. You still have to live near each other, and sooner or later – if it is not already obvious – they will figure out who it is. And the easiest place to begin, if you are looking – based on this poll – is to check your neighbor’s party registration.