Am I just imagining it, or is there a growing wing of Democrats

[G_j]

who are more authoritarian in their views, such as distaining dissent and desiring to silence it?
There just seems to be an attitude that is more in the forefront than I ever remember it being. Hopefully, it's just here.
Some of us old schoolers appreciate that a healthy democracy can be a bit loud and messy.
Who really cares if Jill Stein showed up to join the carnival outside the convention?
As a chant we've heard at demonstrations says "This is what Democracy looks like"

Edit: To be clear, I am not talking about non dems inside the convention, but dems inside and anybody and everybody outside the convention in the public arena.

[phleshdef]

1. Democratics?

[G_j]

3. spellcheck strikes again nt

[WhiteTara]

17. It got you on

disdaining too

[earthshine]

28. Are you the grammar police?

There should be a comma before the word "too."

And your sentence (if it could be called that) should have a period at the end.

[WhiteTara]

31. No; but, it looks

like you are.

[Hortensis]

41. Back to the OP: Yes! Increased authoritarianism

is being seen in Europe and here among far left groups, which are vulnerable to it. Writers in the U.S. so far are mostly noting the rise of far-left groups, and their attempts to quash those who don't agree with them, on college campuses, but of course it's seen in politics, just less written about -- so far.

BUT, authoritarian is always present on the right. Conservatives, especially social conservatives, are of course those most prone to and supportive of authoritarianism and authoritarian leaders, such as Trump ("I alone can fix it!&quot . The farther right usually the more authoritarian, and we never see them when they are not in need of a strong leader to obey.

Liberals, generally speaking, are the least vulnerable personality type to authoritarianism. Liberals are the anti-authoritarians both in personality and political beliefs, such as Hillary "We need to... We will...&quot .

[BobbyDrake]

2. There's nothing "authoritarian" about acknowledging the results of a Democratic election.

It's the minority who believe themselves entitled to rule despite not winning the vote who display more actual authoritarian tendencies.

[JoePhilly]

6. +1

[glennward]

7. Nor being loyal to American and your party. nt

[JCanete]

58. being loyal to party ideals isn't authoritarian, being loyal to party in spite of changing ideals is

[G_j]

8. There is a plethora of protest causes

From TPP, Black Lives Matter to fracking etc.

[Exilednight]

30. Our form of government is designed to assure that the majority does not

steamroll over the minority.

It's specifically designed to find compromise and to ensure that the minority has as close to an equal voice as possible to the majority.

This is the democracy I support by being a member of the Democratic Party. If we don't support dissent, the major principle that Jefferson founded this party on, then we might as well change it to "Only Winners Have A Voice Party".

[G_j]

34. Thank you

couldn't have said it better.

[workinclasszero]

37. +1

[LoverOfLiberty]

4. What you are seeing is

the reaction to a very serious threat to our Democracy. People are genuinely freaked out right now about the possibility of Trump becoming president.

[sofa king]

10. Concur.

By colluding with a foreign nuclear power, even publicly asking them to commit espionage against the United States, this election just went beyond the pale. Past Nixon, past Reagan, even past the sustained criminal kleptocracy that was the Bush years.

Now it's about the sovereignty of the United States itself.

[renie408]

35. +1

[Renew Deal]

5. She can run for president all she wants

But she has no place inside the Democratic convention. It has nothing to do with authoritarianism. It's common sense

[G_j]

11. people didn't think she should even be outside

is what I noticed.

[Renew Deal]

20. She shouldn't but, but whatever

The republicans have space in Philly too. It is what it is.

[Squinch]

21. No. I think the problem is that she appears to be working with Democratic delegates.

She is an opposition candidate, trying to influence our election.

If Trump had shown up and was welcomed by those protesting Democratic delegates with open arms as she was, and given a media platform by them as she was, you might see the issue more clearly.

Them giving her a platform is essentially the same thing. She's an opposition candidate, they are Democratic delegates. Its a betrayal.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

22. Is someone advocating jailing her for it?

[Motley13]

53. Rick Santorum was there

http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Rick+Santorum/Democratic+National+Convention+Day+One/rVLVA--F4Ne

[insta8er]

9. Democrats worldwide are known for dialog, difference in opinion and allowing others to express their

individualism. There is a shift in what once was and what "we" are becoming. I blame the media for it, as it seems that it is no longer enough to just control the right...concerted efforts are made and with good results to control the minds of the people on the left very much in the same way they are doing on the right. This all starts by stifling dissent, stifling individualism and speech. Ridiculing those with a different opinion. Recognize some of it?

[Democat]

12. There is also a growing wing of non-Democrats

Trying to help Trump get elected by claiming to be Democrats.

Democrats would be stupid to allow trolls to control the dialogue while fighting Trump.

[workinclasszero]

38. +1

[avaistheone1]

13. k&r

[stopbush]

14. Wrong. Which form of democracy looks this way?

We don't live in a pure democracy. We live in a representative democracy. There's a difference.

Likewise, the internal workings of any political party are not necessarily democratic. The democracy we practice in the voting booth in a GE is not the same as indicating your preference for one candidate over another in a primary. As the SCOTUS made clear in 2000 in California v Jones, political parties are private entities, and they have a First Amendment right to free association to run their affairs however they see fit. That can be something as basic as not allowing the general public to participate in their affairs - like most third parties - or to be very open to participation (like the major parties).

The "loud and messy" part of democracy is really limited to general elections that are run by each state, including the presidential election. Loud and messy within the confines of a political party's affairs - like their primaries, caucuses and conventions - has nothing to do with democracy. It has to do with an inability to control ones internal affairs as a private entity.

[DanTex]

15. The Stein/Naderites have always had an authoritarian streak in them.

Just look at what they are doing this election. Bernie lost the vote by a large margin, but they insisted that the superdelegates should overturn the voters. Then Bernie got almost everything he wanted into the platform. But because they didn't get 100% of what they wanted, the Stein/Naderites are now going to help Trump get elected. The prefer Trump's authoritarianism to any kind of compromise.

[Sheepshank]

51. ^^^^^this this this this^^^^^

[JoePhilly]

71. ^^^^^^^ Thread should end right here ^^^^^^

[randome]

16. So you wouldn't care if Trump crashed our party, then?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[geek tragedy]

18. That's what Joe Lieberman said back in the day.

party discipline matters.

Just because someone is to the left of the party mainstream doesn't mean they get a pass on fragging our candidates any more than LieberDems do.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

19. Calling stein a dangerous nutcase is not

Authoritatian. It's constructive criticism.

Is anyone advocating for the jailing of Jill stein ? If not, this is not authoritarian.

[jalan48]

23. Some people like authority. The Republicans really do, the Democrats not as much.

Religion evokes similar reactions, it's an absolute authority. Rebels are necessary to keep our Democracy healthily whether we agree with them or not.

[Dream Girl]

24. They don't belong at the DEMOCRATIC convention or should they be promoted on

DEMOCRATIC underground. No one is saying that they don't have a right to run or expouse their own view points. But no, they don't have a right to a platform created explicitly for and by DEMOCRATS. Got it?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. "In" or "at"?

[CajunBlazer]

48. Are you still here

I thought you were gone - I guess you were just hiding out until someone attacked Stein.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

49. Still here.

I see you're still here too.

[CajunBlazer]

50. Never left - never hid - never changed the way I post - no need

I can post exactly as I posted before - perhaps even more freely. How about you?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

60. I can see that you're posting more freely. The rules forbid that for me.

[unitedwethrive]

25. I think what you're seeing maybe situational.

Many of us feel that it Bernie had conceded a month ago, the convention would have run much more smoothly, which would have obviously been good for the entire party. Heck, for all practical purposes, it was over after super Tuesday. So It's hard to believe the reasoning that it takes a lot of time to let go of his movement. Maybe it's an age thing, but having been through many, many campaigns, I've seen politicians concede without much notice to anyone, and their supporters are expected to quickly move on.

[demwing]

46. Having the most progressive platform in history is well worth the rough edges

I credit that to Bernie Sanders, his most ardent supporters, and the leverage they applied to the Clinton camp.

[emulatorloo]

52. Agreed! And I credit HRC camp for working with Bernie camp to create this platform

[LanternWaste]

26. It seems to me that voicing dissent against against a protest is just as valid as a protest itself.

It seems to me that voicing dissent against against a protest is just as valid and no more authoritarian than the protest itself.

[JaneyVee]

27. The far left are the authoritarians.

[Exilednight]

36. I think "far left" doesn't mean what you think it means.

It a truly far left society there would be no centralized government or authoritarian rule. That's what it came to mean mid 20th century thanks to people like Mao and Stalin.

[B Calm]

54. Being called far left is insulting!

[sufrommich]

29. It's not "authoritarian" to disagree with you.

I see this word has taken over "oligarchy" as the new most overused word of the week.

[G_j]

32. disagreeing with, is not the same

as wanting someone to shut up. And I am not talking about hecklers inside the hall.

[Avalux]

33. I think it's people's fear talking.

They are so terrified of Drumpf winning, they want everything to be perfect when it comes to the Democratic Party. Any sort of dissent is poo-pooed because it might give the media a reason to stir up controversy, which they feel will help Drumpf.

[G_j]

40. that is a reasonable explanation

All I can say is, it's a shame to have fear be such an influence. I understand and am sympathetic to people being afraid. I agree that Trump is absolutely terrifying, but I don't believe our lively dialogue helps him in anyway.

[adigal]

65. Shutting up the opposition is what trump and Republians do

Not us. If we do that, we become them. That scares me as much as Trump does.,

[Blue Idaho]

39. Well this is a private event.

The convention is a Democrtic Party private event. As such, they get to control who is allowed in and who isn't. Of course, being Democrats, we are a pretty welcoming bunch but make no mistake about it. This is not an open "free speech zone" where anyone can come and express their views about anything.

That's why there are credentials for the Democrats that are there doing a job for the party. There are also tickets allowing some guests to attend. But just like a concert ticket - your purchasing of the ticket is you agreement to abide by the rules set out by the venue and the organization putting on the event.

[yawnmaster]

42. Authoritarianism isn't limited to one side of the political spectrum or the other. I believe it...

is more orthogonal to the spectrum, if you will.
Just as libertarianism can run on both sides.

I've seen the type of person that just wants the "other side" to go away (not by convincing them to change but by other means) and then be able to live in their quasi-utopia (for a while - as I think another "other side" will form).

And then I've seen the type of person that can both argue against the "other side" and live in the same (non-utopian) world.

To me, one of those types leans authoritarian.

[giftedgirl77]

43. Are you referring to the ppl that walked out in a huge dramatic

fashion then after they realized it didn't have the effect they wanted tried to go back in for a do-over?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

44. You're not imagining it. K&R

[CajunBlazer]

47. Nope, just a lot of people showing disatisfaction with a wing of the party....

...that they see is putting more emphasis on their REVOLUTION than winning the general election. Those people are (perhaps rightfully) concerned that with the Republicans in disarray and the media trying to tell the story that the same thing is happening in the in the Democratic party, we cannot afford to appear in disarray - it's about public perception. And to a large extent those people are right.

One of the people showing that concern the most was Bernie Sanders. he was texting and meeting with his delegates constantly over the last two days, encouraging them not to disrupt the convention. He understands, as perhaps you do not, that the REVOLUTION can't make progress under a Trump Presidency, a Republican controlled congress, and a Supreme Court which might be staked with conservative Justices for the next generation.

[Android3.14]

55. Oh yes. And they are here in droves

They are also in the general public. There is a large segment of the population that crave the security of mental enslavement, believe a patriarch (whether male or female) should tell them what to think, how to behave, and to crush anyone who questions the suppression. There's a reason the trope of the lotus eaters exists, as well as that of the Emperor's New Clothes. It is a universal characteristic for many people, many cultures.

I echo this statement "To be clear, I am not talking about non dems inside the convention, but dems inside and anybody and everybody outside the convention in the public arena."

[liberalnarb]

56. Or...

thats just what your reading on DU. I love this site, but too many folks on here take what users say as representing Democrats as a whole. Its still the internet and some of it should be taken with a grain of salt.

[Starry Messenger]

57. No, part of democracy is that everyone gets a chance to discuss the parameters of a process

and once that is set and going forward, everyone is expected to honor the outcome.

If you don't like the outcome, organize effectively to change it, by gaining the democratic majority to help you support it.

That's the actual definition of democracy. Disrupting the results with your individualistic or minority disgruntlement is the opposite.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

59. Authoritarianism?

On a site where posters are afraid to voice their opinions for fear of getting banned? Surely you jest.

[John Poet]

67. ^^^THIS^^^^^

[adigal]

66. This is exactly what the OP is talking about

I hope you're being snarky??

[NurseJackie]

62. "To be clear" ... yes, of course you are.

[NCTraveler]

63. I saw photos of them at the convention with "jail her" signs.

I hit on their authoritarian nature in an op last week.

[adigal]

64. Any criticism is seen as dangerous or sexist, and not just here

Over on dailykos, it's even worse. Democracy is messy. Tyranny is neat. I thought Dems knew that.

[adigal]

69. it hasn't seemed that way. Nt

[adigal]

72. Oh, yes, sorry. I agree. :( nt