alt Hacker NewsAre you really suggesting that armed conflict would be a better option here? Armed conflict is a last resort. It often leads to mass death and destruction, and just as often leads to worse authoritarianism, as in the French, Russian, and Chinese revolutions.
Mockery was very successful in maintaining morale among oppressed groups in both Nazi and Soviet Europe, as well as in many Latin American dictatorships, in times when armed rebellion wasn’t a realistic option. It was also effective during the Yugoslav Wars (Otpor) and the Vietnam War (inside the US).
If mockery weren’t an effective weapon, political cartoons and political satire (and establishment attacks on them) wouldn’t exist.
> Are you really suggesting that armed conflict would be a better option here?
Of course not. I'm simply refuting your assertion that "mockery is...the best weapon against authoritarianism."
> If mockery weren’t an effective weapon, political cartoons and political satire (and establishment attacks on them) wouldn’t exist.
Mockery can be effective in inspiring others to topple authoritarian regimes or amass public support for doing so. But it is rarely, in and of itself, the weapon that does it. It's better thought of as a catalyst.
I'll also remind you that we still live in a democracy, not an authoritarian regime, despite whatever characterizations people make about our leaders (and some certainly might lean toward authoritarian if the Constitution allowed them to). The most effective means of change in a democracy are persuading voters and politicians. Mockery can help here, to the extent it engenders the sympathies of the larger population. That doesn't seem likely, though, given the content I've seen in this thread.