Post by brazilianmike on May 24, 2020 20:25:45 GMT
Dear High Judge of the DSA,
Hello, I am Mike, Bhexa in the region, a law student in real life, and as a court clerk in the DSA, I want a clarification on a component of Extraordinary Misconduct in the Charter. Previously there was a lot of talk and confusion about the inclusion of totalitarianism under Extraordinary Misconduct in the charter. I believe we should have a clear ruling by the High Judge as to what that means. Essentially, I ask:
1. What does totalitarianism mean? What does it mean to advocate or promote totalitarianism?
2. How would advocacy or promotion of totalitarianism be dealt with in the DSA? What should the MOJ or any moderators do when they encounter someone advocating or promoting totalitarian ideas?
Thank you for your question, as many of us are aware, a clarification on this topic will be very useful.
1. As well you know, the concept of totalitarianism is not completely objective, and though its specifics are debated even now amongst academics, there is an overarching consensus. In any instance where you will find totalitarianism discussed or defined, it is generally agreed that totalitarianism manifests as a highly centralised government wielding the greatest authority in a geopolitical area or more commonly a state, over the population, rarely permissive of any real threat towards the government in power and often supressing any perceived threat with disproportionate violence. Unlike softer forms of authoritarianism, which exist to some extent in every nation state or form of governance, Totalitarianism is completely antithetical to democracy, and to all other forms of freedom. Other characteristics of Totalitarianism include a glorification of the leader or governmental body, often using a "cult of personality" to ensure public opinion is unquestioning of their actions. In any credible instance where you find totalitarian regimes being discussed or defined, the examples of historical totalitarian regimes given are the Nazi regime of Germany, Stalin's regime in the USSR, Mussolini's fascist regime in Italy, the Maoist and current Chinese Communist Party regimes, Franco's Falangist regime in Spain, and the Juche regime of North Korea. These regimes are to be considered as examples of Totalitarianism, and not the sole examples.
2. Totalitarian advocacy or promotion is listed alongside advocacy or promotion of fascism, reactionary ideas, any form of bigotry, or general far-right ideas because Totalitarianism has shown itself repeatedly to be a danger to freedom, democracy and equality, ideas that the DSA holds dear, being both a Democratically minded region and a Socialist minded region (though it may be said a distinction between the two might not need be necessary). It is appropriate to say that the spirit of this law is to count advocacy or promotion of Totalitarianism in the same vein as the DSA has approached other serious offences. We may be able to recognise advocacy and promotion of Totalitarianism by; the active promoting of ideals or regimes endorsed and practiced by Totalitarian regimes; the denial, downplaying, and justification of Totalitarian regimes or their behaviour, namely in regards to the many human rights abuses committed by these regimes; the outright rejection of academic consensus by claiming known Totalitarian regimes were infact not Totalitarian in the first place. Given that Totalitarian advocacy or promotion is listed alongside advocacy or promotion of fascism, reactionary ideas, any form of bigotry, or general far-right ideas, it is appropriate to say that the spirit of this law is for the DSA to approach this offense with the same punitive measures that the other listed offenses are approached with.
I hope that this adds enough clarity on the Court's position, though, should any part need further elaboration, it will be delivered upon request.
Sincerely, Mauvemarke, High Judge of the DSA
Upon the authority of the Stonerose Throne, servant to the people.