The reasons for 21st century Luddites' resistance to new technology are rooted in the fear of job loss and economic disruption, as seen in historical examples of Luddites who opposed technological progress due to the threat it posed to their jobs.

Andrew Luck prefers flip phones over smartphones, implying he may be opposed to the complexity or distractions of smartphones.

Resistance to new technologies in the 21st century may be due to the perceived threat of job loss and unemployment, as well as the complexity and uncertainty of new technologies.

Luddites oppose new technology due to fears of job loss and disruption to traditional ways of working, as seen in historical examples such as the British textile industry in the 19th century.

The 21st century Luddites, including my supervisor, may be opposed to new technologies due to concerns about job security and the devaluation of traditional skills, as illustrated by the impact of AI tools on job availability and the shift towards more efficient and cost-effective operations.

The resistance to new technologies in the 21st century can be attributed to the fear of job displacement and the struggle to adapt to new ways of working, as AI tools have made certain tasks quicker and more cost-effective.

Some people oppose new technology due to the fear of job loss or replacement by automation, a concern that is still relevant today as AI tools increasingly take over tasks previously done by humans.

The Luddite revolt was a response to the loss of jobs due to technological innovation in the British textile industry, and this historical context can help explain why some individuals in the 21st century might be opposed to new technologies.

"21st century Luddites fear a society where artificial intelligence and digital technologies undermine human autonomy, community cohesion, and decision-making, potentially leading to digital authoritarianism and the collapse of communities."

The reasons for 21st century Luddites' resistance to new technology are rooted in the fear of job loss and economic disruption, as seen in historical examples of Luddites who opposed technological progress due to the threat it posed to their jobs.

Title:

Content: Does AI make the arts poorer?
The real difference between the rich and the poor is the human mind.
▲ Since we have AI tools, we can do things quickly and well with a simple prompt, and the cost is low. (Illustration / Reuters)
2nd / Podcaster
I had a friend who had been unemployed for a while and asked me if I had a job for him to do, such as simple things like keeping an account and sorting out documents.
I said, if you asked me two years earlier, there must be, but unfortunately not now.
In the past, those chores took time, since the AI tool, as long as the simple prompt can be completed, the monthly fee is only a few hundred yuan, two or three hundred hourly wage students may not do so well.
He listened to me, didn ’ t believe it, and was curious to ask me how I use AI now.
In fact, the application is too broad and too complicated. To make him understand it as soon as possible, I cite my entire workflow as an example.
For example, when writing an article, in the stage of collecting materials, AI helps me to make notes of books / meetings / lectures / courses with speech, and the content is accurate and the grammar is strict. It can also be converted into various forms of charts, different lengths and various articles.
At the writing stage, I will discuss with AI what different topics can be cut into perspective, such as this article I want to know how AI is changing our society, ask it to help me summarize the main views on the Internet, and I will continue to ask for some details, and also ask it to grab the latest data for me.
Next, before po comes to the community, ask it to help me modify the typos and punctuation, the correction only takes a few seconds, and the text creation is basically completed.
I asked my friend, do you think you can do better, faster and cheaper than AI?
▲ AI can help users to take notes with voice, and the content of speech to text is accurate and the grammar is strict. It can also be converted into various forms of charts, different lengths and various articles.
(Chart / CFP)
Next, the image creation.
Now many devices, including WebCam and Monocular, the camera can lock the portrait to move in small amplitude, and even deliberately create a natural hand shake, self-portrait images are becoming more and more dependent on others.
Before the oral video, mainly rely on improvisation or reading, the former plays subtitles until the hand is broken, the latter has to get a reader to adjust the speed, now AI recognition subtitles are very common, the reader also evolved into the script will follow my words run (used readers will know how convenient this is), greatly speeding up the efficiency of recording videos.
It is also a technology derived from AI speech recognition: AI editing. Although it is not completely free from manual work, the editor is now editing by reading the text, without the need to listen with ears, which saves a lot of effort.
Music and images can be generated by AI, saving a lot of time to find materials and reducing the risk of copyright infringement.
As for the job that my friends are looking for, such as document processing and answering e-mail, I just write a SOP file to feed the robot, and it can do it flawlessly, and there is no need to rest for 24 hours.
It doesn ’ t matter if what is said above is not understood, in simple terms, I used to find two or three more people to deal with the process of chores, and it was replaced by AI, and AI did well and fast.
After all, it was all simple work.
▲ Document processing, e-mail and other things, as long as you write a SOP file to feed the robot, it can do flawless, and 24 hours without rest.
(Chart / CFP)
My friend is angry after hearing it.
I said, but I still need someone to help me, because I ’ m saving a lot of time now, have more capacity, and have the opportunity to make more money.
Do you do business sponsorship? Do you write creative scripts that are popular with young people? Do you have experience in IP marketing?
He was frustrated and said that he would not be those, as if he could only be eliminated.
Then he complained to me, saying that Taiwan's industry is serious, only the technology industry can make money, and other people live in deep water.
In fact, every technological innovation is like this, the British textile industry in the 19th century industrialization, a group of textile workers are also very angry at their loss of work, in the factory to destroy the loom.
These people are called Luddites. Now Luddites have become synonymous with opposition to technological progress. Most people also know that Luddites are marginal beings who will eventually die.
But it is obviously not accurate to attribute the fierce competition to the struggle for literature. In the example above, I am also a writer, but my property has leapt with the industrial revolution.
The difference is that I did two things: the first is the investment trend, and the second is that I treat AI as extremely cheap capital and use it to make money.
But I have taken advantage of resources, like I do not mix badly, will mix better, and mixed badly, will only mix worse.
Times change too fast, now this environment can not guarantee that you listen carefully to the classroom to teach those textbooks out of the society to eat, talent needs a flexible brain, as well as a variety of information judgment, to keep up with the pace of faster and faster technological development.
Then it is true that some people can not do, some people from the past to the present, all want to do the simplest job, they either can not find a job, or they have to get a lower salary than the robot.
▲ In the era of rapid technological changes, the advantages of language have been greatly weakened.
(Image from Google Translate)
In fact, education must be reformed as soon as possible, we need new departments, abolish some old departments, and now it seems like the pure language department of the college is really harming students, ensuring that they graduate and lose their jobs. (This sentence is easy to be misunderstood, it seems that I am belittling a particular department, I am not necessary.) And...
In my experience as a minor in Japanese at university, although I can also study culture and history, the advantages of language have been greatly weakened, and the teaching syllabus must be adjusted.)
The gap between the rich and the poor is inevitable, and policies can only try to avoid too many poor people, otherwise there will be social unrest.
Put on the beautiful idea of science fiction, before the civil unrest of mankind, I hope that robots will take care of our food like mothers.
Can you think about it? – I love this post.
Welcome to join the "cloud theory fan group" to see more!
● This article is authorized to be reproduced from the “XIX ” Facebook page.
The above remarks do not represent the position of this website. Welcome to submit "Cloud Theory" to let high-quality good articles be seen by more people, please send to editor88 @ ettoday.net or click here to submit, this website reserves the right to delete the text.
Hot Click 》
► Erotic websites can really be used for united warfare!
You want color, you want health, you don't want to be watched.
► Not "internal waters", not "territorial waters", but "territorial waters".
► Ammunition Preemptive Panic The DPP may be the initiator of the war.
► Can Singapore ’ s 3-Day Weekend Pass Taiwan ’ s Work-Time Revolution?
Share with friends:
Follow us
Back to the top.

Andrew Luck prefers flip phones over smartphones, implying he may be opposed to the complexity or distractions of smartphones.

Title:

Content: Andrew Luck Finally Upgrades His Flip Phone … To Another Flip Phone

Intro: Andrew Luck has made it clear that he’s not interested in joining the world of smartphones. He’s just fine with his flip phone, and he finally got an upgrade this week.

INDIANAPOLIS — Has Andrew Luck finally turned in his ancient flip phone for a smartphone?

No. No he has not.

But, he did get a new flip phone this week.

The Indianapolis Colts quarterback on Thursday shared on his Facebook account that his mobile carrier had hooked him up with a new phone.

In June, Luck became the recipient of the most lucrative contract in NFL history, and many wondered if the fifth-year Stanford product was going to splurge on the newest smartphone for himself.

"One, I like it. It's a comfort thing," Luck said of not giving up the flip phone lifestyle. "I think anybody can appreciate that, if you're used to that. … Two, I don't think I want to be connected 24/7, and this phone is maybe sort of a reminder that you don't have to be connected. And it's nice to get away. It's nice to turn your phone off."

Luck's phone at that time — and his new one, we assume — can send and receive text messages, and for all the newest crazes in apps and technology, he says he has an iPad.

"What else do you need?" Luck asked. "I'm not a Luddite."

Luddite | Ludd·ite | Noun: "One of a group of early 19th century English workmen destroying laborsaving machinery as a protest; broadly :  one who is opposed to especially technological change." Thank you, Merriam Webster.

Nice word choice, Andrew. Looks like his "Andrew Luck Book Club" is paying huge dividends.

While many of us (including the author of this article) remain glued to their smartphones, Luck is obviously content with what's gotten him to this point in life.

Smartphone or flip phone — or rotary phone — he's back on the field and healthy for the Indianapolis Colts, and that's all that should matter to his fans and his organization.

This article has been reproduced in a new format and may be missing content or contain faulty links. Please use the Contact Us link in our site footer to report an issue.

Related Content

2023 Season Tickets On Sale Now!

Secure the best seats, benefits & more for next season! Be there live for exciting matchups against the Pittsburgh Steelers, Tampa Bay Buccaneers and more opponents to be announced soon. Learn more today!

Advertising

Resistance to new technologies in the 21st century may be due to the perceived threat of job loss and unemployment, as well as the complexity and uncertainty of new technologies.

Luddites oppose new technology due to fears of job loss and disruption to traditional ways of working, as seen in historical examples such as the British textile industry in the 19th century.

The 21st century Luddites, including my supervisor, may be opposed to new technologies due to concerns about job security and the devaluation of traditional skills, as illustrated by the impact of AI tools on job availability and the shift towards more efficient and cost-effective operations.

The resistance to new technologies in the 21st century can be attributed to the fear of job displacement and the struggle to adapt to new ways of working, as AI tools have made certain tasks quicker and more cost-effective.

Some people oppose new technology due to the fear of job loss or replacement by automation, a concern that is still relevant today as AI tools increasingly take over tasks previously done by humans.

The Luddite revolt was a response to the loss of jobs due to technological innovation in the British textile industry, and this historical context can help explain why some individuals in the 21st century might be opposed to new technologies.

"21st century Luddites fear a society where artificial intelligence and digital technologies undermine human autonomy, community cohesion, and decision-making, potentially leading to digital authoritarianism and the collapse of communities."

Title:

Content: "Dissent of Dictatorship": The "Digital Dictatorship" era of artificial intelligence as the new oracle, the most terrible is probably the collapse of the community.
Photo Credit: iStock
What we want you to know is
Democracy – especially in modern times, can be said to be a breeding ground for dictators.
Therefore, the book believes that modern people living in a democratic society need to review the history of dictatorship and further consider the relationship between dictatorship and modern democracy, which is the best way to prevent the deterioration of democracy.
(in Japanese).
Chapter 15: The Future of Digital Dictatorship
The epidemic deprives the meaning of "freedom"
Since the pandemic of the new coronavirus pneumonia in 2020, the lives of many people around the world have completely changed.
Infectious diseases can be described as extreme “equality ” in a sense, which deprives people of all kinds of freedoms regardless of income, race or gender.
This is where we stand now and try to explore the politics of the COVID-19 era.
In eighteenth-century France, Benjamin Constant, a thinker and novelist, in his speech entitled “The Freedom of the Modern Man and the Freedom of the Ancient Man ”, mentioned that the freedom of the ancients was“ not a slave, ” as opposed to self-practice, and that the freedom of the modern man was “the enjoyment of the rights of the individual. ”
The ancient man's "not a slave" means not to serve his master, which means that he can decide things according to his own personal will.
However, it is doubtful whether it is equivalent to the modern definition of "freedom".
In most cases, their participation in national and official decision-making is limited.
In the city-states of ancient Greece, only a small number of citizens other than slaves were able to participate in direct democracy.
Moreover, while “direct participation ” sounds good at first glance, it can only be practiced at the expense of time spent enjoying a personal life.
By handing politics over to elected representatives (politicians), modern people have the right to free time and to participate in general direction decisions through electoral voting.
I think of the primitive state of humanity as described in Johan Huizinga ’ s Homo Ludens.
Modern people can exchange their time for personal freedom by means of a representative system and use it for fun.
And many modern people who are completely incomparable to ancient times have gained this kind of “freedom. ”
However, what we are limited by the pneumonia epidemic is precisely this kind of "modern freedom": we cannot travel outside, we cannot meet people we want to meet, and we must "self-discipline" when it is not necessary or urgent to go out.
Especially for modern people living in advanced countries, the freedoms they used to enjoy are being threatened on a scale not seen since World War II.
Why are people deprived of their freedom? Because this is the most effective way to combat infectious diseases.
In other words, in an emergency like a pandemic, it is most effective to make quick, powerful decisions that restrict our freedom, and a dictatorial political system has the advantage in this regard, leaving us in a dilemma that we can ’ t find answers to.
The "medicine" that could turn into a tragedy.
I think now is not the time to completely evade dictatorship, but to adopt a partial, limited dictatorship, and the history of the republican system is a reminder.
As I mentioned in Part II, the Roman republic attempted to defend itself against dictatorship in all its aspects, but it also concentrated power in the hands of the dictator in the event of national events, giving him considerable autocratic power.
In my view, they designed this system of limiting the length of the term, prohibiting reelection, and reporting after leaving office, which can be said to be an ingenious condition for authoritarianism to exist.
Dictatorship does have its disadvantages, so I don ’ t rashly praise it.
For example, the Communist Party of China ’ s suppression of democracy in Hong Kong and the Uyghur Autonomous Region in Xinjiang is, of course, open to criticism.
Modern politicians, at least those who claim to be democratic countries, are in the structure of multiple checks and balances of power; but many of the most senior people use clever control of the flow of money and people, so that this structure of checks and balances is reduced to an empty form.
In addition, it is also necessary to pay attention to whether the most senior people in the country have a tendency to extend their terms of office, etc. History tells us that the corruption of the dictatorship is due to the absolute need to establish a mechanism to limit it.
The people do not have to think or make decisions on their own – this is one of the characteristics of a dictatorship. If this “medicine ” is misused, it will lead to tragedy.
In order to prevent tragedy, we must learn from history now.
Is it really good to deny "factional politics"?
Of course, we should consider the idea that dictatorships are basically harmful and dangerous, and that important matters should be decided by consensus among groups.
On the other hand, it is also important to understand the problems and pitfalls of democracies.
Democracy is essentially populism, and it is better to say that it is populism than to say that it is populism.
With this in mind, we should embrace the mindset of learning the virtues of authoritarianism and republicanism in order to make politics as good as possible.
When I visited Europe, I saw their television coverage and admired the extremely detailed descriptions of politicians.
Even though they were born into a world of debating discourse, and it is not unusual for them to speak like this, I can feel their thoughts as men of knowledge.
In contrast, what about Japanese politicians? It would be good if they only forked the question, and some even threatened journalists who asked questions.
Journalists are also an important part of the checks and balances of power, and with this attitude to their politicians, it is natural not to be called a person of insight and discipline.
However, the people do not seem to attach much importance to this issue, and it may be that one day Japan will suddenly fall into dictatorship.
I am not an expert in Japanese politics, but I think it has nothing to do with the end of factional politics.
Today ’ s Japan, when it comes to “factional politics, ” will probably be regarded as an absolute bad thing, but it should not be just bad.
The Roman Senate is typical of “factional politics ”: they form factios in response to concerns and opinions, and like-minded people ponder their arguments within the party and confront party comrades who disagree — a scenario we often read.
In Japan, the faction is nothing more than a group of politicians with the same goal in mind, discussing policies, discussing ideas, developing ideas, and so on.
Even when they raise money individually, consult with each other (or rather the power struggle around the prime minister ’ s throne), they check and balance each other, and there is a sense of tension within the faction.
And under the effect of this tension, they will carry out a certain degree of talent cultivation in order to enhance the strength of the faction.
However, since Japan switched to the system of small electoral districts and began to implement the administrative party subsidy system, factionalism has gradually disappeared.
Politicians no longer think about their own characteristics, just listen to the party, and since then become more and more like a kind of "office worker", and then go on like this, I think it will be a great loss to Japan.
It is not enough to rely on a "legal society" (Gesellschaft), but also a "polite society" (Gemeinschaft) in which discussions can be freely and actively conducted and internal partners can coordinate with each other.
Therefore, at the level of this "polite society" organization or space formation, factional politics also played a certain role.
Excluding factional politics may be tantamount to weakening some of the senatorial style, and politicians will lose the opportunity to hone their insights.
Things to Consider in the Age of Digital Dictatorship
If you want to explore modern autocracy, you can not ignore the argument of the Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari.
In his recent book 21 Lessons, he points out that the era of digital dictatorship is coming.
In recent years, due to rapid advances in information technology and biotechnology, artificial intelligence (AI) is far more efficient and accurate than humans.
And robots, drones in various fields to replace human work is becoming more and more common.
Harari mentioned that the same thing will happen in the political world next, that is, there may be a “digital dictatorship ” in which artificial intelligence decides everything.
People in ancient times always listened to oracles or scriptures, and these are things that must not be reversed.
At some point, however, the human mind began to override the oracle — I think the dividing line was around a thousand BC, Harari said centuries ago.
No matter when the demarcation point is, in Harari ’ s argument, humanity has advanced into the era of artificial intelligence as the new oracle.
In my opinion, the problems arising from digital dictatorships will be much more serious than human dictatorships, and perhaps the most frightening is that communities are about to collapse.
Because the need for consensus has diminished, from national governments to local assemblies, people no longer have to gather to decide anything.
The existential value of all communities can be shaken, and people will act in accordance with sound decisions made by AI.
Further, the differing legal concepts of Europe and China alone may be clearly projected in the direction of digital authoritarianism.
Europe has followed the tradition of the Roman law: first, rules are made to outlaw those who violate the rules and do bad things; in China, the opposite is true: people tend to think that "bad is why they should be punished."
Lu Xun's "The True Story of Ah Q" is a symbol of the above Chinese thinking: Ah Q was sentenced to death at the end of the story, and the current public opinion is actually that "Ah Q is bad, and being shot is evidence of his bad: How can he be shot if he is not bad?"
When the "digital dictatorship" style of values comes, if the idea of "punishment for bad" is used to respond, I am afraid that there will be many problems: for example, whether there will be a judgment basis that "failure to comply with the judgment of artificial intelligence is bad and should be punished" is a rather profound but disturbing question.
Lessons to learn from history at this moment
It is indeed possible to make fairly correct judgements by practicing a “digital dictatorship ” with AI.
In this way, some people may think that “digital dictatorships are better ”, just as Plato affirmed the philosopher kings in the past.
As mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, one of the characteristics of dictatorships is that each person does not have to make his own decisions, which in a sense is more “relaxed ”.
If the accuracy of AI judgments is high enough, it is undeniable that people will naturally move in the direction of comfort.
The history to date has tended to emphasize the bad side of the dictator, especially the cases of Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Mao Zedong in the 20th century, which have led to much criticism of the dictatorship.
If there is a digital dictatorship, how will people judge it?
This could be a serious problem in the future, and Harari himself seems pessimistic about it.
But Harari also makes the point that if artificial intelligence can replace human work, people will have more time.
And I think it ’ s very important to spend this time on parenting, hobbies, etc., and to create new communities, so that even in the age of artificial intelligence, it doesn ’ t lose the connection between people.
The development of digitization and the popularization of artificial intelligence has allowed people to exchange more time to create new communities, which actually coincides with the ideal of communism.
The ideal state of communism is that people can work in the morning and pursue their interests in the afternoon when they are more productive.
From the history of the 20th century, we can see that the attempts of socialism and communism have failed.
However, this refers to the failure of socialism and communism based on “equality ”. If we take“ freedom ” as the benchmark of socialism and communism, there may be other possibilities, and it may be pushed in the direction of digital dictatorship.
Think about it, the “civil society ” of ancient Greece and Rome was founded on the premise that slaves served as the working class.
With slaves in charge of labor, wealthy people were able to immerse themselves in their interests and pleasures.
It may be possible to do this now with the use of technologies such as digitalization, artificial intelligence, and robotics.
Is it really possible? Or, what are the problems that will arise when we actually achieve that state?
In fact, the study of ancient Greece and ancient Rome is an unexpected shortcut.
In the previous book, Harari used the flood of the Nile River in ancient society to compare the great changes that will come in the future.
The Nile River flood is not something that a single tribe can do to stop, so it requires a collective response from all tribes.
That is, from now on, our thinking is no longer confined to one country, but on a global scale.
His point of view is profound, and the lessons of ancient history should teach us how to explore related problems and challenges.
History can provide great wisdom as we explore the future.
Based on this, we should not do this foolish thing, even if there are some opinions within the education administration that despise ancient history, pre-modern history.
In order to cope with the inevitable social changes of digitization, artificial intelligence, and the spread of robots, we must learn the history of dictatorships, democracies, republics — that ’ s what I want to emphasize, and this book concludes with that.
The Dissent of Dictatorship: Why did Plato reject democracy and instead advocate the “dictatorship ” of the philosopher king?
Book Introduction
Dissent from Dictatorship: From Athenian Democracy and the Roman Republic to Modern Dictatorship, Eight Flags Culture Publishing
Author: The Village Ling II (Hangul, Japanese:,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Translator: Li Weilu
• momo online bookstore
• Enter TNL83 at Pubu E-Bookstore checkout to enjoy 83% off sitewide (excluding some items, such as physical, adult and designated items, cannot be combined with other offers)
• If you purchase the book through the links above, Key Review Network will receive a score profit from it.
Dictatorship, not so bad as you think!
Democracy is not as good as you think!
Democratic dictatorship, on both sides, the President of the United States and the leader of North Korea say they serve the people!
The key is not to choose one or two, but to distinguish between what is a false democracy and what is a true dictatorship!
Let ’ s look back at history and think about how democracy has controlled dictatorships, or why it has become a slave to dictators.
This book will show you that the good or bad choice between democracy and dictatorship is actually a fake issue!
An in-depth history of political philosophy.
Taiwan ’ s Deepening of Democracy Must Read Common Sense
• Ancient Athens overthrew autocracy and established democracy, why did it decline and despotism return in less than a hundred years?
Why did the Roman Republic allow the existence of autocratic power?
How can we prevent the dictator from taking control of the government?
• Since dictatorship cannot be eradicated, Plato believes that it is only through elite education that good dictators can be produced?
• Democracy needs checks and balances, so no matter how good the dictator is, the people will still be dissatisfied?
From the moment that democracy was born two thousand years ago, it was in a difficult relationship with dictatorship.
Whether it is ancient Athens or Rome, or today, the most important task of a democratic society is to think about the dissent of dictatorship!
In the era of democracy, it is even more necessary to understand what dictatorship is!
Today is an era of democracy, with the United States, China, and even North Korea claiming to be a democracy.
Although the US president is elected by the people, his power is greater than that of any dictator in history and in the past. Although the North Korean leader is a dictator with absolute power, he still has to retain various public opinion organs that symbolize democracy to prove the legitimacy of the dictatorship.
Democracy and dictatorship, whether in the United States, North Korea or anywhere in the world, are two sides of the same coin.
Therefore, looking back at history, it is often found that dictatorship is the “dissent ” of democracy, creating a dark side of democracy that seems unreliable and dangerous.
It is no wonder that former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill once said: “Democracy is the worst form of politics – except in the worst ways we have tried it. ”
Will the “bad ” of democracy never change, and will the future once again fall into the depths of populism and dictatorship?
Dictatorship is not a question of right or wrong!
How did dictators rise in Athenian democracy? Why did the Roman Republic allow the existence of dictators? Why did the President of the United States have the power to veto Congress?
This book with in-depth and simple text, a brief but brief review of the history of the evolution of dictatorship, from ancient Athens to Rome, to the rise of totalitarian politics in modern Europe, all the way to the digital technology of today.
The Athenian and Roman republics are two of the most representative forms of government in history against the tyranny of dictatorship, but it is worth considering that while they overthrew the dictators, they did not deny the virtues of dictatorship — its decisiveness and efficiency in times of crisis — and they preserved them and used them cautiously.
However, the weakness of dictatorship – the concentration of power in the hands of a few or a single person – is thus preserved in the DNA of a democratic republic, which can trigger populist tyranny at certain moments (such as war, natural disasters, and plague) and lead to political failure.
This is even more evident in modern European politics after the French Revolution.
Democracy – especially in modern times, can be said to be a breeding ground for dictators.
Therefore, the book believes that modern people living in a democratic society need to review the history of dictatorship and further consider the relationship between dictatorship and modern democracy, which is the best way to prevent the deterioration of democracy.
Democracy and dictatorship, in the actual political operation, has never been a good or bad "right and wrong" issue.
However, the rise of populism often leads the people to fall into the absolute standard of good and evil, leading to the deterioration of democracy, and ultimately the absolute power to judge good and evil is in the hands of the dictator.
Throughout history, the overthrow of dictatorships by the people has often been the beginning, not the end, of the story.
Let ’ s go back to the moment when democracy was born two thousand years ago and start thinking about how democracy coexisted with a dictator and why it became a slave to a dictator.
Editor-in-Chief: Weng Shihang
Editor-in-chief: Wang Zupeng
Tags: