This site is supported by Nobility Studios.

"Does Fascism lurk around the corner for the US?"

62 posts in this topic

Posted

Some excerpts from a column warning about current developments in the US.

Does Fascism Lurk Around the Corner in The USA?

DANNY SCHECHTER

Fascism is one of those words that sounds like it belongs in the past, conjuring up, as it does, marching jack boots in the streets, charismatic demagogues like Italy's Mussolini or Spain's Franco and armed crackdowns on dissent and freedom of expression.

Now, those bells are now being rung by John Hall, an outgoing Democratic Congressman from upstate New York. His fear of fascism has less to do with repressive laws and militarism than the influx of corporate money into politics, swamping it with special interests that buy influence for right wing policies and politicians.

"I learned when I was in social studies class in school that corporate ownership or corporate control of government is called Fascism," he told the "New York Observer." "So that's really the question-- is that the destination if this court decision goes unchecked?"

Hall said the influx of corporate money in the wake of Citizens United handed the House of Representatives to Republicans "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."

So money alone is not the be all and end all of a shift towards a red white and blue brand of fascism. Other ingredients are needed and some may be on the way--like an economic collapse, defeat in foreign wars, rise in domestic terrorism and the emergence of a right-wing populist movement that puts order before justice and wants to crush its opponents

Several writers believe that if and when fascism comes to America it will be packaged in a friendly form tied to beneficial advertising slogans and public interest messaging. It will be sold, 1984, style as being unavoidable, even cool, and in our best interest.

Louisiana's infamous Senator Huey Long, a mesmerizing agitator, once said, "Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism."

http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/12225

These are just excerpts from an essay on the subject. People should read the entire argument and then reply. As I have stated on a previous thread, I believe that Fascists ARE making an attempt to impose their vision of a Corporatist State.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I will read the article later but for now, I think those who understand fascism the best have a streak of fascism in themselves. Orwell understood this very well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I will read the article later but for now, I think those who understand fascism the best have a streak of fascism in themselves. Orwell understood this very well.

Really? Then Anti-Fascists are actually proto Fascists waiting for their big chance to come out of the closet?

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If you're gonna be like this then there's no point in having a rational discussion with you. Typical ideologue. :roll:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If you're gonna be like this then there's no point in having a rational discussion with you. Typical ideologue. :roll:

This is the entirety of your post. (Short Post, difficult to take out of context)

I will read the article later but for now, I think those who understand fascism the best have a streak of fascism in themselves. Orwell understood this very well.

There were so many responses that I could have come up with... :)

But I restrained myself... :D

Now you have poured a little oil on the flame, because of what? No, no, I will restrain myself.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Clearly, this individual has proven to be too emotionally invested in this subject to have any rational discussion, as evidenced by several threads he has authored during his time on TGL.

It would seem to behoove that this individual ought to restrain from such mockery in order to have a fruitful discussion, in order to achieve true dialectic (method of arriving at conclusions) rather than sophistic and eristic (pace Aristotle) but I fear it's asking too much.

Naturally I have thought at length about this, much beyond the simplistic strawmen of ideologues, where fascism is far more complex than the "four legs good, two legs bad" perspective, but there's no point in casting pearls... ah... :lol:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Clearly, this individual has proven to be too emotionally invested in this subject to have any rational discussion, as evidenced by several threads he has authored during his time on TGL.

It would seem to behoove that this individual ought to restrain from such mockery in order to have a fruitful discussion, in order to achieve true dialectic (method of arriving at conclusions) rather than sophistic and eristic (pace Aristotle) but I fear it's asking too much.

Naturally I have thought at length about this, much beyond the simplistic strawmen of ideologues, where fascism is far more complex than the "four legs good, two legs bad" perspective, but there's no point in casting pearls... ah... :lol:

In order to have a fruitful discussion then your first post on this thread is a conversation stopper. It's also completlely untrue, unless you want to claim that Orwell was a proto Fascist because he studied Fascism.

Perhaps you should read his book "Homage to Catalonia?"

Your post was not stupid, it was ludicrous. A silly little post. And your agenda is now revealed by this last post. "Dave is a stupid ideologue and his words are nonsense, always nonsense, and are not worth discussing." And I DON'T apologise for the quotes. All you really want is for these embarrasing topics to go away, and hopefully close the thread.

Not one word of any of your posts replys in any way to what I posted. Naturally this means that you are right in your crtique.

Really, this is beyond absurd. You denounce me, this thread, and you act as if your remarks are some sort of rebutal. They are nothing at all consisting of nothing but insults.

I will read the article later but for now, I think those who understand fascism the best have a streak of fascism in themselves. Orwell understood this very well.

What is one to make of this declarative sentence? Should one conclude that the proper way to oppose Fascism is to remain in total ignorance of it?

That the way to defeat Fascism is to know nothing about it?

That those who oppose Fascism are secret Fascists?

How profound. How non ideological.

And now you tell me that one cannot argue with "Dave" because he's an ideologue. He's simplistic." Why, I guess I should thank you for even posting?

You have nothing to contribute? Why did you even post?

Was my opening post too inflamatory for you? You have to warn the members of TGL not to be fooled by my statements? Maybe. Since not a word was uttered contradicting them. I challenge the intellectual honesty of someone who can denounce an argument, but can't utter a word against it.

Dave

Edited by Chato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Actually, I've read Orwell, & more to the point, I'm quoting what he said about H. G. Wells. I was about to launch onto an in-depth post, one that expands on the initial post, but this individual's first response clearly indicated his inability to read anything other than his narrow perspective charitably. I apologize for giving him the benefit of doubt in the first place. :banghead:

However, I will attempt to elaborate in another thread, and this individual is certainly welcome to post there. But odds are highly likely that he won't be able to see past his nose, beyond that mote in his eye in order to achieve a true dialectical discussion of ideas. :noidea:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Actually, I've read Orwell, & more to the point, I'm quoting what he said about H. G. Wells. \

Bullshit.

He said the opposite...

http://orwell.ru/library/reviews/wells/english/e_whws

Edited by Chato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Recently Chris Mathews, hardly a liberal, made some criticisms of Mark Levin and Michael Savage, two popular Fascist talk show hosts. Both of these men have threatened to sue him for slander, the slander in question is their being blamed for the Arizona shooting. Difficult to do because Mathews himself never made a direct link.

Media Matters in response, assembled a host of remarks of these two personalities, and I quote just a handful of their collection. It should also be mentioned that according to Wikopedia Mr. Savage has a regular audience of eight to ten million people.

However, here's a chart showing the top ten radio talk program, the only one not pushing a Fascist agenda is Don Imus, and he's on the bottom of the list.

radio_ratings_041908.jpg

Matthews: Savage And Levin "Are Just In Some Rage Every Night With Some Ugly Talk." MSNBC host Chris Matthews discussed "the role of talk radio in fueling the heated language," and said:

E. Steven, I have to tell you, though, I'll mention a couple of names without getting into too many fights. People like Mark Levin, or Michael Savage for example, who every time you listen to them are furious -- furious at the left -- with anger that just builds and builds in their voice and by the time they go to commercial, they're just in some rage every night with ugly talk, ugly-sounding talk.

And it never changes. It never modulates. They must have an audience. I looked at the numbers today. They have big audiences. And I guess that's the question: Why? And is there ever going to stop if it keeps working? [MSNBC, Hardball, 1/11/10]

A collection of remarks of Mr. Savage, oldest first...

Michael Savage

There is a risk of this pandemic spreading across America. Make no mistake about it, it is coming from Mexico. What's interesting to me is that Mexico has not suffered a serious flu epidemic before, which leads me to ask something that the dingbat who is running Homeland Security, who is attacking U.S. Marines, returning soldiers, anti-abortion activists, and anti-immigrant activists, why don't you do your job, Napolitano, you bum you? And why don't you ask yourself, you dumb fool, you, could this be a terrorist attack through Mexico? Could our dear friends in the radical Islamic countries have concocted this virus and planted it in Mexico, knowing that you, Janet Napolitano, would do nothing to stop the flow of human traffic from Mexico, and they are a perfect mule -- perfect mules for bringing this virus into America? But you wouldn't think that way, would you? Because you are incapable of protecting America's homeland, Napolitano. [Talk Radio Network, The Savage Nation, 4/24/09]

There are some other stories. "President Obama's czar system concerns some." That's from the LA Times, up on my website. "Super aides for health, the economy, energy, and urban issues, with more to come, prompt lawmakers and groups to worry he may be concentrating power and bypassing Congress." Of course he is. He's a fascist. I know that you don't want to hear this, but the man is a neo-Marxist fascist dictator in the making. He is not using his fascism yet, because he doesn't have enough power to wield the fascist instruments of power, but he is aggrandizing enough power to become a very dangerous president, and you must understand this is an important story. [Talk Radio Network, The Savage Nation, 3/5/09]

Now, you want me to tell you my opinion on autism, since I'm not talking about autism? A fraud, a racket. For a long while, we were hearing that every minority child had asthma. Why did they sudden -- why was there an asthma epidemic amongst minority children? Because I'll tell you why: The children got extra welfare if they were disabled, and they got extra help in school. It was a money racket. Everyone went in and was told [fake cough], "When the nurse looks at you, you go [fake cough], 'I don't know, the dust got me.' " See, everyone had asthma from the minority community. That was number one. Now, the illness du jour is autism. You know what autism is? I'll tell you what autism is. In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out. That's what autism is. What do you mean they scream and they're silent? They don't have a father around to tell them, "Don't act like a moron. You'll get nowhere in life. Stop acting like a putz. Straighten up. Act like a man. Don't sit there crying and screaming, idiot." Autism -- everybody has an illness. If I behaved like a fool, my father called me a fool. And he said to me, "Don't behave like a fool." The worst thing he said -- "Don't behave like a fool. Don't be anybody's dummy. Don't sound like an idiot. Don't act like a girl. Don't cry." That's what I was raised with. That's what you should raise your children with. Stop with the sensitivity training. You're turning your son into a girl, and you're turning your nation into a nation of losers and beaten men. That's why we have the politicians we have. [Talk Radio Network, The Savage Nation, 7/16/08]

CALLER: Yes, I'm calling from the People's Republic of Monterrey, and I had to explain to my young son why these two men were holding hands the other day and he said, "Dad, didn't they say that that's wrong in the Bible?" And I said, "Yes, they did, and yes it's wrong" and yes to everything that he had to say about it. And I told him, I said, "That's the wrongest thing you've ever seen besides the rest of the politicians and the media and CNBC." Because -- SAVAGE: You've got to try to explain to the children why the -- why God told people this was wrong. You've got to explain to them, to the children, how it twists everything. Just take them down to a duck pond and show them a boy duck and a girl duck and then show the ducklings and say to them, "There must be a boy duck and a girl duck for there to be babies." It's the same with a dog, puppies come from a mother duck -- a mother pup, a mother dog. There needs to be a boy dog and a girl dog. You have to explain this to them in this time of mental rape that's going on. The children's minds are being raped by the homosexual mafia, that's my position. They're raping our children's minds. [Talk Radio Network, The Savage Nation, 6/16/08]

But basically, if you're talking about a day like today, Martin Luther King Junior Day, and you're gonna understand what civil rights has become, the con it's become in this country. It's a whole industry; it's a racket. It's a racket that is used to exploit primarily heterosexual, Christian, white males' birthright and steal from them what is their birthright and give it to people who didn't qualify for it. Take a guess out of whose hide all of these rights are coming. They're not coming out of women's hides. Are they? No, there's only one group that's targeted, and that group are white, heterosexual males. They are the new witches being hunted by the illiberal left using the guise of civil rights and fairness to women and whatnot. [Talk Radio Network, The Savage Nation, 1/15/07]

Mark Levin

The tea party activists are acting out of history and patriotism. I said many months ago that we have been tormented and abused far more than the colonists were by the King of England. Far more, far oftener, and far more aggressively. [ABC Radio Networks, The Mark Levin Show, 7/20/10]

You see, the left tries to write the history for this nation. And the left does that because it wants to encourage people, incentivize people to move left. To support some kind of a statist agenda. Not the Klan's agenda, but the radical left's agenda, which in the end are pretty similar, frankly. In the end it's all one big circle that meets at a point. Tyranny is tyranny, however it's dressed up. You've tyrants who wear suit and ties, and you have tyrants who wear goofy white uniforms. [ABC Radio Networks, The Mark Levin Show, 6/28/10]

What does this man Obama want from us? What does he want from us? I mean, he's already taken our health care away. He's involved in virtually every aspect of our lives. Now he wants to change the culture. What do you want from us? All we're doing is trying to work every day, to be good citizens, to follow the law, to contribute, raise our families, put a little money aside for retirement. And he just keeps, just keeps pushing us around like a bully. [ABC Radio Networks, The Mark Levin Show, 7/1/10]

Obama's surrounded by these people. He's surrounded by these people because he's appointed these people. He wants to be surrounded by these people. [...] We have an attorney general who embraces the New Black Panthers, the head of which has talked about killing -- murdering -- white babies. [ABC Radio Networks, The Mark Levin Show, 7/8/10]

Health care, air itself, our finances, controlled by left-wing bureaucrats and left-wing committees. People who aren't even, in the case of Berwick, confirmed by the Senate. Not even a hearing? Somebody who's going to run a quote-unquote consumer agency that's going to oversee your wants and desires who'll have a budget that Congress doesn't even approve. The Environmental Protection Agency, which has taken for itself, thanks to the Supreme Court, the power to determine how much power we get, in terms of energy. No, no, it's not a constitutional republic anymore. It's not a representative republic anymore. It is a soft tyranny. As Alexis de Tocqueville predicted, the genius that he was. It's a soft tyranny. And it's very scary. [ABC Radio Networks, The Mark Levin Show, 7/28/10]

Just because Obama can't stand us, just because Obama doesn't like the Constitution, just because Obama doesn't like what our ancestors did, doesn't mean we agree with him. As a matter of fact, we reject him in this regard. And what's going in the United States Senate today, 24-hour meetings and, you know, violating their own rules and not making laws available for people to read. We're going to have to follow them under penalty of fines and, if not, imprisonment? That's not democracy in action. I said the other day, Harry Reid is the Mussolini of the United States Senate. He's one sick man. He's one power-hungry rogue. And a true lightweight. [ABC Radio Networks, The Mark Levin Show, 12/18/09]

I've been saying for months, they keep creating new enemies. This is how the statist operates. I write about it at length in Liberty and Tyranny. This is how they operate. The enemy today is the insurance companies. The enemy actually this evening now is the doctors, because Harry Reid has now turned on the American Medical Association -- yes, because they won't go along. The enemy yesterday was Fox. The enemy before that was talk radio. The enemy before that was the oil companies. Lots and lots of enemies. You see, we're enemies of the state. We individuals or organizations who resist this are enemies of the state. So, we, as conservatives, by definition are enemies of the state. Well, so be it. It's us against them. [Citadel Radio, The Mark Levin Show, 10/21/09]

http://mediamatters.org/research/201101120041

Now these two commentators that I've highlighted above differ only in style from the others on this list. They are, from the point of view of someone who knows the subject, openly advocating a Fascist solution for the US. By this I don't mean that they call for a "Corporatist State." No one has ever campaigned for a State that is fully controlled by Plutocrats. But their open propaganda, populist and and yet pro business, is an exact duplicate of the type of propaganda of every Fascist who has ever come to power. The dificulty that Fascists have is the need to hide their ultimate aims. Hitler did this with his 21 points program, which contained a lot of anti plutocrats propaganda, and attracted many with leftist ideas. Once in power of course the leftists within his party were almost immediately rounded up and interned in concentration camps or shot. Mussolini maintained a Democratic Facade for six years before Italy became a totalitarian State.

How Fascism would be implemented in the US is anyones guess; two things can be taken for certain. It will be American Fascism, and almost certainly the facade of Democracy would be maintained for as long as possible. Totalitarianism, while in the past has always been a manifestation of Fascism, is not an automatic given. It comes about when the opposition to Fascist ideas start to be a threat to the regime.

Unlike coherent philosophies, no two Fascist States have been alike. Germany didn't resemble Greece, Greece didn't resemble Argentina. Their only mutual characterstic of all Fascist regimes is the merger of Corporate and Government institutions.

It is this last point which so annoys those who wish to turn Fascism into a coherent philosophy. In fact, while not always true, the leaders of most Fascist regimes are little more than thugs and criminals, no matter how many professors they eventually hire to justify their irrationality.

Dave

Edited by Chato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Campy, why do you feel the need to convince people that "the individual" has a simplistic view of fascism, and why do you feel the need to convince people that "the individual" is using strawman attacks against those who challenge him? Surely you could be doing something more productive, like amazing pieces of artwork? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Campy, why do you feel the need to convince people that "the individual" has a simplistic view of fascism, and why do you feel the need to convince people that "the individual" is using strawman attacks against those who challenge him? Surely you could be doing something more productive, like amazing pieces of artwork? ;)

Supposedly he disagree's with my views. Fair enough. Would you be kind enough to point to any statement of his that refutes what I said, other than a few declarative sentencess, and an outright piece of BS pretending to quote Orwell?

This site exists to discuss and debate views, and issues, philosophies and facts. I have no problem with this concept.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Campy, why do you feel the need to convince people that "the individual" has a simplistic view of fascism, and why do you feel the need to convince people that "the individual" is using strawman attacks against those who challenge him? Surely you could be doing something more productive, like amazing pieces of artwork? ;)

DaveT, I've a streak of masochism. :lol:

But I've evidence that Orwell declared as much about Kipling and London, that it was necessary to understand fascism. By obvious inference we can say as much for himself. Too bad this individual lack such an organ, and routinely spits out emaciated strawpersons in every thread of a complex political position. Such demagoguerry is fun to write, no doubt, easy to chew, but ultimately it's hollow and lacks calories. :doh:

Edited by The Heretic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I will read the article later but for now, I think those who understand fascism the best have a streak of fascism in themselves. Orwell understood this very well.

Really? Then Anti-Fascists are actually proto Fascists waiting for their big chance to come out of the closet?

Dave

This looks like a bit of a non-sequitur to me. Imagine the following conversation:

"Those who truly understand evil have a streak of evil in themselves."

"So, good men are actually evil men waiting for their big chance to come out of the closet?"

It sounds quite absurd, does it not? Many people (if not all people) have a streak of evil in them (and, for the sake of argument, let us assume that objective evil exists), but this does not make everybody evil. The creators of South Park are Republican and Libertarian (or at least registered as such), but they show a streak of the other side of the political spectrum by claiming that it's okay to be gay; surely this does not mean that they're secret liberals.

A man can hold a streak of fascism within him, and yet still be against fascism in general or in whole. This is probably why The Heretic felt having a debate with you here would be a waste of his time.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Here’s what Chato says about Levin and Savage:

“….their open propaganda, populist and and yet pro business, is an exact duplicate of the type of propaganda of every Fascist who has ever come to power.”

Yet, Chato claims, “no two Fascist States have been alike.” If no two fascist states are alike, why is their propaganda “an exact duplicate”? It makes no sense.

In addition, Chato lists all the top-rated radio hosts, and claims, “the only one not pushing a Fascist agenda is Don Imus, and he's on the bottom of the list.” Ed Schultz, of course, is a liberal commentator, completely opposed politically to the Limbaughs on the list, but it seems that Chato thinks EVERYONE is a fascist. In addition, someone like Dr. Laura is not a political commentator but a moralist – yet she’s a fascist, too (is believing in female subsurvience somehow advocating the merger of State and coporate power?).

According to Chato, Hall says "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power." If this is true, aren't the corporate bail-outs of GM and the Financial Institutions a move toward fascism, in that they merge the State and corporate power? Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck deplore such bail-outs.

In addition, Levin’s rant that Chato posts above is a rant against “statism”. Isn’t fascism, with its emphasis on nationalism and the glorification of the state PRO statism? Levin goes on to denounce Harry Reid as a Fascist (“the Mussolini of the Senate”). Doesn’t this make the Heretic’s point for him? Here Levin is making specifically anti-fascist statements, and yet, according to Chato, he not only has “a streak of fascism” in him – he’s a full-blown fascist.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

From this link:

The people who have shown the best understanding of Fascism are either those who have suffered under it or those who have a Fascist streak in themselves. A crude book like THE IRON HEEL, written nearly thirty years ago, is a truer prophecy of the future than either BRAVE NEW WORLD or THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME. If one had to choose among Wells's own contemporaries a writer who could stand towards him as a corrective, one might choose Kipling, who was not deaf to the evil voices of power and military "glory". Kipling would have understood the appeal of Hitler, or for that matter of Stalin, whatever his attitude towards them might be. Wells is too sane to understand the modern world. The succession of lower-middle-class novels which are his greatest achievement stopped short at the other war and never really began again, and since 1920 he has squandered his talents in slaying paper dragons. But how much it is, after all, to have any talents to squander.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Up to 1914 Wells was in the main a true prophet. In physical details his vision of the new world has been fulfilled to a surprising extent.

But because he belonged to the nineteenth century and to a non-military nation and class, he could not grasp the tremendous strength of the old world which was symbolised in his mind by fox-hunting Tories. He was, and still is, quite incapable of understanding that nationalism, religious bigotry and feudal loyalty are far more powerful forces than what he himself would describe as sanity. Creatures out of the Dark Ages have come marching into the present, and if they are ghosts they are at any rate ghosts which need a strong magic to lay them. The people who have shown the best understanding of Fascism are either those who have suffered under it or those who have a Fascist streak in themselves.

1

Looks to me like Teh Hairy Tic did (more or less) quote Orwell.

1Orwell (1941), 'Wells, Hitler and the World State’ London, Horizon

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Just checking into this old topic and finding how prescient I was, what with an open Fascist leading in the primary race for a major party, and most of his competitors not being too far behind. Sad to be right... :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Just checking into this old topic and finding how prescient I was, what with an open Fascist leading in the primary race for a major party, and most of his competitors not being too far behind. Sad to be right... :huh:

What was the prescience? If the references to Fascism are restricted to the issue of "the Corporatist State", there is nothing new now occurring. Even Ayn Rand, no later than the 1960s (I think), remarked about how Democrats and Republicans, albeit in slightly different ways, were dedicated corporatists. If the references to Fascism here are instead supposed to indicate something different in the current rhetorical tone, then an interesting aspect of current events would be how Obama (amongst others, of course) as nincompoop rhetoretician has contributed to the current political status, but the discussion from almost five years ago does not seem to have anticipated that contribution.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

When I posted this thread, Republicans as a Party, if not the Right Wing Media, kept their goals at least partially hidden. The racist and Corporate Agenda were covered by code words. They have now dropped the mask, and are openly advocating laws and standards that are Fascist. Sure they don't "call themselves Fascist." After all, according to them Fascism is a form of Marxism. Why would they openly embrace what they call "Socialism?" But by any reasonable definition, that's Exactly what they are. The pretense is gone. Trumps proposed ban on Muslims entering America is supported by two Thirds of All Republicans. Open advocacy of a Police State is now their norm.

And of course this thread was hotly contested as being totally false...

Edited by Chato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Fascist is a word of no particular importance for me. I take it as an introductory term indicating extreme dislike on the part of whosoever is using the term. Trump, Cruz, Clinton, Sanders, Limbaugh, Hannity, Matthews, and the new-to-me Alex Jones, all justified and all revolting, each in his or her own way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Fascist is a word of no particular importance for me. I take it as an introductory term indicating extreme dislike on the part of whosoever is using the term. Trump, Cruz, Clinton, Sanders, Limbaugh, Hannity, Matthews, and the new-to-me Alex Jones, all justified and all revolting, each in his or her own way.

While it is quite true that "Fascism" is weak in the fundamentals of a well specified ideology, there are characteristics which all Fascists share and expound. Unity of Government and Business. Elitism, usually racist, military solutions for any and all problems and a number of others. Fascists denigrate Intellectual solutions of any kind, and Always appeal to a faux populism based on Fear and Hate. They despise Democracy.

Even so Conservative a Newspaper as the New York Times is finally waking up to the danger...


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/opinion/the-trump-effect-and-how-it-spreads.html?mtrref=www.facebook.com&assetType=opinion&_r=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Trump doesn't want to overthrow the existing democratic system. He doesn't want to scrap the Constitution. He doesn't romanticize violence itself as a vital cleansing agent of society. He's simply a racist who wants to keep the current system but deny its benefits to groups he's interested in oppressing.

That's the difference between Trump and fascists. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Trump doesn't want to overthrow the existing democratic system. He doesn't want to scrap the Constitution. He doesn't romanticize violence itself as a vital cleansing agent of society. He's simply a racist who wants to keep the current system but deny its benefits to groups he's interested in oppressing.

That's the difference between Trump and fascists. 

He's openly called for violating the Constitution in a number of ways. He states that he can do all this by Executive Order. He's openly called for suppressing various organizations that he declares to be subversive. Without comparing him to someone like Hitler, except by saying both are Fascists, did Hitler say he was going to end the Weimer Republic? In fact he Never ended the Republic. He merely ruled on the basis of an ongoing emergency, a statement supported and voted into effect by the Reichstag. Mussolini ruled Italy for six years before suppressing the Democracy. Do you listen to Trump, or merely listen to summations by the Corporate Media?

Isn't the Nation in danger? Isn't ISIS a threat to America? Isn't there a Fifth Column openly supporting our enemies? Isn't Obama openly aiding ISIS? Aren't many of  the Syrian refugee's, all men, soldiers of ISIS?  Does the word "Fascist" automatically mean the same as Frankenstein Monster?
:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now