After discovering what fascism is, it's startling how much this country is starting to resemble a fascist nation. Not to the extreme of Nazi Germany or Italy under Mussolini. It's more of a Fascist Democracy. None the less, our nation is showing the signs.
It'd be interesting to hear opinions on this.
Let's try and keep this discussion peaceful. I don't want this thread turning into another Democrat vs Republican thread.
IP: Logged
08:27 PM
PFF
System Bot
blackrams Member
Posts: 33084 From: Covington, TN, USA Registered: Feb 2003
Originally posted by Spektrum-87GT: Let's try and keep this discussion peaceful. I don't want this thread turning into another Democrat vs Republican thread.
After discovering what fascism is, it's startling how much this country is starting to resemble a fascist nation. Not to the extreme of Nazi Germany or Italy under Mussolini. It's more of a Fascist Democracy. None the less, our nation is showing the signs.
In your opinion, what aspects of this country make you feel it's fascist?
IP: Logged
08:37 PM
wikid_one Member
Posts: 2838 From: Ocean City, MD Registered: Dec 2003
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. Hmm sounds like what we got!! I guess we are fascists. Thank You Bush!!
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. Hmm sounds like what we got!! I guess we are fascists. Thank You Bush!!
your kidding right?
since governors are elected not appointed by the president "i fail to see connection" that would make us a fascist nation..
besides nationalism and patriotism are not the same. there is a difference between occupation and claiming it as u.s. territory... we are occupying iraq "because the alternative would be inhumain" , but we have not claimed iraq as u.s. territory.
if you want to make a fascism claim look at the palistinian leadership and china who both claim land they dont occupy as part of their terrirtory.
how can you claim that we have a centralized authority "the guys making the laws are elected by us" and they represent each state . they have the power to impeach the president , ammend the constitution , and even tell the supreme court to go to he!!.
the power isnt centralized and wont be until we either cancle out the house and senate or they them selves ammend the constitution so that the president can appoint them insted of being elected by us.....
the congress is the most powerful branch of our government and is the check piont for everything , the constitution gives them the power to ammend the constitution , but in fact , if congress voted to kill the constitution and replaced it with a new one "they could"
point! - your definitions of the labels are wrong . you must be seeing something you dont like and just trying to stick a nasty label on it. because you certainly dont understand the protections built into our constitution or its weakness. racism? "get a grip"
[This message has been edited by JRM-2M6 (edited 11-21-2004).]
After discovering what fascism is, it's startling how much this country is starting to resemble a fascist nation. Not to the extreme of Nazi Germany or Italy under Mussolini. It's more of a Fascist Democracy. None the less, our nation is showing the signs.
It'd be interesting to hear opinions on this.
Let's try and keep this discussion peaceful. I don't want this thread turning into another Democrat vs Republican thread.
I commend your intrepid curiosity, keep up the good work. Just be fore warned that many are not educated in such things and will fight you, call you a traitor and much more.
Read up on the Constitution of the United States next.
After discovering what fascism is, it's startling how much this country is starting to resemble a fascist nation. Not to the extreme of Nazi Germany or Italy under Mussolini. It's more of a Fascist Democracy. None the less, our nation is showing the signs.
It'd be interesting to hear opinions on this.
Let's try and keep this discussion peaceful. I don't want this thread turning into another Democrat vs Republican thread.
Appearances are deceiving. Watch closely. There is poetic justice afoot.
------------------ 88 4cyl auto Fiero, AC, sunroof, tilt steering, rear swaybar "And isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit!" - The Tick
IP: Logged
11:34 PM
Saber49 Member
Posts: 937 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: May 2004
Can't be fascist. If we were fascist all our leaders would be wearing uniforms!
Check out the grey suits and red ties.
One definition of Fascism is when then government is indistinguishable from business. The current govt. lacks any checks and balances, the cornerstone of the original founding fathers' intent. Hold on folks, 51% of you wished for it, I sure hope you like what you are about to get.
[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 11-22-2004).]
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. Hmm sounds like what we got!! I guess we are fascists. Thank You Bush!!
HMM!! "suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship"? What happened to all the terror alerts after the election, Hmm? I see ! they where used to scare people! It's becoming very clear!
America is a powerful and infuential country.... but not Fascist. We are Antifascist if anything. Our government is very against dictators. That is why we got rid of Hitler. In fear more genocide we got rid of Sadam. Our country sets sanctions against dictators like Castro, North Korea etc.
IP: Logged
01:35 AM
Spektrum-87GT Member
Posts: 1601 From: Yorktown, VA Registered: Aug 2001
Here is a longer definition from Dr. Lawrence Britt:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays. TOP
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc. TOP
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc. TOP
4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized. TOP
5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution. TOP
6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common. TOP
7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses. TOP
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions. TOP
9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite. TOP
10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed. TOP
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked. TOP
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders. TOP
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
IP: Logged
09:09 AM
Spektrum-87GT Member
Posts: 1601 From: Yorktown, VA Registered: Aug 2001
Okay, that's pretty cohesive, but do these conditions apply to the US?
#1: No. The flags we see all over the place these days were not placed or required by any government officials. The people are choosing to display (or not to display, as suits them) the flag.
#2: No. Despite what groups like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International say, the US is a champion of human rights.
#3: Maybe. Our government has cited terrorists attacks on American soil as a reason for national unity.
#4: No. President Bush supported and signed the largest-ever increase in education funding. He also pushed for and signed increases in other domestic programs.
#5: No. "Rampant sexism"? My last FIVE managers were all women. In fact, of all the jobs I've ever worked at, in only TWO of them was my management composed exclusively by men.
#6: No.
#7: Maybe. I don't know if our government's push to secure our nation can be called an "obsession", not when the Mexican border is still wide open.
#8: No. Despite the fear-mongering from the ACLU and others, this has not happened in the US.
#9: No. Go ASK big business if it feels protected.
#10: No. While labor unions are not flourishing in this country, their decline is part of a general trend that has been happening for a long time. It's tied to the general decline in manufacturing as our economy moves away from manufacturing and into service.
#11: No. Simply put, this has not happened. No one involved with the US government has expressed anything like this.
#12: Maybe. It's a fact that we have a crime problem in this country. But according to the description for this, we're not there. The police are still beholden to the Constitution, and I don't think anyone is willing to overlook police abuses.
#13: No.
#14: No.
...by my tally, that's three "maybes" and the rest are "No". But I really didn't need to go through that list point by point to come to that conclusion. The US is still a bastion of freedom and civil liberty in the world. People still risk their lives to get here.
This Dr. Lawrence Britt--when did he write this definition?
Ed
IP: Logged
03:11 PM
Fformula88 Member
Posts: 7891 From: Buffalo, NY Registered: Mar 2000
Okay, that's pretty cohesive, but do these conditions apply to the US?
#3: Maybe. Our government has cited terrorists attacks on American soil as a reason for national unity.
#7: Maybe. I don't know if our government's push to secure our nation can be called an "obsession", not when the Mexican border is still wide open.
#12: Maybe. It's a fact that we have a crime problem in this country. But according to the description for this, we're not there. The police are still beholden to the Constitution, and I don't think anyone is willing to overlook police abuses.
...by my tally, that's three "maybes" and the rest are "No". But I really didn't need to go through that list point by point to come to that conclusion. The US is still a bastion of freedom and civil liberty in the world. People still risk their lives to get here.
This Dr. Lawrence Britt--when did he write this definition?
Ed
I basically agree on all your "no's" so I singled out the maybe's.
For #3, I'd say its no. To me, rallying people to a frenzy to eliminate a perceived threat carries a notion that the threat is not real, but people are made to believe it is real. Since the terrorists have attacked embassies, a Naval destroyer, and finally the Word trade Center, its hard to argue the threat wasn't real anymore, or an eminent danger. Since, they have bombed trains in Spain, killed children in Russia, etc. I'd say they are a threat that needs to be taken care of. Since the threat is obviously real, I wouldn't categorize this as even a maybe.
#7. This is selectively a maybe, and no in other areas. Trying to increase container inspections, steeping up border security along Mexico, things like that are not obsessive. However, when we hear reports of congressmen being hassled at airport security checkpoints, that may be obsessive. Also, some of the scrutinizing done along the Canadian border might be obsessive. A small maybe is probably fitting, but its a long way from fascism.
#12, there is a lot of people against certain aspects of the Patriot Act for abuses of individuals rights. However, the patriot act did exist. Despite that, police are far from having unlimited power, and can still be checked when they abuse their power. This is certainly not a police state.
Maybe the key in all of this for some people is that they are afraid of some unsettling trends. I think there are abusive aspects of the Patriot Act that need to be looked at again. However, even those items are far from fascism, and I believe in due course they will be checked.
Ideologically the country has moved some to the right, but were a long way from fascism.
IP: Logged
03:42 PM
PFF
System Bot
TONY_C Member
Posts: 2747 From: North Bellmore, NY 11710 Registered: May 2001
Am I missing something here or were a bunch of you people who call the US government fascists sleeping thru 9-11-01? That was fascism, islamofascism at work that day. yes, people who want to kill infidels because they don't believe in allah. People who want to kill because they don't believe in the rule of law but rather a fundamentalist islamic mullah. people who are so afraid of democracy because it will lessen their stranglehold on a people, a region and a religion. people who murder innocent men, women and children using technology they can barely understand, much less invent themselves. fascists who won't even let their women learn to read, write or drive or work outside the home. Facists who murder people (van gogh) who had the nerve to make a movie showing the abuses arab (muslim) women face at their fathers, brothers and uncles hands. funny how you never see N.O.W. protesting for muslim womens rights. Funny how the can't even give this President and our brave soldiers, sailors airmen and marines credit for liberating 20 million or so Afghans, HALF of them women. no, ms. pelosi can b**** , b**** , b**** about women in this country making less money then men but she can't even pause to note how women are treated by real facists. Look around the world today and see all the armed conflicts...how many have religion as the central issue and how many are due to islam? most of them are. look at the middle east, how many democracies are their? 5? 3? nope. ONE. israel. Israel, the one democracy in the region where even muslims citizens have more rights then they would if they lived in another arab country. But instead they remain "refugees" in palestine. Q: How long can a people remain refugees? A: if they are arabs, FOREVER. why? the other arabs dont want them in their countries either. Just look at that POS arafat, the terrorist who orchestrated the olympic murders, who condoned killing little children, the man carter called a great staesman. how much money did he steal from his people? probably more than kofi anan and the usless nations stole from the Iraqis but maybe not too much more. peace plan my ass...name one conflict that was decided at a table and not by fighting it out. Democrat or Republican, i dont give a rats ass what you call yourself but to call this country, this government fascist is a disgrace. Stop drinking the Kool-aid. yes the worlds a mess, yes things look bleak. who's gonna fix it? France? Truth is, no one but the US can do the job because no one else is willing to do what it takes to defeat the islamofascists. three short years ago i saw the smoke rising, i smelled the rubble burning, i saw the funerals of firemen and cops and just plain citizens going to work. i go to my kids soccer games and the field is named after men who died that day, whose crime was going to work. I live near neighborhoods where several kids became fatherless that day. So as for the "imagined" threat of terror, well, no one was imagining things that day. I wish we were.
[This message has been edited by TONY_C (edited 11-22-2004).]
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." "Fascism is a religious concept."
Both quotes are from Mussolini.
Just remember the point of this thread. Is America BECOMING fascist?
The American Heritage Dictionary defines fascism as "a system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." Sound familiar? Just on its surface, the Bush regime is following the above definition. Witness the parade of corporate CEOs that now populates the president's cabinet and key advisory bodies. Observe how quickly the Bushites snap at the patriotism of anyone - anyone - who challenges their worldview. So yes to end the thread America is Becoming fascist!
I'd rather live in a fascist nation then socialist/communist Thats just me. Looks like lots of people here would love to live in the "peoples republic" tell they got there, then it would be bushes fault lol
IP: Logged
10:09 PM
TONY_C Member
Posts: 2747 From: North Bellmore, NY 11710 Registered: May 2001
The American Heritage Dictionary defines fascism as "a system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." Sound familiar? Just on its surface, the Bush regime is following the above definition. Witness the parade of corporate CEOs that now populates the president's cabinet and key advisory bodies. Observe how quickly the Bushites snap at the patriotism of anyone - anyone - who challenges their worldview. So yes to end the thread America is Becoming fascist!
Well, it is a shame Bush picks CEOs to be in his cabinet, I'm sure we'd be better off with a stock clerk or a janitor or a few celebrities or maybe michael moore and alec baldwin running things. And from another posting about the Ashcroft bashing....Janet Reno sent US armytroops into Waco, against the US constitution to kill AMERICAN men women and children CIVILIANS but thats not fascist. Neither is taking a boy away from his family and sending him back to COMMUNIST cuba. Name one thing Ashcroft did that even approaches the tactics of mr reno.
Well, it is a shame Bush picks CEOs to be in his cabinet, I'm sure we'd be better off with a stock clerk or a janitor or a few celebrities or maybe michael moore and alec baldwin running things. And from another posting about the Ashcroft bashing....Janet Reno sent US armytroops into Waco, against the US constitution to kill AMERICAN men women and children CIVILIANS but thats not fascist. Neither is taking a boy away from his family and sending him back to COMMUNIST cuba. Name one thing Ashcroft did that even approaches the tactics of mr reno.
the nut christians with machine guns at Waco were not CIVILIANS they were criminals who were allied with otherlike minded nut christians like mcVay and the arian militias our own domestic taliban the fascist was their leader david koresh who got them killed and the FBI and ATF are not army troops
the kid was sent to his father who under the law had every right to get his son back funny how the so called family values get droped by the far rightwing when it does not fit their programs btw did you know the head of the miami " family" was a convicted drug smuggler
AshKKKroft was 0 for 5000 is doing his job of convicting those responceable for the terror and never thought about terror before 9-11 what was he doing back then???? planing to attack the porno people in LA
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
IP: Logged
10:45 AM
Fformula88 Member
Posts: 7891 From: Buffalo, NY Registered: Mar 2000
The American Heritage Dictionary defines fascism as "a system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." Sound familiar? Just on its surface, the Bush regime is following the above definition. Witness the parade of corporate CEOs that now populates the president's cabinet and key advisory bodies. Observe how quickly the Bushites snap at the patriotism of anyone - anyone - who challenges their worldview. So yes to end the thread America is Becoming fascist!
I agree that Bush has a lot of corporate types around him, and that the republicans have been quick to criticise people who do not fully support them as being non-patriotic. However, I think that is a long way from being a fascist government. First of all, this is nowhere near a dictatorship. Second of all, I don't think having some business world advisors constitutes a mergine of business and state leadership. Our legislature is still populated by elected officials and they are not all corporate leaders (not sure if any may have been or not, but I am guessing few are). Our courts are not full of business leaders.
I also agree the Bush administration is quick to criticize the patriotism of people who have been against the war. I am not sure that is at a level of billigerant nationalism. The brown shirts are not running around the country beating people up for expressing dissenting views.
Our government is run by republicans right now, and therefore it is going to do things in keeping with a right wing ideology. Its no different than when democrats are in office and favor Social Security, or health care. They are not turning the government into a communist government (which is extreme left) but they are doing things in keeping with their left wing ideology.
IP: Logged
12:29 PM
Kelvin Vivian Member
Posts: 1233 From: San Jose, CA, USA Registered: Jan 2001
Dan Rather, embattled anchor of the "CBS Evening News," announced Tuesday that he will step down in March, on the 24th anniversary of taking over the job from Walter Cronkite.
"The veteran anchor has been under fire in recent months for his role in a "60 Minutes Wednesday" story that questioned President Bush's service in the National Guard, which turned out to based on allegedly forged documents."
IP: Logged
12:47 PM
Nov 24th, 2004
frontal lobe Member
Posts: 9042 From: brookfield,wisconsin Registered: Dec 1999
Interesting topic. Thanks for the concrete definition so we can assess it.
The obvious answer to your question is "no", and it isn't even close. But it was still fine to ask.
To the over-reactionary responders, just please for one moment take a deep breath, slow down, quit looking at short periods in this country and look at the long perspective. Compare the country now to the 1940's. That period of time fit the criteria for fascism WAY, WAY, WAY more than now. 1950's, too. Not even close between now and then.
So, fascist nation, no, not even close.
The more debatable question would have been, Is America becoming a socialist nation? Now THAT would be a discussion.
IP: Logged
12:15 AM
PFF
System Bot
NEPTUNE Member
Posts: 10199 From: Ticlaw FL, and some other places. Registered: Aug 2001
Interesting topic. Thanks for the concrete definition so we can assess it.
The obvious answer to your question is "no", and it isn't even close. But it was still fine to ask.
To the over-reactionary responders, just please for one moment take a deep breath, slow down, quit looking at short periods in this country and look at the long perspective. Compare the country now to the 1940's. That period of time fit the criteria for fascism WAY, WAY, WAY more than now. 1950's, too. Not even close between now and then.
So, fascist nation, no, not even close.
The more debatable question would have been, Is America becoming a socialist nation? Now THAT would be a discussion.
At what point do you consider it to be facist.. Would you see things differently if you didn't live there? (serious questions)
IP: Logged
02:34 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
There are a number of definitions of Fascism, most of them purely arbitrary, depending on who's arguing what.
First of all, the republicans here seem to be confusing "facism" with "Nazism" I'd like to point out that both are mutually exclusive.
Second, the democrats here are expanding the definition a little too broadly to be of any use.
(I'd like to interject here, and say, given how 2 polarized societies exist in the US, (Rep./Dem.), how the hell does ANYTHING ever get done?!? )
Dr. Lawrence Brit is a political scientist. The definitions that he puts forward were a result of a compare-and-contrast of several historical fascist regimes; notably Germany, Spain, Indonesia, and Chile. (Brit, 2003)
My own poli-sci prof taught me 3 defining characteristics, namely: Reactionary: Decisions are based on the "clear and present danger" so to speak; Very little in terms of long-term policy is attended to.
Chauvenistic: Here's *MY* disagreement with Brit. I don't think a fascist regime is necessarily sexist (my library of fascist regimes dates furth back than the 20th century), but I do think it is mired in old-fashioned views. Essentially, it's conservatism in it's purest form: Dislike of Change.
Imperialistic elements of Finance Capital: Imperialism isn't just limited to raising a flag over rubble in for'n countries. Economic and political domination of other sovereign nation counts as well... For example, pressuring certain political decisions via covert *cough* operations, or by economic means (We'll call your debt if you don't...) (Lewis, 1999)
Granted, the Bush administration does leave me scratching my head... So, let's walk through Brit's 14, with my definitions and ideals in mind...
1) Powerful and Continuing Nationalism: Here's where edhering makes a bit of a mistake. Nationalism does NOT have to be a government institution. Actually, to thrive, a fascist government NEEDS the overwhelming support of the middle class (read: Majority. Think belcurve). Nationalism is an affirmation of power hled over the people by the state. Basically, it means that the more flag-wavers you have, the more likely it is that you can do just about anything and not have to justify it to the people; They will justify it to themselves using their percieved "patriotic" ideals. Is it a bad thing? That all depends on how far the governing body is willing to go.
2) Disdain of Recognition of Human Rights. I think that Brit was being a bit of a sensationalist here. You can't directly compare the US to Nazi Germany with it's holocaust. HOWEVER, in continuation of a point made in 1), a willingness to declare war on a sovereign nation based on the fear that they may be a threat at some point... That certainly shows a disregard of human life, at the least. Pre-emptive strike is a scary idea. Which brings us to point 3
3) Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats. A Facism can NOT work unless you can unite the people against a common threat, either real, OR percieved. In the case of Terrorist, it's a bit of both. The Bust administration has taken a very REAL threat (Al-Qaida) and somehow managed to bundle that group (with a specific set of ideals) into a broad definition. Terrorism is not inherently evil. The US did it in the War of Independance. Guerrilla warfare can be loosely tied into this definition... The absurdity is that Bush has vowed to triumph over a CONCEPT. It doesn't make a lot of sense. For example, if you took an IRA operative, and an Al-Qaida operative, and tossed them in a locked room, what do you think would happen. Would they a) put their heads together and work a plan to destroy a small town in Rural America, or b) try to rip the other's limbs off and beat themselves to death with the wet ends? It would have been more accurate to target a specific group (or groups.) The reason that this is important is that if you broke it down into a small number, it wouldn't seem like such a big war, now would it?
4) Supremacy of Military. I have to agree with Brit here, if the military is getting disproportionate funding, WHILE homeland economic problems persist, something is horribly wrong. And you can't tell me that all of this funding is strictly for Guarding the US border. If that much money is being spent on the war machine, how can any result EXCEPT war be reasonably expected?
5) Rampant Sexism. As stated before, I disagree with Brit's definition; I expand it to cover most types of traditionalism and chauvenism. Not just the "weaker sex" ideal.
6) Controlled Mass Media. Come on... CNN. 'nuff said.
7)Obsession with National Security. This is pretty much the same thing as 3). Basically it's restating the need for a fascist government to identify a common enemy with which to unite the populace.
8) Religion and Government are intertwined... Personally, my readings incline me to think that this is again an extension of 3). And Enemy of God is a common enemy to a population of similar-faith.
9) Corporate Power is Protected. One of the classical definitions of Fascism was a unification with State and Corporation. The flipside is the corporation existing to serve the government's needs (i.e, almost true capitalism) which is a Technocracy.
10) Labor power is suppressed. This is a very important idea. Fascism exists only because of the middle and upper class. Controlling Labor power is a way to keep the lower-class in check, so to speak. Another good tactic is to force them to join the military. Doing jumpingjacks at 4am isn't conducive to political introspection.
11) Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts. Not really sure where this comes in. Personally, I feel that this item is contextually based on the fascists studied from earlier periods. For example, in early 19th century Europe, the Arts were seen as creations by people beyond (above?) society. In todays context, it brings to mind the paradox of free-speech in the US. You are free to say what you want, unless what you have to say conflicts with 1), at which point you are ostracized. Censorship is bad, but the same mentality closes minds and ears. No-one will listen to what you have to say if they think you are putting down their country.
12)Obsession with Crime and Punishment. Well, Brit quotes the statistic that the US has the highest per-capita imprisonment in the world. Me, I'm a bit leary in using this as a definer. The question begs "Is this a cause or effect?" Personally, I think it speaks louder volumes about the economic state of lower/lower-middle class America than anything else.
13) Rampant Cronyism and Corruption. I have to agree. The stories we hear in the news about lobbyists, who's in who's pocket... The whole Halliburton/Harken/Enron thing just stinks badly.
14)Fraudulent Elections. Man, I'm not touching that with a 6 foot pole. BOTH sides are 100% decided on what they believe, and NOTHING will swing anyone.
WHEW... Alright, that post should be good for a half-dozen negatives or so...
Now, to offend the rest:
KILL WHITEY!
Frontal Lobe: I wouldn't say "not even close." There is definitely enough for conversation. And I'm not even comparing the US to Nazi Germany. I don't think GW is going to start marching the goose-steppers into Big Poland anytime soon... But it makes for interesting discourse...
[This message has been edited by Mach10 (edited 11-24-2004).]
IP: Logged
03:00 AM
frontal lobe Member
Posts: 9042 From: brookfield,wisconsin Registered: Dec 1999
No, I wouldn't think differently if I didn't live in the US. But say I was Canadian, like you. I would be more WORRIED about them BECOMING fascist. Because if the US REALLY becomes fascist, you guys are in a heap of trouble.
I would start worrying about the US being fascist if we ALSO wind up invading Syria. Then move on to Iran and maybe Pakistan. THEN we are starting to talk about being fascist.
Then maybe we are concerned about the security of our common border, so we better start taking over the government of Canada so we are secure. Better take over Mexico and the Caribbean islands, too.
1) Nationalism. The middle class LOVES this country, as it should, but by and large doesn't have animosity toward other particular countries. It was only when attacked that they rose up. Every time the US has been attacked in the 1900's and 2000's, they have helped rebuild and left. Hardly fascist. Good track record there.
2) Disdain of human rights. Bah. If TOTAL, over-all disregard of human life is the issue, that disregard was greater in ignoring the Hussain regime than going in. I'm not saying that was the reason we went in, I'm just saying there was NO disregard for human life involved in that decision. No fascism there.
3) Bush is reacting against terrorism that may be directed against the US. He isn't trying to stop all terrorism in the world.
4) "Homeland economic problems" would be a relative term, since this society I live in daily has an absolutely unbelievably high standard of living compared to any civilization in the entire history of the world. The "economic problems" are more ones of perceptions of an unparalleled degree of spoiled, whiny, ungreatful ingrates that is the average US citizen with their myopic view of history and the world.
5) To accuse the US, or the current Bush administration of sexism or chauvenism is absolutely absurd. Well, except, I guess, for the fact that they make Condi cook breakfast for everyone every morning. Didn't Dan Rather break that story? No fascism.
6) Controlled mass media. Come on. What a joke. They were so blatantly anti-Bush it was pathetic. No fascism.
7) I don't call paying attention to our usually lax national security being obsessed with it. Travel in airports lately. STILL minimal security. Do you see armed people walking the streets of the cities? Rarely. No fascism.
8) Religion and government intertwined. Another over-reaction. INDIVIDUALS in government have their individual beliefs, and SOME of them discuss them more openly than others, like Bush for example, and now all of a sudden there is TOTAL breakdown of "separation of church and state". Come on. Really. And the middle class of this country STILL, in spite of the nationality of the attackers, is NOT screaming for the heads of Islam. Give me the number of attacks on muslims, their places of worship, etc. There aren't any. No fascism.
9) Corporate power is protected. Funny one. Enron was going down the tubes. Ken Lay and Bush, according to the media, practically have homosexual relations they are so close. Lay tries to get Bush to somehow intervene. He flatly turns them down. What a fascist president. No fascism.
10) Labor power is suppressed. As far as I have heard, there are still unions in this country. The amount of power they have waxes and wanes, but there has been no legislation I am aware of to cripple them. No fascism.
11) Disdain for intellectuals and the arts. People GROSSLY miss the point on this one. "Art" is still freely expressed in this country. What is being erroneously ACCUSED of being fascism is that the people via the government are unwilling to PAY for certain kinds of "art". Since these "artists" can't get the government to PAY them for producing their crap, the government is supposedly fascist. No. If your crap art is so important to you "artists", get out there and make your art whether you can get the government to pay for it or not. The other lie of calling fascism, is that if you produce it, you have a right to have it viewed. What if no one wants to admire your crappy art? Oh, well, they are a fascist. No, they just have taste and think your art is crap. Oh, you fascist. Yeah. No fascism here.
So good discussion. No negatives for you, even though you want me killed because with the lack of sunshine, I am about as white as one can get right now.
Now what would make a good discussion would be: someone break down 1940's US for me, 1950's US, and 2004 US. See which period is more fascist, and then tell me why you are even worried.
IP: Logged
02:44 PM
ditch Member
Posts: 3780 From: Brookston, IN Registered: Mar 2003
At what point do you consider it to be facist.. Would you see things differently if you didn't live there? (serious questions)
That's an excellent point. I've lived here all my life. I wonder how I would feel if I had been born and raised in some other country. The feelings can vary based on location (on the inside or viewed from the outside).
One thing to consider is this: our current system may have some traits which overlap with a fascist system, but does that mean it's moving that way? The are many systems of government and many of them share some of the same traits.
Another thing to consider: is this ultimately just another anti-Bush campaign? It seems like people will try to make sense of any rediculous thing if helps their bashing of him.
Dave
IP: Logged
02:56 PM
Spektrum-87GT Member
Posts: 1601 From: Yorktown, VA Registered: Aug 2001
First off, I'd like to thank everyone who has posted, it's pretty much remained a party-neutral discussion.
I think many in here are being too easy on our government. Especially the posters who said no to most of the things on the list. Governments are inherentely evil. People get into positions of power and abuse it. It doesn't matter if you're left or right wing, they all do it.
I seriously hope that some of you can see through the lies and evil happening on both sides.
It is not a bad thing to speak up when the government is no longer working for the people. Thomas Jefferson himself said "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."
This is why we should not rip each other apart when someone calls a politician out on something they have done. Whether it be Janet Reno and Waco, Bill Clinton and Monica, or Bush and Iraq. Although this seems to be a long forgotten responsibility, we have to speak up when the government is no longer working for us. The problem today is that we're usually called unpatriotic if we do.
Just try and remember to keep a mind of your own. Watch the news with skepticism and don't believe everything you're told. Also remember your First Amendment right to freedom of speech and use it.
IP: Logged
05:49 PM
Nov 25th, 2004
frontal lobe Member
Posts: 9042 From: brookfield,wisconsin Registered: Dec 1999
Checks and balances, buddy. There is a reason for them.
It's not that I'm not being watchful. But still, not one person has responded to the point. 1940's US looked a lot more fascist than now. So did 1950's US. So the trend would actually be that we are LESS fascist now than then. Shouldn't that relieve some of you?
IP: Logged
12:04 AM
Mach10 Member
Posts: 7375 From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Registered: Jan 2001
Frontal: I KNOW that I'm not all that up to snuff on mid 19th century US politics, but that which I do seems to suggest that the US was more isolationist technocracy than facist. Which brings me to a point: Your comment about invading doesn't really jive; while expansionism IS sometimes associated with facism, I would argue that it is mutally exclusive. Case in Point, the former USSR was aggressively expansionistic. But definitely NOT facist.
The US in MY books began the long road to what I'd call "Moderate Facism" in the 50s with the Iran-Contra scam. It was at this point that the US began a campaign of questionable foreign policies. Again, you don't need to OCCUPY a country to exert control (and fulfill one of the "requirements") Simply meddling with foreign affairs to acheive your own end is the same.
Earlier this century, goods and services weren't really as mobile. You could argue that Germany invaded poland partly as an economic measure, since it'd be cheaper to overtake the industrial infrastructure than to start importing massive quantities.
Again, facism doesn't mean goose-stepping dictators. Broadly speaking, it's a definition of a method of government, and by proxy, a reflection of it's policies.
Oh, and to whoever said that the US was "anti-facist..." "Anti-Facism" would be COMMUNISM. And the mid-east is not a hothouse for facist governments. The Mid east sprouts FUNDAMENTALISTS. There's a huge difference. Loosely speaking, the difference is such:
quote
FACISM Do this thing for your country, because we are superior, and we will triumph!
quote
FUNDAMENTALISM Do this because God says so!
[This message has been edited by Mach10 (edited 11-25-2004).]
)
