1. Post #1
    Gold Member
    FreakyMe's Avatar
    December 2005
    4,929 Posts
    Our country is at war. To anyone who has read a headline or watched a news promo, it should come as no surprise. No, I’m not speaking of the war on terror or the war in Iraq or Libya or any other foreign country. This war is taking place right on our own soil. I’m not talking about the war on drugs. I’m not even talking about the fact that the war on poverty has turned into a war on the poor. We are in a war of words…a war of soundbites, and we are losing.

    Conservatives in general and tea partiers in specific love to throw words at us. One day we are socialists or communists, the next we are fascists. Sometimes, we are all three at the same time. Though poorly articulated, their arguments defend a vague idea of freedom against a principle of totalitarianism.

    This is where the ideas generally end. To the American extreme right (which is most of the current Republican party), freedom seems to mean the freedom to hire their own cops and firefighters. Freedom to the left means an agreement that there is a public good, that if our neighbor’s house catches on fire, a fire department will make sure that ours isn’t ignited by a spark, that if there’s an epidemic, everyone can afford to go to the doctor so it doesn’t spread further. Freedom means the ability to achieve greatness because there is a safety net that makes a fall slightly less painful.

    Like many progressives, it doesn’t bother me when I am called ‘socialist.’ In fact, I wear the badge with honor. A socialist is against oppression. A socialist is for rule by the people, not by a dictator or by for profit corporations. A socialist believes in democracy in its purest form. As with any system, when the people put the wrong government in place, totalitarianism can be the result, but totalitarianism is no more inherent in socialism than in democracy.

    If the right really wants to call us totalitarian, they are on the right track with the word ‘fascism,’ or are they? Are they really just projecting?

    In 2004, Dr. Laurence Britt, a political scientist, studied the fascist regimes of: Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile). He compiled a list called “The 14 Points of Fascism.” Next time Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh trots out the word ‘fascism’ in reference to President Obama or the progressive movement, perhaps they should consult the following:

    1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism

    From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

    This one speaks for itself. As an American, there is no greater sin than to criticize the symbols of America.

    2. Disdain for the importance of human rights

    [I]The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.[i]


    Denial of basic human rights is typically hidden in code. These code phrases can be, “playing the race card”, “asking for special rights”, “playing the victim,” “states rights” and “property rights.” While these phrases might sound innocuous, they are all protecting privilege, not rights.

    3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause

    The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

    Muslims, gays, women, the poor, Mexicans, etc.

    4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism

    Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

    Despite a frenzy to cut the budget, almost no one, especially on the right, dares touch the sanctity of the military.

    5. Rampant sexism

    Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

    Sexism is becoming slightly less prevalent, but it is still rampant. The growing anti-choice movement is anti-woman. The traditional white male is still trying to hold on to his last vestiges of power. Rush Limbaugh is the perfect example.

    6. A controlled mass media

    Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.

    Despite the accusation of the left-wing media, the vast majority of news outlets are owned by right leaning, large, for profit corporations. Companies like Comcast are being handed the ability to control what is seen in a viewer’s home as well as what is seen on the internet.

    7. Obsession with national security

    Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

    Patriot Act, anyone?

    8. Religion and ruling elite tied together

    Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

    Is there one conservative in power who doesn’t call him or herself a Christian conservative?

    9. Power of corporations protected

    Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.

    This is the Republican platform in a nutshell.

    10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated

    Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

    Need I say more?

    11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts

    Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

    Today’s attacks are on education in general and specifically on intellectualism. People of “faith” are demanding proof of near universally accepted scientific facts such as as global climate change and evolution.

    12. Obsession with crime and punishment

    Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

    13. Rampant cronyism and corruption

    Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

    Cronyism can mean anything from no-bid contracts for companies like Blackwater and Halliburton to the hiring of unqualified people to head up important agencies such as the CIA and FEMA, as was done during the Bush administration. Mitt Romney’s Utah Olympics were rampant with crony capitalism, on the taxpayer dime.

    14. Fraudulent elections

    Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.

    Elections are not stolen through isolated incidents of voter fraud. They are stolen through voter suppression tactics, such as ID laws.

    Unfortunately, a fascist future is not unforeseeable. But these ideals are not progressive ideals. They are the ideals of the corporatists. They are the ideals of the Supreme Court who declares personhood for corporations and in turn, fraction of personhood for those who are not blessed with billions. They are the ideals of those who would bless the highest bidder with the power to control our most basic needs. These are the ideals of those who would require a religious purity test to serve office. They are the ideals of those who would blame those less fortunate for their own hardships. They are the ideals of those who respect power over humanity. They are the ideals of rigid ideologues. While some Democrats admittedly adhere to some these ideals, they are the ideals of today’s Republican party.
    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/07/27/fascists-1/
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Dumb x 11Informative x 9Funny x 3Agree x 3Late x 1 (list)

  2. Post #2
    Absolute tosser, manchild, and belligerent douche-nozzle.
    download's Avatar
    July 2006
    6,658 Posts
    Yep, the far right elements of the Republican party are nearly Fascist

    In Australia, one of the Premiers for our right wing party, the Liberal Party (no, they're not really liberal, they're just called that for some strange reason), was basicly a fascist. Joh Bjelke-Petersen was corrupt (His political career ended after most of his government was found to be corrupt, he got pardoned for some fucking reason), he moved and scaled electorates around so he would win the next election (electorates that voted for him would be broken up into small electorates, giving them move seats for the same number of people, while electorates that didn't would be merged giving them less seats with the same number of people), he banned protests, he is widely believed to have created the Whitlam Dismissal (where the government was abolished and replaced by the Governor General), he regularly accused anyone who didn't agree with him as "Communists" or "Socialists", removed indigenous rights, and used riot police on peaceful protesters.

    While the Republican Party hasn't done this, many have called for them
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 Australia Show Events Friendly Friendly x 15Dumb Dumb x 4Agree Agree x 2 (list)

  3. Post #3
    Gold Member
    Glorbo's Avatar
    May 2010
    5,368 Posts
    Just for laughs, might I see a source please?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 Israel Show Events

  4. Post #4
    Gold Member
    Mr. Someguy's Avatar
    March 2006
    24,062 Posts
    Yep, the far right elements of the Republican party are nearly Fascist
    An overstatement for sure. But I have seen the occasional fascist or genocide advocate on Fox Nation
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 11Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  5. Post #5
    Gold Member
    draugur's Avatar
    March 2012
    4,890 Posts
    The polarized downs syndrome baby that is our political system is incredibly broken in either direction. Pick your poison.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 7Funny Funny x 2Winner Winner x 1Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  6. Post #6
    Absolute tosser, manchild, and belligerent douche-nozzle.
    download's Avatar
    July 2006
    6,658 Posts
    An overstatement for sure. But I have seen the occasional fascist or genocide advocate on Fox Nation
    I said nearly, not were
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 Australia Show Events

  7. Post #7
    SJW 4 lyfe
    DaysBefore's Avatar
    December 2009
    7,342 Posts
    The bias is so thick I can taste it. Still pretty interesting.

    Found the source
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 Canada Show Events

  8. Post #8
    Hi, my name is mastermaul, and I'm a butt.
    mastermaul's Avatar
    January 2008
    8,344 Posts
    This is an opinion piece, not news.

    An extremely biased, arrogant one at that.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 37Dumb Dumb x 1 (list)

  9. Post #9
    Gold Member
    POLOPOZOZO's Avatar
    May 2006
    14,921 Posts
    I thought fascists had to also advocate a single party system.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  10. Post #10
    Gold Member
    Mr. Someguy's Avatar
    March 2006
    24,062 Posts
    I thought fascists had to also advocate a single party system.
    90% of Fox Nation already advocates that at best (death to liberals at worst)

    Of course, they're just a bunch of crazies and nobody cares what they say. They're just a source of cheap entertainment to me.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Funny Funny x 1Optimistic Optimistic x 1Dumb Dumb x 1 (list)

  11. Post #11
    Gold Member
    draugur's Avatar
    March 2012
    4,890 Posts
    90% of Fox Nation already advocates that at best (death to liberals at worst)

    Of course, they're just a bunch of crazies and nobody cares what they say. They're just a source of cheap entertainment to me.
    Sounds like MSNBC.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 5Disagree Disagree x 4Dumb Dumb x 4Optimistic Optimistic x 1 (list)

  12. Post #12
    I make sexist and racist jokes all the time yet,i still support the feminist movement and the rights of blacks.
    znk666's Avatar
    July 2010
    5,535 Posts
    Any ideology further than center right tends to be fascist or have elements of fascism.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 Slovakia Show Events Agree Agree x 12Dumb Dumb x 3 (list)

  13. Post #13
    Gold Member
    Splarg!'s Avatar
    September 2005
    2,419 Posts
    Sounds like MSNBC.
    MSNBC leans left. Fox leans right and feeds its audience sensationalist garbage that often has factual errors or has been taken out of context.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 12 (list)

  14. Post #14
    Motherfuckers's Avatar
    January 2012
    739 Posts
    Facist commie socialism.

    Ooga booga booga I'm American Satan, be gone or I'll menace you with healthcare.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows XP Australia Show Events Funny Funny x 8 (list)

  15. Post #15
    Gold Member
    Omali's Avatar
    September 2005
    3,059 Posts
    The polarized downs syndrome baby that is our political system is incredibly broken in either direction. Pick your poison.
    "Both sides are equally as bad" is the common phrase of someone who doesn't actually pay attention to what is going on, but wants to make people think they are in tune with current politics. It's the false equivalency, and it doesn't exist.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 8 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 21Disagree Disagree x 3Winner Winner x 2Zing Zing x 1 (list)

  16. Post #16
    Gold Member
    Splarg!'s Avatar
    September 2005
    2,419 Posts
    "Both sides are equally as bad" is the common phrase of someone who doesn't actually pay attention to what is going on, but wants to make people think they are in tune with current politics. It's the false equivalency, and it doesn't exist.
    We obviously need more bipartisanship and logical discussion, but I hate it when people say this in real life (complaining about Republicans on Facepunch doesn't mean much).

    It makes me sick when comedians have to be like "blah blah all politicians suck" as if they're afraid they're going to piss someone off.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 9 (list)

  17. Post #17
    Gold Member
    Boba_Fett's Avatar
    August 2007
    9,125 Posts
    Any ideology further than center right tends to be fascist or have elements of fascism.
    What about right-wing Anarchism or Libertarianism?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 4Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  18. Post #18

    August 2011
    707 Posts
    People really need to stop using the term 'Fascism'. It pretty much died after WW2. Plus, it's a massive umbrella with little specific definitions. (Unless, we use Italian Fascism as a standard)

    Edited:

    Any ideology further than center right tends to be fascist or have elements of fascism.
    What about right-wing Anarchism or Libertarianism?
    Depends what kind of measurement you're using.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events

  19. Post #19
    Any ideology further than center right tends to be fascist or have elements of fascism.


    i didn't know i lived in a fascist country
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events Informative Informative x 3Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  20. Post #20
    Gold Member
    Roof's Avatar
    January 2006
    3,022 Posts


    i didn't know i lived in a fascist country
    how is france the least of all of them?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events

  21. Post #21
    Gold Member
    Vasili's Avatar
    December 2007
    10,721 Posts
    your rights stop where my feelings begin
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 4Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  22. Post #22
    Gold Member
    draugur's Avatar
    March 2012
    4,890 Posts
    MSNBC leans left. Fox leans right and feeds its audience sensationalist garbage that often has factual errors or has been taken out of context.
    They do the exact same thing but for different sides.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 8Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  23. Post #23
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    February 2006
    3,001 Posts
    What about right-wing Anarchism or Libertarianism?
    They are no less vulnerable to fascism than the liberal or conservative, especially if they have nationalist leanings.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete United States Show Events

  24. Post #24
    GlebGuy's Avatar
    August 2010
    2,395 Posts
    In my book most politicians are corrupt as Hell or really are dumb as shit.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 Lithuania Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  25. Post #25
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    September 2010
    8,080 Posts
    They do the exact same thing but for different sides.
    MSNBC doesn't intentionally spin things so out of line that they're practically creating reaction.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 4 (list)

  26. Post #26
    Spooter's Avatar
    August 2007
    954 Posts
    Are the people whose views I agree with Fascists? Or are the people whose views I disagree with Fascists?
    opinion piece by Biased Fuckhead
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Winner Winner x 4Dumb Dumb x 1Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  27. Post #27
    Gold Member
    snuwoods's Avatar
    February 2008
    1,603 Posts
    Well most parties tend to shy away from the idea of natural rights, so I'd say that Libertarians and Anarchocapitalists are the only ones that aren't fascists.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux United States Show Events Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  28. Post #28
    Gold Member
    POLOPOZOZO's Avatar
    May 2006
    14,921 Posts
    They do the exact same thing but for different sides.
    do you actually watch either channel
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Zing Zing x 2Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  29. Post #29
    An overstatement for sure. But I have seen the occasional fascist or genocide advocate on Fox Nation
    To be fair I have seen that here too every now and then. "Just kill them all".
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Mac Denmark Show Events

  30. Post #30
    Gold Member
    Raidyr's Avatar
    February 2007
    23,595 Posts
    Sounds like MSNBC.
    MSNBC is not an analogue to FOX just because their political messages differ.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events Agree Agree x 5Zing Zing x 1Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  31. Post #31

    August 2011
    707 Posts
    If we use The Political Compass as a measurement, Fascism would be centre-right with a big push towards Authoritarianism. Extreme-right would be Thatcherism/Neoliberalism.
    how is france the least of all of them?
    I'm guessing Hollande. I don't know.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events

  32. Post #32
    Dennab
    March 2012
    867 Posts
    Microfascism: The worst kind of fascism
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events

  33. Post #33
    Smug Bastard's Avatar
    April 2011
    2,611 Posts
    Here, this chart I made should help clear things up.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Winner Winner x 3Disagree Disagree x 1Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  34. Post #34
    Ryder1337's Avatar
    October 2007
    344 Posts
    "Both sides are equally as bad" is the common phrase of someone who doesn't actually pay attention to what is going on, but wants to make people think they are in tune with current politics. It's the false equivalency, and it doesn't exist.
    They're definitely not just as bad as each other, but they're both really bad.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  35. Post #35
    Gold Member

    March 2007
    2,264 Posts
    These 14 points of Fascism have been around for sometime (as the article says, it's from 2004), I've seen them before on other sites. It's a bit simplistic to look at it that way, but it's important to debunk this myth of "liberalism" in the States having a common ancestry with Fascism by way of the role of the state and welfare. Hell, there's a best-selling book based off this trash unfortunately, and has been often repeated by pundits in trying to add more mud to Obama's policies.

    Fascism isn't as simple as police state and economic regulation though. Never has been, and it's a bad principle to classify it by.

    Part of the problem with Fascism in trying to apply it to certain groups now is that it was a product of its time. It was a reaction to rising workers movements that exploded after World War I- both Italy (Bienno Rosso) and Germany (Spartacus Uprising, Bavarian Soviet) saw mass strikes if not outright revolutions that added to the tension.

    They had some common characteristics though. Despite their claims of being for the workers, and even in the Nazi's case appropriating both "Workers" and "Socialist" in their title, they got a lot of support from what we'd call Middle-Class nowadays. They positioned themselves in favor of protecting private property from either impending confiscation from the government or strikers, and often attacking the latter in the streets. Not kidding really about the property thing- look at the things that spawned Fascist-types before- Mussolini from the Bienno Rosso and charges the trade unionists were going to take people's stuff, Hitler from the communist insurrections, Franco from the rise of the left-wing Popular Front in Spain and charges that their policies would be taking people's property, Pinochet from Allende's land reforms that made people feel they'd have their shit expropriated.

    In power they were totalitarian and had a corporatist economic structure. While officially Corporatism was supposed to incorporate labor, business, and the state into a harmonious and organic arrangement, it arguably did benefit business more, particularly the large ones such as automotive and steel during the time of Mussolini and Hitler. Really in the end, IMO, it was just a cynical power grab by some guys wanting power and the business partners that helped them along, there's nothing really of value in the ideology. There's only hate and resentment, which unfortunately still is sufficient on its own to spawn skinheads and other dweebs.

    I can't really say that we can fairly say that either liberal or conservatives in the US currently are Fascists. The only people I could really say could possibly be considered as such (excluding the obvious self-declared neo-fascist/nazi scum) are some fringe elements of the Tea Party Movement that go on about protecting their property and the middle class, chastising Unions and Banks at the same time for weakening America. And of course all the language about "taking back" America doesn't help much either. A good (fiction) book about how a Fascist movement could ook in the United States was the timely It Can't Happen Here. Iron Heel is an interesting look at it too, though it was written before Fascism even came about it essentially described the same system.

    Honestly though this is really a consequence of us trying to constrict political views to "left" and "right" based on the degree the state is involved in the economy and personal lives of people. It's more complicated than that honestly, and ignores other issues like the relationship between labor and business, what interests the state is serving, property, rule of law, society, and so on. I guess it also doesn't help that words like "communist", "socialist", and "fascist" are thrown around so blindly as insults by people nowadays, in the states at least.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Winner Winner x 5 (list)

  36. Post #36
    Gold Member
    PvtCupcakes's Avatar
    May 2008
    10,900 Posts
    Just typed define:fascism into Google

    fas·cism/ˈfaSHizəm/
    Noun:
    1. An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
    2. (in general use) Extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

    Extreme right wing? Why would the "left wing" Democrats be fascist if the "right wing" Republicans haven't blown by that already?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Mac United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  37. Post #37
    USER HAS BEEN DISCONNECTED FROM REALITY - RETRY CONNECTION IN 5 MINUTES
    Dennab
    February 2006
    22,239 Posts
    Just typed define:fascism into Google

    fas·cism/ˈfaSHizəm/
    Noun:
    1. An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
    2. (in general use) Extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

    Extreme right wing? Why would the "left wing" Democrats be fascist if the "right wing" Republicans haven't blown by that already?
    It isn't as simple as "right wing" or "left wing". Those terms are relative to each other, and without political or societal context are meaningless phrases used to bash an opposing side. The left wing of the United States would be the right wing in Norway. The right wing of the United States would be left wing in a libertarian nation.

    So when that definition says Fascism is a "right wing movement", that only matters in a specific context. National Socialism, an adapted form of Fascism, bore striking resemblance to a Stalinist Regime socially, and even economically to some degree, even though Hitler hated the Bolsheviks and created special pacts against the Comintern.

    So no, Fascism is not a purely "right wing" movement, it is an authoritarian system of government based upon nationalism and military power, and endorsing cohesion through a closed and censored society. It is also often anti-capitalist and masquerades as a liberation of workers, much like a Stalinist or any other deformed workers' state.

    By the way, almost all western democracies take cues from Fascism regarding social cohesion through censorship and top-down economic restriction.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 2 (list)

  38. Post #38
    JumpinJackFlash's Avatar
    December 2010
    2,142 Posts
    "Both sides are equally as bad" is the common phrase of someone who doesn't actually pay attention to what is going on, but wants to make people think they are in tune with current politics. It's the false equivalency, and it doesn't exist.
    No, both sides are equally bad. If you go with Democrat liberals, you're essentially supporting the notion of an expensive nanny state that tries to interject into the lives of citizens. If you go with the Republican conservatives, you're supporting a corporate monopoly that continues to erode and chip away at civil liberties because either God said so or the terrorists will win.

    Both sides are completely fucking nuts and I'm well-informed enough to find it morally irresponsible to support either of them.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows XP United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 8 (list)

  39. Post #39
    McGii's Avatar
    April 2012
    644 Posts
    Yep, the far right elements of the Republican party are nearly Fascist

    In Australia, one of the Premiers for our right wing party, the Liberal Party (no, they're not really liberal, they're just called that for some strange reason), was basicly a fascist. Joh Bjelke-Petersen was corrupt (His political career ended after most of his government was found to be corrupt, he got pardoned for some fucking reason), he moved and scaled electorates around so he would win the next election (electorates that voted for him would be broken up into small electorates, giving them move seats for the same number of people, while electorates that didn't would be merged giving them less seats with the same number of people), he banned protests, he is widely believed to have created the Whitlam Dismissal (where the government was abolished and replaced by the Governor General), he regularly accused anyone who didn't agree with him as "Communists" or "Socialists", removed indigenous rights, and used riot police on peaceful protesters.

    While the Republican Party hasn't done this, many have called for them
    And now Newman (Same state same party 20 years (I think) later) has so many seats that their isn't an opposition party because no other party has enough seats is going to end up being pretty similar.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 Australia Show Events

  40. Post #40
    Ast_risk's Avatar
    March 2012
    1,368 Posts
    Nazi Germany was fascist, and the Soviet Union was Communist. One was far-right, one was far-left. However, both were controlled by mad men. Both exploited the rights of their own citizens. Both started mass genocides. As far as I can tell, once you get to either extreme, there is not much of a difference.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)