Fascism - Why...

[fantome profane]

If you can't answer the question yourself, forget about it.

I think the question has been answered. If you keep asking the question people are justified in thinking you want more detailed information.

But apparently not.

 

[Valjean]

Does socialism allow for one to choose not to participate in socialism?
Not in my lifetime.

Certainly, why not? Socialism celebrates individual freedom, human rights and individual choice.

But refusing to work in a coöperative, shared profits workplace, or take advantage of the social services, education, healthcare, housing, &c that an "of, by, and for the people" government affords, would be pretty silly.

To each his own, though. Socialism's fine with dissent and diversity. It isn't coercive or repressive like some governments that pretend to be democratic, socialist, or communist.

 

[Valjean]

Just about everything there, a case could be made applied to leaders of this country prior to Trump being elected perhaps with the exception of the run on the Capital an extreme result of "Fraud elections". Though foolish, I don't think the run on the capital is enough to qualify Trump as fascist

It's his political philosophy, foreign policy, and actions that trend toward Fascism.
It's not the run on the capitol, it's his support of the insurrectionists' violent, authoritarian political actions that's Fascist.

 

[Valjean]

Really? Then what does it sound like to you? The effort to stop the vote in which the people chose their President -- which is what a democracy is about, after all, and replace the people's choice with one of their own, and who would therefore NOT be properly elected but hold all the power -- certainly sounds exactly like trying to overthrow the government and install a dictator, to me.

It was actions like these that brought Hitler's Nazi party and Mussolini's Fascist party to power a century ago.
Hitler had his Brown Shirts. Mussolini had his Black Shirts. Trump has His Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and other far right supporters.

 

[Unfettered]

Certainly, why not? Socialism celebrates individual freedom, human rights and individual choice.

But refusing to work in a coöperative, shared profits workplace, or take advantage of the social services, education, healthcare, housing, &c that an "of, by, and for the people" government affords, would be pretty silly.

To each his own, though. Socialism's fine with dissent and diversity. It isn't coercive or repressive like some governments that pretend to be democratic, socialist, or communist.

"Taking advantage" of socialized services is not the question. The question is one of non-participation in the socialism.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

... do so many Americans desperately want it?

("inspired" by the thread regarding Trump at the next election)

It can be a very good ideology under the right circumstances.

All ideologies have there place.

People connotate fascism with evil but it’s not the ideology that’s bad its the people practicing it

 

[Kfox]

If you're too lazy, forget about it.

It's not about being lazy, I asked YOU a question; not somebody else who wrote a book. If you don't care to give me your opinion concerning an issue; but instead refer to what someone else wrote, forget about it.

 

[Kfox]

I think the question has been answered. If you keep asking the question people are justified in thinking you want more detailed information.

But apparently not.

No the question was not answered, I was told to read a specific book. I didn't come here for book recommendations.

 

[Kfox]

It's his political philosophy, foreign policy, and actions that trend toward Fascism.

What is it about his political philosophy and foreign policy that is fascist?

It's not the run on the capitol, it's his support of the insurrectionists' violent, authoritarian political actions that's Fascist.

Excluding the run on the capital, when did support insurrections, violent authoritarian political actions?

 

[fantome profane]

No the question was not answered, I was told to read a specific book. I didn't come here for book recommendations.

Then read post 379.

 

[Stevicus]

The writer I quoted in my initial post in this thread also said this, that American fascism would not "necessarily or even probably turn out like Italian Fascism — or German, Syrian, Argentinian, or any other. We are not going to live a shot-for-shot remake of the Holocaust or the Second World War." But when you break fascism down to components, the building blocks are there. I do agree with you that it resembles something from America's past. Our history isn't pretty, and the Nazi goons we see today aren't the first time we've seen them.

I agree that the building blocks are already there. We still have some checks and balances in place. I think what we might end up with is not so much complete fascism on a national scale, but possibly a kind of "cold war" between the states - without secession or any kind of shooting war - but more possibly a jurisdictional war between lawyers and politicians.

How are we predisposed to it? As a nation, maybe it goes back to the Calvinists. To the way we treated the Native Americans, the Blacks, the Catholics, the Chinese, the Mexicans, all 'othered' by the system. But that's a thought, I don't know the answer.

But individually? The right wing authoritarian personality is measurable.

Right-wing authoritarianism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I was looking for my own transcribed notes from one of my psychology texts and couldn't find it but can definitely pull out the book and screenshot the actual page for you if you're interested.

I think there's probably been a variety of factors which has made many people predisposed towards malignant nationalism, which is pretty much the core of fascism. I think Americans are a product of their society and that society's past - as so much of it seems to permeate the culture and the way many Americans look at the world.

Ironically, it was WW2 and the Cold War which led to the creation of the apparatus which actually moved America ever closer to fascism. The creation of the OSS during WW2 eventually became the CIA, and the NSA was also created around the same time. The FBI started out mainly as a bureau of file clerks, but eventually became much larger, more important, and more feared. What we call "McCarthyism" wasn't really just about McCarthy, but about whole segments of the population which were kind of geared up with an ultra-patriotic, pro-American mindset. The way some people would talk, one would think we were in some sort of epic struggle between good and evil. I won't say that it was fascist, but it created a certain national mindset which could make people more predisposed to it, given the right prodding. That was tempered to a large degree by strong voices of opposition coming from liberals and progressives, and for a time, it appeared America was heading in a more progressive direction.

Reagan took us off that track and pushed us on to a more national security oriented agenda, with an renewed emphasis on the Cold War and fighting communism wherever it may have been - even on a tiny island like Grenada. Even after the Cold War ended, the same basic mentality persisted - and perhaps even got more brazen, since many Americans believe that we "won" the Cold War. 9/11 was another watershed event which only served to make Americans even more oriented towards national security and fear of various enemies and rogue nations in an uncertain world.

Along those same lines, the President holds an enormous level of power, even though it's a democratically-elected position bound by the Constitution and the rule of law. I don't think the Founders meant for the President to have that much power, but it just evolved over time. If we wish to create a barrier to fascism, a good place to start would be to clip the wings of the Presidency and divide the power of the Executive Branch among a few or several elected officials. That way, no single individual can have all that power.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

It was actions like these that brought Hitler's Nazi party and Mussolini's Fascist party to power a century ago.
Hitler had his Brown Shirts. Mussolini had his Black Shirts. Trump has His Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and other far right supporters.

Biden has his unions, his media, his antifa, his illegals….. sounds like Biden is the worst of the bunch

 

[Kfox]

Really? Then what does it sound like to you? The effort to stop the vote in which the people chose their President -- which is what a democracy is about, after all, and replace the people's choice with one of their own, and who would therefore NOT be properly elected but hold all the power -- certainly sounds exactly like trying to overthrow the government and install a dictator, to me.

To me it sounds like an attempt to temporally disrupt the vote (which they did). But no attempt was made to install Trump as Dictator.

 

[Kfox]

Then read post 379.

I read post #379, and on post #391 I responded to it. However 379 is a response to a different question than the one I asked.

 

[Valjean]

"Taking advantage" of socialized services is not the question. The question is one of non-participation in the socialism.

Sorry, not following. Participation implies participation in the system of socialism, doesn't it.

 

[Valjean]

Biden has his unions, his media, his antifa, his illegals….. sounds like Biden is the worst of the bunch

Unions help people resist exploitation. Unions built the middle class in America.
All politicals have their media.
Antifa? Do you support fascism? What's wrong with opposing fascism, given its history?
Illegals? Many are assylum seekers. Many are fleeing violence and the poverty we created. Historically, most immigrants have proven beneficial. The idea of an invasion of thugs, rapists, and drug dealers is scurrilous propaganda, nor are they the result of Biden's policies.

 

[Secret Chief]

It can be a very good ideology under the right circumstances.

All ideologies have there place.

People connotate fascism with evil but it’s not the ideology that’s bad its the people practicing it

Under which circumstances?

Are there examples of when it has been shown to be a very good ideology?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

To me it sounds like an attempt to temporally disrupt the vote (which they did). But no attempt was made to install Trump as Dictator.

You're going to run out of Republican whitewash soon, I'm sure.

What would be the actual point of doing all that damage, all those injuries, making some people dead just to "temporarily" disrupt the vote? Just slowing it down so that Biden isn't declared until a whopping 3 whole hours later is hardly worth the effort, don't you think? So what was the point? And if the point failed -- is that the same thing as "no attempt was made?"

 

[Kfox]

What would be the actual point of doing all that damage, all those injuries, making some people dead just to "temporarily" disrupt the vote?

I think they were acting on emotion; not reason. I think they were fired up without any type of plan, and they reacted on how they felt at the moment. This was not something thought out.

Just slowing it down so that Biden isn't declared until a whopping 3 whole hours later is hardly worth the effort, don't you think?

No it wasn’t worth the effort, and I’m sure they realized it once they succeeded on taking over and didn’t know what to do next. I doubt they went there with the intent of storming the capital, I think it was more of a spur of the moment thing.

So what was the point? And if the point failed -- is that the same thing as "no attempt was made?"

There was no point! If they had an actual point, they would have taken steps to implement that point once they got control of the building; and did more than take a few pictures, and yell obscenities.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think they were acting on emotion; not reason. I think they were fired up without any type of plan, and they reacted on how they felt at the moment. This was not something thought out.

No it wasn’t worth the effort, and I’m sure they realized it once they succeeded on taking over and didn’t know what to do next. I doubt they went there with the intent of storming the capital, I think it was more of a spur of the moment thing.

There was no point! If they had an actual point, they would have taken steps to implement that point once they got control of the building; and did more than take a few pictures, and yell obscenities.

And you don't wonder, I suppose, why many juries -- when presented with the actual evidence in a court of law, including able defence lawyers -- are finding participants guilty of seditious conspiracy. Sedition means, by the way, "conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state."