Fascist USA?

[Rex]

To the moderators,

fascism = censorship

Duh.

What is your point? Nobody is claiming fascism.

 

[Faminedynasty]

I don’t think that anyone is actually trying to say that Bush is Hitler or that the United States is a Nazi state, rather I think that this is used to misrepresent the legitimate aspects of the argument. It is undeniable that the right in this country is moving away from anything that can be called conservatism, it is a new political ideology entirely, and unfortunately it does bear some resemblance to fascism. The militarism, imperialism, nationalism, religious fervor, paranoia and belief in supremacy are all obviously and frighteningly present in the United States today. And since so many Americans decided their vote for President based primarily on their hatred for homosexuals, intellectuals and artists, one must acknowledge that there is the potential for our national political identity to move further from one based on democratic ideals, and closer to one based on fear and hatred.

 

[Yerda]

From here in the UK I've seen documentaries about election rigging, read articles about the rise of fascism, and found people in discussion groups conversing on the delicates and implications involved in vote counting machines. All this in regards to the US.

Typical bookstores in Scotland have several of Chomsky's works, anything Michael Moore ever dreamed up and limitless copies of Reagan's and Clinton's autobiographies. I have to spend considerable time searching for anything dealing with UK issues.

It surely then can't be difficult to find infomation on subjects concering abuses of power in America. That suggests to me that America is not facist.

 

[Ceridwen018]

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
And yet, we still do not see anyone at the top taking the blame or responsibility for the abuse and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners. The silence is deafening.

All of those responsible have taken the blame for their actions. What matters, however, and what makes this statement untrue, is that everyone agrees that these acts were horrendous. There is no confusion as to what is right and what is wrong in this country, as far as human rights go. That was not a proud moment in our history by any means, but the fact that it is collectively recognized as wrong outlines out country's strong emphasis of civil rights.

5. Rampant sexism.
I suppose it depends on what you consider "rampant".

Well, perhaps you could provide some examples of ways in which you have been mistreated due to your sex. Our nation's emphasis on equality between the sexes is one of the reasons why we got blown up on 9/11. If you really think that people are treating you differently because you're a woman, take it all the way to the supreme court, baby, because our country doesn't mess around with that.

6. A controlled mass media.
The conservative right has a stranglehold on the media. Check out where the media donated their political dollars and if you don't believe they also used their ownership of the media to tilt the political balance further you're naive. Even journalists are beginning to speak up about how they're gagged by the conservative right owners of the papers, radio stations, etc.

This is ridiculous. Save for FOX news, perhaps, the media has such an obvious liberal bias it's astounding. This holds true not only for television shows which are supposed to report news, but even shows which aren't, as well as newspapers, etc. Yes, republicans do have more influence in some channels, but compared to the democrats, it's nothing. As a republican, I'm not complaining about this, I'm just stating facts. In fact, I thought it was common knowledge that in general, the media had a liberal bias.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
Funny...I've been reading on a few other threads were people feel threatened by bush and others who are openly combining their political stance with their religious beliefs. Weren't the higher ups of many religions telling their congregations that they had a duty to vote for Bush? Doesn't matter the reason...the fact is that they're tied together.

Leaders of churches telling their congregations to vote for Bush is not Bush's problem. People can whine and complain as much as they want that our country is turning into a theocracy, but this is an unsound theory instigated by the liberal media to help justify the disappointed emotions of the loser democrats. The truth of the matter is that although Bush is open about his religion, (which is perfectly constitutional, by the by), he does not mix it with his work to the degree where injustice would ensue. Also, Kerry was a Catholic--why was that not a problem?

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
It's only ok to be an intellectual if you remain politically correct. Talk to the university professors who were taken to task, denied tenure or outright fired for not being politically correct. I consider this suppression.

Come on now Melody, you're smarter than this. If you work in a state run institution, or a private institution which stresses secularism--such as a university--and you say or do something which could be interpreted as being politically incorrect, you can bet your last dollar you're going to get fired! It's the fault of those professors for speaking in an inappropriate forum.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
You're joking, right? The Bush government has elevated this to an art.

If you could provide some sturdy examples, I would be much obliged.

14. Fraudulent elections.
Well, there are some who would say our last elections were fraudulent...and some who still believe fraud was involved in florida in our last election.

Well, hold on while I call the Waaaaambulance. Where I come from, when you argue with the ref after you've lost, and say that it was because his calls were unfair, it's called being a bad sport, and trying to make excuses for not playing better.

 

[CJW]

Fascist USA?

If that was not the point then don't title the post that. You are being disingenuous.

Even here you say: "...hatred for homosexuals, intellectuals and artists, one must acknowledge that there is the potential for our national political identity to move further from one based on democratic ideals, and closer to one based on fear and hatred."

The avante-guarde artists supported fascists.

Intellectuals, See Hitler's Professors

And on, and on.

Your posts lack truth. This can all be proven historically.

 

[CJW]

"That suggests to me that America is not facsist."

The comparison is "overwrought" to say the least.

But it contains deep ironies given the "intellectuals, artists" etc., doing the comparison.

 

[CJW]

"The conservative right has a stranglehold on the media."

Who wrote this thing, anyway?

Different types of story telling:
"On March 24,2003, the fourth day of the war in Iraq, [Dan] Rather opened his newscast with this upbeat description of the American-led military campaign: “Barreling toward Baghdad. Fast-moving U.S. ground forces fight their way to within miles of the capital. Up above, air raids try to cut up and cut off Iraqi divisions. Iraq insists Saddam is alive, well, and in control.”

But over at ABC, Peter Jennings seemed to be reporting on an entirely different war:

“On World News Tonight, the U.S. attacks all over Iraq, the drive on Baghdad is cautious. There is opposition and there is weather. The Iraqi leader is alive and on television. Who knows how well he is. The U.S. believes he is still in control. Two more Americans are captured, their helicopter shot down. So many others are coming back frill of bullet holes. And the pictures of the POWs. So public now, such pain for the families.”

As it turned out, of course, Rather’s reporting was not simply more optimistic than Jennings’s; it was far more accurate. "
(Weapons of Mass Distortion: The Coming
Meltdown of the Liberal Media
By Brent Bozell :69)
http://mynym.blogspot.com/2004/12/different-storytellers-makes-for.html

Note, it's not really anyone elses fault that they are beginning to have a meltdown, just as Bozell predicted. He well documents the many reasons that they are melting down.

 

[Feathers in Hair]

I'm sorry but I have difficulty really caring what rude people, who resort to ridicule and name calling, have to say. Is it so difficult to treat people respectfully even when you disagree with them?

I agree, Melody. It's sad when people don't realize that they can make more of a point with tact than with attention-seeking behavior.

I'm still curious as to what a 'subpagan' is, but I'm not sure if I can stomach reading anything else in this thread.

 

[Rev. Thomas Keister]

Bush is not a fascist...i propose that he has no clue what a fascist is, just his admin, especially the outgoing John Ashcroft, and the likely to be confirmed Alberto Gonzales...

 

[Christopher Krajewski]

:flirt: The dominium question: If we have dominium over all life on Earth then how do we express trust that we will be punished for usurping It? What should man regard usurpng Life? It still amounts to specific individuals. Fascism would regard that kind of reasoning for the masses. But can we all identified as per guilt, or as guilty?
These may be perplexing questions. Perhaps we should leave that for another time.
The soul of a TREE, or the soul of the angst encapable upon its ego?


Chris, Merry Christmas to all.

 

[Faminedynasty]

Fascist USA?
Even here you say: "...hatred for homosexuals, intellectuals and artists, one must acknowledge that there is the potential for our national political identity to move further from one based on democratic ideals, and closer to one based on fear and hatred."

The avante-guarde artists supported fascists.

Intellectuals, See Hitler's Professors

And on, and on.

Your posts lack truth. This can all be proven historically.

First, I titled the post that because I didn't title the post, it was done by default because that is the title of the thread. Secondly, what on earth is your argument? That hatred for homosexuals, artists and intellectuals is justified today, simply because people of those descriptions have done wrong in the past? I certainly hope that there is more to it than that, because that's ridiculous. I don't think that you in any way challenged any truth within my post. I did not see you deny that homosexuals, artists and intellectuals are hated, you merely seemed to attempt to justify bigotry.

 

[No*s]

I agree with Deut. 32.8 on this. Using the term "fascist" in this way will dilute it, and when we really need such a term, it'll be useless. People will be used to ignoring it, which will help it.

We may be heading towards a more federal system, but we are a *long* ways away from fascist. The very fact that you've safely posted this, is evidence you aren't in a fascist country.

I knew a lady when I was a child, who survived Nazi Germany. I wouldn't have the guts to go tell her that the USA is a fascist country, even if she were still alive. She would consider it a personal insult.

As for me, I'll continue to write my senators and representitives on the issues at hand, and I'll do so without cheapening a powerful word just because I don't like the candidate. I don't like the Bush administration much, but it isn't a fascist, and saying so is cheap and base. It devalues the struggles of an entire generation.

 

[Faminedynasty]

The fact that something is not the same does not make it impossible to recognize similarities. And I do not think that it is an insult to those who have suffered under fascism to point out these similarities and disturbing political trends. Rather, I believe being aware of them is our best weapon against letting such attrocities happen in the future.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

Fascism Anyone?
Laurence W. Britt

OK, let's do some scorekeeping. I'll use the traditional W-L-T scoring; ties are defined as a situation that is unsure or too close to call.

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.

Perhaps not as powerful but definitely continuing. The xenophobia thing pushes it over. 1-0-0.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. 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.

My knowledge of gay rights is limited in this regard, but there is no question that this sort of tactic is used on the rights of civilian Iraqis. 2-0-0.

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.

No explanation necessary. 3-0-0.

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.

Yikes. 4-0-0.

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.

With all the attention being focused on other issues, American women continue to endure the quiet persecution of wage discrimination, sexist attitudes, a one-in-four lifetime chance of being raped, and less reproductive freedom than men. 5-0-0.

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.

This I don't know enough about to make a call on. 5-0-1.

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.

Duh. 6-0-1.

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.

It is a clever, and yet uncooth, tactic. 7-0-1.

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.

It isn't so much that these powers are protected as they are unchecked. But that's enough for me. 8-0-1.

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.

Again, I don't know enough about this to make a call. 8-0-2.

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.

Without question free speech is suppressed. 9-0-2.

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.

That, and overfocusing on the penal system is a regressive way of taking care of the problem, rather than the progressive method of educating people into becoming compassionate and tolerant humans, particularly at a young age. 10-0-2.

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.

Halliburton, anyone? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. 11-0-2.

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.

Not enough information to make a call. 11-0-3.

So, that's eleven pieces of evidence in favor of the notion that the US is facist, and zero pieces of evidence against it. You be the judge.

 

[Ceridwen018]

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
Perhaps not as powerful but definitely continuing. The xenophobia thing pushes it over. 1-0-0.

Maybe if our country acted this way without having planes fly into buildings which symbolize our success and happiness, you would have an argument here. The bottom line though, is that we have every reason to bond together in our nationalism, and every just cause to fear possible foreign agendas.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
My knowledge of gay rights is limited in this regard, but there is no question that this sort of tactic is used on the rights of civilian Iraqis. 2-0-0.

I have never heard anything about Iraqi civilians being mistreated. Perhaps you could post your source?

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
No explanation necessary. 3-0-0.

Who do you claim to be the unifying 'scapegoat'? Osama? I mean, he only organized the entire operation!

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
Yikes. 4-0-0.

Obviously, we're going to have 'avid militarism' in times of war. As for the first claim, I have not seen the 'supremacy of the military' thing happening. Could you provide some examples?

5. Rampant sexism.
With all the attention being focused on other issues, American women continue to endure the quiet persecution of wage discrimination, sexist attitudes, a one-in-four lifetime chance of being raped, and less reproductive freedom than men. 5-0-0.

Pa-leez. Our emphasis on gender equality is one of the things that got us blown up on 9/11. I won't sit here and say that things are just peachy and perfect, but we're in no way in danger of a national crisis here. Women are steadily moving up the ladder and closing the gap between themselves and men.

7. Obsession with national security.
Duh. 6-0-1.

I should think that our justification for this is pretty obvious.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
It is a clever, and yet uncooth, tactic. 7-0-1.

Would you vote for a president who was an open and devout atheist? I do not know of any world leader who did/does not openly subscribe to one religion or another. You are being unfair.

9. Power of corporations protected.
It isn't so much that these powers are protected as they are unchecked. But that's enough for me. 8-0-1.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
Without question free speech is suppressed. 9-0-2.

Examples, please.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
Halliburton, anyone? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. 11-0-2.

Evidence, please.

 

[Doodlebug02]

OK, let's do some scorekeeping. I'll use the traditional W-L-T scoring; ties are defined as a situation that is unsure or too close to call.

Perhaps not as powerful but definitely continuing. The xenophobia thing pushes it over. 1-0-0.

My knowledge of gay rights is limited in this regard, but there is no question that this sort of tactic is used on the rights of civilian Iraqis. 2-0-0.

No explanation necessary. 3-0-0.

Yikes. 4-0-0.

With all the attention being focused on other issues, American women continue to endure the quiet persecution of wage discrimination, sexist attitudes, a one-in-four lifetime chance of being raped, and less reproductive freedom than men. 5-0-0.

This I don't know enough about to make a call on. 5-0-1.

Duh. 6-0-1.

It is a clever, and yet uncooth, tactic. 7-0-1.

It isn't so much that these powers are protected as they are unchecked. But that's enough for me. 8-0-1.

Again, I don't know enough about this to make a call. 8-0-2.

Without question free speech is suppressed. 9-0-2.

That, and overfocusing on the penal system is a regressive way of taking care of the problem, rather than the progressive method of educating people into becoming compassionate and tolerant humans, particularly at a young age. 10-0-2.

Halliburton, anyone? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. 11-0-2.

Not enough information to make a call. 11-0-3.

So, that's eleven pieces of evidence in favor of the notion that the US is facist, and zero pieces of evidence against it. You be the judge.

Excellent post Rising Tree! While I do not necessarily believe that our nation is currently fascist in the sense that Nazi Germany was, I do feel that we are showing at least a few signs of fascism in this nation. Hopefully our nation will not continue to move in the wrong direction.

 

[Melody]

Obviously, we're going to have 'avid militarism' in times of war. [/QUOTE}

The militarism in question began before the official debacle we now call a war.

I have never heard anything about Iraqi civilians being mistreated. Perhaps you could post your source?

Except for a little footnote at the end of the news, there has been little mention of this, but after the Abu Graib (sp?) abuses, they started releasing Iraqi's who are now claiming they also were abused in some manner....and these are civilians since they obviously found no reason to continue holding them.

Pa-leez. Our emphasis on gender equality is one of the things that got us blown up on 9/11. I won't sit here and say that things are just peachy and perfect, but we're in no way in danger of a national crisis here. Women are steadily moving up the ladder and closing the gap between themselves and men.

Hmmm...again not what I heard on NPR. In one of their news reports they said there is actually evidence that the gap is not closing and may be widening again (based on salary figures). Our gender equality is not one of the things that got us blown up on 9/11. It goes deeper than that and there are many more (justified) reasons for why they saw us as the enemy and attacked us. How less "peachy and perfect" does it have to be before it's a problem?

Would you vote for a president who was an open and devout atheist? I do not know of any world leader who did/does not openly subscribe to one religion or another. You are being unfair.

It depends. Is he pushing his atheist agenda as avidly as The Shrub is pushing the Christian agenda? I don't want any president who uses the office to spout his/her religious convictions.

 

[No*s]

The fact that something is not the same does not make it impossible to recognize similarities. And I do not think that it is an insult to those who have suffered under fascism to point out these similarities and disturbing political trends. Rather, I believe being aware of them is our best weapon against letting such attrocities happen in the future.

Words mean things. "The fact that something is not the same" does mean that it doesn't fit the definition. Dogs are not cats. It's true there are similarities. They have fur, four legs, kill other animals, and so on. It doesn't change the fact that mothers correct their children. "No, that's not a kittie. It's a doggie."

So it is here, there are disturbing trends, and they do bother me. However, they don't constitute fascism. There were no men out enforcing and beating opposition in the streets. As patriotic as things have gotten, there was still more than enough room for disagreement. Nobody was treated as a criminal for disagreeing. These similarities are not fascist. The fact that we're on an open channel discussing it is proof of that.

Now, I do agree with you that people need to be made aware of the current trends, but over-the-top rhetoric isn't going to help. It simply gets classified as partisan rhetoric. I'm an Indie, and I think both mainstream parties are beating a path in the wrong direction. I'll use real facts to make my case. I can talk about their implications. I won't use the term fascist, and I will object to in a place like this where it is inaccurate.

In the end, such partisan bomb-throwing is just like crying wolf. When you really need it, it won't be there anymore, becuase nobody will believe you or else the definition will be useless.

Lastly, if you really think it isn't demeaning to those who survived it. Go find one who's still alive. They are still some. If he/she is still coherant and not senile, go tell him this is a fascist country. Put your money where your mouth is there. It is the acid test.

 

[Melody]

Lastly, if you really think it isn't demeaning to those who survived it. Go find one who's still alive. They are still some. If he/she is still coherant and not senile, go tell him this is a fascist country. Put your money where your mouth is there. It is the acid test.

From your own lips.

My mother-in-law is French. She is not senile, and is very coherent. She is the one who told me that America is showing signs of fascism and that if we weren't very careful and very vigilant, we would spawn our very own Hitler, and wonder how we got there.

She grew up in Nazi occupied France and has very clear memories of what it was like to live under the Nazi's fascist regime. She lost family members to their insanity. She said she still has nightmares about the day they dragged the entire village out to the square and executed 9 men because the resistance killed 1 german officer. One of those 9 men was her uncle. She remembers the neighbors dragged away to concentration camps, never to be heard from again. She also remembers when the village was liberated and the next morning they found the mayor and a few other citizens hanging in the square with "fascist" and "nazi collaborator" signs hanging on them.

When I told her about the conversation going on here, she said to remind you all that the fascism of Nazi Germany did not grow up overnight either. The Europeans and Americans watched it grow for decades but never really considered it a threat....and we would be a foolish people indeed if we did not learn by their lesson. Fascism is fascism and it doesn't matter whether it's in its infancy or fully grown except that the toll on human life in controlling the fully grown version is much greater.

Do I need to go talk to my uncle's (by marriage) mother who grew up in Mussolini's fascist Italy? I already know what she's going to say though because I hear it from my uncle.

Melody

 

[No*s]

When I told her about the conversation going on here, she said to remind you all that the fascism of Nazi Germany did not grow up overnight either. The Europeans and Americans watched it grow for decades but never really considered it a threat....and we would be a foolish people indeed if we did not learn by their lesson. Fascism is fascism and it doesn't matter whether it's in its infancy or fully grown except that the toll on human life in controlling the fully grown version is much greater.

Do I need to go talk to my uncle's (by marriage) mother who grew up in Mussolini's fascist Italy? I already know what she's going to say though because I hear it from my uncle.

Melody

No. She's obviously of a different temperment than the ones I've spoken to, and if I had said it to them, they would objected heavily and chastise me firmly (that they are Republicans may be quite relevant also). You made your point in that respect, though.

Also, don't think for a second that because I object to calling this nation fascist that I'm inactive in opposing the more authoritarian trends of our leaders (both Democrats and Republicans are authoritarians). If you think that, then you would be dead wrong. I just object to the partisan labeling here. After all, if we were truly nascent fascists, we'd be seeing whole networks taken over and shutdown, people jailed, etc., but we aren't seeing much of that at all.