Fascist USA?

[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.

My in-laws are the calmest, most tolerant people I have ever met (atheists by the way) and don't belong to any political party. They vote their conscience and don't worry about party lines. They're as likely to vote republican as democrat or independent....depends on the candidates.

 

[No*s]

My in-laws are the calmest, most tolerant people I have ever met (atheists by the way) and don't belong to any political party. They vote their conscience and don't worry about party lines. They're as likely to vote republican as democrat or independent....depends on the candidates.

I wasn't questioning the integrity of your in-laws. I can't even make assertions about their character. I hope you didn't take it that way.

My reference to this being a partisan issue is because it is largely that. Terms like this are thrown around frequently, and usually in the place of actually discussing the policy. "Conservatives" (they are anything but) often smear their opponents as "liberals." The "liberals" will smear others as "religious fundamentalists."

I'm not asserting that's what your in-law's criticisms are simply partisan. The closest I'm going to come to that is to assert, and firmly so, that the rhetoric of "fascist U.S.A." has a more partisan basis than not. For some people it may not be partisan, but the vast majority of the time I've heard it used, it is very partisan and normally has very little to do with the facts (told by the same people's conspicuous silence about authoritarian legislation on the other side).

I'm sorry if I made you think that I was calling your parents purely partisan. That was my intent.

 

[Melody]

I wasn't questioning the integrity of your in-laws. I can't even make assertions about their character. I hope you didn't take it that way.

My reference to this being a partisan issue is because it is largely that. Terms like this are thrown around frequently, and usually in the place of actually discussing the policy. "Conservatives" (they are anything but) often smear their opponents as "liberals." The "liberals" will smear others as "religious fundamentalists."

I'm sorry if I made you think that I was calling your parents purely partisan. That was my intent.

No,
I didn't take it that way at all. You had commented that the people who had an opposing view were Republican. I was simply giving my in-laws political bent as a comparison. They honestly don't go around yelling "fascist" but in a political discussion will make comparisons as to how the U.S. is showing the beginning signs of fascism.

No misunderstandings here...I think

 

[Doodlebug02]

No,
I didn't take it that way at all. You had commented that the people who had an opposing view were Republican. I was simply giving my in-laws political bent as a comparison. They honestly don't go around yelling "fascist" but in a political discussion will make comparisons as to how the U.S. is showing the beginning signs of fascism.

No misunderstandings here...I think

lol! You know, I have yet to see someone going around yelling "fascist"!

 

[Melody]

lol! You know, I have yet to see someone going around yelling "fascist"!

You just aren't hanging around in the right circles.

 

[No*s]

No,
I didn't take it that way at all. You had commented that the people who had an opposing view were Republican. I was simply giving my in-laws political bent as a comparison. They honestly don't go around yelling "fascist" but in a political discussion will make comparisons as to how the U.S. is showing the beginning signs of fascism.

No misunderstandings here...I think

OK. Good

 

[Sunstone]

I think Ben Franklin was right in saying that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Just because we don't have a fascist regime today in the United States is no reason to suppose that one is impossible of arising, nor any reason to suppose that certain trends we can see are not disturbing.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

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.

Do you mean this to say that because of 9/11, we had to invade Iraq?

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

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

Do Saddam and all those insurgent rebels ring a bell?

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?

You do realize that the US military is far and away larger than any other military force on the planet?

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.

Because of the growing level on women's rights, we got attacked? Heh, so should we send our women back into the Dark Ages? Besides, you just admitted that sexism still exists.

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

Do you think that the current method of enforcing the Patriot Act is a good thing?

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.

Atheism isn't a religion. And you bet I'd vote for an atheist, so long as I agreed with his or her platform.

Examples, please.

Evidence, please.

I will provide some once I get my battery recharged....

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I think Ben Franklin was right in saying that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Just because we don't have a fascist regime today in the United States is no reason to suppose that one is impossible of arising, nor any reason to suppose that certain trends we can see are not disturbing.

An excellent summary.

 

[jonbaker]

Fascism Anyone?
Laurence W. Britt

dear folks,
this laurence (aka. " dr. lawrence britt, the eminent political scientist") britt rant is all over the liberal web political scene in this very format. however, the original article comes from this site. www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/britt_23_2.htm
and can be found in it's original form in 'free inquiry magazine' volume 23, #2 spring 2003. of course this site and magazine represent the 'atheist alliance of america', and espouses the affirmations of humanism, which laurence britt requests that you read in conjunction with his 14 points of facism.

laurence britt's only claim to fame is a fictional narrative called "june 2004" written in 1998. it depicts a future america dominated by right wing extremists. no he is not a political scientist, as some sites claim, but another hatemonger basking in his 10 minutes of hyperbolic fame.

the author's perspective can be an eye opener, and those of the asatru persuation should be wary.

 

[jonbaker]

please refer to post #50 for the origin of the 14 points

 

[Sunstone]

The 14 points could have come from Satan himself and that would still not merit dismissing them merely because of their source. To argue that you should dismiss them merely because of their source is to commit a fallacy of logic.

 

[jonbaker]

Fascism Anyone?
Laurence W. Britt

i don't recall using your term 'dismiss'. my original post only mentioned 'perspective', as in take it for what it's worth and consider the source.

if the devil himself has perspective on the 14 points, all the better to judge him.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

Thou shalt not kill, eh? What do you think about the war in Iraq, then?

 

[linwood]

IF this is indeed the criteria with which fascism is determined...

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
This is obviously going on here since 9/11 in a way I have never witnessed in my lifetime.
How often did any American hear the phrase "The Homeland" before Bush started spouting it as if it were some sacred relic?
Rodinia anyone?
Google it.

Can you drive two blocks to the store without seeing American flags or ribbons pasted on 75% of all vehicles you pass?
How many home Christmas displays incorporated the "God Bless America" theme before 9/11?

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
To deny this is ridiculous.
My paper yesterday ran a few articles.
1: We are now attempting to find a way to keep suspected terrorists incarcerated for life in US prisons built in nations that don`t have to abide by our constitutional laws.
Because our constitutional laws say we must be able to show "some" evidence to hold them and we have none .
2: Our government has just broadened it`s definition of "torture" which was up until the day before yesterfday only that which causes harm equal to major organ failure.
This has been done to allay critisism of Gonzalez who had a hand in supporting this horrid definition which resulted in the Abu Graib and Gitmo abuses.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
The Project for a New American Century whose membership includes a majority of people working in high admin positions of our governemnt has publicly published a report that states they would need just this thing (Pearl Harbor like situation)to accomplish their military goals.
These members include Dick Cheney, Rumsfeild, Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush and others.
This cannot be denied.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
I won`t comment here but to say that our military has always been powerful

5. Rampant sexism.
I don`t see this as rampant and no more a problem than it was before the Bush admin.

6. A controlled mass media.
Fox news.
They are not the only media outlet here though but perhaps confusion among the mass media can elicit the same affect.
I don`t know.

7. Obsession with national security.
Whats the color code say today?

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
This is obvious and also cannot be denied.
The religious leaders of this country are right now demanding their agendas be passed due to their help in electing Bush.

9. Power of corporations protected.
Tax breaks, Halliburton, Off shore tax evasion, American Jobs going overseas.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
Tax breaks, Halliburton, Off shore tax evasion, American Jobs going overseas.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
Whoever speaks against this admins policies for awhile there was branded unpatriotic.
At least one gallery I know of was visited by the FBI due to it`s showing anti war paintings in a show and the display windows.
This gallery shut down due to the fear the owner had when she and her children were threatened and her gallery vandalized.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
Ashcroft
That man just ain`t right.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
Halliburton, Duck Hunting with the supremes

14. Fraudulent elections.
Who really knows?
I do know the idea was never brought up in my lifetime before Bush.

Is this a fascist state?
No.
I don`t believe it can be simply because of the way our system is designed.
It cannot happen unless we allow it over a very long period of time.

We simply cannot allow it, the judicial system and the constitution will protect us from this if we keep them from being altered.
Thats where our efforts should focus.

I voted for Kerry but I am not embittered considering I didn`t believe he would win anyway.

I have far too much faith in the ignorance of my fellow countrymen to have thought he had a chance.