Pogo
Well-Known Member
And stoking outrageousness is his style to create the belief in the enemy within, Yes the reactions did more for him than almost anything he ever said.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Trump / MAGA / the US Fascist?
- Thread starter Heyo
- Start date
Soandso
ᛋᛏᚨᚾᛞ ᛋᚢᚱᛖ
This is America, speak English, those are faggots.
Unfortunately he picked the sticks up on the Sabbath and was later promptly stoned to death. This was the last known sighting of stick man from Numbers 15:32-36
Last edited:
Pogo
Well-Known Member
We are just taking the cue from your countryman Umberto Eco who expounded quite well on Trump and his fascistic tendencies from his experience growing up as a fascist.
Umberto Eco: A Practical List for Identifying Fascists
Fascism is present even in the most progressive democracies; some points for identifying its component parts.
A Freemason who wrote Freemasonic stuff.We are just taking the cue from your countryman Umberto Eco who expounded quite well on Trump and his fascistic tendencies from his experience growing up as a fascist.
Umberto Eco: A Practical List for Identifying Fascists
Fascism is present even in the most progressive democracies; some points for identifying its component parts.www.faena.com
Wow....
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Abstract
https://www.scielo.sa.cr/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1659-42232014000200004
This paper explores how Umberto Eco’s novel Foucault’s Pendulum can be interpreted as a critical parody of The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail by the historians Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln respectively. We explore why two of these authors chose Dan Brown’s novel The Da Vinci Code as the object of their copyright grievance when Eco’s work was at least potentially an equal case. Especially since Eco’s work is frequently referred to as ‘the thinking man’s Da Vinci Code.’ First, we have analyzed the proximity of the structure of Eco’s novel with that of The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail’s. Second, we have highlighted the similarities between the themes in both Eco’s and Brown’s novels to show how any attempt of copyright litigation against either publication, according to the ruling of the judges in the United Kingdom’s High Court and Court of Appeal would still result in a loss for the claimants.
Eco's Foucault's Pendulum as a Satire of HBHG
Umberto Eco is a world renowned and respected philosopher, academic and author with his most noted interests being medieval history as well as an area of literary criticism known as semiotics as evidenced in his numerous non-fictional and fictional publications. FP was his second novel and is arguably the first work of fiction that deliberately mocks the authors and contents of HBHG to any alert reader who has examined both books closely. For purposes of the upcoming legal discussion, it is the second book chronologically, having been published in 1988 with the English translation being published in 1989. For those unfamiliar with information available on perceived shadowy orders such as Freemasonry, the Knights Templar and other spiritual organizations and philosophies, FP can cause authentic fear as a mysterious thriller. However, for those already familiar with such matters, this novel can be interpreted as a tragic-comedy based on the ideas presented by HBHG, which Eco obviously finds amusing enough to transform nearly all of its content into an infrastructure of absurdities.
This is a book written by experts who are familiar with the diagnosis of malignant narcissism. These are people who know what they are talking about and present the evidence for their views.
So don't tell me that people who call Trump a narcissist don't know what they are talking about.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
I did not tell you that. I do believe though that SOME people bandy about both words or either word as if they know what they are talking about and they do not.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
The point that John Kelly made about Trump was not that he fit some specific definition of a fascist, but that he fit the pattern of traits that we associate with fascism--ultranationalism, authoritarianism, use of state security forces to put down opposition, jailing political opponents, limiting press freedoms, and so forth. Trump has publicly advocated these things. He even called for "termination of all rules...even those found in the Constitution" in December 2022--in other words, suspension of the Constitution of the United States. This was him saying such drastic action was justified because of the "election fraud" that led to him losing the election.
See:
Nothing in Trump's rhetoric is like anything we've ever seen in the past from a major party candidate for the presidency. The most shocking thing about it is that everything is there for voters to see, yet polls tend to show that half the country is is either fine with it or doesn't take it seriously. His supporters certainly do not see him as a fascist, and even many of his opponents push back against putting such a label on him.
The denialism strikes me as something out of Hans Christian Andersen's fairy tale The Emperor's New Clothes. A more serious study of this phenomenon can be seen in historian Barbara Tuchman's The March of Folly. There is plenty of historical evidence that large numbers of people are prone to acting on delusional beliefs, on denying the reality of what sits right in front of them. Donald Trump is an existential threat to US democracy, but the majority of us may have to experience it to believe it. Another historian has come up with a laundry list of the signs of how democracies get replaced by dictatorships. It should be on your post-election reading list, if Donald Trump wins. It was published in 2017, the first year of Donald Trump's first term in office.
See Timothy Snyder's:
See:
Fact Check: Did Donald Trump Call to Suspend the Constitution?
Nothing in Trump's rhetoric is like anything we've ever seen in the past from a major party candidate for the presidency. The most shocking thing about it is that everything is there for voters to see, yet polls tend to show that half the country is is either fine with it or doesn't take it seriously. His supporters certainly do not see him as a fascist, and even many of his opponents push back against putting such a label on him.
The denialism strikes me as something out of Hans Christian Andersen's fairy tale The Emperor's New Clothes. A more serious study of this phenomenon can be seen in historian Barbara Tuchman's The March of Folly. There is plenty of historical evidence that large numbers of people are prone to acting on delusional beliefs, on denying the reality of what sits right in front of them. Donald Trump is an existential threat to US democracy, but the majority of us may have to experience it to believe it. Another historian has come up with a laundry list of the signs of how democracies get replaced by dictatorships. It should be on your post-election reading list, if Donald Trump wins. It was published in 2017, the first year of Donald Trump's first term in office.
See Timothy Snyder's:
On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century
Last edited:
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
But it is hard to push back against Donald Trump without actually putting the spotlight on him. Anderson Cooper had a very interesting exchange with Charlamagne tha God on calling Trump out for his fascist rhetoric and the way the press handles it. I felt that both sides of the (9 1/2 minute) exchange made good points.
So people who know what it means to call Trump a narcissist call him a narcissist. And people who know what a fascist is call Trump a fascist.
The term at first was bandied about with little consideration.
But Trump had 4 years in office, & has acted politically since
then. He now has an extensive record of action, inaction,
threats, promises, losses in civil court, & felonies.
To say he's a fascist, a narcissist, & suffering from grandiosity
is thoroughly evidenced.
Far less evidenced is that Trump is sent by & protected by God
to save Americastan, as so many Magas claim.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Doesn't change what I said at all, which is that some people use those words (to describe all sorts of people) without really knowing what they mean.
Some of us saw this coming and tried to warn you.
Being correct is more accident than soothsaying.
I recall being told that GW Bush was worse
than Hitler. The left is always making histrionic
claims. Now it's "the end of democracy". Sure,
there's a risk of that....but I see it as unlikely.
The left's shrill certainty is unwarranted.
I don't care. Why do you focus on those who don't know? Listen to those who do know.
A four star general who worked closely with Trump knows what he is talking about.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
I think it is interesting. Which is why I said it. People really need to think about what they are saying.
Yes, their behavior and attitudes match items on the list that describes fascists.
Not just “some people “ , but experts in human behavior.
One telling things about the super conservative is the tendency to reject experts and expertise. I believe political conservatives have borrowed from creationists. Minimizing or rejecting experts doesn’t work as a defense or argument. It actually reveals a loss of the issue being discussed.
Here are some questions and answers put to Trump supporters in Arizona this week. Please look at them to get an idea of how Trump’s rhetoric is changing the whole political landscape in unprecedented ways. Here's how 4 different Trump supporters answered:
And I’d like to point out just how often we get that same sort of thing here on RF – members on the right making what are clearly ludicrous claims about the left wanting to destroy the country, it never seeming to occur to them that people who try to tear down their own house will have nowhere to live.
Well, this is how fascism works. If you can replace a political language, which is about citizens and their interests and the things you have in common, along with compromise and peace, replace that with the language of "enemies" and "us and them," then you are changing the political system.
Trump with his rhetoric, and with the way his rhetoric works, and thanks to his charisma, is able to change the way people are oriented. So no longer are you a nation together, trying to make a better government -- but instead you are turned against one another. And this is the fundamental shift and Trump is good at it, and so is Vance, distracting you from what government is supposed to do, which is represent you. They’re transforming government instead into a source of messages about who the enemy is, and how to defeat those evil threats.
And we know from history that this can work.
Then compare that with the kind of language that was used during the DNC, and in many rallies afterward by the Democratic party – words of hope, the future, working together. But the right has bought so deeply into Trump’s divisive, fascistic rhetoric that there’s little chance anymore that can work, and so it’s become necessary for the Harris/Walz team to turn their rhetoric on Trump/Vance, and say out loud what they’re doing, to point out their fascistic rhetoric.
If you can’t see how this is tearing the country apart, and if you can’t see that it is directly the result of Donald Trump and not the other side, then you are not paying attention at all.
Q: “So recently trump has been saying some of his rallies have been calling Democrats the ‘enemy from within.’ Do you agree with that sort of rhetoric?”
A1: “Yes, I do, I do!”
A2: “Why? I think they are bound and determined to destroy our country and make us like Venezuela.”
A3: “Yes, I think as the communists started it, yes. I mean, it's been slowly tearing everything down. There's no morals, no values anymore.
A4: “They are now the party of suppressing people's rights under the guise of misinformation. So, yes, Donald Trump is correct.”
And I’d like to point out just how often we get that same sort of thing here on RF – members on the right making what are clearly ludicrous claims about the left wanting to destroy the country, it never seeming to occur to them that people who try to tear down their own house will have nowhere to live.
Well, this is how fascism works. If you can replace a political language, which is about citizens and their interests and the things you have in common, along with compromise and peace, replace that with the language of "enemies" and "us and them," then you are changing the political system.
Trump with his rhetoric, and with the way his rhetoric works, and thanks to his charisma, is able to change the way people are oriented. So no longer are you a nation together, trying to make a better government -- but instead you are turned against one another. And this is the fundamental shift and Trump is good at it, and so is Vance, distracting you from what government is supposed to do, which is represent you. They’re transforming government instead into a source of messages about who the enemy is, and how to defeat those evil threats.
And we know from history that this can work.
Then compare that with the kind of language that was used during the DNC, and in many rallies afterward by the Democratic party – words of hope, the future, working together. But the right has bought so deeply into Trump’s divisive, fascistic rhetoric that there’s little chance anymore that can work, and so it’s become necessary for the Harris/Walz team to turn their rhetoric on Trump/Vance, and say out loud what they’re doing, to point out their fascistic rhetoric.
If you can’t see how this is tearing the country apart, and if you can’t see that it is directly the result of Donald Trump and not the other side, then you are not paying attention at all.
I can't watch the video at the moment, but I think perhaps a possible strategy might have been to talk around Trump rather than to Trump or about Trump. I think the goal should have been to gain the hearts and minds of the voters to steer them away from Trump.
I continue my rant on Trump -- for the first time, he has described the U.S. as a "garbage can." The garbage can where the whole world dumps its trash -- who once upon a time were called "immigrants." You know, people like Trump's own grandfather, and Harris's mother, and the great-greats of all Americans who aren't First Nations!
Now you know all you need to know about America's immigrants and children of immigrants -- they're garbage. They're not as good as you, there not worth what you are, you need to be frightened of them disgusted by them, find a way to expel them from your midst, from ruining your perfect Eden!
Oh, yeah. He's got his supporters nailed down.
Now you know all you need to know about America's immigrants and children of immigrants -- they're garbage. They're not as good as you, there not worth what you are, you need to be frightened of them disgusted by them, find a way to expel them from your midst, from ruining your perfect Eden!
Oh, yeah. He's got his supporters nailed down.