Fascist America, in 10 easy steps

[nthdimension]

Capitalism is not at odds with fascism. Aligning the government with business interests would be integral to a fascist state.

 

[Xarog]

A fascist state would I presume require a fascist leader and nothing barring a constitutional amendment would Bush running for a third term. In fact the American people voiced their obvious displeasure with him in the last election.

America is also a bastion of capitalism which I assume doesn't gel too well with fascist ideology.

A fascist state does not have to revolve around a cult of personality, it can just as easily be fascist without that.

And Mussolini himself said that facism may just as well be called corporatism. (Which nthdimension has just addressed).

 

[bwana]

Capitalism is not at odds with fascism. Aligning the government with business interests would be integral to a fascist state.

Capitalism revolves around private ownership and profit - fascism "considers individual and other societal interests inferior to the needs of the state".

You dont consider this as being at odds?

 

[Xarog]

Capitalism revolves around private ownership and profit - fascism "considers individual and other societal interests inferior to the needs of the state".

You dont consider this as being at odds?

Fascism uses 'private ownership' in the same way America uses it; large financial interests wearkening the economic power of individuals; making the people easier to control politically. Big Business gets kickbacks in the form of becoming obscenely rich.

Edit : Since you're quoting Wiki, it might be useful to quote the entire paragraph :

Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests inferior to the needs of the state, and seeks to forge a type of national unity, usually based on ethnic, religious, cultural, or racial attributes. Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: nationalism, authoritarianism, militarism, corporatism, collectivism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, and opposition to economic and political liberalism.

 

[bwana]

A fascist state does not have to revolve around a cult of personality, it can just as easily be fascist without that.

The thrust of the article being debated revolves around a centralised figure - George Bush.

From Hitler to Pinochet and beyond, history shows there are certain steps that any would-be dictator must take to destroy constitutional freedoms. And, argues Naomi Wolf, George Bush and his administration seem to be taking them all.

Are you suggesting that the emergence of Fascist America will continue with a Democrat in the White House?

Edit : Since you're quoting Wiki, it might be useful to quote the entire paragraph :

I also left out this bit -

Fascism has been defunct in the Western world as a major political ideology since the defeat of the Axis powers in World War II.

 

[Xarog]

The thrust of the article being debated revolves around a centralised figure - George Bush.

So?

Are you suggesting that the emergence of Fascist America will continue with a Democrat in the White House?

Time will tell. If the various measures put in place by the neocons are not reversed, then yes.

I also left out this bit -

Fascism has been defunct in the Western world as a major political ideology since the defeat of the Axis powers in World War II.

I doubt the article takes the views of the PNAC into account.

 

[Xarog]

Oh please

I posted many points and backed them up. Something you've often failed to do You focus on the niggle and ignore the rest because you can't stand up to it fact to fact.

The posts are are there for everybody to see and they can judge for themselves.

And yet for each 'fact' you used, you made 3 other baseless ipse dixit claims. Every single 'fact' you presented in this thread was refuted with the real McCoy; each one of the things I made reference to are public knowledge and can be referenced using external sources. Pity you can't say the same for the drivel you posted.

Get the plank out of your own eye before you start worrying about someone else's splinters.

@Bwana

Insulting, ad-hommiens and "strawman" only go one way. Right to left. Physically impossible for it to go the other way. Bit like racism was also once a one way street to them. Well at least today they are coming around about racism. Lets hope coming around to the former is not asking to much of them

And back we go to Alan-land. Enjoy your visit, the rest of us who concern ourselves with reality won't be joining you in your delusional fantasies of what constitutes a 'liberal'.

 

[McSack]

I don't understand the anti-AllThingsAmerican sentiment

It seems some forumites support just about any atrocities / actions committed by right or left wing extremists as long as they're against America

 

[Xarog]

You see you stop. Heckle, heckle, heckle hoping and praying I'll go away so you don’t get yourself muddled again. It's not my fault you refuse accept the points that I backed up with links. You still believe your claims in the Iran thread that the IAEA doesn't refer countries to the U.N SC and ElBaradei
is satisfied with Iran. I disagreed and posted links to back it up but you refused to believe it sighting the date of the link for the later after initially claiming that you "didn't bother" backing up your claim. So I posted a more recent link barely a day old backing up my claim and you disappeared . Still to this day you haven't posted a link for either of those claims. Yet you refute my claims and I post drivel .

I was giving you a taste of your own medicine. I've told you that before, too. You only backed up ONE claim on the whole Israel affair, and that was when you were linking to the circumstances that brought Hamas into existence (unfortunately for you, it was totally the wrong thing). And if you recall that thread, Kilo did a nice job of pointing out what a rag you were posting from; I see no need to become redundant. But hey, feel free to focus on that *one incident* while ignoring the bigger picture. It would certainly be in character for you.

As above. You can plainly see you're having trouble with reality . Thank god I'm not in your little word where place like Iran are preferable to the U.S.

Lol.

As I said, get the plank out of your own eye before you start complaining about splinters.

*shudder*

I wonder how many people live in your little world sharing your views. The few there must be rather unpleasant

The majority of the world population, strangely enough. The majority of Americans and Iraqis oppose whats happening in Iraq at the moment. The majority of the world population thinks the War on Terrorism is a PR farce. The majority of the world just wants to get on with their lives. Pity that you and a few other fringe lunatics feel the need to drag the whole world into your petty squabbles.

But enough. As you say, the posts speak for themselves and as can be plainly seen, when it comes to Israel you don't know your head from your rear.

 

[Xarog]

It's called Anti-Americasm and is bigotry. Just like racism, sexism and ageism which you'll note some of the forumites here suffer from. All are the same, ludicrous and baseless.

ROFL

By that standard, anti-terrorism is bigotry too!!

 

[arf9999]

Oh please you only ignore the points I make and constantly harp on the niggle, which I might add, is only me giving you a bit of your own medicine. Just like this thread. Have you contributed anything to points I have made?

Refuting is a contribution.

You went straight for me. It seems like kilo you have developed an unhealthy obsession over me . You're not interested in debate but instead enter threads to heckle people who don't share the same views with you. You're happy to insult but then complain when others do it to you. You have no problem insulting others when you disagree with them and you attempt to shut them up with your heckling.

I don't go after you personally, it just so happens that you make the most ignorant, naive and obnoxious statements. I would have gone after Kilo in this thread as well after his attack on bwana, but it looks like that was handled pretty well by others.

Again you haven't said anything about the points I've made. Yet I am "obnoxious, selectively ignorant and narrow-minded" but you haven't taken up any of my points instead you just insulted me by sighting my age (an ad hominem) . Which I might also add is bigotry.

I'm not bigoted about who you are, but rather about what you say, which is obnoxious, selectively ignorant and narrow-minded. I wasn't commenting on your age, but rather the maturity (or lack thereof) evident in your posts. Oh, and the word you want is "cite".

If my views are so "childish" why don't you just ignore me? Why the need to shut me up? Surely if I post rubbish you'd be confident others wouldn't take me seriously. Yet you don't

I often ask the same question. The fact is that, if you continue to spew bilge and do not get challenged, some readers may think that you are correct. I'm just asking you to debate the point without reverting to insults, using terms without understanding their definition, and using strawman arguments. At the very least your posts will be shorter.

I posted many points and backed them up. Something you've often failed to do You focus on the niggle and ignore the rest because you can't stand up to it fact to fact.

Show me where I've done this. In this thread, if you actually read my posts, you'd see that I actually agree with you that the article is junk journalism, I just highlighted some of your less than honest debating techniques. edit: Sorry, I just saw that this was written to Xarog, not me... please disregard my comments.

Yeah it's all personal with you. I don't mind it but unfortuantely if I return the favour mods get involved which saves your bacon

So far, you're the one that has reported me... My bacon hasn't needed saving.

It's called history. Look into it you might learn something . You don't have to personally be around at the time to now the sitution at that particular time. How outrageous. I never claimed that I personally remember "those days". I was sarcastically refering to the numerous moonbates on the forum who are old enough to think back to the days when they supported BoB so they can see the resemblance to how they thought then and their thinking today. As well as the types they support today who are so similar to those they supported then.

The strawman argument is evident in your attributing that view to people that have never stated anything of the kind. And using the term "moonbates" isn't obnoxious?

@Bwana

Insulting, ad-hommiens and "strawman" only go one way. Right to left. Physically impossible for it to go the other way. Bit like racism was also once a one way street to them.

Another strawman argument... in a debate about strawman arguments... how ironic .

 

[Xarog]

edit: Sorry, I just saw that this was written to Xarog, not me... please disregard my comments.

Mind if I crib it? The logic is sound.

 

[arf9999]

A bit hypercritical one world think.

Nothing wrong with being hypercritical, one would think.

 

[Xarog]

You see there you go again.

It doesn't get much more immature than picking out spelling errors

Or are you just that desperate

Maybe you're just getting muddled.

 

[arf9999]

Oh so wise and enlightened one. Your obsession with superiority is quiet something. Quick to always point out spelling errors and other small things to boost your own fragile ego . Like you don't make any spelling errors . It's quite clear your objective when you continually bring up my age. Others have even commented on it. Strangely one could attribute immaturity to you and your constant niggling and obsession with me/

My ego is fine, but thanks for the concern. I'm not obsessed, you're inflating your own ego there. You seem to find the fact that I don't back down from your abuse and nonsense debating troublesome tho'.

I don't get challenged ? I almost always get challenged by one of the posse. If not them some other forumite. So that doesn't add up. Secondly do you not trust other people’s mental capacity to see through the "rubbish" I "spew". Are they that stupid that they need guidance from you the exulted and enlightened one? Thirdly almost all the time you don't argue my points but attack me personally. So that proves your not interested in giving another view but only to trash me personally ( which is rich considering that's what you always accuse me of doing). So this leads to only one conclusion. You want to shut me up. Or else you would have just ignored me.

What's a posse? I don't attack you personally, I don't know you. I only attack what you write.

I did no such thing

If not, my bad... I have had my posts deleted, assumed you were feeling sensitive. My mistake.

What like troll, racist, stupid and childish isn't.

not when they relate to the contents of a post... which they did.

I got tired of seeing others and myself being subjected to that constantly so all I did was return the favour.

Ride that high horse much?

As expected that didn't go down to well . Surely it isn't to much to ask that one also takes a bit of what they dish out.

Care to debate the facts for a change? Look at my posts, identify one time where I attacked you (or anyone else) which didn't relate to your (or their) post contents. If I call someone racist it is because they posted something racist. If I call you stupid or childish... well you can guess the rest.

Hey if anything I'm learning from the master

?? What is that? "...rubber and glue..."?

 

[arf9999]

You see there you go again.

It doesn't get much more immature than picking out spelling errors

Or are you just that desperate

Spelling errors are fine as long as they don't change the meaning of the sentence. Hypocritical /= Hypercritical

 

[sabagamma]

US citizens have all the freedoms and opportunities to change their society for the better or for the worse. If they want to spend their time watching M-TV and American Idol then they will live with the consequences (good or bad).

The concept of a fascist US state is alarmist and misleading. It is very much a product of liberal hysteria. This is not the same as saying GB, the Patriot Act and the illegal war on Iraq is correct or even justified. The US has made many mistakes and is making many more. They have paid for those mistakes and will continue paying for them for decades, generations or even centuries to come.

I think that history will see the last 3 decades as the beginning of the end of the US’s world dominance:
1. Increasing levels of inequality
2. Third world wages being introduced to the US and the associated labour unrest
3. Education that has been permanently devastated by budget cuts that were started in the Reagan era
4. Its outrageous military spending that is blowing a hole in its budget
5. Its politicians and voters are focused on issues that are either peripheral or insignificant
6. An economy that is slowly but surely falling behind the rest of the world
7. Lastly the rising Asian powers of China and India are harder working, more entrepreneurial and have a greater desire to succeed - not forgetting that they are a very smart bunch of people with a lot of growth opportunities.

I think the US is in a state of terminal decline. It has and will have the most powerful military on earth for the foreseeable future. However threats and violence will only get it so far abroad and will do nothing to resolve its problems at home.

Israel will loose its importance as an ally as the budget crunches kick in. The Arab acolytes will be done away with, leaving them weak and vulnerable to radical Islamic movements which will probably overwhelm them. Israel will either be targeted by the new radical Islamic governments or far more likely its own Muslim populations would have changed the demographics and it will be not longer a Jewish state, it will be a Muslim state with a lot of Jews.

Those Jews will be forced to stay in Israel; Europe with its own huge populations will be hostile. The US will also be hostile; Israel will be blamed (scapegoated) for the economic disaster being suffered by the US - thanks to the resentment of years of US patronage of Israel which brought little or no benefits to the US.

I do not know if we should mourn the decline of the US but we certainly should not be afraid of it. Why fear the inevitable? It will certainly be a tumultuous and dangerous time for anyone alive. Perhaps it would be better if it occurs during our lifetimes, seeing that we have each played our part in the creation of the world we live in. Leaving this mess to our children would be abdicating responsibility - a cowardly action.

Just my 2c.

 

[Xarog]

What I write are my thoughts and views which you attack and hence that is an attack against me. Not that I mind to much. Just pity you think it's your privilege to dish it out but others can't.

The fundamental difference is that you dish it out as a matter of course rather than as a reaction to any particular thing. You are unable to discuss politics without resorting to constant sniping at what you perceive to be the 'other' side and that gets people's backs up.

You can go examine my posts, and on this forum I only get 'nasty' with one poster from over 20 000 other members. Don't you sometimes wonder why that is?

The really really really sad thing is that sabagamma has just made an interesting post, but I fear if I attempt to make an informed and constructive post which sparks a discussion on his views, that you will come along and immediately debase the discussion so it's just another mudslinging match - which is really not why I'm here.

 

[Xarog]

You don't do the same thing?

With one exception, no.

Bit rich coming from you. Plenty of other posters do that including you yet I'm the only one you have a problem with . Hey if I see it stop then by all means I'll refrain from it myself.

I point out the ridiculousness of a certain view rather on those that hold the view, and there's a HUGE difference between the two.

Really, you sure?

Yes.

Other posters will remember what you wrote in those threads.

Funny how no one claims that I'm generally abusive. Also rather strange that I've never ever had a mod warning, and aside from one case where an entire thread was deleted, I've never had any of my posts edited or deleted, to the best of my knowledge.

Though if it makes you feel better : I hereby issue an open invitation to anyone to gripe if they feel that I victimised them or resorted to ad-hominem arguments instead of debating the actual merits of the discussion at hand.

Funny I was just about to reply to his interesting post when your popped up . but hey if you refuse to read my points and links and focus only on the niggle(for obvious reasons) why don't just ignore me. Since that's all I post why the need to counter it. Why get involved in a mudslinging match if you don't want to.

What niggle? You make blase, sweeping statements about the political landscape of one of the most (politically) important regions of the world and you think that someone taking you to task for making unproven assertions is a 'niggle'!?

And the reason I get involved is because usually your posts amount to nothing more than white noise. You create mythical 'liberals' and then proceed to deconstruct these mythical beings as if to show your position is somehow more superior. Frankly, despite the fact that your reasoning is often terribly spurious, the ultimate conclusion is that your POV is superior because the alternative simply does not exist.

But once in a while your attention focuses on something which more or less does exist in a meaningful sense, and that's when your misguided views start needing to be deconstructed so that everyone can see just how flawed they are.

I suppose in a perfect world I would be able to ignore you ALL the time... but hey, nothing's perfect.

 

[kilo39]

I'm still waiting for alanf, or even bwana (or anybody else) to 'admit' the war in Iraq was instigated on lies and falsely created 'intelligence.' Don't 'you lot' get it? They 'created' intelligence (a whole department setup to justify a false war, by Rummy.) If 'the trolls' cannot acknowledge this MAJOR LIE then what is the point of any other discussion (surely anything else they write could be construed as a similar lie?) So, please admit it now: George Bush and crew are liars and deliberately fermented (basically) a civil war in the middle east, to justify their continued presence and through this their proxy support of Israel.

Also all this talk of Islamofascism is not identifying the true 'culprits.' Why is this? Answer? Once again proxy support of Israel and their fascist regime in the middle east (and they surely have the grand total for dead children and dispossessed people, nevermind thousands in prison who have never been charged with any crime. Um, seems similar to america in this regard.)

Hamas is not the enemy; hamas was set up to fight zionist expansionism in Israel (and the middle east.) Hamas was set up to fight 'what could be construed' as the fascist policies of the israeli government (apartheid, destruction of a people.) They 'prove' this by their prison population and their total disregard for any life beyond their own. Nevermind expansionist policies that shows any original agreement on Palestine now leaves 22% of that territory remaining (and a disenfranchised people.) (Exactly as apartheid.)

I make the following post in response to earlier comments but it is germane 'right now.'

Hamas was formed with goal of the destruction of Israel. In any case you just have to look at the treatment of Palestinians by their very own to realise the likes of Hamas has no interest to "protest a wrong". In their eyes Israel the very state is the "wrong" and this "wrong" must "righted" with it's destruction. The "wrong" you propagate conveniently fails to mention that Israel was attacked countless times by hostile neighbours with the intent to destroy that country and kill their citizens. That is what is causing the trouble. Until Israel is recognized as a legitimate state without the threat of her destruction then people are going to suffer the consequences. Egypt and Jordan have and look at the relative peace they have had with Israel

Um excuse me. Nowhere in the Hamas Charter does it talk of a "non-Israel." In fact it states they will quite happily work with the jews or anybody else: just not the Zionists with their policies of expansionism (and in an extreme: extremism!)

Hamas is a humane movement, which cares for human rights and is committed to the tolerance inherent in Islam as regards attitudes towards other religions. It is only hostile to those who are hostile towards it, or stand in its way in order to disturb its moves or to frustrate its efforts. Under the shadow of Islam it is possible for the members of the three religions: Islam, Christianity and Judaism to coexist in safety and security.

The Hamas, while breaking its path, reiterates time and again to all members of our people and the Arab and Islamic peoples, that it does not seek fame for itself nor material gains, or social status. Nor is it directed against any one member of our people in order to compete with him or replace him. There is nothing of that at all. It will never set out against any Muslims or against the non-Muslims who make peace with it, here or anywhere else. It will only be of help to all associations and organizations which act against the Zionist enemy and those who revolve in its orbit.

But read the document (I'm tired of doing your reading for you.) About as bad as it gets:

We cannot fail to remind every Muslim that when the Jews occupied Holy Jerusalem in 1967 and stood at the doorstep of the Blessed Aqsa Mosque, they shouted with joy: “Muhammad is dead, he left daughters behind.” Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims. “Let the eyes of the cowards not fall asleep.”

And a rant on the crusades. As said, read the doc (instead of spewing endless hatred here.)