It’s Time We Called It What It Is: Fascism

[J842P]

If "authoritarianism plus capitalism = fascism" then China is indeed fascist; nobody argues differently. For discussions on this message-board, this simplistic definition of fascism might be "good enough" and we would ask "what is the debate about?" Moreover — as depicted by the quote which segues from "fascism" to "concentration camps" — the "debate" here might rely on an identity like "fascism = bad." Simplifications can be good, but with over-simplification discussion loses focus and posters "talk past" each other.

In fact — though it might be a digression to discuss in a thread like this — terms like "fascist" have connotations slightly more complex than the juxtaposition of two binary characters. For example, here is an article claiming China isn't "fascist". It argues that China, while authoritarian, has decentralized authority. It also argues that Chinese political philosophy is as much a result of centuries-old Chinese values (e.g. respect for family) as it is a result of modern trends. But this needn't bear directly on whether China's government is "good" or "bad"; it's just a caution to be careful of terminology.

Exactly. People calling China and Saudia Arabia "fascist" are simply using it as pejorative, sloppily. It is hard to separate fascism from the early 20th-century European context that inspired it. But at the very least, you need a hypernationalistic, totalitarian governmental structure with autarkic social and economic policies. At least in Italy and Germany, the two uncontroversial exemplars of fascism, there was a sort of hearkening back to a mythical historical past, e.g. the Roman Empire for fascist Italy, to serve as a model for a rebirth in a modern age.

 

[J842P]

Text-based communication is different from face-to-face verbal communication; misunderstandings often result when we can't detect tone of voice.

This is a general request to all of you, to help evaluate my reading skill. I quote a post by Bomb#20 in which he is being sarcastic, but I completely missed that it was sarcastic. Would others have done better? On another message-board I am often the one who detects sarcasm that others miss; but I failed in this instance.

One clue, of course, is that Bomb's claim is completely wrong. If I were familiar with his posts I might have concluded that he was far more likely to post an untruth as sarcasm rather than due to ignorance. But I'm not; and untruths written in earnest are not uncommon on the 'Net.

Now, even if 70 million people think the election was 'rigged', where is the evidence that these people believe Trump should be 'installed' as an 'effective dictator'? You can believe the election had problems, rigged, or was outright stolen, and that does not mean you think Trump should be 'installed' as an 'effective dictator'.

Of course it does. Don't you remember 2016? About 70 million people apparently believed Trump rigged the election. The mainstream media was even egging them on with weasel-worded reports of Russian "interference" that millions took to mean Putin hacked into our voting machines. Surely you must remember the consensus conclusion, that everybody who believed the election was rigged wanted Clinton installed as dictator. Sauce for the goose...

So: Is it obvious that Bomb's rejoinder here is sarcastic?

In any event, I do apologize to Bomb for misinterpreting this quote. I do not apologize for suggesting that his remarks elsewhere about Russian interference in the 2016 election are, at best, misleading.

Well, it was obvious to me, but I've been reading Bomb's posts for over a decade.

 

[RVonse]

What will it take to convince the TeaParty that American interests matter more than their partisan politics? What will it take to convince real Republicans that TeaParty idiots are burying their party?

I don't know. My guess is that RINOS have successfully taken over the GOP. Trump is solid evidence. He's not a Republican. And lots of Republicans pointed this out back in 2016, like Romney and Ryan and the Bushes and Cruz to name a few.

According to conservative host Rush Limbaugh, Trump has proven to be a pretty decent conservative. His stance was pro life and he appointed many conservative judges. If you actually examine his record he was much less of a RINO than Romney or mcCain was.

Trump is a worse disaster than Bush II.
Tom

You can not get any worse than starting a big fake war and Trump never dreamed of starting a war with Iraq or anyone else for that matter. And although Trump's economy went down with COVID (which he had no control of), it did not reach a level of disaster as the 2008 banking crises.

 

[RVonse]

Who has been saying the US economy is failing? Which media? Personally, I think the economy is failing but I would never know this watching any media. I would never know this listening to the US fed, or looking at the government GDP, inflation stats, or unemployment stats either.

Honest question here. If authoritarianism plus capitalism = facism then why do we not call the Chinese Communist Party fascist? China is using capitalism and they also are a government based on authoritarianism. At present, the CCP is claimed to have concentration camps just like the Nazis did if not worse.

This is a very serious question that gets absolutely no discussion anywhere. Because if the CCP is just like the Nazis, you would never know it by what you observe or hear in the media. You would never know it by what our Democrat politicians do either. All we ever hear from CNN and Democrats is that Russia is very bad and China is our friend.

Yes, I would say China is fascist, communist fascist. And Saudi Arabia is religio fascist. Happy now in your derail?

I do not consider this a derail at all, in fact it is the main point that your article completely misses and ignores.

But I thank you nonetheless for answering the question.

 

[RVonse]

Who has been saying the US economy is failing? Which media? Personally, I think the economy is failing but I would never know this watching any media. I would never know this listening to the US fed, or looking at the government GDP, inflation stats, or unemployment stats either.

Honest question here. If authoritarianism plus capitalism = facism then why do we not call the Chinese Communist Party fascist? China is using capitalism and they also are a government based on authoritarianism. At present, the CCP is claimed to have concentration camps just like the Nazis did if not worse.

This is a very serious question that gets absolutely no discussion anywhere. Because if the CCP is just like the Nazis, you would never know it by what you observe or hear in the media. You would never know it by what our Democrat politicians do either. All we ever hear from CNN and Democrats is that Russia is very bad and China is our friend.

Yes, I would say China is fascist, communist fascist. And Saudi Arabia is religio fascist. Happy now in your derail?

I would say that as well, and also that the article says "economic system," not capitalism per se. You don't need capitalism to have a fascist state. Any economic system will do.

You have lost me there. How can you have a communist fascist state? Because a communist government can not be control of capitalist corporations unless there are capitalist corporations.

 

[RVonse]

Who has been saying the US economy is failing? Which media? Personally, I think the economy is failing but I would never know this watching any media. I would never know this listening to the US fed, or looking at the government GDP, inflation stats, or unemployment stats either.

Honest question here. If authoritarianism plus capitalism = facism then why do we not call the Chinese Communist Party fascist? China is using capitalism and they also are a government based on authoritarianism. At present, the CCP is claimed to have concentration camps just like the Nazis did if not worse.

This is a very serious question that gets absolutely no discussion anywhere. Because if the CCP is just like the Nazis, you would never know it by what you observe or hear in the media. You would never know it by what our Democrat politicians do either. All we ever hear from CNN and Democrats is that Russia is very bad and China is our friend.

The CCP isn't really using their power to support business, just themselves.

And the Nazis were different? How so?

 

[RVonse]

If you read this definition of fascism here: https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism

extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites,

It actually sounds just like China to me. The only thing missing is that the CCP did not start out in Rome. And I believe one can also argue the article in OP is also correct that the US is trying to act more and more like China. We are not quite there yet, but with the election of more and more Democrats who despise liberty I see it happening in the near future. We already have the rule of elites mostly in place. And we also have in place an unaccountable FBI and CIA who are taking an unelected role that the secret service did in Nazi Germany.

 

[TomC]

According to conservative host Rush Limbaugh, Trump has proven to be a pretty decent conservative.

In what way is cranking the federal deficit through the roof conservative? The Republicans used to be the party of "fiscal sanity". They made fun of "tax and spend" Democrats. Now the Republicans have become the party of fiscal insanity. "Borrow and Spend".

Then there's the federal immigration policies. We conservatives believe that what Made America Great was immigration. Ya know, like what's written on The Statue of Liberty. Republicans don't believe in that claptrap any more. They believe in walling out poor immigrants.

Sorry, but we real conservatives know that Trump and his supporters aren't conservative. They're progressive. That's why I vote straight ticket Democrat. Because they're the real conservatives.
Tom

 

[Bomb#20]

I do not apologize for suggesting that his remarks elsewhere about Russian interference in the 2016 election are, at best, misleading.

This puzzled me, since I didn't say anything at all controversial about Russian interference -- my remarks weren't even about Russian interference per se; they were about U.S. media coverage of Russian interference. But now I'm guessing your issue is that I put the word "interference" in quotation marks and people often use quotation marks to express the view that something isn't real. But that's not what I was doing there; I was using quotation marks for their original purpose: to indicate that the contents are a verbatim quotation. Likewise "meddling". Sorry about the ambiguity.

 

[ZiprHead]

According to conservative host Rush Limbaugh, Trump has proven to be a pretty decent conservative.

In what way is cranking the federal deficit through the roof conservative? The Republicans used to be the party of "fiscal sanity". They made fun of "tax and spend" Democrats. Now the Republicans have become the party of fiscal insanity. "Borrow and Spend".

Then there's the federal immigration policies. We conservatives believe that what Made America Great was immigration. Ya know, like what's written on The Statue of Liberty. Republicans don't believe in that claptrap any more. They believe in walling out poor immigrants.

Sorry, but we real conservatives know that Trump and his supporters aren't conservative. They're progressive. That's why I vote straight ticket Democrat. Because they're the real conservatives.
Tom

Conservatives are only the party of fiscal conservatism when they aren't in power. This has been true for forty years.

The Two Santa Claus Theory

The Two Santa Claus Theory is a political theory and strategy published by Wanniski in 1976, which he promoted within the United States Republican Party.[15][16] The theory states that in democratic elections, if Democrats appeal to voters by proposing programs to help people, then the Republicans cannot gain broader appeal by proposing less spending. The first "Santa Claus" of the theory title refers to the Democrats who promise programs to help the disadvantaged. The "Two Santa Claus Theory" recommends that the Republicans must assume the role of a second Santa Claus by not arguing to cut spending but offering the option of cutting taxes.[citation needed]

According to Wanniski, the theory is simple. In 1976, he wrote that the Two-Santa Claus Theory suggests that "the Republicans should concentrate on tax-rate reduction. As they succeed in expanding incentives to produce, they will move the economy back to full employment and thereby reduce social pressures for public spending. Just as an increase in Government spending inevitably means taxes must be raised, a cut in tax rates—by expanding the private sector—will diminish the relative size of the public sector."[16] Wanniski suggested this position, as Thom Hartmann has clarified, so that the Democrats would "have to be anti-Santas by raising taxes, or anti-Santas by cutting spending. Either one would lose them elections."[17]

 Jude Wanniski

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Text-based communication is different from face-to-face verbal communication; misunderstandings often result when we can't detect tone of voice.

This is a general request to all of you, to help evaluate my reading skill. I quote a post by Bomb#20 in which he is being sarcastic, but I completely missed that it was sarcastic. Would others have done better? On another message-board I am often the one who detects sarcasm that others miss; but I failed in this instance.

One clue, of course, is that Bomb's claim is completely wrong. If I were familiar with his posts I might have concluded that he was far more likely to post an untruth as sarcasm rather than due to ignorance. But I'm not; and untruths written in earnest are not uncommon on the 'Net.



So: Is it obvious that Bomb's rejoinder here is sarcastic?

In any event, I do apologize to Bomb for misinterpreting this quote. I do not apologize for suggesting that his remarks elsewhere about Russian interference in the 2016 election are, at best, misleading.

Well, it was obvious to me, but I've been reading Bomb's posts for over a decade.

It's the same for me.

 

[Swammerdami]

I do not apologize for suggesting that his remarks elsewhere about Russian interference in the 2016 election are, at best, misleading.

This puzzled me, since I didn't say anything at all controversial about Russian interference -- my remarks weren't even about Russian interference per se; they were about U.S. media coverage of Russian interference. But now I'm guessing your issue is that I put the word "interference" in quotation marks and people often use quotation marks to express the view that something isn't real. But that's not what I was doing there; I was using quotation marks for their original purpose: to indicate that the contents are a verbatim quotation. Likewise "meddling". Sorry about the ambiguity.

No, it is I who owe you another apology. I misremembered the "interference" mention — or rather viewed it in an unfavorable light since I never guessed that the entire paragraph was sarcasm. I should apologize to you; and additionally offer a special apology to you and to the rest of the board for repeating the charge without bothering to double-check it. I'll plead holiday intoxication. AtDhVaAnNkCsE.

 

[Patooka]

If you read this definition of fascism here: https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism

extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites,

It actually sounds just like China to me.

Sounds like someone else as well. I'll give you a hint; he is big on military parades, has wondered about the process of being made President for life, says things like "Article 2 says I can do anything I want", appoints family members to perform roles they can't achieve security clearances for, has a long standing history of crying elections are rigged when things don't go his way and in all likelihood would view you as scum because you are not a billionaire or dictator.

 

[Jarhyn]

If you read this definition of fascism here: https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism

extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites,

It actually sounds just like China to me.

Sounds like someone else as well. I'll give you a hint; he is big on military parades, has wondered about the process of being made President for life, says things like "Article 2 says I can do anything I want", appoints family members to perform roles they can't achieve security clearances for, has a long standing history of crying elections are rigged when things don't go his way and in all likelihood would view you as scum because you are not a billionaire or dictator.

Yeah. It's like more than one thing, place, or phenomena can match a category of behavior.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If you read this definition of fascism here: https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism

extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites,

It actually sounds just like China to me. The only thing missing is that the CCP did not start out in Rome. And I believe one can also argue the article in OP is also correct that the US is trying to act more and more like China. We are not quite there yet, but with the election of more and more Democrats who despise liberty I see it happening in the near future. We already have the rule of elites mostly in place. And we also have in place an unaccountable FBI and CIA who are taking an unelected role that the secret service did in Nazi Germany.

But China is about rule by the communist party, not the wealthy.

 

[Elixir]

And we also have in place an unaccountable FBI and CIA who are taking an unelected role that the secret service did in Nazi Germany.

No worries, dude - the unidentified thugs of the executive branch will keep "taking care" of those liberty hating democratz. There has never been a BLM protest that could withstand the combined forces of FreeDumb represented by inidentifiable ICE agents, CBP thugs and other Security ob Das Homelandt heroes, along with Proud Boys and other "liberty" loving militiae. Hell - they can't even stand up to one single liberty-lovin' 17 year old whose mom gave him an assault rifle and drove him to a protest!
Your stupid-assed notion of "liberty" is safe from those "Democrats who despise liberty" for at least another 2½ weeks.