Fascism - is this where we are headed?

[pinkpops]

Fascism is a philosophy or a system of government the advocates or exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership,
together with an ideology of aggressive nationalism. Celebrating the
nation or the race as an organic community surpassing all other
loyalties. This right-wing philosophy will even advocate violent

....

Just as Hitler used the Jews as his scapegoat these militia
groups have there own victims that the use. Federal officials and law
enforcement officers, minority groups, gay and lesbian right
activists, and people of color or immigrants are just a few of the
escape whole the right-wing militia use.


http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/ReportEssay/SocialIssues/Political%5CFascism_and_its_Political_Ideas-27.htm

[aquart]

1. Aww, you noticed.

[pinkpops]

2. Somebody shoulda woke me up.

[liberalhistorian]

14. Too bad a lot of other

people refuse to notice and are closing their eyes and ears to all the evidence of what's really going on. By the time they do notice, it'll frankly be too late. And that's just what the neocons are counting on. It's happened over and over and over again throughout history, you'd think we would have learned by now. Especially this country.

Never, ever in a hundred million years did I ever think this would be happening here. It's unbelievable just how easy it really is to manipulate people, no matter what country or culture you're talking about.

[leesa]

3. That would be the correct term.

[elepet]

4. We are not heading...

We are there now.

[okieinpain]

5. I thought we were already like that. you mean it's going to get

worse.

[pinkpops]

6. I read the news today, oh boy.

[prolesunited]

9. Why, yes,

yes it is. We are entering a very dark time. I wonder when the others will wake up?

[pinkpops]

11. Dark times, funny

I was looking at this earlier:

American empire in decline

In her new book Dark Age Ahead, writer and thinker Jane Jacobs makes an uneven but intriguing attempt to answer some of these questions, describing a dangerous precipice at which North America currently stands. Jacobs says that the fall of every empire, from the Romans to the Chinese, is hastened by "internal rot in the form of fatal cultural turnings.

http://www.sptimes.com/2004/09/05/Columns/American_empire_in_de.shtml

[okieinpain]

21. when american idol is interupted.

[AmerDem]

7. This is something most of us here have known for a long time

At least you are finally aware of it. Now start spreading the word. Tell anyone and everyone you know.

[pinkpops]

12. Hey, that looks like MY world he has there.

[AmerDem]

16. don't ya just love the glimmer in his eyes?

[Pachamama]

8. Umm, we are already there...welcome to reality...it bites....

:hi:

[AmerDem]

10. Fourteen Defining Characteristics Of Fascism

By Dr. Lawrence Britt
Source Free Inquiry.co
5-28-3


Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread
domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.


http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm

[pinkpops]

13. (1) check (2) check (3)...uh oh ...

looks like we're there.

[natrat]

30. #11 check

cutting student loans for college students---

[Minstrel Boy]

15. Nothing else to wait for. America's there already.

It's been a long and winding road, but America's finally reached the end of it.

[anarchy1999]

22. Welcome to the ugly reality of it all. Sorry. Go to

www.reclaimdemocracy.org and also google David Cobb. we are alreday there and Ike warned us of this in his farewell speech. Beware.

[NEDem]

17. We're already there.....

eom

[bobthedrummer]

18. We are there all right.

[Unforgiven]

19. Not only are we there

we will be the scapegoats.

[Selatius]

20. Our fascism is more subtle than Germany's and Italy's

Unlike corporatist regimes of the past, the government does not own the news media. Instead, the corporatists themselves own the media and lend a sympathetic ear to their allies in government. It's not state-run media, so you can argue that our press is still technically "free."

Unlike in the past, there is no need to arrest thousands of political dissidents and have political opposition parties liquidated. They already control the legislature and the executive branches and are nearly in control of the judicial branch. There is no need. The smart thing to do is to leave them in order to have the appearance of diversity of opinion and democracy.

The relationship between corporations and the state is not a true partnership. It is more indirect than in previous incarnations of corporatism seen in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. Back then, both the state and corporation openly collaborated to achieve their goals. In our case, what happens is that corporatists heavily fund candidates who are willing to carry out their agenda in government. Where previous incarnations had one binding with the other, in our case it is one influencing the other, sometimes heavily. It is more subtle and hard to detect.

In the end, our version of corporatism is far more efficient. They have succeeded in establishing the illusion of free government. Therefore, they do not have to devote as much time and resources to keeping the people in check because they see nothing wrong. In more overtly authoritarian regimes, huge amounts of energy must be diverted just to keep the people from rising up. The more efficient approach is to trick the people into believing they still live free. As long as the illusion holds, the people are less likely to rise up. It is an excellent example of social engineering.

[intheflow]

36. Religious and cultural nationalism.

You wrote:
"The more efficient approach is to trick the people into believing they still live free. As long as the illusion holds, the people are less likely to rise up. It is an excellent example of social engineering."

They do this with religion and culture.

Religion: As long as they promote a religious view that holds that Jesus is ONLY a personal savior, promoting individualism within the confines of doctrine and dogma, they have their complicit society. Personal Jesus = freedom.

Culture: As long as they provide T&A (or even the suggestion of T&A) in the culture, as long as they control the media, they can promote another kind of individualism based on consumer culture. This is the American Dream myth, that each of us can have it all, just like the rich people. Once people buy into that myth, they also become a complicit society. Ownership of things = freedom.

:scared:

[Selatius]

40. Yeah, religion is used as a decoy and has been before under corporatism

They generally adopt the religion of the majority in order to appeal to as many folks as possible. In the US it is being used as a wedge issue in order to divide the populace. Playing up issues such as abortion and gay marriage is a way to distract the population, while they move to consolidate more power.

In a way, religion is used as a red herring, and it has been effective. If these weren't major issues, then other more pertinent issues such as corruption in government, the environment, public education, health care, worker rights, etc. would have more of an opportunity of being discussed.

[zippy890]

42. Excellent points

"They have succeeded in establishing the illusion of free government

It is an illusion. These fascist are slick indeed.

:scared:

[Beetwasher]

46. It's a Kinder Gentler Fascism

At least for the moment...It won't stay that way, it never does...

[PatriotGames]

57. Excellent observations! Thanks.

[Cleita]

23. Where have you been for the last four years?n/t

[elepet]

24. Appropriations bill passage

Watched it on C-span yesterday...beautiful and sad. Senator Byrd from West Va. said it all. I felt like I was watching the death knell of democracy in America.
So folks..what are we gonna do about it? Needs some clear thinking and strategy. Clear, not emotional. What we've been doing was a good try, but it didn't Quite work. Anger and name calling just don't do it. We really do need a deep understanding of the forces that are at work.
This has been going on for a long time...since FDR I believe.
There is a lot of resistance, but it is scattered and unfocused, with plenty of wheel spinning, and no strong leadership. By leadership, I'm not talking about presidency etc. Moral leadership.
I think that Hillary and Feinstein voted with the majority, McCain and Boxer and Byrd and of course Kennedy, Kerry and Edwards with the minority. I don't remember the other names... probably is a link somewhere.
There will be more action taken on Wednesday in the house and the senate, I believe. We really do need to let our congress people know our opinions and urge them to reconsider this "monstrosity" as Sen. Byrd called it.

[Cleita]

25. I really think we are going to have to have a civil war.

I don't want it, but it seems like it's getting hopeless for us to try to hold our country together under the present constitution while the neo-cons systematically destroy it. Hopefully, it can be a war of resistance rather than a war with guns. I think secession of the blue states is in order and that we need to form a new democratic government as a antidote to the war-mongering corporate America we have now.

As a model, I can offer post-war German which was split into east Germany and West Germany. Liberal West Germany prospered under the occumpation of the allies while East Germany fell into poverty and totalitarianism as a client state of Soviet Russia. East Germans risked their lives to escape into West Germany during that period.

When the Berlin wall fell no one knew exactly how bad things had been in East Germany until then. Rebuilding East German after the reunification almost broke the West German economy. I think if we split into two countries, there will be parallels in history here. We will also need some countries in support of our backs to hold Christo-fascist America at bay. I don't think this will be difficult since no one backs Bush in the world other than soon to be British ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Okay, got my asbestos suit on. Flame away.

[pinkpops]

26. Yeah but funny, when I think about it

the only people I know who would be prepared to do that are the guys who vote against liberals who want to take their guns away, yet don't feel threatened by any loss of rights except the right to keep their guns.

[Cleita]

27. Wars have previously made uneasy allies.

They may become part of a movement. Remember we were allied with Russia during WWII.

[Selatius]

28. You do realize you advocate outright sedition?

I just want you to realize the full measure of what it is you are saying. Secession will most likely result in outright war on American soil. Are you sure you can grasp the full measure of what that would mean for many Americans?

The Republican Congress would never allow the northeast or the west coast to leave the Union peacefully. The Supreme Court set down the precedent after the Civil War. No state that joins the Union has the right to leave.

The northeast and the west coast hold vital economic centers, and it would represent a hit on middle America if port cities and financial/telecommunications hubs such as New York, Los Angeles, and Boston as well as a few other places split off. They would never allow it.

It'd turn into a war over control over the nation's infrastructure. Even if these states secede en masse, war would be declared to regain control over these centers. They need these centers. It's the base that supports the war machine and is a vital lynchpin for the economy.

[Cleita]

35. You are so right about how important we are and what a vital

lynchpin the blue states are for the economy. This is why we need to start exercising our power and demanding some concessions from the idiots in charge. I personally am tired of supporting those morons in red states while they cast their vote for me. Enough is enough.

Incidentally, I am not advocating sedition, others are way ahead of me. The ball is already starting to roll without any help from me.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

29. I think there's a tendency to overuse the word "fascist"

Fascists and modern American Republicans have very little in common. To indulge in math-speak for a moment, if you take orthogonal projections from both positions onto the left-right axis of politics they end up in roughly the same place, but the orthogonal compliments are very different.

The most important difference is that Fascists take their adoration of the state and state power almost to the point of making a religion out of it, Republicans take their hatred of the state and state power almost to the point of making a religion out of it.

Fascists are often pro-eugenics, Republicans are opposed to abortion.

Fascists regard the will of the people as an irrelevance; Republicans believe it is paramount, they just can't accept that they don't represent it.

Fascists are often either anti religion or want to subordinate the church to the state, Republicans want to subordinate the state to the church.

Fascists believe in state censorship. I'm probably going to get into trouble for saying this here, but most Republicans are in favour of favour of freedom of speach.

Fascists want to raise taxes, Republicans want to abolish them.

I think a lot of people reason as follows:
Fascists are bad.
Republicans are bad.
Therefore Republicans are Fascists.

I think this is a mistake, both factually and rhetorically. There are similarities (nationalism, militarism, opposition to homosexuality, draconic punishment of crime), but they come from very different philosophies.

[pinkpops]

31. Maybe so, but see #10 above - regardless of

the motivation, the key indicators are there.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

38. I'm not convinced, I'm afraid.

Looking down Dr Britt's list, I don't think "Rampant Sexism", "Corporate Power is Protected", "Disdain for intellectuals and the arts" or "Fraudulent elections" are necessarily charactersistic of Fascism.

There have been numerous sexist fascist regimes, but I'm pretty sure there have been some with extremely utilitarian attitudes to gender roles as well. I'm not sure about this one, though.

Fascist regimes tend to suppress all power apart from that of the government, including corporate power.

Under a fascist regime, academia nd the arts don't perish, they get perverted. The Nazi's produced all sorts of weird philosophers and "medical scientists", and lots of rather dull neoclassical art.

And under fascism you don't have any elections, fraudulent or otherwise.

It looks to me rather as though Dr Britt has chosen his criteria specifically to prove that America is a fascist regime, rather than to provide a useful determinant. He's missed several very obvious ones that don't apply to America, and included several dubious ones that do, so I think reverse engineering is probable.

[toddaa]

32. The word we're all looking for is Theocracy

But I think only a minority of the Republicans actually want this. The economic Repubs hold their nose and dangle the social conservatives out in front to keep the masses of people in the so called Red States from voting them out of office. Unfortunately, for us and the economic conservatives is that the theocrats are beginning to actually think they are in charge.

James Dobson is not a fascist any more than the Ayatollah is.

[Malva Zebrina]

34. Well

"Fascists are often pro-eugenics, Republicans are opposed to abortion."

Under Hitler, women were expected to bear children for the glory of the Reich. Women were expected to bear at least four or more children, the theory being they were adding to the Aryan descent of a race born to conquor.

Children, and women, have been exterminated in Iraq in astounding numbers by Bush's bombs as well as the brutal sanctions imposed upon Iraq for ten years or more. This is the eugenics of the Bush administration.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

But

I assume that Bush hasn't been killing Iraqi's with a view to improving the gene pool. And I find it hard to imagine Bush sponsoring Mengelesque medical experiments, or indeed any medical experiments at all.

[Cat Atomic]

41. You're confusing Nazism with fascism.

Nazism is only an eccentric flavor of fascism. Eugenics isn't a prerequisite for fascism- it's completely unrelated. Same goes for several of your other points.

It's a bit like saying, "Hitler had a square moustache and Bush does not. We are obviously not fascist".

[Donald Ian Rankin]

45. Point taken.

You're right that I overstate my case, but while eugenics isn't a prerequisite of fascism, it's a fairly common feature. Not a proof, but something worth looking at.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

49. Nnot having health insurance is a form of eugenics (look at the infant

mortality rate of the poor and uninsured)..besides..George Bush Sr actually WAS part of the eugenics movement.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

58. Was he?

I'm intrigued - I'd never heard this before. Can anyone go into more detail, please?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

62. Loads of links, some more credible than others

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=Bush+eugenics&btnG=Google+Search

[Donald Ian Rankin]

37. But

I assume that Bush hasn't been killing Iraqi's with a view to improving the gene pool. And I find it hard to imagine Bush sponsoring Mengelesque medical experiments, or indeed any medical experiments at all.

[puddycat]

47. You are confusing fascism with Nazism

Eugenics is not a feature of fascism, although it can be present.

Fascism is corporate control of government (which we have) and excessive nationalism (which we have).

Bush is, however, promoting the mass screening of everyone in a Mental Health program he endorses. Imagine--a whole nation on Prozac, carefully controlled and chemically lobotomized.

[datasuspect]

52. eugenics

is one of the core beliefs of conservatism. cf. universal mental health testing, the adoption industry, gentrification, what have you.

some of nazi germany's best minds came here after the war and did a hell of lot to shape industry, health care, and politics.

[JNelson6563]

43. There's the "W" cult

And if you read the characteristics of fascism posted above you will see it's not just because Rethugs are bad that many see fascism.

Julie

[AmerDem]

48. I take your point of view as one a repuke would have

on this subject.As if they can't for the life of themselves except the fact that the people leading their party and the agenda they follow have striking similarities to the start of Nazi Germany. Full blown Nazi Germany didn't happen over night.

There is quite alot of information here at DU in regards to how Hitler and his team took over. I suggest you read through as much as possible to get a more informed view and come back and tell us what you think.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

55. Well, I suppose that technically you're right!

Most republicans would deny that the Republican party was fascist, and so would I. However, that doesn't ipse facto make me wrong (wouldn't things be easy if it did)!

As to similarities between Bush and Hitler: yes, of course, but it doesn't prove your point. As I've said, both are far right-wing leaders, and as such there are obviously similarities. There are some very glaring differences though.

[AmerDem]

59. Here is Dr. Britt's full article, BTW, what are your credentials?

Fascism Anyone?
Laurence W. Britt

The following article is from Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 23, Number 2.

Free Inquiry readers may pause to read the “Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles” on the inside cover of the magazine. To a secular humanist, these principles seem so logical, so right, so crucial. Yet, there is one archetypal political philosophy that is anathema to almost all of these principles. It is fascism. And fascism’s principles are wafting in the air today, surreptitiously masquerading as something else, challenging everything we stand for. The cliché that people and nations learn from history is not only overused, but also overestimated; often we fail to learn from history, or draw the wrong conclusions. Sadly, historical amnesia is the norm.

We are two-and-a-half generations removed from the horrors of Nazi Germany, although constant reminders jog the consciousness. German and Italian fascism form the historical models that define this twisted political worldview. Although they no longer exist, this worldview and the characteristics of these models have been imitated by protofascist1 regimes at various times in the twentieth century. Both the original German and Italian models and the later protofascist regimes show remarkably similar characteristics. Although many scholars question any direct connection among these regimes, few can dispute their visual similarities.

Beyond the visual, even a cursory study of these fascist and protofascist regimes reveals the absolutely striking convergence of their modus operandi. This, of course, is not a revelation to the informed political observer, but it is sometimes useful in the interests of perspective to restate obvious facts and in so doing shed needed light on current circumstances.

For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. To be sure, they constitute a mixed bag of national identities, cultures, developmental levels, and history. But they all followed the fascist or protofascist model in obtaining, expanding, and maintaining power. Further, all these regimes have been overthrown, so a more or less complete picture of their basic characteristics and abuses is possible.

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/britt_23_2.htm

[rman]

53. Fascists say all the right things to the public,

in order to win them over.
Then they turn around and do the opposite of what they said. Sounds familiar?


No fascist ever said in public:

"we are pro-eugenics"
"the will of the people is irrelevant"
"we are anti religion"
"we are against freedom of speech"

Bush never said:

"i want more air polution"
"i'm going to leave every child behind"

But then again, Fascists are all about lies and deception, of which propaganda and censorship are simply forms with a different name.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

54. I value my mental health

too much to plough through everything google spews up when I type in "mein Kampf" "Hitler" or similar, but I would be very surprised indeed if he at no point said in virtually as many words "we are pro-eugenics" or "we are against freedom of speech", or if he never said anything similar to "the will of the people is to be led, not to be followed".

I'm not claiming fascists are anti religion; I'm claiming they want to subordinate it to the state. Hitler's attitude to catholicism, for example, is well known.

[rman]

56. Hitler pandered to religious sentiments in the population,

as it suited him.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm
Privately he scoffed at god.
see the docu/film "Hitler: the rise of evil"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0346293/

Political idiologists/philosophers surrounding Hitler did purport within their own circles that indeed people need to be mislead in order to be led. One of those has been teaching exactly that in a few US universities. Amongst others he had Paul Wolfowitz as his pupil.

Leo Strauss:

"Those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right, the right of the superior to rule over the inferior".

"A political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat, if no external threat exists, then one has to be manufactured."

"Perpetual deception of the citizens by those in power is critical because they need to be led, and they need strong rulers to tell them what's good for them."

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2003/05/04/weekinreview/030504_STRAUSSIANS_GRAPHIC.html
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030512fa_fact
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EE09Ak01.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EC20Ak07.html
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3011profile_strauss.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~karljahn/Strauss.htm
http://www.straussian.org/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312217838/qid%3D961192609/sr%3D1-3/103-6779631-3720631

[banana republican]

33. I just reread "The Nature of Fascism"

It was a compendium from a seminar held at Reading University in 1967 during the height of the Viet Nam War. Some of the quites are very telling:

Let us begin with a model that encompasses the major patterns that bring fascist systems into existence. Three patterns seem to characterize the period preceding the fascist power takeover:
1) Clearly detectable, long-range, rapid economic growth;
2) Large scale social mobilization with a heavy component of rural to city migration;
3) Vast and rapid political mobilization, particularly acute just before the fascist take power. This is understandable, because the fascist party is a form of mobilization in response to the mobilization of others, and fascist mobilization in turn triggers off a heightened mobilization of other political movements.

<snip>

The idea of class equilibrium within an imperialist economy sums up, in my opinion, the basic political conditions for the birth of fascism as a political system. This equilibrium is typified by a ruling class unable to settle the crisis by ordinary means and a working class unable to bring about a socialist revolution. That was the position of Italy at the beginning of 1920 and in Germany after the great crisis of 1929. the labor movement frightened the ruling class but was incapable of changing the existing order in any way. This situation drastically increased class conflicts, and particularly affected the middle classes and the petty bourgeoisie, crushed between monopolistic capitalism and the prospect of a socialist revolution which they found deeply repugnant.

<snip>

Fascism is therefore unstable and of brief duration. For the distribution of power that permits fascism to come to power is overturned as the modern sector is permitted to continue growing, and once it is no longer weaker it will no longer accept a secondary position in the society or constraints that prevent it from tapping the unused resources of the traditional sector. In view of the position of the society when fascism comes to power this period is relatively brief. It is unlikely that fascism will outlive its original leader.

<snip>

In conclusion fascism is part of the process of transition from a limited participation to a mass system, and, fascism is a last ditch stand by the elites, both modern and traditional, to prevent the expansion of a system over which they exercise hegemony. The attempt always fails and in some ways the fascist system merely postpones some of the effects it seeks to prevent.

The Nature of Fascism
Edited by S.J Woolf
Random House, New York, NY
1968

[RBHam]

39. You've been Fascist since 1948...

You can thank Harry S Truman...

[rman]

44. Left or Right isn't relevant, it's a matter of pro- or anti-democracy

...a system of government the advocates or exercises a dictatorship of the extreme *left*, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with an ideology of aggressive nationalism...

comes down to the same thing, though it'd probably be called Stalinsim rather then Fascism.


Of course when i say "democracy" i mean real democracy; one where the people are politically engaged, well educated, and well informed by independant media (as opposed to media that are beholden to corporate interests).


Whether Left or Right, any kind of dictatorship/tyranny/whateveryouwanttocallit is in essence Despotism, which is in short, the rule of a minority over the majority.


Politics 101 in a nutshell, it's really very simple:
"Despotism"
Producer: Encyclopaedia Britannica Films
Audio/Visual: sound, B&W
Keywords: Political science
http://www.archive.org/movies/details-db.php?collection=prelinger&collectionid=00178

"Illustrates the thesis that all communities can be ranged on a scale running from democracy to despotism. The two chief characteristics of despotism -- restricted respect and concentrated power -- are defined and illustrated. Two of the conditions which have historically promoted the growth of despotism are explained and exemplified. These are a slanted economic distribution and a strict control of the agencies of communication."

[blindpig]

50. it's the wave of the future

Been thinking about this awhile. The convergence of technology and population combined with our sorry history make fascism the most likely trend for history to take. Not that it is desirable or inevitable, it's simply the course of least resistance.
We like to think that the Enlightenment pointed the way to the future and maybe it does, just not the immediate future, and not our future. Perhaps history on the macro scale does a one step forward/ two steps back dance.
Someone should have taken away our plows 10,000 years ago, the world would be a better place.

Convince me otherwise. Please.

[datasuspect]

51. prescient video

http://www.archive.org/movies/details-db.php?collection=prelinger&collectionid=00178

prelinger archives, 1946

[brainwashed]

60. Hitler

I keep telling my friends that this is not exactly like nazi
Germany but it's getting harder every day.

[durutti]

61. Last year, I would've said no.

Now I'm not so sure.