Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: FUNKED1 on September 01, 2006, 01:40:11 PM
-
Interesting list. Do you think it's correct? Anything missing?
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.
-
so you are saying that england is a fascist state?
Interesting.
lazs
-
I would say for the most part, yes. But you could change a few words here and there and describe most of the Leftist/Marxist regimes of the 20th century.
Totalitarian/Authoritarian regimes have many things in common regardless of their ideology.
-
so ... what are you trying to troll for ... er ... say, say here?
-
"Properly understood, fascism and communism were, as the Soviet and German labels openly declared, actually the same thing:, just two varieties of socialism."
http://coastalpost.com/95/10/15.htm
-
Quite a few of those point a finger directly at America soo....
-
"Democracy is the worst of the regimes, but we don't know a better one" (Karl Marx).
-
To the citizen (or subject if you prefer), both fascism (http://m-w.com/dictionary/fascism) and socialism (http://m-w.com/dictionary/socialism) probably taste the same, but there are some differences.
-
Originally posted by nirvana
Quite a few of those point a finger directly at America soo....
That wasn't direct finger pointing... This is direct finger pointing. (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/08/30/keith-olbermann-delivers-one-hell-of-a-commentary-on-rumsfeld/) ;)
-
That list is carefully worded, much like a horoscope. Depending on how you interpret it, you could make it apply to virtually any country in the world.
J_A_B
-
I think he's saying that school unions are a necessary evil. :)
-
let me translate funky's post......
BOOOSH IST HITLER, SIG HIEL
-
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.
Eva Peron wielded much power in Fascist Argentina, and Juan Peron resisted the entreaties of the military in 1943 to crack down on homosexuality. Instead he ordered the police and judiciary to let up on their gay-baiting. In addition, Perón promoted the tango, legalized prostitution, granted women's suffrage, recognized divorce, and suppressed former discrimination between first-born and later children.
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.
The cornerstone of Juan Perons power was the poor and the Unions... most notably the CGT... Argentina's AFLCIO... The CGT was more or less his powerbase, his political party. He greatly expanded union power
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so you are saying that england is a fascist state?
Interesting.
lazs
Actually I think he means America.
-
John9001, you do have the social skills of a SS in the way your answer threads around this board.
On a side note, Democracies protect themselve the same way fachist do, because there's only one way to protect oneself. When Bush will start killing education, and sending to prison the educated Americans, then I'll start to believe.
-
heh, this might get a lot of catches.
-
your right frenchy, i tend to be a little blunt sometimes, but i call them like i see them, no sly innuendo from me. :)
-
:)
-
Wow, what a nice job of spinning. Too bad the motive that what was trying to be avoided was so obvious it`s pathetic. The article released and published in the direct opposite direction in which he chose to take. The smokescreen would still have been there, but at least it would have been watered down enough to not choke on it`s on source. Published in a magazine that promotes a cult with an article that basicaly says to it`s followers.."Here is a list of things that might possibly be used in a pinch in an attempt to show that we are not really like the majority of people say we are. We know it`s weak, but hey......it`s the best we could come up with" .....is like trying to promote aircraft to the airforce. Another one of the Secular Humanist gems is just as weak. See! Look! Hitler was not an atheist. So we are in the clear. It always cracks me up when some wacko trys to say that Hitler was religous on one hand , but avoids the fact that he was also one of history`s most skilled deceptionists.
If it had been released as a world shaking study, instead of in Free Inquiry it just might have slid by a small percentage of those who have half a brain.
The term Secular Humanism in itself, in my opinion, contradicts itself. The invention of a term to label it as a religion of sorts by a group who claims to be totaly non-religious is hilarious.
The writer should drop the Political Science tag and send a resume to leading Media reps. He certainly has the spinning qualification dwon pat.
If you are going to set a line, and expect any reasonable outcome, you got to change your choice of baits. Mine is a guaranteed product. :D
-
facism... socialism... whatever.. they all amount to the same thing.
The destruction of individual rights for the "good" of the whole.
The only thing that stops either of these forms of government from destroying the rights of it's citizens is a strong bill of rights.
england has no bill of rights. We have one but so many liberals here, and some conservatives...
Think it is a "flexible" document and can either (in the case of the liberals) be interpreted in "modern" terms or.... like the conservatives.... can be suspended in time of (cough) "emergency"
neither are correct and both want us to be more socialist with more government power over the individual.
We need more rights spelled out and the ones we have enforced at all costs.
only that will stop socialism. england is a government on the "honor" system... the government says "trust us" and they have no bill of rights.
The defenitions of fascism are a modern one made up by liberal socialists to paint conservatives as fascists but.... it is funny that by the time they are done they are covered in paint.
NEVER vote for a democrat. Republicans are bad enough but democrats are total socialist commies.
lazs
-
Lazs England has a bill of rights. Its had a bill of rights before the USA even existed.
-
Lasz,
The British do have a bill of Rights. It is composed of rights spelled out over the course of British history in various documents, beginning with the Magna Charta.
William of Orange, also codified many of the basic rights of Englishmen in the English Bill of Rights, which was passed in the late 1600s, if memory serves.
http://[URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689
-
Wow, dmf and nirvana, you guys are the masters of the obvious.
Funked has gone off the deep end lately, sorry to witness that.
-
I think denial of the previous characteristics when majority of those are true is the 15th characteristic.
-
Originally posted by Dago
Wow, dmf and nirvana, you guys are the masters of the obvious.
Funked has gone off the deep end lately, sorry to witness that.
I won't ever go as deep as you currently are.
-
Is it not true that the english bill of rights are subject to the whim of the crown?
Most seem to be "suggestions" more than inalianable human rights. Just like their firearms "rights".
I think that what funked came up with is an essay that some liberal socialist came up with and tried to taylor to conservative Amercia.
I will admit that we are going the wrong way but I thank god that we didn't elect kerrie and co and now had two supreme court justices that felt that our bill of rights was a suggestion and for them to modify according to fad or their socialist ideals.
lazs
-
From what I've read, the birth of fascism in Italy was in response to growing socialism/communism. Both routes lead to a totalitaristic police state making a difference barely discernable.
-
No lazs. The point of the Bill of rights was to reduce the power and the rights of the monarch and to give certain rights to all people of England.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I think that what funked came up with is an essay that some liberal socialist came up with and tried to taylor to conservative Amercia.
Hehe. The writer is hiding behind a tag of Political Science, not very cleverly released in a magazine that caters to non-beleivers who, not very cleverly are hiding behind the non-religous religion tag of Secualr Humanism. That should clear it up. :) The organization is graciously providing great amounts of vaguely hidden propaganda , in any sense of the word, which is in itself a cult while claiming that the believers are a misinformed foolishly and hopelessly lost and misguided by the Evilness of...................religion .
" Head my words Brothers and Sisters. Repent and become Godless before it is too late. It is your only hope. A higher being and creator cannot be scientificaly proven."
" Seek out the truth that Hitler was not an atheist. He said so himself and you know how truthful and trustworthy he was. It was the religion who steered him down the wrong path."
............................. .....and other "No we are not" loads of horse crap. :)
People who are absolutely terrified by something they claim does not exist crack me up.
-
The 1689 Bill of Rights has some interesting points:
"Freedom {for Protestants} to have arms for defence, as allowed by law."
The right to bear arms....but notice the caveat. The right can be restricted by law...which means it is, ultimately, no right at all.
"The Freedom of speech in Parliament ..." There is no mention, at least in this document, of the right to freedom of speech for the common people. Evidently, that had to wait for a later time and document.
Regards, Shuckins
-
If I have to choose between fascism and socialism/communism I think I'll have to go with the former. Both will destroy individual liberty and the end result will be the same. With facisim though I think I'll have a better seat on the train to hell.
Or, we could renounce both and get back to valuing individual liberty, personal responsibilty, and earning your lot in life.
-
Has any nation's government gone fundamentally unchanged for more than 200-300 years since Rome? Seems humans are basically unable to self-govern without an occasional violent revolution or war. Guess we all need to press that reset button when the system becomes corrupted beyond repair.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
I think denial of the previous characteristics when majority of those are true is the 15th characteristic.
:aok
-
no one is saying that things aren't getting worse in the U.S.
They most certainly are.
What we are saying is that this liberal clowns idea of a horror government (facism) is no worse than socialism.
My point is that it may be bad under the current guys..... but it would have been 10 times worse under kerrie and co with his handpicked judges.
There is nothing worse than socialism. The more of it the worse it gets.
NEVER vote for a democrat.
no matter what the guy with the balding pony tail in the teachers lounge tells ya.
I have not seen one suggestion other than revolution that would work.
My only suggestion is.... never vote for any new tax and never vote for any new law that takes away anyones rights and NEVER vote for a democrat no matter how much he tells you that he isn't like all the other democrats.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lukster
Has any nation's government gone fundamentally unchanged for more than 200-300 years since Rome? Seems humans are basically unable to self-govern without an occasional violent revolution or war. Guess we all need to press that reset button when the system becomes corrupted beyond repair.
we ar completly able to govern ourselves, its when someone else tries to govern for us that it goes wrong.
-
Originally posted by vorticon
we ar completly able to govern ourselves, its when someone else tries to govern for us that it goes wrong.
If we were all able to govern or control ourselves perhaps treating others as we want to be treated I think we would have no use for lawyers, judges, politicians, or tyranical leaders. If only.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
NEVER vote for a democrat no matter how much he tells you that he isn't like all the other democrats.
lazs
Now there is something we both agree on.
-
It's a bit odd.. but I don't see anything in there that defines fascism. Those traits are found in virtually every government.
The "modern lingo" style is duly noted. Amazing how many catch phrases in there have only recently been made popular.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
NEVER vote for a democrat.
no matter what the guy with the balding pony tail in the teachers lounge tells ya.
lazs
OMG you hit the nail on the head. This guy is everywhere too. Plus you can add a Richard Dreyfuss beard to him at times.
My job takes me into a lot of public schools, and right into the Teachers Workrooms as they are called down here. He's in many of them,
hands waving in the air complaining about everything American. God only knows what he says to the students.
In fact I saw one of these guys cause an automobile accident last year. He pulled off on a busy highway that had no shoulder holding his hands up to stop traffic because a f***ing tortise was crossing the road. Three damaged vehicles, and two injured humans all so Captain Planet could save the day. Yeah I know this guy. :(
-
Originally posted by Dago
Wow, dmf and nirvana, you guys are the masters of the obvious.
Funked has gone off the deep end lately, sorry to witness that.
I'm the mother of a 3 year old, you should see what I can do with the unobvious :D
-
Originally posted by Mini D
It's a bit odd.. but I don't see anything in there that defines fascism. Those traits are found in virtually every government.
I'm having a hard time trying to find the traits from any of the nordic countries. However it was easy pickings in the states, if only looked around for a bit. I haven't visited in the UK, but as far as I can tell, some of the traits are true there too, although that's not a big surprise, walking on a leash held by the US.
-
The list is almost dead on. I think I've seen it before. If I could change anything it would be the section about Religion. Fascism is best known for using tools to grab more power. It isn't necessary that Religion is used to gain power, but it is itself a powerful tool.
Btw, I find it odd that the writer didn't mention the largest Fascistic state to ever exist: The Soviet Union.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Btw, I find it odd that the writer didn't mention the largest Fascistic state to ever exist: The Soviet Union.
A socialistic state. The SU is the largest totalitarian state to ever exist.
besides, the list was of fascist countries the writer has examined, not a list of fascist states that have existed.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
A socialistic state. The SU is the largest totalitarian state to ever exist.
besides, the list was of fascist countries the writer has examined, not a list of fascist states that have existed.
Is he rewriting history then? I would think that fascism would be defined by the first to claim and embrace it for their own. Italy comes to mind.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Is he rewriting history then? I would think that fascism would be defined by the first to claim and embrace it for their own. Italy comes to mind.
Uh, what do you mean? how do you get to that conclusion by my post?
-
Socialism is the legislating away of personal freedoms on the way to Communism (the ultimate goal). However, the Soviet Union was a Fascist state for the exact same reasons listed above.
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
That list is carefully worded, much like a horoscope. Depending on how you interpret it, you could make it apply to virtually any country in the world.
J_A_B
I was thinking pretty much the same thing
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Uh, what do you mean? how do you get to that conclusion by my post?
You said the list was from facist states he examined, not those that have existed. I guess I should ask what states did he examine to create his list?
What I meant was that if his list of characteristics aren't observations from self proclaimed facist states then isn't he redefining "fasicsm" as embraced by it's founders?
-
Maybe this will help fuirther the discussion of "Fascism".
http://www.library.wisc.edu/libraries/dpf/Fascism/Intro.html
-
Originally posted by Fishu
I think denial of the previous characteristics when majority of those are true is the 15th characteristic.
They ae all pretty on cept 2,5,6,10,11 &14.
hmmmm thats 6 of 14....or 15 if we include yours.
Guess your right. That "Majority" of them are
by a whole two
Three if we include yours
-
If his observations were made chiefly from Nazi Germany then we're talking about socialism, not fascism. Germany did name itself a socialist state afterall. Perhaps that won't fit his ideology in regards to socialism though. How inconvenient for him.
-
Originally posted by lukster
If his observations were made chiefly from Nazi Germany then we're talking about socialism, not fascism. Germany did name itself a socialist state afterall. Perhaps that won't fit his ideology in regards to socialism though. How inconvenient for him.
Ahh.. I checked the dictionary and found out where I made the mistake, now I understand what you were after. You can nevermind the post then. Got me a little puzzled.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
They ae all pretty on cept 2,5,6,10,11 &14.
hmmmm thats 6 of 14....or 15 if we include yours.
2. Gitmo. That is only for one example, sufficient I might say.
5. Bush is pretty much against abortion and promotes christian values on marriage. Lots of people are alike him in the government. I suppose there are also more men than women in the higher positions and in the congress? Condoleza Rice (sp) is an exception to the male dominance, perhaps she's the "almost" factor. However, she'd make no difference to male leaders if we wouldn't know she's a she. A good reason why she's there - She's no whining lady which would be a nuisance to a fascist regime.
6. The media IS being controlled in the states. The government is using the media to push their agenda into the people. There are many ways to utilize the media without direct control or censorship.
10. I've read of many people on this board being negative towards labor unions. Wallmart or whatever mall chain is disencouraging workers from being a part of a union. I suppose republicans, as the flag holders of the corporate america, doesn't care for the unions either.
14. Florida? The past smear campaigns?
We need to review the list after next election or two. Those will mark the corner stones on the path to fascism.
-
I would say #8 isn't always the case. Sometimes the fascist state will view religion of any kind as a threat (you cant have folks praying to a higher power), and actively subvert it. China is an example, the govt does not like organised religion there. Nazi Germany wasnt keen on the church either, but christianity was too well entrenched for them to be overly blatant about subverting it.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
I think denial of the previous characteristics when majority of those are true is the 15th characteristic.
I think that either denying or accepting the mindless babble would be pretty pathetic. I also think that if someone was actualy gullible enough to give either the author or the article any thought as to being a researched , indepth study wouldn`t have to worry about denial or accepting the list. If someone couldn`t see the lame attempt of the boggled intent and gobbled it down, government, social decline or anything in the real world would be the least of your worries. At that lobotomy state you would already be in the sheep pen ringing a dinner bell for a wolf who might pass by............any wolf.
I believe that most any average grade school child could have spent an hour with reference books and came up with an essay that would be more unglaringly obvious as to the intent. With just a bit more effort, the same kid could address it to any country that has any noticeable impact on world affairs with the changing of the wording and have at least a better chance of not being considered mindless and pathetic.
At least it was published where it belonged and addressed to the buyers of the ship in the desert crowd for which the publication is intended.
-
Although all "states" to some degree subvert individual rights (even democracies), I would say the stand out feature of real democracies are the seperation of powers, ie, an independant judiciary, and a genuine elected body (or bodies), backed up by entrenched institutions, and traditions. Thats why they are slow to evolve, and were rare at the start of the 20th century.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
2. Gitmo. That is only for one example, sufficient I might say.
5. Bush is pretty much against abortion and promotes christian values on marriage. Lots of people are alike him in the government. I suppose there are also more men than women in the higher positions and in the congress? Condoleza Rice (sp) is an exception to the male dominance, perhaps she's the "almost" factor. However, she'd make no difference to male leaders if we wouldn't know she's a she. A good reason why she's there - She's no whining lady which would be a nuisance to a fascist regime.
6. The media IS being controlled in the states. The government is using the media to push their agenda into the people. There are many ways to utilize the media without direct control or censorship.
10. I've read of many people on this board being negative towards labor unions. Wallmart or whatever mall chain is disencouraging workers from being a part of a union. I suppose republicans, as the flag holders of the corporate america, doesn't care for the unions either.
14. Florida? The past smear campaigns?
We need to review the list after next election or two. Those will mark the corner stones on the path to fascism.
Lets start with the biggest first shall we. 14
Florida was not fixed.
Like it or not, for better or for worse Bush WON Florida.
All recounts after the election. including on conducted by "THE Reverand Jessie Jackson" Showed Bush Won Florida
As for smear campaigns. They are hardly unique to the last couple of elections
2 Gitmo is a poor example. What was/is being done there isnt any different then we have done throughout our history.
Ad isnt anything any country of any type has done throughout history.
Hardly something that is unique to Facism
5 Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated.
Ummmm http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/Facts/Officeholders/cong-current.html (http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/Facts/Officeholders/cong-current.html)
BTW Last time I checked. Abortion was still legal
6, heh I dont know which media your watching "the 700 club" perhaps?
10. I too speak negativly about Unions. Primarily because they have gone from addressing legitimate concerns. To being unreasonable whining crybabies who just want to suck the teet dry.
Hell around these parts postal carriers dont even have to get out of their trucks to deliver mail if there is a car blocking the roadside box (poor babies)
But unions still exist and still weild considerable power.
Just because unions, or a particular union doesnt get everything they want doesnt mean its being supressed.
And many of todays labor laws make unions less important
But as for 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. "
Today most labor unions in the United States are members of one of two larger umbrella organizations: the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) or the Change to Win Federation, which split from the AFL-CIO in 2005. Both organizations advocate policies and legislation favorable to workers in the United States and Canada, and take an active role in Democratic party politics. The AFL-CIO is especially concerned with global trade issues.
Private sector union members are tightly regulated by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), passed in 1935. The law is overseen by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), part of the United States Department of Labor. Public sector unions are regulated partly by federal and partly by state laws. In general they have shown robust growth rates, for wages and working conditions are set through negotiations with elected local and state officials. The unions' political power thus comes into play, and of course the local government cannot threaten to move elsewhere, nor is there any threat from foreign competition. In California the public sector unions have been especially successful.
SOURCE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_States)
-
I think the sexism characteristic is a little shaky, since the vast majority of all governments presently and historically have been male dominated; I wouldn't call this a defining characteristic of fascism.
One thing that I can think of that may be missing from the list is military conquest. There are very few fascist states that I can think of that did not try to annex their neighbors.
-
Originally posted by lukster
If his observations were made chiefly from Nazi Germany then we're talking about socialism, not fascism.
No
Socialism is an economic system, fascism is a system of government. Many fascists states have had socialist economies.
Also bear in mind that facsist states often will adopt titles that have benevolent connotations. Nazi Germany was no more socialist than the DPRK is democratic, or the PRC is a republic.
Hey another defining characteristic ?
-
fishu... have you been to england? the state runs everything and there are brit flags everywhere you look.. people are wearing em and they are printed on everything you see.
The government takes most of everyones money in taxes... I would say that england fits the description far more than the U.S.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Suave
No
Socialism is an economic system, fascism is a system of government. Many fascists states have had socialist economies.
Also bear in mind that facsist states often will adopt titles that have benevolent connotations. Nazi Germany was no more socialist than the DPRK is democratic, or the PRC is a republic.
Hey another defining characteristic ?
Whadda ya mean no? Why are you any more of an authority on what a socialist state is than the leaders of Nazi Germany? If you define Fascism as being other than that created by Italy then you have created your own "ism".
-
The only media controled in the U.S. is the national media and most of us would like to see tax supported radio and TV go away.
Every other country, especialy england has more government run (tax supported) media than we have. You can't even own a TV in england without paying a tax for using it.
-
Originally posted by lukster
If you define Fascism as being other than that created by Italy then you have created your own "ism".
There are a few new isms in this thread. The biggest being I]Yankedchainism[/I]
I`m amazed. Look at the source, the publication, the group for which it is for, then check out some of their other articles and views on most everything else.
The generic contents make no statement of value whatsoever.
The majority of us here are "The Debul" under their views...........of course they would give us a different label due to The Debul being associated with religion. This by a group that had to come up with religious tag, so to speak, in order to place themselves in the religious minority to self justify their whine.
It`s Felix The Cat Growling at Godzilla. :)
-
Originally posted by lazs2
fishu... have you been to england? the state runs everything and there are brit flags everywhere you look.. people are wearing em and they are printed on everything you see.
The state runs everything? That's a little bit far fetched.
I saw flags and slogans everywhere in the states, often in quite unusual places.
Like I said, there are many similarities between the both, UK and US. More of the traits fits to UK than any other country in the EU.
The government takes most of everyones money in taxes... I would say that england fits the description far more than the U.S.
The tax money is used to give free education, health care and such for the people. It's only a different philosophy, which doesn't violate anyones huoman rights.
I'd be more worried when poor people are thrown on the streets and everyone would rather see the problem taken care by getting disposed of the poor people who can't pay their share of the taxes. That would be fascism.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Whadda ya mean no? Why are you any more of an authority on what a socialist state is than the leaders of Nazi Germany?
I know that the DPRK is neither a democracy nor a republic yet I am no more of an authority of what a democracy is than anybody else. Facts don't respect authority anyway.
If you define Fascism as being other than that created by Italy then you have created your own "ism".
The subject of this thread is fascism the polical term. Not literally the ideals espoused by the various fascio movements of sicily and italy 100 years ago.
If somebody refers to you as stoic there's a very high probability they're not talking about where you lie philisophically.
Clumsy example but I hope it helps.
-
fishu... how is it "free" if the government uses your money to pay for it?
And... no one has ever been thrown out on the street in the U.S. that I know of. No one starves that I know of unless they are just insane.
If you are too stupid or lazy to care for yourself there are numerous (too numerous) government programs run with money extorted from it's citizens or... (better yet) charities that will care for people.
I don't see that many American flags around except by private citizens.
I don't see any merge of church and state. Which religion would that be that you think the U.S. supports as a government religion? How is abortion a religious matter anyway? There are plenty of agnostics and even (chuckle) athiests who do not believe that abortion is a good thing and even murder at some point.
It seems odd to me that the countries with the biggest socialist governments are worried that our government has too much power over it's people.
You claimed that in a socialist country no ones human rights are violated by "free" socialist programs. No? try to not pay your taxes commie boy and see where you end up. You have no individual rights... you think it is fine if you lose any so long as most of your neighbors all think it is a good idea.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
fishu... how is it "free" if the government uses your money to pay for it?
[/b]
You can have it even if you didn't pay enough taxes to cover your part of it.
If you want to be philosopical of the meaning of "free", then you should consider this: There's no such thing as free, everything has a cost of some kind. Either directly or indirectly.
We could go on and on about the taxes, but one thing is for sure, the current tax system in the UK isn't fascistic.
And... no one has ever been thrown out on the street in the U.S. that I know of. No one starves that I know of unless they are just insane.
[/b]
Of those who YOU know.
Anyway, I wasn't making an example of the US. I made it as an example of a facistic taxation.
I don't see that many American flags around except by private citizens.
[/b]
American flag can be seen almost anywhere and in anything in the states. It's whole lot different than over here. Over here there is an absence of anything resembling the finnish flag if nothing special is going on.
No? try to not pay your taxes commie boy and see where you end up. You have no individual rights...
If I don't have invidual rights, then how could you have any more of it than I do? Or are you saying that you don't and neither do we?
I don't know how taxing affects invidual rights. I see the rights as.. well.. human rights.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
[/b]
American flag can be seen almost anywhere and in anything in the states. It's whole lot different than over here. Over here there is an absence of anything resembling the finnish flag if nothing special is going on.
[/B]
And this would be true. But hardly and example of Fascism.
Americans by and large are a very patriotic group.
Other then during the late 60's during Nam and afterwards did overt visible signs of that patriotism wane.
During that period and immediately afterwards we. This country as a whole didn't feel very good about ourselves.
A lot of us had a "this country sucks" attitude. Quitting in Nam and seeing it overrun and ultimately controlled by the NV had a lot to do with it. Viewed by many as being defeated in Nam
We were....depressed for lack of a better term.
Then came the Iran hostage deal which raised our ire but the failed rescue attempt ended up sapping our national pride yet farther.
I think that failed attempt did more then fail there. But we felt as if all of us failed in it.
It was much deeper then a military failure.
It further eroded the national psyche
Reagan. Like him or not helped re instill our national pride again. Minor military victories also helped that damaged pride at home.
In combination of those victories His speeches about America were delivered like that of a good coach giving a pep talk to work the team up.
You see any good sporting coach while they may mention the negative they always focus on the positive. And that's what he did with lines like.
Americas best days are ahead of us" Pretty soon we started to believe that.
We weren't just people living in the America anymore. We were once again AMERICANS.
Now, why did I say that?
Because he didn't instill anything new into us. It was always there.
He just knew how to bring it out again
Because Prior to Nam. and the 70's and throughout our history we have always had a huge sense of national pride be us Democrat, Republican or otherwise and have always been unshy about displaying that pride.
Not because the government mandates it or tries to push it on us. This type of thing cant just be legislated into being or even brainwashed into us.
and neither is the case. Never has been
Because we actually feel it. We've always felt it. ITs in our blood. its in our spirit.Its in our heritage.
ITs what was meant on one of our original flags "Don't tread on me"
ITs what was felt at Fort Mc Henry when its commander Major Armistead had a HUGE American flag (30 feet by 42 feet ) specially made just so the British ships could see it could see it better. And what Francis Scott Key felt when he wrote "oh say can you see. by the Dawns Early light. what so PROUDLY we hailed. At the twilights last gleaming"
And what he felt to see that "The Flag was still there"
And it wasn't felt by just him. But in the people of the surrounding area. He simply managed to put into words perfectly what everyone already felt.
And throughout our history
ITs what was felt on 9/11 at the WTC when they raised the flag there amongst the rubble.
And the homeless man who displayed a flag outside his cardboard box that served as his home
Its what the Indian guy (who received US citizenship last year)at the local store felt when I was teasing him about "his country" (meaning india) and he turned to me with a twinkle in his eye and a broad smile on his face and said "What you mean my country? tapping his finger hard on the counter surface for emphasis and typical American "arrogence" said "This is my country. America my country Jack. I am American now."
Our national pride and display of such pride isn't mandated by our government.
And we sure as hell don't need a special occasion to display our pride.
We do so because we want to and are proud to do so. And if I have to explain it to you then you will never understand untill you become an American.
Because we ARE Americans. We understand it perfectly
We may do a lot of infighting amongst ourselves but at the end of the day no matter what political affiliation we may be. or none at all, we ARE Americans. We belong to a country that against all odds and in spite of Civil war and seemingly endless bickering amongst ourselves has endured and grown in a little more then two hundred years to be the longest running democracy and the most powerful nation on earth.
And we dont just belong to that country. we ARE that country
What are we supposed to be, Ashamed of that?
are we supposed to apologize for it?
Hell no!
To many we are arrogant.
I say damn right we are. And proud of it too
We are AMERICANS
-
Originally posted by Fishu
The tax money is used to give free education, health care and such for the people. It's only a different philosophy, which doesn't violate anyones huoman rights.
I guess stealing one man's property and giving it to another is not a crime in your country.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
I'd be more worried when poor people are thrown on the streets and everyone would rather see the problem taken care by getting disposed of the poor people who can't pay their share of the taxes. That would be fascism.
How come the poor don't pay their taxes? It's for the greater good as you said?
Why should some folks work their tulips off, and be raped by the taxman, while others lay in a gutter drink booz and ingest drugs and are worshiped for it by the commie wannabees?
You feel you have some extra cash, by all means give it away to whomever you choose, yor property your decision. Just stay away from me.
-
yep... fishu... you don't get it. mielta boiled it down. a socialist government steals one mans money and gives it to another. if the man protests he is jailed or has his property confiscated... if he resists... he will be forced with..... up to death.
"free" does not mean that you are free to steal from your fellow citizen.
No wonder there are no finnish flags being displayed.... I would be ashamed too.
lazs
-
Troll or Tool....I cant decide...
TJ
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
And this would be true. But hardly and example of Fascism.
Americans by and large are a very patriotic group.
Other then during the late 60's during Nam and afterwards did overt visible signs of that patriotism wane.
During that period and immediately afterwards we. This country as a whole didn't feel very good about ourselves.
A lot of us had a "this country sucks" attitude. Quitting in Nam and seeing it overrun and ultimately controlled by the NV had a lot to do with it. Viewed by many as being defeated in Nam
We were....depressed for lack of a better term.
Then came the Iran hostage deal which raised our ire but the failed rescue attempt ended up sapping our national pride yet farther.
I think that failed attempt did more then fail there. But we felt as if all of us failed in it.
It was much deeper then a military failure.
It further eroded the national psyche
Reagan. Like him or not helped re instill our national pride again. Minor military victories also helped that damaged pride at home.
In combination of those victories His speeches about America were delivered like that of a good coach giving a pep talk to work the team up.
You see any good sporting coach while they may mention the negative they always focus on the positive. And that's what he did with lines like.
Americas best days are ahead of us" Pretty soon we started to believe that.
We weren't just people living in the America anymore. We were once again AMERICANS.
Now, why did I say that?
Because he didn't instill anything new into us. It was always there.
He just knew how to bring it out again
Because Prior to Nam. and the 70's and throughout our history we have always had a huge sense of national pride be us Democrat, Republican or otherwise and have always been unshy about displaying that pride.
Not because the government mandates it or tries to push it on us. This type of thing cant just be legislated into being or even brainwashed into us.
and neither is the case. Never has been
Because we actually feel it. We've always felt it. ITs in our blood. its in our spirit.Its in our heritage.
ITs what was meant on one of our original flags "Don't tread on me"
ITs what was felt at Fort Mc Henry when its commander Major Armistead had a HUGE American flag (30 feet by 42 feet ) specially made just so the British ships could see it could see it better. And what Francis Scott Key felt when he wrote "oh say can you see. by the Dawns Early light. what so PROUDLY we hailed. At the twilights last gleaming"
And what he felt to see that "The Flag was still there"
And it wasn't felt by just him. But in the people of the surrounding area. He simply managed to put into words perfectly what everyone already felt.
And throughout our history
ITs what was felt on 9/11 at the WTC when they raised the flag there amongst the rubble.
And the homeless man who displayed a flag outside his cardboard box that served as his home
Its what the Indian guy (who received US citizenship last year)at the local store felt when I was teasing him about "his country" (meaning india) and he turned to me with a twinkle in his eye and a broad smile on his face and said "What you mean my country? tapping his finger hard on the counter surface for emphasis and typical American "arrogence" said "This is my country. America my country Jack. I am American now."
Our national pride and display of such pride isn't mandated by our government.
And we sure as hell don't need a special occasion to display our pride.
We do so because we want to and are proud to do so. And if I have to explain it to you then you will never understand untill you become an American.
Because we ARE Americans. We understand it perfectly
We may do a lot of infighting amongst ourselves but at the end of the day no matter what political affiliation we may be. or none at all, we ARE Americans. We belong to a country that against all odds and in spite of Civil war and seemingly endless bickering amongst ourselves has endured and grown in a little more then two hundred years to be the longest running democracy and the most powerful nation on earth.
And we dont just belong to that country. we ARE that country
What are we supposed to be, Ashamed of that?
are we supposed to apologize for it?
Hell no!
To many we are arrogant.
I say damn right we are. And proud of it too
We are AMERICANS
:aok
Sometimes you can come out with a real crowd pleaser. :)
Only two things I see differently is about the Nam era and the Iran situation.. At least in my area people became more aware of what was going on and the fact that bureaucratic BS was hindering our troops. Our troops in Nam were Kickin butt, taking names. The problem was they were being held back and used as pawns in a lot of cases. It got more people involved in what was being done in our country in general. In my area if you had been caught disrepecting a returning member of the armed forces you wouldn`t have had a pleasant day.
After the botched attempt in Iran and the bureaucratic shuffle , people had just about enough of the BS. The little big eared man from TX told the gov to go to hell in such a nice way that they looked forward to the trip. :)
The problem was solved by Americans. Americans stick togetherwhen things get realy tough when it comes to other Americans...even if it means tell old gov to kiss your backside. Hope we never lose that. If we do , we`re done. Stick a fork in us.
American pride and having pride in the fact that you are American is the glue that binds this country.
Without patriotism a country is a bunch of loose pebbels in a can that can be rattled and thrown around at will. With patriotism a country becomes solid rock and a force to reckoned with.
Proud to be an American. :aok
-
Originally posted by lazs2
yep... fishu... you don't get it. mielta boiled it down. a socialist government steals one mans money and gives it to another. if the man protests he is jailed or has his property confiscated... if he resists... he will be forced with..... up to death.
hmm, sounds pretty similar to the US, just with a different tax rate.
-
Funked you have become such a tool. :aok
-
BTW... the article is a lie. Not a single thing listed "defines" fascism.
A better title would have been "14 reasons I think the bush regime is a bunch of fascists!".
-
Originally posted by mietla
I guess stealing one man's property and giving it to another is not a crime in your country.
Don't take the high road, it's not a crime in the US either.
People are getting very confused here. It's natural for people who do little or no research themselves. So I'll clear it up. Yet even though I'm going to make it brutally simple, you're still going to argue about it. Just know right now that you're wrong, it will make things a lot simpler.
Fascism is a means of reaching Totalitarianism. The purpose of Fascism is to gain so much power that the leaders are the people who decide on everything.
Socialism is a means of reaching Communism. Communism is the thought that the group is more important then the individual. The defining characteristics of Socialism is that the whole assumes that the individual does not know what is best for them, so individual choice is legislated away. Along with individual choice is individual property.
When you analyze the issue, you'll realized that one is the other, but in a broader sense. Just know that in the world, Communism has never existed. Everytime socialism has been kicked in, it has turned to Totalitarianism because the people in charge have made power grabs.
Anyway, Fascism is the means of taking power away from the individual and giving it to someone higher. Socialism is the means of taking away power from the individual and giving it to something higher, often an group of people who "Act" on behalf of the whole. Yet everytime Socialism has been practiced it has led to Totalitarianism.
Communism is a child's ideal of a perfect world. Much like a child, those who believe in Communism are not in grip with the reality of the world.
-
yep fishu... you are of course correct.. the U.S. is just like your socialist hell except for the degree.
It is like.... my home is just like the desert in that it gets hot here... the difference is in degree.... when it is 120 in the desert it is 90 here. I prefer to live here even tho both are hot tho.
lazs