14 Fascist Characteristics

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-05-25 05:01pm

See the full article at http://secularhumanism.org/library/fi/britt_23_2.htm

Originally published in Free Inquiry magazine.

My agreement with this article is well known.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-25 05:07pm

That's the problem with being a conservative/libertarian secular humanist. This kind of shit is awfully off-putting.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-05-25 05:28pm

Being conservative is one thing...but that doesnt mean you have to agree with fascism or hold allegience to the party.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-25 05:34pm

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Being conservative is one thing...but that doesnt mean you have to agree with fascism or hold allegience to the party.

It doesn't mean I have to recognize a description of fascism that is 1) fictional and 2) designed to smear my country as anything other than crap.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-05-25 05:45pm

Ho is it fictional?

It isnt smearing the US, but rather the Policy of the US government. There is a difference.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-25 06:05pm

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Ho is it fictional?

It isnt smearing the US, but rather the Policy of the US government. There is a difference.

Read Marina's post.

And it most certainly is smearing America (equating traditional American patriotism with Nazism is just sick).

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-05-25 06:15pm

the surge of nationalism as of late is not traditional patriotism.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-05-25 06:18pm

Upon reading marinas post...point conceeded. Thugh I do not agree with the actions of the current regime any more.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-25 06:24pm

No worries. I have my problems with the current administration but the leftist wanking isn't valid.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-05-25 06:30pm

I like my leftist wanking

Darth Gojira · Post by **Darth Gojira** » 2003-05-26 07:14am

I knew mudslinging would commence as soon as this was posted.

Ah well, back to the other forums.

Lord Sander · Post by **Lord Sander** » 2003-05-26 07:40am

Darth Gojira wrote:I knew mudslinging would commence as soon as this was posted. Ah well, back to the other forums.

But.. that's the fun!

Sriad · Post by **Sriad** » 2003-05-29 07:26am

A few caveats with the Dutchess:

Confusion of nationalism with fascist slogans. Fascist regimes created new ideologies seperate from nationalism, replete with completely new slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Look at Nazi Germany and tell if you see much that harkens back to the nationalism of the Second Reich - There wasn't much there at all. That nationalism had been subsumed and replaced by something else, and that something else was fascist ideology. The two are entirely different things blatantly clear. The Horst Wessel Lied was not Deutschland Uber Alles.

There's a whole lot of talk about revenge posing as patriotism these days and not a lot of talk about the inherent worth and dignity of human beings. Why would the neo-conservatives go to the trouble of designing a new flag when the old one carries so much weight among the credulous and is so easily co-opted? New slogans? We got those. New songs? Jesus, have you listened to Country any time in the last two years? Well, maybe not, but that's where you'll find the evidence.

Fascist regimes, to the contrary, usually promote human rights - for a particular group. What they do is define people who are not in that group, and are not worthy of normal rights and protections. This has not been done in the USA. Actions against non-citizens have in general been applied regardless of ethnic origin, and have not been matched by similiar actions against citizens of the same ethnic origin. This example cannot apply and does, besides, show its origin in fascism.

Excuse me for a moment: I can't believe you wrote that!!! Could you possibly be any more fucking dense?! Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick! Ahem. That is EXACTLY what disdain for human rights means: advancing a chosen group over the non-chosen groups.
Now. re: Your actual comments on this point, human rights are being ignored. This is happening most blatently to aliens accused of terrorism, but it is also happening to ME, because of crap like the Patriot act, reshaping the Constitution with nearly as much subtlty as a blow torch. The actions in question are deprivation of human rights based on philosophy, which is about as un-American as you can get.

Your reaction to point three just doesn't make any sense.

4: Okay, granted.

One should note that fascist regimes have generally come to power in eras in which government was male-dominated anyway, and that the Argentinan fascist government was heavily influenced by a woman, Evita Peron, who exercised a lot of influence on government for the era in which she lived.

Also, is this really meant as a critique of the US government? There are more Cabinet-level women in Bush's government than in Clinton's, and Cheney's daughter is a lesbian, even if that has been sadly negated. If it is, then it is a rather pathetic attempt at comparison.

Ahem: "Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy." What exactly does Cheney's lesbian daughter have to do with national policy? I don't know either, but I'd hazzard a guess of "not much."
The anti-abortion camp seems to have renewed vigor. Anti-gay sentiment seems to be at about even keel to me, but Santorum's recent comments seem to have slipped from the national conciousness already. Gay rights certainly aren't speeding up.

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.

Okay. Don't see anything to complain about here - I also don't see any comparison.

Clear Channel. Ted Turner. Fox News. Any of these names ringing a bell? AOL-Time-Warner-godknowswhat. You have a choice in what station you tune into, but there isn't a choice regarding what you hear. Is there proportionate representation of dissenting view points? Where?

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

It is also was by Communist governments, who mobilized the Proletariat to fight the forces of "Reaction." This will be relevant shortly.

I actually can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing here. So this is where I'll stop typing, just because it is late enough that most normal people would call it early. I will, of course, blame any stupid mistakes I've made on that.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-29 09:37am

There's a whole lot of talk about revenge posing as patriotism these days and not a lot of talk about the inherent worth and dignity of human beings. Why would the neo-conservatives go to the trouble of designing a new flag when the old one carries so much weight among the credulous and is so easily co-opted? New slogans? We got those. New songs? Jesus, have you listened to Country any time in the last two years? Well, maybe not, but that's where you'll find the evidence.

There is still a very important distinction to be had between good old fashioned patriotism and fascist sloganeering. Fascist slonganeering is racist, carries a sense of entitlement, and tends to unite the people agaisnt a common scapegoat (and PLEASE do not call terrorism a scapegoats, scapegoats do not kill 3,000 people mercilessly). To claim that extreme nationalism is somehow uniquely fascist is ridiculous.

And spare me the crap about the inherent worth and dignity of human beings. If you can find one country in the history of the world that has taken as much care to minimize civilian casualties while in war as the U.S. has done in Afghanistan and Iraq, then we can talk about not giving a shit about people.

Excuse me for a moment: I can't believe you wrote that!!! Could you possibly be any more fucking dense?! Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick! Ahem. That is EXACTLY what disdain for human rights means: advancing a chosen group over the non-chosen groups.

Well, that doesn't make sense. You chastise her and then you admit that her position is correct.

Now. re: Your actual comments on this point, human rights are being ignored. This is happening most blatently to aliens accused of terrorism, but it is also happening to ME, because of crap like the Patriot act, reshaping the Constitution with nearly as much subtlty as a blow torch. The actions in question are deprivation of human rights based on philosophy, which is about as un-American as you can get.

It is true that some minority groups have been hit a little harder by the Patriot Act than others, but the analogy with fascism still really doesn't pan out, because no ethnic group is really being promoted at the expense of all other groups. There is absolutely no rhetoric even resembling the Hitlerian superiority mantra coming from our leaders.

Ahem: "Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy."

Animal rights legislation is also common in fascism (Nazism specifically), but I guess that didn't fit in with this shill's blatant attempt to lump in the fascists with Americans.

The anti-abortion camp seems to have renewed vigor. Anti-gay sentiment seems to be at about even keel to me, but Santorum's recent comments seem to have slipped from the national conciousness already. Gay rights certainly aren't speeding up.

Isn't it a good thing that no one gives a shit what Santorum has to say about gays? Dick Cheney, by the way, is the first national ticket candidate in American history to have endorsed homosexual marriage.

Clear Channel. Ted Turner. Fox News. Any of these names ringing a bell? AOL-Time-Warner-godknowswhat. You have a choice in what station you tune into, but there isn't a choice regarding what you hear. Is there proportionate representation of dissenting view points? Where?

Have you ever heard of network news? Print? Online publications? PBS? The blogosphere? There are dissenting viewpoints to be had everywhere; print especially.

Post by **NecronLord** » 2003-05-29 01:56pm

Durran Korr wrote:(and PLEASE do not call terrorism a scapegoats, scapegoats do not kill 3,000 people mercilessly).

From their prespective it was revenge for the people that US foreign policy has killed. Or do you think they got up in the morning and thought "I'm gonna kill some yankeez!"

And spare me the crap about the inherent worth and dignity of human beings. If you can find one country in the history of the world that has taken as much care to minimize civilian casualties while in war as the U.S. has done in Afghanistan and Iraq, then we can talk about not giving a shit about people.

Just for fun:

Britain, same wars, caused less civillian casualties even relative to the size of force. Also managed to avoid half as many 'friendly' fire incidents.

That said, your point is invalid. No other nation has had tha ability to. Thus it doesn't matter re their respect for life.

_______________________

And I wish these dumbasses would get the real definition of fascism right: http://www.constitution.org/tyr/mussolini.txt

As for lack of arts funding. Excuse me while I laugh my head off.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-29 03:20pm

From their prespective it was revenge for the people that US foreign policy has killed. Or do you think they got up in the morning and thought "I'm gonna kill some yankeez!"

Your point here would be stronger if the 9/11 hijackers were angry Iraqis, angry Serbs, or even German Nazi holdouts still mad at America for the defeat of the Third Reich (anyone who had actually experienced harm from U.S. foreign policy, basically). But they weren't; they were rich, spoiled brats from Saudi Arabia and Egypt who had never been done any harm by America (America has invested quite a bit into defending Saudi Arabia in the past, in fact). No one has a worse case for attacking America than these folks; hell, if retaliation for the people that US foreign policy has killed is the sine qua non of Islamic terrorism, than we should be getting attacked on all sides by Iraqis, Afghanis, the PLO, Hamas, anyone who has experienced harm from American foreign policy. They're attacking us because they hate the West, they hate women who aren't wearing burqas, and they want us dead.

Britain, same wars, caused less civillian casualties even relative to the size of force. Also managed to avoid half as many 'friendly' fire incidents.

That said, your point is invalid. No other nation has had tha ability to. Thus it doesn't matter re their respect for life.

Point taken; that does not alter the fact that the U.S. is certainly not careless about the inherent value of human beings.