while the republitards scream socialism...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by slurper_la, Sep 13, 2009.

  1. slurper_la

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    Messages:
    5,354
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    713
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Los Angeles (CA, US)
  2. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    Fascinating read.
     
  3. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    I read it twice. Despite the alarmist subject matter, the actual tone is straightforward and clear. It also does a very good job of restating the actual definition of Fascism as it was understood by everybody before Coulter, Goldberg and Limbaugh twisted it to all holy hell.

    Words are extremely precise things when used by people of intelligence and reflection, and it's good to read an American author who hasn't dumbed her approach down to talk radio levels.
     
  4. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    I've been warning of this since the Patriot Act. Time and again people laughed or outright dismissed such an idea. Socialism! Communism! They're the threats we're under now (supposedly), yet all I have seen when holding the US to a mirror is the Weimar. We're not terribly far from using scrip as heating and cooking fuel either.

    I've got to get a copy of The Eliminationists.

    It is so disturbing to me, a complete nobody who never even graduated college, that my views are being echoed by people who should know what they're talking about. I kinda hoped I was alone because I know I'll be one of the people they'll come for while my parents will be part of the Fascist movement. God, I'll be just like Sam Lowry in Gilliam's Brazil!
     
  5. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    Re-read the Second Amendment, and take solace in the knowledge that you are most definitely not alone. :wink:
     
  6. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    That won't get me very far though I do live in New York so when and if things fall apart I expect I'll be in one of the countries that will side with the sane.
     
  7. Bodaddio

    Bodaddio Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    what Roger Griffin calls &#8220;palingenesis&#8221; Doesn't that make you giggle a little?

    Cheers
     
  8. Bodaddio

    Bodaddio Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    So call me stupid or ignorant or what not. What makes this website and this essay any better than any other out there?
    Why is this one that pretty much says, republicans bad, democrats good more true, than an essay or website that says democrats bad, republicans good?
    I know it is a little off topic, but really, what makes a group/website one to look to for information?
    I read this essay and think to myself, if I put the work democrat in there it says the same thing. For every crazy they state on the right, the left has one just as bad.
    I thought this essay was well written until it stooped to the level of everyone else and called it the Teabag Movement. Why is it OK to be childish in society today? Again why is Pat Buchanan actually making some sense today?

    Cheers
     
  9. Penis Aficionado

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2007
    Messages:
    2,135
    Likes Received:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
    Persuasive thesis, but this statement stopped me in my tracks: "And these days, GOP-sanctioned anti-immigrant groups make life hell for Hispanic agricultural workers in the US."

    I'm no Minuteman, but there's a massive difference between "anti-immigrant" and "anti-illegal immigration." I question the motives of people who cannot recognize the distinction. I've spent enough time in academia to know plenty of people who believe that the influence of Western Civilization on America is essentially an evil influence -- and their remedy is a huge influx of people from the Third World.

    I believe this writer is one of those people.
     
  10. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    :rolleyes:

    Surely you aren't naive enough to believe these self-appointed militants are checking greencards before harassing immigrants, do you? It's the very next sentence following your quote, for fuck's sake:

     
  11. Penis Aficionado

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2007
    Messages:
    2,135
    Likes Received:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
    "self-appointed militants," no, probably not. But that's a tiny fraction of the people who make up the anti-illegal immigration movement, or the resurgent conservative movement in general. Those people couldn't take over a city block, let alone the entire country.

    In fact the more I think about that article the more I call bullshit. Rightwingers and teabaggers are not the only people in this country that are armed and ready to throw down. For one thing, we already have violence-prone, authoritarian uniformed forces patrolling the streets dedicated to order and traditional values. They're called "the police." They're also diehard unionists who, in every large city in the country, work for pro-immigrant, pro-business, pro-taxation local governments. Somehow I fail to see them being overwhelmed by overzealous members of the teabag movement, most of whom are not militants or even the least bit tough, but instead are the former members of your college or university's "Objectivist Study Group," a few years down the road.
     
  12. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    The author of the article, Sara Robinson, is a candidate for a master's degree in future studies and a bachelor's degree in journalism. She currently works for a liberal PAC, Campaign for America's Future. The founders of CAF are primarily academics (Robert Paxton is not one of them) and union leaders. Board members include Robert Reich and Warren Beatty. Funding is private but if the board members are any clue, many of them also sit on boards of philanthropic trusts which lean left. Some of the people employed have worked for various George Soros-sponsored organizations so it's a fairly safe bet he's contributing to this too. The site focuses heavily on supporting Democratic party initiatives that lean more to the liberal side of the political spectrum and seem very interested in supporting Van Jones. The CAF do run an allegedly non-partisan think tank, The Institute for America's Future. The CAF is run by this guy, Robert Borosage.

    The source document, Five Stages of Fascism, was written by Robert Paxton. It was published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Modern History published by The University of Chicago. The JOMH rather brazenly claims, "The Journal of Modern History is recognized as the leading American journal for the study of European intellectual, political, and cultural history." The fact is, however, they do have an esteemed editorial staff and the JOMH is highly respected.

    Robert Paxton, currently a professor emeritus at Columbia, is a heavyweight in his field. He's ridiculously over-educated. He was a Rhodes Scholar, earned an MA from Oxford, earned a PhD in history from Harvard, and his BA is from Washington and Lee. He's the expert on Vichy France and his work has been so respected that France has awarded him a Legion of Honor, their highest award.

    What you now have to do is weigh the article. Is Ms. Robinson reasonably weighing America's political right with the specter of fascism? She has quoted sources and drawn parallels which appear to agree with the facts she has sourced. Given her employer, however, one has to wonder if her article isn't biased in favor of her employer's very public policies. What you have to do is look at her claims and look for counter-claims. Has she misquoted or misrepresented her facts or quotes? Has she made any errors in logic? Has she drawn conclusions which cannot be logically and reasonably derived from her sources?

    That job is up to you and when you do so you can then go through the exact same process with your sources. At that point you can decide whether the article is accurate or not.

    The last two questions I cannot answer. Sometimes it rains frogs too.
     
    #12 jason_els, Sep 14, 2009
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2009
  13. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    The SPLC compared the statistics of the FBI and found that anti-Hispanic hate crimes have risen 33% between 2003 and 2006. This is interesting because according to the FBI, 61% of all hate crimes are directed toward Hispanics. The figures for 2007 show a rise of a few percentage points in anti-Hispanic violence. The FBI and SPLC are careful to note that this violence was directed against legal and illegal immigrants, US citizens and legal temporary workers. Most crimes were reported in California and other western states.

    One has to be careful with hate crime data. Some victims, as a group, are less likely to report hate crimes than others. Some jurisdictions are less likely to classify a crime as a hate crime than others and in some cases, the motivations of the criminals are not entirely clear. Whether there actually are more crimes or a change in the number of crimes reported or in how the crimes are classified by law enforcement impact hate crime statistics.
     
  14. Qua

    Qua
    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,507
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm sorry, but at this point an assessment of American politics so blatantly partisan and one-sided such that it pleases one faction and disgusts the other cannot be taken seriously.

    As someone in the thick of the ivory tower and all the academic bullshit that resides here, I can tell you with some confidence that no one studying a topic as ill-defined and open to personal aims as "future studies," particularly on a non-Ph.D level and especially being so blindly partisan would be given too much thought in peer-reviewed academic circles. Which isn't her aim. Academic credibility is not the goal, it's rallying towards her left-wing sympathizing PAC. Which should tell you everything you need to know.

    The article was interesting, and well-written, and brought up some good points. But it outstepped its logical grounding almost before it started.
     
  15. SilverTrain

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    4,582
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    404
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    I'd be interested to hear with which of her assertions you disagree.
     
  16. mynameisnobody

    mynameisnobody New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    CT, USA
    Well, isn't that convenient.

    Include in your definition of "fascism" the fact that historical fascism considered "liberal" forms of government and society to be enemies, and you're all set. Volia, anyone who criticizes modern "liberals" must be a fascist. Pat yourself on the back. Rinse and repeat.

    But it's self-serving twaddle of the sort you'd expect to see on Alternet. For a decent modern article on fascism, skip this childish rubbish; see David Ramsay Steele's The Mystery of Fascism. Be warned, it's heavier wading than Robinson's effort.

    Opposition to contemporary liberalism was, indeed, one of the salient characteristics of the fascisms which came to prominence after WW1. So far, so good. In fact, it's one of the few characteristics which all the fascist variants shared. But it was also shared by the Bolsheviks (soon to rename themselves Communists) and the few remaining monarchists. So for purposes of identifying fascists, it's essentially useless. All we can really say for certain is that in those days, everybody except liberals was opposed to liberalism.

    And now for the second, and much bigger, problem. What was "liberalism"? When Hitler, Mussolini, Trotsky, or Stalin railed about it, they meant any government which was not based on central control of the national economy, as well as central control of damn near everything else. That was the only important characteristic of "liberalism" so far as they were concerned. The most important part of that was voting and anything resembling universal suffrage. They didn't think it appropriate for anyone aside from themselves to have their fingers in government, gumming up the works. When they spoke of "liberalism" they did not mean policy details about tariffs, immigration, the gold standard, the silver standard, price controls, retirement plans, blah blah. They meant it as shorthand for all non-totalitarian governments.

    So there is the fundamental logical trap of the article. The appeal is obvious - (i) fascists hated (hate) liberalism, (ii) we're good liberals, (iii) therefore fascists hate us (and, we will assume, they hate us for the best of reasons, our liberalism), and (iv) we conclude that those who hate us are fascists. Q.E.D.

    Since most people haven't the slightest idea what a "fascist" is, they will doubtless find this reasoning convincing.

    The really bad news is that to the extent that modern "liberalsim" (whatever that is) resembles "progressivism" of the pre-WW1 era (and the modern attempt to rename "liberals" as "progressives" is ominous), to that extent it is fascism, of the Italian variant, or as close to it as is legally possible. The Progressives of the 1920s admired Mussolini a great deal. They lost their enchantment only after his invasion of Libya and, shortly after, Abyssinia. American Progressives weren't quite as fond of Hitler, although TIME announced him "Man of the Year" at least three times.
     
  17. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    That's why I don't even use the word when debating.
    When it comes to American Politics, both sides of the coin think it's evil and do all they can to make comparisons to the other to make it seem as if they are closer to it than themselves. The article in the OP is an interesting read, though. One that actually stretches out the brain instead of contract it.
     
  18. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    I have neither the time nor inclination to go through your rather long post point-by-point, and will leave most of it to someone with more than an armchair knowledge of Classical Liberalism and the Great Revolutions of 1848-9 that swept much of Europe.

    But in decrying the conflation of contemporary understandings and historical realities, you've slipped into a pile of mud yourself.

    Time magazine in the 1920s and 30s was hardly a lefty publication. It was founded by Henry Luce, who was a virulent anti-communist. According to his Wikipedia bio:

    Suggesting that Luce was anything other than conservative would be like attempting to do the same of Henry Ford or Charles Lindbergh, both of whom were American Nazi sympathizers as well.
     
    #18 Bbucko, Sep 14, 2009
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2009
  19. B_24065

    B_24065 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    1
    What a laughable pile of liberal retard bullshit. OMG this is worse than 9/11 truther bullshit. I love the strategy though...create a narrative in such a way so that anyone opposed to collectivism, multi-cultural homoginization, egalitarianism, borderless borders, redistribution of wealth, big gov't, etc., ect., is a FASCIST. This article is rediculous and intellectually offensive. This is the kind of propoganda that appeals to idiots; ignorant, uneducated idiots. Thats why im surprised at some of you on here (whose opinions i respect) who seem to go along with this horseshit.

    There were comparable groups to the KKK on the left (black panthers,etc.)

    There were comparable movments to the Tea party movements(which by the way is a grass roots movment of Dems, Repubs, and Indys who are opposed to big govmt and fiscal irresponsiblity, and in no way display any orgainized push toward anything that even closely resembles fascism) during the Reagan and both Bush administrations (million man march {which was self-admittedly nationalist}, code pink, etc).

    And here we are in a position where the left controls all three branches of the fed and we are somehow on the brink a right-wing fascism?

    This is an example of rediculous, selective, revisionist history and analysis.
     
  20. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,369
    Likes Received:
    2,099
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    A great, concise description of republicans:

    the entire Republican party now openly defines itself along these lines. At this late stage, it’s blatantly racist, sexist, repressed, exclusionary, and permanently addicted to the politics of fear and rage. Worse: it doesn’t have a moment’s shame about any of it. No apologies, to anyone.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted