Fascism

[Kenny]

I was reading the OP on the Robert E Lee Memorial when I saw this signature for @tytlyf which says "When Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."

The word "fascist" has been thrown around a lot until, perhaps, people don't even know what it really means.

I then looked up the word fascist in the Encyclopedia Britannica and found:

fascism

Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation.

Interestingly, I didn't find anything about "carrying a cross", didn't find that "nationalism" isn't bad just the extreme nationalism (I think that makes a difference IMO), found contempt for "electoral democracy, and "cultural liberalism" as well as the rule elites and the elimination of individual interests.

Of course, I also wondered "why the cross" if it isn't in the definition although there may be a good reason. Perhaps the extreme KKK?

I assume that "fascism" could actually come out of either of the two current parties in the US since, one one side, socialism seems to be an impetus and extreme militaristic nationalism on the other.

Your thoughts?

EDITED

 

[Left Coast]

Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism,

Repubs definitely take the cake here.

contempt for electoral democracy

Repubs

and political and cultural liberalism,

Repubs

a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites,

Dems can definitely be this way, but Repubs do it in spades.

Of course, I also wondered "why the cross" if it isn't in the definition although there may be a good reason. Perhaps the extreme KKK?

Fascism doesn't have to be Christian per se, but in the West it has tended to be Christian-flavored historically.

 

[Kenny]

Repubs definitely take the cake here.



Repubs



Repubs



Dems can definitely be this way, but Repubs do it in spades.



Fascism doesn't have to be Christian per se, but in the West it has tended to be Christian-flavored historically.

Actually, it is the Democrats who are pushing the effort of no democratic electoral college.

I also noticed you never state why you have those points.

 

[Left Coast]

Actually, it is the Democrats who are pushing the effort of no democratic electoral college.

The electoral college is UNdemocratic. It's the reason why our current President won the election despite earning fewer votes (which is definitionally undemocratic).

I also noticed you never state why you have those points.

Which would you dispute?

 

[Kenny]

The electoral college is UNdemocratic. It's the reason why our current President won the election despite earning fewer votes (which is definitionally undemocratic).

I find it very democratic as it is a Democratic Republic. It gives a voice to the smallest of states.

Which would you dispute?

Wouldn't know since I don't know what points you have to support your position. Who knows? Maybe your points would be valid.

 

[Left Coast]

I find it very democratic as it is a Democratic Republic. It gives a voice to the smallest of states.

A democratic election gives equal voice to all people, regardless of where they live. One person, one vote, period. Why should your address give your vote more weight than someone who lives somewhere else? That's definitionally undemocratic.

Wouldn't know since I don't know what points you have to support your position. Who knows? Maybe your points would be valid.

Would you say the Democratic or Republican Party is more militaristic?

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Repubs definitely take the cake here.



Repubs



Repubs



Dems can definitely be this way, but Repubs do it in spades.



Fascism doesn't have to be Christian per se, but in the West it has tended to be Christian-flavored historically.

^^ This, for the most part.

Although I would question this part in its response to;

“a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites”...


Dems can definitely be this way, but Repubs do it in spades.

The ‘rule by the elites’ as some kind of Democratic leaning is hogwash staight from Rush Limbaugh’s ***.
Unfortunately, it has been taken up by US culture, (obviously more so by the right) that Democrats are “latte-sipping elitist scum”.
No. The kids sipping lattes in Starbucks shops are desperate (and sometimes very intelligent) college students, earnestly looking to improve the world (and make a buck in the process if they can).
The real elites are the corporate millionaires and billionaires who fund the Republicans to make laws favoring them along with greater police power to protect the rich.
[side note: Yes, Dems take money from the rich too. Why? Because the rich are wise enough to hedge their bets. Duh. But it doesn’t even come close. Thank you Citizens United. ]


And as far as “natural social hierarchy”. WTF?? No that is the right/KKK. It is why Dems lost the south decades ago. Because Dems do not believe in such racist drivel.

 

[Left Coast]

^^ This, for the most part.

Although I would question this part in its response to;
The ‘rule by the elites’ as some kind of Democratic leaning is hogwash staight from Rush Limbaugh’s ***.
Unfortunately, it has been taken up by US culture, (obviously more so by the right) that Democrats are “latte-sipping elitist scum”.
No. The kids sipping lattes in Starbucks shops are desperate (and sometimes very intelligent) college students, earnestly looking to improve the world (and make a buck in the process if they can).
The real elites are the corporate millionaires and billionaires who fund the Republicans to make laws favoring them along with greater police power to protect the rich.
[side note: Yes, Dems take money from the rich too. Why? Because the rich are wise enough to hedge their bets. Duh. But it doesn’t even come close. Thank you Citizens United. ]


And as far as “natural social hierarchy”. WTF?? No that is the right/KKK. It is why Dems lost the south decades ago. Because Dems do not believe in such racist drivel.

My assessment that Dems can be elitist wasn't cultural, but based on the reality you noted that Dem politicians in particular can be just as beholden to rich/corporate donors, and oppose populism. I would agree Repubs are definitely worse in that regard, but we cant pretend Dems don't partake in that corruption. They do, particularly the more conservative/centrist folks in power in the party.

 

[Stevicus]

I was reading the OP on the Robert E Lee Memorial when I saw this signature for @tytlyf which says "When Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."

The word "fascist" has been thrown around a lot until, perhaps, people don't even know what it really means.

I then looked up the word fascist in the Encyclopedia Britannica and found:

fascism

Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation.

Interestingly, I didn't find anything about "carrying a cross", didn't find that "nationalism" isn't bad just the extreme nationalism (I think that makes a difference IMO), found contempt for "electoral democracy, and "cultural liberalism" as well as the rule elites and the elimination of individual interests.

Of course, I also wondered "why the cross" if it isn't in the definition although there may be a good reason. Perhaps the extreme KKK?

I assume that "fascism" could actually come out of either of the two current parties in the US since, one one side, socialism seems to be an impetus and extreme militaristic nationalism on the other.

Your thoughts?

EDITED

"Fascism" would have to have elements of nationalism or extreme patriotism, although it also entails extreme rigidity and authoritarianistic enforcement of rules, however minor or petty.

For example, if someone is going 1 mph over the speed limit, a non-fascist would think "Well, no harm no foul. Nobody has been harmed, so let it go." A fascist thinks differently. A fascist believes "The law is the law. He broke the law and deserves to be punished."

 

[Daemon Sophic]

My assessment that Dems can be elitist wasn't cultural, but based on the reality you noted that Dem politicians in particular can be just as beholden to rich/corporate donors, and oppose populism. I would agree Repubs are definitely worse in that regard, but we cant pretend Dems don't partake in that corruption. They do, particularly the more conservative/centrist folks in power in the party.

 

[Polymath257]

Actually, it is the Democrats who are pushing the effort of no democratic electoral college.

I also noticed you never state why you have those points.

And that is because the EC is NOT democratic. It wasn't designed to be (the goal was a republic, not a democracy). In place of the EC, the Dems want to have *direct* election of the President. And that *is* democratic.

Remember that senators were originally not elected directly, but were appointed by the state legislatures. It was only much later that democratic election of senators was instituted.

The original goal of the EC was, similarly, to *prevent* democratic election of the President by putting a barrier between the voters and the actual people who elected the President. The idea was that it was supposed to reign in the excesses of the voters. It has failed in that goal.

 

[tytlyf]

Actually, it is the Democrats who are pushing the effort of no democratic electoral college.

I also noticed you never state why you have those points.

Correct, because it's from a time of injustice and inequality. I prefer 1 vote = 1 vote.
The republican elitists only support the electoral college because it's the only way they can win.

 

[Tambourine]

Fascism isn't really a fixed ideology in the sense that, say Marxism-Leninism is, as it never developed a singular vision of society and was implemented with considerable variation across very different countries throughout history. It's not even clear how to define Fascism, as while its heyday was definitely in the 1920s and 1930s, many authoritarian regimes and nationalist-extremist movements after WW2 heavily borrowed ideas, rhetoric, aesthetics and political methods from Fascist regimes and intellectuals associated with Fascist organisations or movements.

One could even argue that for Fascists, consistency with any particular ideology is secondary to a general political aesthetic or rhetoric.

 

[Tambourine]

In his essay "Eternal Fascism", Italian writer Umberto Eco characterizes Fascism as a particular set of rhetoric or political aesthetic, which typically employs some (or all) of these elements (paraphrased by me):

1. A cult of tradition.
2. Rejection of modernism.
3. The cult of action for action’s sake.
4. Disagreement is treason.
5. Fear of difference - racism.
6. Appeal to individual or social frustration (specifically, the frustrations of the middle class)
7. An obsession with plots or conspiracies.
8. The enemy is, at the same time, overwhelmingly strong, and too weak to be effective.
9. Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. Life is struggle.
10. Contempt for the weak and the poor.
11. A cult of heroism, specifically military heroism.
12. Machismo, and an obsession with weaponry.
13. Qualified or selective populism - only a selected group of citizens are seen as "the people".
14. Newspeak and/or an impoverished vocabulary.

(Source: Eco, Eternal Fascism)

It's probably not a definitive definition of Fascism - and also not meant to be - but I think it is helpful to look at these points to get a feeling how fascists operate and what their most common rhetoric looks like.

 

[fantome profane]

I was reading the OP on the Robert E Lee Memorial when I saw this signature for @tytlyf which says "When Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."

The word "fascist" has been thrown around a lot until, perhaps, people don't even know what it really means.

I then looked up the word fascist in the Encyclopedia Britannica and found:

fascism

Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation.

Interestingly, I didn't find anything about "carrying a cross", didn't find that "nationalism" isn't bad just the extreme nationalism (I think that makes a difference IMO), found contempt for "electoral democracy, and "cultural liberalism" as well as the rule elites and the elimination of individual interests.

Of course, I also wondered "why the cross" if it isn't in the definition although there may be a good reason. Perhaps the extreme KKK?

I assume that "fascism" could actually come out of either of the two current parties in the US since, one one side, socialism seems to be an impetus and extreme militaristic nationalism on the other.

Your thoughts?

EDITED

 

[Kenny]

A democratic election gives equal voice to all people, regardless of where they live. One person, one vote, period. Why should your address give your vote more weight than someone who lives somewhere else? That's definitionally undemocratic

Because, the results would be basically done by big cities at the expense of the rural community. That is why we have both the Senate (equal vote for rural states) and Representative (voice of masses)

Would you say the Democratic or Republican Party is more militaristic?

If you looked at my OP, I said that the Republican party has the potential because of the military support of that party. Don't disagree with you there.

 

[Kenny]

View attachment 40519

relevance?

 

[Rational Agnostic]

relevance?

View attachment 40521

LOL. It's obvious to most of us that Trump is not religious at all--probably is agnostic/atheist. Funny how the religious right can't see through his religious acts. Obama and Bush were also most likely non-religious (both of them criticized the bible and said it's not literally true). Clinton probably is/was religious as he apparently read the bible 5 times and studied it constantly, but he's also a sex addict, so...

 

[fantome profane]

extreme militaristic nationalism, ,

contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism,

a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites ,

and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”),

 

[Left Coast]

Because, the results would be basically done by big cities at the expense of the rural community.

Address is irrelevant. Every person gets one vote. That's what democracy is. Any system that weights the votes of a minority disproportionately is by definition UNdemocratic.

We recognize this logic for literally every other elected office. Mayors, county supervisors, governors, congresspeople - all are elected democratically. But suddenly when it comes to the Presidency, we have this completely, definitionally undemocratic system that unfairly weights the votes of certain people based on their address. That is not democracy.

If you looked at my OP, I said that the Republican party has the potential because of the military support of that party. Don't disagree with you there.

Oh okay, good. So that's one down. Which party is more nationalistic, the Democratic or Republican Party?