"Fascism—American Style"

[Nowhere]

http://blog.dankim.com/2006/02/10/fascism%E2%80%94american-style/

I don't hink his needs to be in temp - at least as long as we'll remember the "dictionary" definitions of fascism and forget about, largery irrelevant, connections with Nazi Germany (this one's for sure tough for some people...OTOH I don't have a problem with the fact that Poland in 30's was technically (at least) almost fascist, and also that our current administration is somewhat "fascist-wannabe").

So, as on topic - based on my knowledge and accepted definitions, I'd have to largery agree with the link, even if some points are a bit weak. Not really sure what to add more (oh, and I haven't slept last night ). but I'm curious what others, especially citizens of US, think.

[gt40]

Really, some of the points made are so weak, that this whole argument would apply to every country in the world

[Nowhere]

Not necesserilly every...at most 5 could apply here.

[Brian Ellis]

This is an untenable hypothesis. Dr Lawrence Britt published the 14 characteristics in Free Inquiry in Spring 2003. It is clearly written in terms designed to indict the GWB Administration, not to define fascism as such. The clearest false premiss is #8. However, his biggest mistake is grouping various totally different types of régime under the single umbrella of fascism. Mussolini's Italy had little in common with Hitler's Germany and the former was benign compared with the latter, even if it was authoritarian.

If it had been written, say, 20 years ago, instead of 2 years into the Bush régime, with a too-obvious agenda, I would have commented differently. It is nothing but political posturing.

[Jessterw]

The points are rather broad, and as gt40 said and you narrowed down, any country with a considerable amount of power and presence would be recognized as fascist.

A number of points are debatable and several don't even apply to the US. Yes, if you look for specific incidents and trends within the current administration (or even past ones), the points will ring true; however, many are limited to just that, specific incidents that do not represent a pattern or trend.

[KRSESQ]

Hmmm...No bias or ulterior agenda on that website...Just a lot of common, run-of-the-mill, rather unimaginative Bush-bashing.

(I'm not above a little Bush-bashing myself, but this guy is just another member of the cut-and-paste brigade.)

Kevin

[TnT]

I think the US is in a whole different regime: corporate controlled government.

[Jammrock]

I think the US is in a whole different regime: corporate controlled government.

And this is different from other western european-based governments ... how?

[TnT]

And this is different from other western european-based governments ... how?

The US does spend more money on the military to provide for those corporations though. Otherwise not much, the optimist in me wants to believe not every government out there is brainwashed.

Bolivia's little revolt was nice, we'll have to see where they end up.

[KRSESQ]

The main thing that worries me about the new Bolivian government is that the US government will decide it doesn't like the Morales government and give it the Cold War treatment, i.e. destabilize it in support a more right-wing, US-friendly government. I like to think our current leaders would be beyond that, and stand behind their high-minded statements about "allowing democracy to flourish," but I'm a little too cynical to expect that.

You can see the seeds for such action being planted with the Hamas regime in Palestine (or Israel, depending on your sympathies). On the one hand, I have no love for Hamas. They are too motivated by blind unreasoning hate (and that's the subject for another thread). On the other hand, I expect the Bush administration to live up to its credo of "supporting free elections" and let Hamas earn the respect of the international community if they're able or inclined to do so. I just don't think they're able or inclined.

I'd be perfectly happy to see international aid to Hamas depend on their good behavior, both nationally and internationally. The problem is for every western nation ready to slap Hamas' fingers for misbehaving there's another nation (or three) ready to give them a nice big lollipop.

This wasn't too off-topic, was it? As far as corporate interest in politics, it would be extraordinarily difficult to stop without a Constitutional amendment initiated at the state and local level. The big boys in Washington sure as hell aren't going to do anything about it. Why should they?

Constitutional Convention, anyone?

Kevin

[Wombat]

The main thing that worries me about the new Bolivian government is that the US government will decide it doesn't like the Morales government and give it the Cold War treatment, i.e. destabilize it in support a more right-wing, US-friendly government. I like to think our current leaders would be beyond that, and stand behind their high-minded statements about "allowing democracy to flourish," but I'm a little too cynical to expect that.

All you have to do is look at the treatment we give Chavez to know that nothing's changed.

[schmosef]

You can see the seeds for such action being planted with the Hamas regime in Palestine (or Israel, depending on your sympathies). On the one hand, I have no love for Hamas. They are too motivated by blind unreasoning hate (and that's the subject for another thread). On the other hand, I expect the Bush administration to live up to its credo of "supporting free elections" and let Hamas earn the respect of the international community if they're able or inclined to do so. I just don't think they're able or inclined.

Start a new thread if you like. I agree that this isn't the place. In fact, there already is a thread on the issue.

But don't think you can open a can of worms like this and not expect a response from me just because its OT.

The issue is far too complicated to sum up in a few sentences. It's almost bad sportsmanship to bring it up in this context. If you have something to say on the issue, I honestly and truly want to hear it, but let's have a proper discussion in an appropriate thread.

[TnT]

That's my bad at getting the topic in the wrong direction. I was in a ranting mood.

[schmosef]

A more appropriate thread to continue the discussion.