Fascism is an authoritarian nationalist ideology focused on solving economic, political, and social problems that its supporters see as causing national decline or decadence. Fascist governments typically seek to prepare a nation for armed conflict with other nations, to defend itself or to expand its state to allow for the growth of a nation. Fascists aim to create a single-party state in which the government is led by a dictator who seeks unity by requiring individuals to subordinate self-interest to the collective interest of the nation or a race.
Fascist governments permanently forbid and suppress all criticism and opposition to the government and the fascist movement. Fascist movements oppose any ideology or political system that gives direct political power to people as individuals rather than as a collective through the state (liberalism, democracy, individualism); is deemed detrimental to national identity and unity (class conflict, communism, internationalism, laissez-faire capitalism); may oppose major changes to government and other institutions that it proposes (conservatism) and that undermine the military strength and military ambitions of the nation (pacifism).
We'll see.
25 comments:
Very astute C-Bug-a-loo.
I always chuckle when liberals say conservatives are fascists. These are obviously liberals not familiar with Misters Webster, Funk or Wagnall.
The hallmarks of fascism:
1. Belligerent nationalism
2. Overt racism
3. Contempt for the weak
4. Fear of those who are different
Sounds like the republican party platform.....
HLF just described democrats... then called it the republican party
You are an anonymous retard.
I don't do this often but here goes...
you're wrong Dick Weed Freak.
Fascists seek to control media, schools, monetary policy and peoples thoughts and / or ways of thinking, what they can say openly. They do most of it by demonizing the rich, the religious or a combination of the two.
That, you poor excuse for human debris, is American Liberals and has been for 60 years.
The characteristics of the conservative are far closer to fascism. The most overwhelming one is the authoritarian streak that conservatives have. Then there's the tendency to dominate and humiliate. The hatred they harbor for the poor which is an extrapolation of the fascist distaste for the "weak".
Read the hallmarks again. There's conservatism all over that.
Liberals don't seek to control what people think. We just don't think encouraging racism, ignorance and division are good things.
Obviously, you managed to hold on to your ignorance despite the efforts of civilized society to convince you otherwise.
...yep, that vicious, mindless buzzing is back, and worse than ever. Much like my tinnitus, I'll just ignore him...er, it.
But before I go back to ignoring him...er, it.
I still hope you're for real, because if you're one of "us", and I ever find out who, I'll flatten your fucking nose. And no, that's not an idle, knee jerk, typical conservative threat of violence, it's a GD'd promise.
Believe me, I would sooner eat my own liver than be a conservative.
But why would it bother you if I was one of the regulars? Do you suspect one of yours harbors liberal ideas??
Steve: I came to the conclusion that it is not one of us. It's a cancer that should be eliminated
As I indicated some time ago in another thread - it's definitely not one of us. It follow a link over here from Moonbattery where it used to call itself 'Dino'. It quit calling itself that when any post with that signature was deleted because they were always totally hateful with no social redeeming value. It goes by several names over there now - but it's the same hateful personality and it's "prose" are clearly recognizible.
And I agree Bill - it's a cancer.
HLF said...
You are an anonymous retard.
January 25, 2009 2:58 PM
Liberals aren't supposed to use adjectives such as "retard". It's against everything you believe in and everything you preach. Oh! You don't believe in it, you only preach it?
Hm. Who would have thought that liberals were hypocrites? The pudding is the proof.
Who keeps farting?
Liberals don't seek to control what people think.
That is really rich! The post-modern iteration of the concepts of speech codes and political correctness were developed by Donna Shalala while she was the chancelor of the University of Wisconsin. She was closely followed by Sheldon Hackney while president of the University of Pennsylvania. Surely you have heard of the now infamous "Water Buffalo incident."
Need I point out to you that Ms. Shalala served as director of HHS in President Clinton's administration? Her liberal credentials are impeccable and I would imagine, rival even your own.
Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are very obvious.
First of all, both are totalitarian ideologies. The totalitarian nature of Political Correctness is revealed nowhere more clearly than on college campuses, many of which at this point are small ivy covered North Koreas, where the student or faculty member who dares to cross any of the lines set up by the gender feminist or the homosexual-rights activists, or the local black or Hispanic group, or any of the other sainted "victims" groups that PC revolves around, quickly find themselves in judicial trouble. Within the small legal system of the college, they face formal charges – some star-chamber proceeding – and punishment. That is a little look into the future that Political Correctness intends for the nation as a whole.
Indeed, all ideologies are totalitarian because the essence of an ideology (I would note that conservatism correctly understood is not an ideology) is to take some philosophy and say on the basis of this philosophy certain things must be true – such as the whole of the history of our culture is the history of the oppression of women. Since reality contradicts that, reality must be forbidden. It must become forbidden to acknowledge the reality of our history. People must be forced to live a lie, and since people are naturally reluctant to live a lie, they naturally use their ears and eyes to look out and say, "Wait a minute. This isn’t true. I can see it isn’t true," the power of the state must be put behind the demand to live a lie. That is why ideology invariably creates a totalitarian state.
Second, the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness, like economic Marxism, has a single factor explanation of history. Economic Marxism says that all of history is determined by ownership of means of production. Cultural Marxism, or Political Correctness, says that all history is determined by power, by which groups defined in terms of race, sex, etc., have power over which other groups. Nothing else matters. All literature, indeed, is about that. Everything in the past is about that one thing.
Third, just as in classical economic Marxism certain groups, i.e. workers and peasants, are a priori good, and other groups, i.e., the bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil Sound familiar? They should; they're your own words. In the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness certain groups are good – feminist women, (only feminist women, non-feminist women are deemed not to exist) blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals. These groups are determined to be "victims," and therefore automatically good regardless of what any of them do. Similarly, white males are determined automatically to be evil, thereby becoming the equivalent of the bourgeoisie in economic Marxism.
Fourth, both economic and cultural Marxism rely on expropriation. When the classical Marxists, the communists, took over a country like Russia, they expropriated the bourgeoisie, they took away their property. Similarly, when the cultural Marxists take over a university campus, they expropriate through things like quotas for admissions. When a white student with superior qualifications is denied admittance to a college in favor of a black or Hispanic who isn’t as well qualified, the white student is expropriated. And indeed, affirmative action, in our whole society today, is a system of expropriation. White owned companies don’t get a contract because the contract is reserved for a company owned by, say, Hispanics or women. So expropriation is a principle tool for both forms of Marxism.
And finally, both have a method of analysis that automatically gives the answers they want. For the classical Marxist, it’s Marxist economics. For the cultural Marxist, it’s deconstruction. Deconstruction essentially takes any text, removes all meaning from it and re-inserts any meaning desired. So we find, for example, that all of Shakespeare is about the suppression of women, or the Bible is really about race and gender. All of these texts simply become grist for the mill, which proves that "all history is about which groups have power over which other groups." So the parallels are very evident between the classical Marxism that we’re familiar with in the old Soviet Union and the cultural Marxism that we see today as Political Correctness.
The suggestion that liberals do not attempt to control what people think, speak and do is so monstrously and laughably idiotic that it hardly bears addressing by anyone who has left two brain cells to rub together. Everything that you have posted here perfectly fits the model of cultural Marxism (e. g. the rich are evil and should be killed and their wealth redistributed).
Marxism and fascism are not all that far apart for the both lead to a totaliarian state. That is the trouble with slinging around terms that one does not fully understand. Eventually, any meaning that the original words had is gone.
Very well put, nerd. Did you make that up all by yourself? :-)
Be forwarned; a liberal (like HLF) will only get through the third word in the second sentence before their brains shutdown and they label you a "hateful racist" - even though they have no idea if what you say is true or not. (They have really low reading comprehension.)
Luke ''The Drifter'' says:
"We Americans were damn tired of being thought of as dumb by the rest of the world. So we went to
the polls in November and removed all doubt."
Outstanding post (and explanation) nerd. Unfortunately, the liberal puke that has infested our site will simply rearrange everything you've said until it fits what "it" wants to hear. As usual!
QUOTABLE QUOTES
"The principle feature of American liberalism is sanctimoniousness. By loudly denouncing all bad things -- war and hunger and date rape -- liberals testify to their own terrific goodness. More important, they promote themselves to membership in a self-selecting elite of those who care deeply about such things. It's a kind of natural aristocracy, and the wonderful thing about this aristocracy is that you don't have to be brave, smart, strong or even lucky to join it, you just have to be liberal." –----- P. J. O'Rourke
To be honest, I didn't read Nerd's post because his/her/it's premise was faulty.
Political correctness is conservative shorthand for "having to be polite". You can't call someone a nigger, you can't be a sexist, you should try to get along and not offend people.
Conservatives HATES this because they're offensive by nature and can't stand a new world where the white straight male rides herd over everyone else. So they derisively call attempts to rein in their ignorance "political correctness".
But I understand why people with limited intellect were impressed by Nerd's utter bullshit post.
PS. Jimbo, I never go to Moonbattery. There must be other people who find that site to be full of brainstem whackjobs.
Ha ha, this is killing me.
Homo-Loving Fruitbat is the poster boy for that Fascist mentality...with a little Socialism thrown in to sweeten the pot.
The epitome of loon.
And, a mouthy one, at that.
HLT,
no the idea that one of my "friends" harbors liberal thought doesn't bother me. I do have liberal friends and family members. I believe that they have as much right to their opinion as I do. I took an oath, and I continue to support their right to free speech. If you are for real, I think you too have that right.
What NO ONE has right to be is rude and offensive. If you're for real, you're an idiot. If your one of "us", then it's a joke, and I don't put up with that kind of joke.
To be honest, I didn't read Nerd's post because his/her/it's premise was faulty.
But I understand why people with limited intellect were impressed by Nerd's utter bullshit post.
Do you realize how idiotic and contradictory those two statements are? You did not read it, yet you somehow know that my statement is false? How colossaly immature and childish. What's next, Plugging your ears and screaming I CAN'T HEAR YOU!
Be forwarned; a liberal (like HLF) will only get through the third word in the second sentence before their brains shutdown and they label you a "hateful racist"
It would appear that thou knowest thine own enemy.
Sorry Nerd. Limited amount of time and I don't feel like wasting it reading a verbose statement of repetition. You could have said all of that in 1/3 the space.
Re-read the hallmarks of fascism and you'll see conservatism all over it.
nerd, i hate to say i told you so, but i did! The liberal puke is totally detached from reality, which proves "it's" a true leftist.
That's fair enough HLF. I am a little busy this morning as well. I shall re-read your halmarks of fascism. Please scan my remarks and we shall talk later.
1. Beligerent nationalism: While this was a halmark of the GWB administration, particulartly in its Mideast foreign policy, Bush in no way represents conservativism, as evidenced by his willingness to amass huge debts in order to conduct regime change in Iraq. Beligerent nationalism has also characterized the government policies of China, Russia, the old USSR and Cuba.
2. Overt racism: Travel to Japan sometime and see all the signs that say, "No Gai Jin!" That, my friend is true racism. Actually, it is more properly described as xenophobia, but the result is the same. An entire class of people is disenfranchised.
3. Contempt for the weak: You'd be hard put to find a better example of this than the old USSR, whose failed collectivist ideology split the country into it's component parts.
4. Fear of those who are diferent: Again, China, Russia and the USSR.
What do these countries have in common, save Japan? They are all examples of the discredited and failed collectivist ideology of Marx and Lenin. You have stated that the left would move the United States in the direction of socialism by force, if necessary. How, exactly would you accomplish that?
Post a Comment