- Joined
- Mar 18, 2005
- Messages
- 46,262
- Reaction score
- 9,912
- Location
- on the Seven Bridges Road
- Website
- thepondsofhappenstance.com
VOTE_BOT said:At least till they shut down the Internet and fire up the ovens, eh?
D*ckhead...
Rob
VOTE_BOT said:At least till they shut down the Internet and fire up the ovens, eh?
VOTE_BOT said:At least till they shut down the Internet and fire up the ovens, eh?
BradyH1861 said:If anything, I think that those of us who have taken part in this discussion have proven one thing. There is a middle ground out there. Maybe the country isn't as polarized as some would have us think. Perhaps if WE got together, then we could come up with a PACT that everyone could live with. How's that for a thought?
I would like to once again thank everyone who has taken part in this thread. The topic alone was one charged with strong feelings and emotion. I think we have shown that controversial issues can be debated in a calm, rational, respectful, and reasonable manner.
Jamesaritchie said:"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -- Thomas Jefferson.
There are certainly bad aspects to teh Patriot Act, but as a whole, it's a good bill, and you can bet it will be renewed, as it should be.
Adjust the Patriot Act where needed, but getting rid of it would be the height of fooloshness, and would, in the long run, bring in laws far worse, far more invasive.
As for a national ID card, well, we should have done this twenty years ago. Funny how people don't mind state ID cards that contain the exact same information, but somehow think a national ID card is the work of the devil.
robeiae said:Pffft!
The continued growth of government bureaucracies, particularly those dealing with the social services sectors and the IRS, have sapped more freedoms from us since the 1930's than any of the people you're worried about could even dream of doing. Once upon a time, your vote mattered; people in office could actually change things. Now, I'm afraid we've almost lost/surrendered too much freedom to the bureaucrats..
Now Bill Clinton, I could deal with, since he was content to leave things alone (more concerned with getting his...well, you know).
Now my rant is done!
Love ya!
Rob
Roger J Carlson said:drgnlvr, I apologized in private, but I want to do so publicly. I did not intend offense when I used the "name-calling and sloganing" line. I simply thought that calling the president the Commander in Thief was not relevant to the discussion.
You are certainly free to do so and I'll fight anybody who tries to stop you!
However, in retrospect, I believe MY comment was uncalled for and inflammatory, and again I apologize. Thanks for not responding in kind.
robeiae said:Hmmm...well, I must be hanging out in all the wrong places (or right places, orleft places, depending on your point of view). But that's cool, even if I was hearing analogies using Stalin and communism instead of Hitler and Nazism, I'd still think they were BS.
Rob
BradyH1861 said:Germany as we know it today is a relatively new country. They were unified in 1871. Prior to that, they were a collection of German states ruled by princes. The Prussians unified the country and installed their head of state as Kaiser. The Kaiser ruled Germany until the end of World War One. Only then were they a democracy under the Weimar Republic. However, with numerous factions fighting for control of the country (literally fighting in the streets on many occasions), the country did not really have a high opinion of "democracy." The rotten state of affairs, plus the lack of a democratic tradition made it relatively easy for a strongman like Hitler to assume power. Nazis were elected to offices in the Reichstag, as were other parties. However, once they got total control (after Hitler assumed the office of President AND Chancellor after the death of Hindenburg), they outlawed other parties.
If it hadn't of been the Nazis, there was a good chance that perhaps Germany would have become a socialist/communist state. So Germany was actually only a democracy for about 15 years before Hitler came to power. That is a fundamental difference between the United States and Germany. Here we have a long established tradition of freedom. That actually did not exist in Germany even before Hitler.
Brady H.
VOTE_BOT said:Not to mention we haven't just lost a World War, after which our borders shrunk, and we're not rolling wheelbarrows of dollar bills into stores just to pay for basic foodstuffs because of ruaway inflation.
Those were crucial factors in creating an atmosphere in which a militant nationalistic party could rise.
BradyH1861 said:When I was in grad school, I took a course in Modern Germany 1871-1945 as an elective. The professor said something very interesting that has stayed with me longer than the information learned in the class.
He said "Nazism is a uniquely German phenomenon. Fascism, however, can happen anywhere."
Oh, and after banning free speech, etc, Hitler also outlawed private ownership of firearms.....just thought I'd pass that along too
Brady H.
drgnlvr said:No. Honestly? I think the -intended- goal of our current government is to create a Fascist state. And they're doing a darn fine job of it.
And sorry if I -do- seem overly cynical. But I'm seeing way too much going on that is ugly, and dangerous.
Yes, let's. And let's further see how they can be correctly interpreted.parowley said:Laurence Britt wrote a little something a while back called "Fascism Anyone?" in which he outlines 14 points that are common to some of the great fascist regimes of history (Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Suharto and Pinochet were his case studies) and then sees how well the administration of George W. Bush matches up with the these other regimes.
The results are pretty darn scary....let's take a look shall we?
This was also fairly typical of the US during WWII, a time when the US lead the fight against Fascism. I guess it's sad to me when a love of one's country is equated to fascism.parowley said:1) Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
Well, as one of America's neighbours to the north (you can even tell with my fancy shmancy spelling) I've always thought that Americans were an incredibly patriotic lot...almost pathologically so in fact. Ever since 9/11 however it was taken to a whole new level, understandably in my opinion, yet also disturbing. Case in point, quite often I'll take a look at CNN or Fox News, not for news but for entertainment (if I want news I'll take the BBC thankyouverymuch) and I'm shocked at how often debate is stifled by responses that basically amount to "if you disagree with the policy of our government you're 'Un-american' or 'un-patriotic.'" In my opinion the Bush's American clearly meets this point.
Yes, I think you do. Are you seriously comparing the abuses (and there were abuses) of Abhu Garib with the beheading in the Iraq? With the mass execution of Jews by the Nazis? With the physical and psychological torture inflicted by the North Koreans? Muslim clerics encouraging suicide bombings? You are measuring with the wrong scale.parowley said:2) Disdain for the recognition of Human Rights.
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
Abhu Garib, GitMo, the leaked "torture memo." Need I say more?
Unified? The US? If we're in such a unified frenzy, you certainly can't tell it by the news, radio, television, or this board. In fact, this country is split about in half between conservatives and liberals. I think that's rather healthy.parowley said:3) Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a unifying cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic, or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists; terrorists, etc.
Well, I do believe that terrorists should be eliminated. Absolutely and whole heartedly. And while I do believe that the Bush administration is expending SOME of it's energy towards that end it seems that once they had the pretext of a war on terror they got a little bit side tracked onto other things...like a certain middle eastern country that shall remain nameless.
You make a lot of claims with no proof. Infrastructure falling apart? I don't see that. Healthcare a shambles? I work in a very large health care system and it is not a shambles. Third world poverty? Ridiculous! Why then are Mexicans streaming into our borders? Yes our military budget is increasing. We ARE fighting a war pretty much alone. Thanks for your help. And glorification of the soldier in military recruitment. You find that disturbing? It's an AD! What should they say to try to encourage people to join?parowley said:4) Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military professions are glamorized.
There are serious, serious, serious domestic problems in the United States. Infrastructure is falling apart. Health care is a shambles (I realize that as a Canadian I'm a bit biased when it comes to that). Many regions still live in absolutely crushing, almost third world poverty. The proposed military budget for 2006 is $2.57 trillion dollars, yet many social programs are being cut. Does the US military, by far the MOST powerful military in the world, really need all that money? Frankly I kind of wonder...
As for the glorification of soldiers and military professions all you need do is take a look at a recruitment video and see that there's at least a little bit of truth to that...
Let's see: Condolezza Rice. She is in a very high position for a male dominated regime.parowley said:5) Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. 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.
The big flap over gay marriage would seem to back up this criteria. So too would Bush's expressed desire to get rid of Roe v. Wade in regards to abortion.
Illogic. Just because Fox doesn't report it the way the BBC doesn't make Fox wrong. You are assuming facts not in evidence. In fact, the fact that Fox reports things differently than CNN or MSNBC, is evidence that our media is NOT controlled in any way.parowley said:6) Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokepeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Look at the way Fox News covers a story. Compare it to the way that the BBC covers the story. If you want an even bigger contrast go and comapre it to the way that Al Jazeera covers the story. There will always be bias in the media. What's scary is the lack of alternative news sources in mainstream American culture these days. Also scary is the way in which the Bush administration and channels like Fox News went on the attack when Newsweek (it was Newsweek wasn't it?) ran their story about Koran desecration at GitMo. A wee bit ironic that after being dragged through the mud and accused of severely damaging US interests abroad that corroborating evidence came up in some leaked FBI documents...
File that under things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Well, forgive us for being concerned about a big hole at the Southern tip of Manhattan.parowley said:7) Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
I believe it was drgnlvr who commented on a startling connection between Bush taking a dive in the polls and the rainbow alert (or whatever the damn thing's called) goes up. Using fear for political gain? Naaaaah.
Yes. And the law of this land IS a "wall of separation" between church and state. It is also the tradition of this country for people to feel free to question and have opinions about this for and against.parowley said:8) Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
Bush describing the war on terror as a "crusade" (talk about a poor choice of words). The on-going Creationism vs. Theory of Evolution debate in many southern school districts. Tom DeLay saying that "the US need not separate Church and state." The so-called "Judicial War on Faith" (yikes).
No government can NOT have close ties to big business. John Kerry had close ties to big business. Even the Canadian government has close ties to big business. The reason is that government needs big business and big business needs the government. The surest way to drive your economy into the ground is to try to punish big business.parowley said:9) Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
I don't think that anyone can possibly deny that the Bush administration has some very, very close ties to big business. Some of these dealings are more than a little shady. Case in point, many of the Iraq reconstruction contracts going to Halliburton without a competitive bidding process. Or the supreme court overturning the conviction of the Arthur Andersen accounting firm in regards to Enron. Smells fishy to me.
Labor is losing ground in this country at the grassroots level, not by any surpression from above.parowley said:10) Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Labor relations in the US is something I know next to nothing about, so I'm not going to comment too much asides from saying that given the government/big business ties I don't see how they possibly COULD be pro-Union as well...
Since when is it a right for governments to fund the Arts? Preposterous! And I see a lot of open and spirited debate. Right here on this board in fact.parowley said:11) Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
One need look only at the lack of open and spirited debate when it comes to policy to see a form of censorship (true people aren't being locked up, but it's not an atmosphere that lends itself to constructive debate). Bush has also repeatedly slashed funding for things like the National Endowment for the Arts and education.
Police do not have limitless powers, even under th Patriot Act. And as seen by the dust up over Abhu Garib, people are not "willing to overlook police abuses".parowley said:12) Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
The Patriot Act fits very nicely into this niche.
Again, connection to big business does not equate to Saddam looting millions from Iraq. It's a comparison of apples to oranges.parowley said:13) Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes are almost always governed by by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental powers and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
Big business connections again. The deep personal friendships and family ties (especially with George sr.) that many members of Bush's cabinet have.
Sometimes elections have problems. That was one. But to equate this with the kind of wide spread abuse that fascist nations use is ludicrious and disingenuous. Oh, and who was assassinated in Florida?parowley said:14) Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
One word: FLORIDA!!!!!!
drgnlvr said:But the act of "terrorism" in Germany, and the subsequent loss of freedom, the scapegoating of certain groups, and the gaining of absolute power by the people in charge are all very familiar feeling. The names and faces are different, but the similarities are there, and it has the potential to become another Nazi Germany, if we are not very, very careful, and very, very vigilant. It creeps closer and closer to that line, every day.
BradyH1861 said:I'm sorry I missed the program. From how you described things, it sounds like our city council meetings! (talk about people up to no good and drunk with their own power...)
Brady H.
parowley,parowley said:Thanks for the warm reception drgnlvr, all I have to say is that it's amazing what a bout of insomnia and a lively political debate can do...
Roger J Carlson said:It might interest you to know that there are some Americans here who love their country and support their President. Everyone here has a right to an opinion, but comparing the USA to a fascist state crosses the line from opinion into disrespect. Such name-calling is not in the spirit of this board.
Yes and no. You are a US citizen are you not? As such, you have a right to believe that YOUR government is becoming fascist and to be alarmed by that fact. But parowley is Canadian. It is an entirely different thing to tell us that OUR government is becoming fascist. She has a right to believe that and be alarmed by it. But it is disrespectful for him/her to come here, call MY President by an insulting name, and claim that MY country is becoming a fascist state.drgnlvr said:Forgive me Roger, but if you are going to scold someone for comparing the US to a Fascist state, I deserve a ding too.
Let's be fair here.