lawrocket 3 #26 June 24, 2006 Quotewe do see what appears to be new levels of control that have hitherto not been seen. Tell that to the Japanese in the 1940's. Or perhaps the communists of the early to mid 1900's. Or to those who were jailed by either of the Sedition Acts. Or to anyone denied the writ of habeus corpus when Lincoln instituted martial law. Truth be told, here in the US, we are nowhere even freaking CLOSE to what we had before. This is exactly why I'm not in the business of comparisons - because by comparison, the present administration is squeaky clean. But as a matter of reason and righteousness, thie present administration is wrong. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #27 June 24, 2006 Unfortunately, comparison is how we judge our present against history. [I know that you didn't say it but] If the idea of Gito and rendition is squeaky clean, then we're on a rather slippery slope. and this deos bring us freaking close to the previous internments. Regards, (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ahegeman 0 #28 June 24, 2006 It always amuses me when I hear liberals bemoan the end of freedom as we know it because of the privacy and other invasions of Republican administrations. These transgressions are miniscule compared to the wholesale anal-probing we all get during tax season, yet they think we should all gladly smile and shake the taxman's hand for allowing us to do our civic duty. If these libs were serious, they'd also rail against the constant and never ending presence of the IRS in our families, our homes, our businesses, and our bank accounts. Until then, they're just pissin' in the wind.--------------------------------------------------------------- There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'. --Dave Barry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rookie120 0 #29 June 24, 2006 QuoteUntil then, they're just pissin' in the wind. I did that once. Kinda messy and you get all wet. Not much fun.If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #30 June 24, 2006 Quoteactual control of the state will have passed to a small and privileged group who rule for the benefit of their wealthy peers and corporate patrons. Yup. I agree that the US has been run this way since its inception. You know, even the Civil War was prolonged due to buisiness dealings between Lincoln, the Union government and northern big business. One of the largest most public controling groups actually resulted in an uprising of people creating a political party to combat the group known as the Masons. I laugh when people think something is new and it shows their complete lack of understanding in history, even recent history (the past 100 years).--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rookie120 0 #31 June 24, 2006 QuoteI laugh when people think something is new and it shows their complete lack of understanding in history, even recent history (the past 100 years). Hell I think some people have trouble remembering what they had for breakfast much less remember history from 100 years ago.If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mpohl 1 #32 June 25, 2006 Thank you for your genuine, intelligent response. America can really be proud to have you as one of her sons! QuoteQuoteWho I am is unimportant. THINK! I am thinking, and I think your full of shit! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mpohl 1 #33 June 25, 2006 "It isn't here"? Are you sure. Do you think that Germans, '33-'45, considered themselves fascist? What about Franco's Spain? Salazar's Portugal? Suharto's Indonesia? Bush's USA??? There is a well-known article by Laurence Britt that defines the 14 common traits of fascist societies. Part of it is reproduced below. [...] For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. To be sure, they constitute a mixed bag of national identities, cultures, developmental levels, and history. But they all followed the fascist or protofascist model in obtaining, expanding, and maintaining power. Further, all these regimes have been overthrown, so a more or less complete picture of their basic characteristics and abuses is possible. Analysis of these seven regimes reveals fourteen common threads that link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of power. These basic characteristics are more prevalent and intense in some regimes than in others, but they all share at least some level of similarity. 1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia. 2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation. 3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly. 4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite. 5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses. 6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses. 7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous. 8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion. 9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens. 10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice. 11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist. 12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power. 13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population. 14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite. Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not. [...] QuoteQuote--Chris Floyd, November 10, 2001 Blah. Ben Franklin also warned of Facism, as have others throughout US history. It isn't here. It's not going to be here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #34 June 26, 2006 QuoteA cut and paste rant isn't a good mechanism for debate when it isn't followed up by an opinion by the OP. Hey, at least the OP credited his words to the original writer. We've got tards around here that would claim the words for themselves (at least one, anyway). . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rookie120 0 #35 June 26, 2006 QuoteThank you for your genuine, intelligent response. America can really be proud to have you as one of her sons! Intelligent response to the garbage you put up there? Nobody knows who you are you just come in and when somebody questions you your response was "THINK". I just call it as I see it my friend.If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #36 June 26, 2006 QuoteQuoteThank you for your genuine, intelligent response. America can really be proud to have you as one of her sons! Intelligent response to the garbage you put up there? Nobody knows who you are you just come in and when somebody questions you your response was "THINK". I just call it as I see it my friend. But you didn't question what he wrote, you made a comment about not remembering what you had for breakfast. Seems to me his comment was right on the mark. Maybe you should think.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #37 June 26, 2006 Remember, these are characteristics of Facism. Not proof. QuotePowerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting. . . Since the beginning of The US, national pride has been around. In all those years, facism has not taken over. Maybe in the 60's and 70's the Vietman War has caused Pride to drop some. But that was a product of the Hipster-wannabe college students and hippies calling Revolution because it was the "in" thing to do or the new Disestablished fad. Sadly the Revolution failed; or sadder, imagined. The hippies grew up and the college students graduated and became the Yuppies of the 80's(What generation did you think the Yuppies grew up in?). QuoteDisdain for the importance of human rights. Today is the highest time of human rights a U. S citizen can enjoy. Women can vote now, Gay Rights are making some headway and Blacks and minorities are protected against discrimination.(A lot of people can claim Reverse Discrimination and can rightly beleive that. But it is still a product of healthy Human Rights, or Too much of it.) QuoteIdentification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. We saw this in Nazi Germany, But when did any of our presidents blame a minority in the U. S as a cause of our demise of this Country thus sending them off to extermination? There's still communists here after McCarthy and we still have the same Govt. QuoteRuling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. They have to. They are the ones who send us off to war. Military costs money. This applies to all countries, not just facist ones. Quote A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. Unfortunately, an opinion that cannot be backed up by either side. QuoteThe military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, That is the main purpose of any military and has been since dawn of Humankind. This statement applies to all countries facist or not. Quote and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite. Can't argue against this one. There's been evidence, but not proof. Only time will tell. So far, oils and halliburton are not showing exclusion to the stock market slump. Quote Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact. . . Women in the U. S today have more freedom than any of those countries in their Facist periods QuoteThe result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses. How would one know this? Especially if the General Public was unawares. QuotePower of corporations protected. Most of these"Corporations" mentioned were Commanding Heights for those countries that were State Runned. Corporations are owned by Shareholders here and everybody can be part of the pie. Quote Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Doesn't apply in the U. S. anymore. The consumers and technology eliminated the labor format of yesteryear. QuoteThe poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice Not true in the U. S. The "Contempt" caused here is because the poor are usually not highly educated well and use "Common sense" to make sense of their areas of weakness. Problem is, common sense only work within peer groups and job descriptions, rarely works if crossed from different peer groups. This brings up the bulk of Conspiracies of organizations they are not educated enough, or have the drive enough, to work in. QuoteDisdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Where has this happened here? Quote Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. Nothing illegal and wrong with this statement. I sure as hope the powers to be are obsessed. Can't let our enemies know are true capabilities. Though the NSA fiasco was a black eye, I'm sure it won't bring down the house to Facism. Quote Fraudulent elections. Evidence, circumstanial at best, but not proof. ___________ This is a Fortune Telling recipe for Facist seekers and doomsayers; You can find any example of each step in any country and say "yup, there it is"._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #38 June 26, 2006 I wonder how many of the signs of fascism have to apply before we have to admit we are fascists on the scale of Hitler or Stalin? Is it just 1 or 2 or do they all have to apply? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #39 June 26, 2006 Well, Dr. Britt found 14 instances. But we still have a Constitution; Corporations owned by the public; no Nationalized Commanding Heights; the fact that we can have this discussion comfortably and not worry about dissapearing in the night. And we are protected by a lot of want-for-drama influenced "viva-la-resistance" movements that spout their imaginary causes in very public media, papers, and in front of the very people that can oppress them._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #40 June 26, 2006 QuoteRemember, these are characteristics of Facism. Not proof. . If it walks like a duck....... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #41 June 26, 2006 QuoteQuoteWho I am is unimportant. Why does your profile list 12 posts, but only three show up? QuoteTHINK O.K. I think you might be trolling... Ciels- Michele Thats a pretty hefty accusation for what is a thought provoking post. So back to the post, do you agree or disagree Michele.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #42 June 26, 2006 Quote14 common traits of fascist societies. These actually descibe the US during the Kennedy Administration very nicely. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #43 June 26, 2006 QuoteQuote14 common traits of fascist societies. These actually descibe the US during the Kennedy Administration very nicely. Yes. Describes it even better right now.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #44 June 26, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuote14 common traits of fascist societies. These actually descibe the US during the Kennedy Administration very nicely. Yes. Describes it even better right now. I agree. But that is a qualitative judgment. It seems that JFK was way worse in a number of categories. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #45 June 26, 2006 QuoteQuoteRemember, these are characteristics of Facism. Not proof. . If it walks like a duck.... It may have bad hips Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #46 June 26, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote14 common traits of fascist societies. These actually descibe the US during the Kennedy Administration very nicely. Yes. Describes it even better right now. I agree. But that is a qualitative judgment. It seems that JFK was way worse in a number of categories. You mean JFK wasn't they saint they make him out to be? I would also like to point out that the DNC holds Kennedy out as one of our finest presidents ever, but the fact reamin he may have been one of the worst, and was a lousy skipper as well. (No wonder Halsey wanted him keel hauled) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #47 June 26, 2006 QuoteIf it walks like a duck.... True. But, if an over-enthusiastic duck hunter is looking for duck, he is always going to find it somewhere in any way possible. He might even accidentally shoot one of those short-neck geese that resemble ducks._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #48 June 26, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote14 common traits of fascist societies. These actually descibe the US during the Kennedy Administration very nicely. Yes. Describes it even better right now. I agree. But that is a qualitative judgment. It seems that JFK was way worse in a number of categories. You mean JFK wasn't they saint they make him out to be? I would also like to point out that the DNC holds Kennedy out as one of our finest presidents ever, but the fact reamin he may have been one of the worst, and was a lousy skipper as well. (No wonder Halsey wanted him keel hauled) POLL of over 1500 registered voters, May 2006 8. Which of these eleven presidents we have had since World War II would you consider the worst president - Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush Senior, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush? Tot Harry Truman 1% Dwight Eisenhower 0 John Kennedy 1 Lyndon Johnson 4 Richard Nixon 17 Gerald Ford 2 Jimmy Carter 13 Ronald Reagan 3 George Bush Senior 3 Bill Clinton 16 George W. Bush 34 DK/NA 5 Margin of error +- 2.5% George W. Bush wins handily as worst, only registered Republicans and white born again Christians put him anywhere except bottom of the list. Kennedy was 3rd from best overall, after Reagan (#1) and Clinton (#2).... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #49 June 26, 2006 1 - Nixon and Carter stand out. 2 - The last two presidents stand out 3 - The rest are essentially zero (forgotten) The curve is dramatically tied to the reverse calendar. with the exception of Nixon and Carter. Not surprising at all, as we have a generally skeptical and dissatified base with terrible long term memories. In fact, I suspect the 1500 polled were likely sampled in a non-biased fashion (other than coming from the group of "those that will take the time to answer a poll") - if either GWB or Clinton would have stood out alone, that would have been a strong indicator of a biased sampling. I suspect that anytime this poll is conducted, the most recent Dem and the most recent Rep scores poorly and the rest don't even show up in the race. Nixon and Carter stand out as they truly were crappy or at least had lousy PR. As someone who's been around, you know this, yet still try to purposely imply a false conclusion. In two or three more terms, let's look at this again and see if it still stands. It might, but a negative conclusion drawn from this on either Bush Jr or Clinton is way premature. QuoteKennedy was 3rd from best overall, after Reagan (#1) and Clinton (#2). Kennedy was with Truman and Eisenhower and Ford and Reagan and Bush Sr in the "I don't Recall" group Clinton was right there with Nixon and GWB and Carter in the "Oh yeah, I recognize those names - Presidents suck all the time" group ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #50 June 26, 2006 QuoteThe curve is dramatically tied to the reverse calendar. That was my first thought as well. But then Kallend edited to add the point about the "Best" survey. It does NOT show the same recency effect you're speculating about. Isn't that odd? First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
