Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I will argue it does, and that fascism is the greatest threat to our republic in this, the first decade of the new century.
But first, before the debate begins, how do YOU define fascisim (small 'f')?
If you argue that it is the greatest threat, the onus is on you to not only define what Fascism is, but also to define what you mean by greatest threat.
You have the process of debate backwards. Apparently, you want people to willingly fall into the hole, and then state what the definition of a hole is while they are in said hole. Then, you will start what you consider the debate aspect.
That's the way it works for honest brokers of discussion.If you argue that it is the greatest threat, the onus is on you to not only define what Fascism is, but also to define what you mean by greatest threat.
You have the process of debate backwards. ....
If you argue that it is the greatest threat, the onus is on you to not only define what Fascism is, but also to define what you mean by greatest threat.
You have the process of debate backwards. Apparently, you want people to willingly fall into the hole, and then state what the definition of a hole is while they are in said hole. Then, you will start what you consider the debate aspect.
Don't be so quick to judge Wry. I know him from a previous MB and while I don't always agree with him, I have found him to be a fair and honest debater. Give him some latitude, please.
If you argue that it is the greatest threat, the onus is on you to not only define what Fascism is, but also to define what you mean by greatest threat.
You have the process of debate backwards. Apparently, you want people to willingly fall into the hole, and then state what the definition of a hole is while they are in said hole. Then, you will start what you consider the debate aspect.
Don't be so quick to judge Wry. I know him from a previous MB and while I don't always agree with him, I have found him to be a fair and honest debater. Give him some latitude, please.
What I stated is true. He started the thread and debate backwards. I know what he is up to. I read posts.
I will argue it does, and that fascism is the greatest threat to our republic in this, the first decade of the new century.
But first, before the debate begins, how do YOU define fascisim (small 'f')?
That's the way it works for honest brokers of discussion.If you argue that it is the greatest threat, the onus is on you to not only define what Fascism is, but also to define what you mean by greatest threat.
You have the process of debate backwards. ....
I will argue it does, and that fascism is the greatest threat to our republic in this, the first decade of the new century.
But first, before the debate begins, how do YOU define fascisim (small 'f')?
[edit] Fascist corporatism
Part of the Politics series on
Fascism
In Italy, corporatism became influential amongst Italian nationalists. The Charter of Carnaro gained much popularity as the prototype of a 'corporative state', having displayed much within its tenets as a guild system combining the concepts of autonomy & authority in a special synthesis. This appealed to Hegelian thinkers such as Mussolini who were looking for a new alternative to popular socialist & syndicalist stances which was also a progressive system of governing labor and still a new way of relating to political governance as a whole. Alfredo Rocco spoke of a corporative state and declared corporatist ideology in detail. Rocco would go on to become a member of the Italian Fascist regime.[29] Italian Fascism involved a corporatist political system in which economy was collectively managed by employers, workers and state officials by formal mechanisms at national level. [30] This non-elected form of state officializing of every interest into the state was professed to better circumvent the marginalization of singular interests (as would allegedly happen by the unilateral end condition inherent in the democratic voting process). Corporatism would instead better recognize or 'incorporate' every divergent interest as it stands alone into the state organically, according to its supporters, thus being the inspiration behind their use of the term totalitarian, perceivable to them as not meaning a coercive system but described distinctly as without coercion in the 1932 Doctrine of Fascism as thus:
Corporatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What do you call it when the government takes over and then tells key industries, like say car companies and banks what they will do, right down to setting executive pay?
Oh yeah, that's right, Fascism!
What do you call it when the government takes over and then tells key industries, like say car companies and banks what they will do, right down to setting executive pay?
Oh yeah, that's right, Fascism!
What do you call it when the government takes over and then tells key industries, like say car companies and banks what they will do, right down to setting executive pay?
Oh yeah, that's right, Fascism!
Now was this action by the government before or after said car companies voluntarily begged said government to bail them out and keep them from going out of business?
That's the way it works for honest brokers of discussion.If you argue that it is the greatest threat, the onus is on you to not only define what Fascism is, but also to define what you mean by greatest threat.
You have the process of debate backwards. ....
You need to play by your own rules, si modo.
What do you call it when the government takes over and then tells key industries, like say car companies and banks what they will do, right down to setting executive pay?
Oh yeah, that's right, Fascism!
Now was this action by the government before or after said car companies voluntarily begged said government to bail them out and keep them from going out of business?
They had it coming because they dressed so provocatively, gotcha.
What do you call it when the government takes over and then tells key industries, like say car companies and banks what they will do, right down to setting executive pay?
Oh yeah, that's right, Fascism!
Now was this action by the government before or after said car companies voluntarily begged said government to bail them out and keep them from going out of business?
They had it coming because they dressed so provocatively, gotcha.
Now was this action by the government before or after said car companies voluntarily begged said government to bail them out and keep them from going out of business?
They had it coming because they dressed so provocatively, gotcha.
Why? Did they beg for money, too??
They had it coming because they dressed so provocatively, gotcha.
Why? Did they beg for money, too??
They could have and should have went through a real Chapter 11 so they they could finally put salt on the Leach-like UAW.
