Fascism

[yiostheoy]

Please review the following two links on fascism and what we have observed since the election of Donald Trump to the office of POTUS.


Fourteen Defining Characteristics Of Fascism

Donald Trump and the 14 signs of Fascism • /r/politics

Consider the promises made by Mr. Trump during the time before he received the nomination of the Republican Party, his rhetoric before his election after being nominated, and his rhetoric since being elected to POTUS?

We need more choices for this so-far rhetorical poll.

My own answer is "too early to tell -- I don't know yet."

 

[Wry Catcher]

Provide proof!

Jeff Rense is conspiracy theorist and antisemitic: Jeff Rense: In His Own Words

A definition of fascism can be found here: Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

Sorry, your link is one more example of the dishonesty on the right.

"Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism ("Fascism Anyone?," Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine's policy."

• Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
  
• disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
  
• Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
• Supremacy of the Military
• Rampant Sexism
• Controlled Mass Media
• Obsession with National Security
• Religion and Government are Intertwined
• Corporate Power is Protected
• Labor Power is Suppressed
• Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
• Obsession with Crime and Punishment
• Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
• Fraudulent Elections

It's clear that most of these elements are obvious to those who listened to Trump's stump speeches and read Trump's tweets. The choice of Pence as VP was a bone toss to the Bible Belt, his attacks on Hollywood and Journalists, on Muslims and Mexicans, and his cabinet appointments all fit nicely with most of these points.

If Britt is correct and these elements reflect accurately on the words an deeds of fascist regimes, it seems to follow logically that Trump's words and deeds mirror those of other fascist leaders.

 

[Pogo]

Provide proof!

Jeff Rense is conspiracy theorist and antisemitic: Jeff Rense: In His Own Words

A definition of fascism can be found here: Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

Sorry, your link is one more example of the dishonesty on the right.

"Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism ("Fascism Anyone?," Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine's policy."

• Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
  
• disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
  
• Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
• Supremacy of the Military
• Rampant Sexism
• Controlled Mass Media
• Obsession with National Security
• Religion and Government are Intertwined
• Corporate Power is Protected
• Labor Power is Suppressed
• Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
• Obsession with Crime and Punishment
• Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
• Fraudulent Elections

It's clear that most of these elements are obvious to those who listened to Trump's stump speeches and read Trump's tweets. The choice of Pence as VP was a bone toss to the Bible Belt, his attacks on Hollywood and Journalists, on Muslims and Mexicans, and his cabinet appointments all fit nicely with most of these points.

If Britt is correct and these elements reflect accurately on the words an deeds of fascist regimes, it seems to follow logically that Trump's words and deeds mirror those of other fascist leaders.

True, however............. going out on a limb here........ I'm not convinced Rump actually believes in Fascism. Not as a Hitler or Mussolini would -- although he's certainly got the Mussolini narcissistic body language but that's another matter.

I'm not sure Rump believes in anything --- anything but Rump and how many accolades he can get because he can never get enough. If fascism is the route to that he'll do it but if abolishing the Electoral College works, he'll do that too. When a head of state doesn't have any particular agenda to push it's not necessarily going to go in a given direction. In other words, anything can happen. He can probably be easily manipulated by well-timed tweets, which was not only Hillary's best line but doubtlessly why Putin wanted him in there.

So the whole direction of the country depends on who successfully manipulates his gigantic Ego.

It certainly cannot be said that we didn't try to warn people.

 

[TemplarKormac]

No communication of real substance can even begin unless & until those on the ends of the spectrum stop the wild hyperbole and binary thinking.


.

True dat.

By using the odious Jeff Rense as the source material, all this thread does is obfuscate what is and is not fascism.

You don't read reel gud do ya. My screen says:

Fourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism
By Dr. Lawrence Britt
Source Free Inquiry.co
5-28-3​

I read just fine, son.

The link used originally is from an antisemitic hate site.

Provide proof!

Even if true, that still does not make each of the 14 points irrelevant. No matter how many red herrings you choose to post, It will not prove that Trump's stump speeches and policy ideas are different from those posted in the OP.

Your insistence on being dishonest is obvious, as is your inability to compose a rebuttal. All you have is an unsupported allegation of antisemitism which you cannot prove with evidence, and even if that one source is antisemitic, it has no bearing on the issue at hand, i.e. the list. Your response is simply a red herring + an ad hominem, compounding your dishonesty with logical fallacies is the work of a loser.

Obviously he's intimidated by the actual content, so he tries to make it "go away" by Poisoning the Well.

No, Pogo, Wry was drawing from an already poisoned well.

 

[TemplarKormac]

• Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
• disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
• Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
• Supremacy of the Military
• Rampant Sexism
• Controlled Mass Media
• Obsession with National Security
• Religion and Government are Intertwined
• Corporate Power is Protected
• Labor Power is Suppressed
• Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
• Obsession with Crime and Punishment
• Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
• Fraudulent Elections

Okay, let's start from the top:

1) What? How is expressing patriotism (mainly what nationalism is) a form of fascism?

2) Lol. When liberals start recognizing the slaughter of Christians in the Middle East by ISIS, then we can talk about human rights.

3) Oooooh this one is a veritable gold mine! You see how Trump supporters were treated this past year and change? As enemies. They were used as scapegoats by Hillary supporters to avoid addressing her own shortcomings.

4) Whats wrong with that?

5) Hmmm. So what of all the sexism directed at Republican and conservative women?

6) Heh, if the media as it is now isn't controlled by the Democrats, I don't know who it would be then. When you have an entire array of media outlets preaching your talking points, that means they are under your control. Guess what the predominant political affiliation of the MSM is?

7) If it isn't our obsession with national security, it's your willful disregard of same. Overconfidence has felled many a civilization.

8) Can you provide me an example of where government and religion are now intertwined?

9) How is that fascism?

10) Ever seen a Marxist? Do you have a mirror handy?

11) No, a contrary opinion or a resistance to a certain type of idea is not a disdain for intellectualism and the arts. It's called free speech. Let's say I don't like the artistic style of a prominent liberal artist. Am I now against the arts and therefore a fascist?

12) Obsession with crime and punishment? Wasn't it your disregard of crime and punishment that allowed you to nominate Hillary?

13) Washington is full of it. You seem to think this is unique only to Trump/Republicans/Conservatives.

14) Wow. And we've come full circle. Hillary pounded Trump for not accepting the results of an election that may not go his way, yet here you are...

 

[Mac1958]

No communication of real substance can even begin unless & until those on the ends of the spectrum stop the wild hyperbole and binary thinking.

Or, unless & until those people are somehow culturally marginalized.
.

Which people are "those people"?

The ends of the spectrum. The hardcore partisan ideologues on both ends. The narcissists who have convinced themselves and each other that only they and their side have all the answers.
.

 

[Divine Wind]

Sorry, your link is one more example of the dishonesty on the right.....

Why is it dishonest? Why do you think I'm "on the right"? Are you on the left? What is the purpose of your thread labeled "Fascism" then a biased poll on Trump? I didn't vote for him and have already responded that when he takes the oath of office he is duty-bound to put the Constitution first. Nothing about fascism in it.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

 

[Divine Wind]

True, however............. going out on a limb here........ I'm not convinced Rump actually believes in Fascism. Not as a Hitler or Mussolini would -- although he's certainly got the Mussolini narcissistic body language but that's another matter.

I'm not sure Rump believes in anything --- anything but Rump and how many accolades he can get because he can never get enough. If fascism is the route to that he'll do it but if abolishing the Electoral College works, he'll do that too. When a head of state doesn't have any particular agenda to push it's not necessarily going to go in a given direction. In other words, anything can happen. He can probably be easily manipulated by well-timed tweets, which was not only Hillary's best line but doubtlessly why Putin wanted him in there.

So the whole direction of the country depends on who successfully manipulates his gigantic Ego.

It certainly cannot be said that we didn't try to warn people.

Wouldn't calling the President-elect "Rump" and claiming he can be manipulated a form of "poisoning the well"?

Fallacy: Poisoning the Well
Description of Poisoning the Well
This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person. This "argument" has the following form:

1. 
   
   
2. Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented.
3. Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.

This sort of "reasoning" is obviously fallacious. The person making such an attack is hoping that the unfavorable information will bias listeners against the person in question and hence that they will reject any claims he might make. However, merely presenting unfavorable information about a person (even if it is true) hardly counts as evidence against the claims he/she might make. This is especially clear when Poisoning the Well is looked at as a form of ad Homimem in which the attack is made prior to the person even making the claim or claims. The following example clearly shows that this sort of "reasoning" is quite poor.

Before Class:
Bill: "Boy, that professor is a real jerk. I think he is some sort of eurocentric fascist."
Jill: "Yeah."

During Class:
Prof. Jones: "...and so we see that there was never any 'Golden Age of Matriarchy' in 1895 in America."

After Class:
Bill: "See what I mean?"
Jill: "Yeah. There must have been a Golden Age of Matriarchy, since that jerk said there wasn't."

 

[Wry Catcher]

True dat.

By using the odious Jeff Rense as the source material, all this thread does is obfuscate what is and is not fascism.

You don't read reel gud do ya. My screen says:

Fourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism
By Dr. Lawrence Britt
Source Free Inquiry.co
5-28-3​

I read just fine, son.

The link used originally is from an antisemitic hate site.

Provide proof!

Even if true, that still does not make each of the 14 points irrelevant. No matter how many red herrings you choose to post, It will not prove that Trump's stump speeches and policy ideas are different from those posted in the OP.

Your insistence on being dishonest is obvious, as is your inability to compose a rebuttal. All you have is an unsupported allegation of antisemitism which you cannot prove with evidence, and even if that one source is antisemitic, it has no bearing on the issue at hand, i.e. the list. Your response is simply a red herring + an ad hominem, compounding your dishonesty with logical fallacies is the work of a loser.

Obviously he's intimidated by the actual content, so he tries to make it "go away" by Poisoning the Well.

No, Pogo, Wry was drawing from an already poisoned well.

If the only site/cite was the Rense Link, you might have a point. As it is your post is nothing more than an echo of a red herring & personal attack. How about that echo chamber?

 

[Wry Catcher]

• Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
• disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
• Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
• Supremacy of the Military
• Rampant Sexism
• Controlled Mass Media
• Obsession with National Security
• Religion and Government are Intertwined
• Corporate Power is Protected
• Labor Power is Suppressed
• Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
• Obsession with Crime and Punishment
• Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
• Fraudulent Elections

Okay, let's start from the top:

1) What? How is expressing patriotism (mainly what nationalism is) a form of fascism?

2) Lol. When liberals start recognizing the slaughter of Christians in the Middle East by ISIS, then we can talk about human rights.

3) Oooooh this one is a veritable gold mine! You see how Trump supporters were treated this past year and change? As enemies. They were used as scapegoats by Hillary supporters to avoid addressing her own shortcomings.

4) Whats wrong with that?

5) Hmmm. So what of all the sexism directed at Republican and conservative women?

6) Heh, if the media as it is now isn't controlled by the Democrats, I don't know who it would be then. When you have an entire array of media outlets preaching your talking points, that means they are under your control. Guess what the predominant political affiliation of the MSM is?

7) If it isn't our obsession with national security, it's your willful disregard of same. Overconfidence has felled many a civilization.

8) Can you provide me an example of where government and religion are now intertwined?

9) How is that fascism?

10) Ever seen a Marxist? Do you have a mirror handy?

11) No, a contrary opinion or a resistance to a certain type of idea is not a disdain for intellectualism and the arts. It's called free speech. Let's say I don't like the artistic style of a prominent liberal artist. Am I now against the arts and therefore a fascist?

12) Obsession with crime and punishment? Wasn't it your disregard of crime and punishment that allowed you to nominate Hillary?

13) Washington is full of it. You seem to think this is unique only to Trump/Republicans/Conservatives.

14) Wow. And we've come full circle. Hillary pounded Trump for not accepting the results of an election that may not go his way, yet here you are...

A for effort, F for not focusing on Trump's words and actions, in the form of tweets, and those he has picked for his administration.

HRC is yesterday, and she was more conservative than Trump appears to be (your use of HRC as an example is a red herring). However, HRC has empathy for others (her life story proves that); Trump is a classic narcissist and a callous conservative (if we are to believe his behavior with women and employees accurately describes him).

• There is a broad distinction between being a Patriot and a Nationalist
• Your use of ISIS is another red herring
• How did Trump treat the others seeking the Republican Nomination, Journalists and Democrats (grow up, this is politics)
• If you have to ask, you need to take some courses in world history.
• Sexism is a word you seem to not understand. It is akin to racism, not the behavior of a few, but of the entire set
• The media is not a singular item, it is thousands of men and women most employed by corporations
• Simple thinking is the error here, once again history would guide you (in this case look to the ME, the Mandates after WW I, the State of Israel, the overthrow of the Iranian Government by the CIA, and let's not forget our lust for oil)
• Pence (I'm a Christian, a conservative and then a Republican)
• Again, look at how fascism in Italy = corporatism
• I'm a Marxist? That's using a pejorative as you default to ad hominenism.
• Verbal attacks on Hollywood
• Law and Order, rings of Nixon and Agnew
• LOL, have you seen his choices for leadership in his administration?
• Trump was betting he would lose, and claimed over and over our election was rigged. Which allowed him to reinforce the meme for the Republican Party effort to suppress the votes of likely Democratic voters.

 

[Mac1958]

Please review the following two links on fascism and what we have observed since the election of Donald Trump to the office of POTUS.


Fourteen Defining Characteristics Of Fascism

Donald Trump and the 14 signs of Fascism • /r/politics

Consider the promises made by Mr. Trump during the time before he received the nomination of the Republican Party, his rhetoric before his election after being nominated, and his rhetoric since being elected to POTUS?

We need more choices for this so-far rhetorical poll.

My own answer is "too early to tell -- I don't know yet."

Yep!

The minds of those on the ends are already made up, of course, but for the rest of us it's way too soon.
.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Why is it dishonest? Why do you think I'm "on the right"?

When a person is an authoritarian at the extreme end of the political spectrum, everybody else looks to hold views in the other direction, and when they are incapable of understanding politics with any more acumen than a game of my team vs your team, they simply ascribe anything they cannot understand as the enemy.

In terms of rigidity of belief and demand for absolute conformity, they are everything they decry.

If these kids actually understood what fascism IS, they would realize it is predicated upon the absolute conformity to a rigid belief system that is highly structured and treats all those who do not share this belief system as enemy. Good grief, in this regard, Trump is almost the antithesis of a fascist as he hardly seems to even HAVE a belief system. He is certainly a populist, and a demagogue, even, but fascist? The extremist kids who pull this stuff are simply too immature to deal in politics beyond their mud slinging.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

True dat.

By using the odious Jeff Rense as the source material, all this thread does is obfuscate what is and is not fascism.

You don't read reel gud do ya. My screen says:

Fourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism
By Dr. Lawrence Britt
Source Free Inquiry.co
5-28-3​

I read just fine, son.

The link used originally is from an antisemitic hate site.

Provide proof!

Even if true, that still does not make each of the 14 points irrelevant. No matter how many red herrings you choose to post, It will not prove that Trump's stump speeches and policy ideas are different from those posted in the OP.

Your insistence on being dishonest is obvious, as is your inability to compose a rebuttal. All you have is an unsupported allegation of antisemitism which you cannot prove with evidence, and even if that one source is antisemitic, it has no bearing on the issue at hand, i.e. the list. Your response is simply a red herring + an ad hominem, compounding your dishonesty with logical fallacies is the work of a loser.

Obviously he's intimidated by the actual content, so he tries to make it "go away" by Poisoning the Well.

No, Pogo, Wry was drawing from an already poisoned well.

Yep -- he indulged in Godwinning while referencing a hate site that actually celebrates Hitlers birthday, and then when confronted with that fact, simply engaged in a bunch of personal attacks while constantly whining that he was the one being attacked.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

look to the ME, the Mandates after WW I, the State of Israel

Which is why you were at Rense in the first place.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No communication of real substance can even begin unless & until those on the ends of the spectrum stop the wild hyperbole and binary thinking.

Or, unless & until those people are somehow culturally marginalized.
.

Which people are "those people"?

The ends of the spectrum. The hardcore partisan ideologues on both ends. The narcissists who have convinced themselves and each other that only they and their side have all the answers.
.

I agree. And yet the radical and revolutionary elements are no longer on the fringe, they have become mainstream - most were once considered part of the idiot fringe (which I still do).

 

[Mac1958]

No communication of real substance can even begin unless & until those on the ends of the spectrum stop the wild hyperbole and binary thinking.

Or, unless & until those people are somehow culturally marginalized.
.

Which people are "those people"?

The ends of the spectrum. The hardcore partisan ideologues on both ends. The narcissists who have convinced themselves and each other that only they and their side have all the answers.
.

I agree. And yet the radical and revolutionary elements are no longer on the fringe, they have become mainstream - most were once considered part of the idiot fringe (which I still do).

Yes, they're becoming more so, and that concerns me no end.
.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Fuck you. You're a dishonest piece of shit.

 

[Divine Wind]

Fuck you. You're a dishonest piece of shit.

Why did you start this thread in the CDZ if this is your manner of debate?

 

[Pogo]

True, however............. going out on a limb here........ I'm not convinced Rump actually believes in Fascism. Not as a Hitler or Mussolini would -- although he's certainly got the Mussolini narcissistic body language but that's another matter.

I'm not sure Rump believes in anything --- anything but Rump and how many accolades he can get because he can never get enough. If fascism is the route to that he'll do it but if abolishing the Electoral College works, he'll do that too. When a head of state doesn't have any particular agenda to push it's not necessarily going to go in a given direction. In other words, anything can happen. He can probably be easily manipulated by well-timed tweets, which was not only Hillary's best line but doubtlessly why Putin wanted him in there.

So the whole direction of the country depends on who successfully manipulates his gigantic Ego.

It certainly cannot be said that we didn't try to warn people.

Wouldn't calling the President-elect "Rump" and claiming he can be manipulated a form of "poisoning the well"?

Fallacy: Poisoning the Well
Description of Poisoning the Well
This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person. This "argument" has the following form:

1. 
   
2. Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented.
3. Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.

This sort of "reasoning" is obviously fallacious. The person making such an attack is hoping that the unfavorable information will bias listeners against the person in question and hence that they will reject any claims he might make. However, merely presenting unfavorable information about a person (even if it is true) hardly counts as evidence against the claims he/she might make. This is especially clear when Poisoning the Well is looked at as a form of ad Homimem in which the attack is made prior to the person even making the claim or claims. The following example clearly shows that this sort of "reasoning" is quite poor.

Before Class:
Bill: "Boy, that professor is a real jerk. I think he is some sort of eurocentric fascist."
Jill: "Yeah."

During Class:
Prof. Jones: "...and so we see that there was never any 'Golden Age of Matriarchy' in 1895 in America."

After Class:
Bill: "See what I mean?"
Jill: "Yeah. There must have been a Golden Age of Matriarchy, since that jerk said there wasn't."

I don't need a lesson on what Poisoning the Well is, thanks. But thanks also for bringing up "Rump". Love to explain. I use "Rump" not as a proper name but as a title A title the man has duly earned through hard work, i.e. the hard work of being an Ass. And of course it puns on his real name so everybody knows who I refer to.

But I haven't been discussing Rump here and certainly not as a source. If I were picking apart something Rump said as a source, i.e denigrating the content on the basis of where it comes from ---- then you'd have Poisoning the Well.

On the other hand picking on "Rense" when the citation is a simple verbatim citiation of the exact same analysis availabe from multiple other sources that are wholly unrelated to Rense in any sense, ABSOLUTELY is poisoning the well. It's a blatant attempt to sweep the topic away, usually meaning the well-poisoner is afraid of it.

 

[Pogo]

look to the ME, the Mandates after WW I, the State of Israel

Which is why you were at Rense in the first place.

>> RENSE IS IRRELEVANT HERE <<..

I cited four different books (post 40) that cite the exact same analysis, and I could cite more, and you can too. You're wimping out because you can't handle the topic.