The GOP's other new idea: Bringing back Fascism »
Posted By Spadecaller 7 months ago in Political NewsRepublican activists want to brand Obama and his policies "fascist." So, they're resorting to the tried and true tricks of the vast right wing conspiracy. The epithet, commonly associated with Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy, gained new currency among conservatives with the publication of Jonah Goldberg’s 2008 book, “Liberal Fascism.” Here’s another one of those new ideas from today's desperate leaders from the GOP.
Read Full Story at americablog.com »
976 Views Share Story 323 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Spadecaller
Welcome to my profile. About me: I'm an artist of several kinds; from bull to painting. I don't spare too many words. Most ...
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 313 of 323 Comments (view all)
-
81%
Charlson7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's another word that will lose it's true meaning because of the Republicans. Just like marxism and socialism, fascism will be misused and abused. Won't they ever learn? Their days of sling mud and hoping it will stick is over unless they actually use the truth, but they are too afraid of the truth.
Reply-
-
31%
Endoscopy7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Listen to the liberals rant. Do they even know what they are talking about?
Reply
Here are some of the things that Fascism are known for.
"Fascists advocate the creation of a single-party state."
Sounds like the liberals chortling over the demise of Republicans.
"Fascist governments forbid and suppress criticism and opposition to the government and the fascist movement."
Sounds like the fairness doctrine at work. The result would be to keep conservative views off of radio. Talk radio stations like a lot of other stations run with just enough profit. Forced to put on the air programs that the public turns off forces them to change what they put on the air. By by talk radio just like the liberals want. If the audience will not listen to them then they have to get rid of it.
"Fascists reject the individualism and self-interest of laissez-faire capitalism. Many fascist leaders have claimed to support a "Third Way" in economic policy, which they believed superior to both the rampant individualism of unrestrained capitalism and the severe control of state communism. This is to be achieved by a form of government control over business and labor."
Sounds like what Obama is preaching. The treasury Secretary wants to make rules about what companies can do, how much to pay, and to be able to take control of those he wishes to. All kinds of controls he wants. This feature of Fascism is what makes Fascism a left wing ism.
So if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and acts like a duck then just maybe it is a duck.
Rant on you super libs. -
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned3 Replies
-
71%
donald517 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Isn't it amazing that John Dean pulled together some psychs and gave us "Conservatives without Conscience" to validate that right wingers and evangelicals fall in to the same psychological profile as that developed after WW2 on the followers of Mussolini- a fascist!
Reply
-
-
75%
Spadecaller7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
For eight long years some people objected when we used Nazi comparisons for a government that invaded sovereign nations, tortured at will, spied on it's own people.
Reply
But if someone spends some money on worthwhile public projects and to save the country from the shambles left behind by Bush--he's a fascist?
As long as we're allowed to redefine the meaning all terms except "marriage", can we decide that Satanist is the proper term for fundamentalists and historical revisionists?-
68%
not2needy7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't remember one single speech, press conference or State of the Union Address that W gave where he didn't use the term fascism or fascists 3 or 4 times, at the very least. I don't really think he had any idea what the word meant, it just sounded sinister enough to get his agenda across.
Reply -
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned2 Replies
-
-
55%
RedRiverJ7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Is there really a right way to use the term "fascism"? It only sounds extreme. And, I don't think most Americans even know what it means.
Reply
It is amazing how many authors think the american people are stupid. I think there are many that know what our politicians are doing. That's with an S meaning all of them.
I covered many of the tea partys. People I talked with, photographed were democrats and republicans who are frustrated with ALL of them.
I can't comment on the book, haven't read.-
76%
Spadecaller7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
RRJ
Reply
BTW: If you can't comment on the book because you haven't read it, is seems awfully bias of you to drop the article.
Furthermore, one doesn't have to read the book in order to look up Mr. Anuzis' definition of "liberal fascism."
So, despite your admission that you do not understand what the term "liberal fascism" means, why would you support its use? -
-
88%
Beau78907 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's Jonah Goldberg, the author of the book, talking about what he means by comparing "progressivism," which he calls "the same as liberalism," to fascism:
Reply
http://vodpod.com/watch/470386-jon-stewart-intervi...
Watching the interview, it's obvious Goldberg is equating liberals to fascists by taking the most extreme, least practical, never in a million years would be implemented, ideas of today's progressives as examples of totalitarian ideas. Then he argues that because some progressives 80 years ago supported certain hateful totalitarian ideas, it's proof that today's progressives are fascists.
In other words, he's either denying that movements and people have changed over the past 80 years, or he's being entirely disingenuous in asserting that there is any link between today's mainstream liberals and fascists.
My guess is the latter, because being provocative sells more books. -
75%
mesodude7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"People I talked with, photographed were democrats and republicans who are frustrated with ALL of them."
Reply
--You wish, rrj. Stop peddling the lie that anyone other than CONS were there in significant numbers. Just stop because you can't prove this and no one believes it.
-
-
75%
Spadecaller7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
RRJ:
Reply
The tag, frequently associated with Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy, gained new meaning among conservatives with the publication of Jonah Goldberg’s 2008 book, “Liberal Fascism.” This spring, an article in The American Spectator titled “Il Duce, Redux?” described President Obama’s goals, language and conception of government “straight out of Mussolini’s playbook.”
Mr. Anuzis identified Fox News commentator Glenn Beck as an enlightened (reborn) conservative , as did some participants at the antitax “tea party” rallies last week. Mr. Anuzis spreads the word on Facebook and Twitter referring to Obama as the "liberal fascist".
His use of the term is completely ignorant and shows a complete lack of understanding of fascism.
It also discomfits mainstream and centrist conservatives who question its accuracy and political wisdom, as it is turning off the swing voters and independents. -
74%
jordan117 months ago
-
68%
Spadecaller7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If they keep it up, they will scare more people away from the party. On the other hand, the violent rhetoric that much of it incites may also lead to triggering some of the crazies to attacks against innocent citizens, like Timothy McVeigh's twisted act of "patriotic terrorism".
Reply
-
-
75%
NoWayMan7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the GOP leadership is simply the squeaky wheel these days, loud and shrill in a feeble attempt to stay relevant. but the louder and shriller they get, the less everyone wants to hear them.
Reply
eventually the squeaky wheel simply gets replaced. -
38%
tadair9197 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's important to know what "fascism" means before you try to debunk it. The author finishes, "And, I don't think most Americans even know what it means." The left included.
Reply
Otherwise, people would have no question that what bernanke, giethner, and paulsen are doing today is fascism.-
89%
Beau78907 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No, everyone would have quite a few questions about how Bernanke, Geithner and Paulsen (who isn't in power anymore anyway) are doing is fascism.
Reply
Your (and Goldberg's) arguments are like saying that because the USSR used money it got from citizens to finance the space race, and because the USSR was totalitarian, therefore, entering the space race is totalitarian.
Fascism encompasses SO much more than the inconsequential comparisons Goldberg makes, and the ones the right-wing makes against today's liberals, that it's entirely ridiculous to compare the two.
-
-
73%
tadair9197 months ago
-
92%
Beau78907 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Which is exactly why it's ugly, irresponsible and meaningless for people to toss the term around at those who support the least destructive of policies fascists implemented using methods no one today advocates.
Reply
Mussolini made the trains run on time. Does that make everyone who wants trains to run on time a fascist?
-
-
65%
not2needy7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
lol, republicans try to take Liberals to task, demanding definitions to the word fascism when they can't even provide one themselves. I think we all have a working idea of what fascism is, God knows Bush threw the term around for 8 years adnauseam! Nothing about the word describes anything a Liberal stands for, and to keep trying to associate it with Libbies is redundant and honestly shows lack of intelligence!
Reply-
38%
tadair9197 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
this coming from the same twit, who was asked to give their definition of fascism a few days ago and plagiarized a few paragraphs from wikipedia.
Reply
sorry pal. you're not making the case.
want to try again and tell us what you think fascism means, or are you going to continue to dodge the question by saying "bush fits the bill"
-
-
43%
tadair9197 months ago
-
56%
not2needy7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NO, that sounds a lot more like the motto of the modern day con! In fact, the modern day right winger wants everyone who doesn't think like them shot, not just the messenger.. That's one of the things that makes being fascists so easy for them! lol
Reply -
-
50%
Jeboba7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
your message is the same old tired regurgitated 'talking points' from the radical right, Faux, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, etc.
Reply
If you cons ever had an original idea and one that contributed positively to ANYTHING, we would be happy to listen. BUT, all you do is rant, rave, call names, and follow your loser leaders like a bunch of bleeting sheep!
-
-
94%
Bkumm7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm not sure which group of people is more ridiculous. Is it the people who label others with a term like "fascist" in an effort to make the debate about the word or whether it is those of us that are triggered by the word in such a way that we can't talk about anything else? I'm not sure.
Reply
Fascism is a very specific political and economic system originally formulated to be a "middle way" between capitalism and communism. It only acquired its "evil" character with the efforts of people like Mussolini and Hitler. But, in the historical context, it is no more or less "evil" than communism or capitalism. Although, to be totally accurate, communism and capitalism are economic systems not political ones.
When we fail to understand that it is not a system or a word that is evil, but rather that it is people themselves that have the capacity for evil, no matter the label, we fail to recognize the basic truth that will set us free.-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned5 Replies
-
-
93%
Bkumm7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I must also add here that it is equally disingenuous to say that NAZI's and fascists are the same thing.
Reply
The NAZI's were a specific political party in Germany. Period. Not all NAZI's were fascists and not all fascists were NAZI's. There are no NAZI's currently, except for some few very old members of the Party who have not relinquished their allegiance. There is certainly no recognized NAZI Party.
For instance, one could argue, under the economic definition, that the Chinese government is more fascist than communist. Communism does not leave room for individuals to be entrepreneurs for themselves. If an individual makes more money than other individuals then his or her excess is automatically diverted to the State to be equally divided amongst the People. Fascism, on the other hand, dictates that the State will run some institutions, but that individual entrepreneurs can succeed for themselves as long as their interests to not run contrary to the "needs of the State". Both of these are different than socialism and capitalism.
Socialism argues that those who have more should give more, especially when the more given tends to benefit those who have less. It does not, whatever Rush says, demand an equal distribution of resources amongst the People of a State. That would be communism.
Capitalism argues that the individual has the right to as many resources as they can attain, regardless of the needs of the State or the People. It's logical conclusion is, well, we're seeing it.-
82%
Progressive7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"The NAZI's were a specific political party in Germany. Period."
Reply
Nazi Germany under the leadership of Hitler soon became a dictatorship:
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/Nazi_Germany_... -
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned4 Replies
-
Neutral
Spadecaller7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Technically, the word NAZI was the acronym for the National Socialist German Worker's Party. It was a fascist movement. Nazism was a form of fascism that included the concept of Aryan Superiority. Nazism and fascims share many similarities and a few differences.
Reply
Nazism had its roots in the European nationalist and socialist movements that evolved to include the grotesque belief in"Aryan" supremacy. "National socialism" refers to the early Nazi movement before Hitler came to power, which was sometimes termed the "Brownshirt" phase, and the term "Nazi" was coined to refer to the movement after it had consolidated around ideological fascism.
The seeds of fascism, however, originated in Italy. "Fascism is reaction," were Mussolini’s exact words. This fascist reactionary movement following World War I opposed the social theories that formed the basis of the 1789 French Revolution, and whose early formulations in this country had a major influence on our Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights.
"Fascism, which was not afraid to call itself reactionary... does not hesitate to call itself illiberal and anti-liberal."
_Benito Mussolini
-
-
100%
frctm57 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Facism: A form of government characterized by extreme nationalism, one party rule, and an aggressive and militant foreign policy. There is no state ownership of private industry but a cozy relationship between the private sector and the authoritarian regime. Going along with the government's agenda is profitable. Opposing it spells ruin.
Reply
Fascism began in Italy. It means "bundles" as in bundles of sticks which is an archaic word referring to bundles of wood used for fires. Its application to the fascist movement was intended as a metaphor for small groups of activist, ex-soldiers in Italy, who were disillusioned after the first world war with their inability to get work and the incompetence of the Italian government. Tapping into this sense of betrayal, Mussolini was able to guide the movement to his expansionist, imperial agenda. Hitler was an admirer of Mussolini and tapped into similar elements of frustration in Germany. Fascism is also characterized by the idea that races and countries are in competition with each other and that only those who are strongest are equipped to survive. Eliminating weakness strengthens and purifies the race. They would be opposed to a pluralistic society. Now, to be clear, Italy had a different interpretation of fascism than Germany. Mussolini was not anti-semitic like Hitler but did adopt his anti-semitic program once he became dependent upon Germany for his survival. Mussolini did, however, subscribe to ideas of racial superiority. Even though fascism began in Italy, it was never embraced with the same zeal and enthusiasm as it was in Germany. If Germany had not intervened, Italy would have fallen out of the war much earlier. The Italians were very glad when Mussolini fell and felt liberated by the allies. Eventhough fascism began in Italy, it is far more associated with Hitler and the Nazi's. Spain is the only place where this form of government endured the war.-
83%
tadair9197 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i think why people are so pragmatic about the topic is because of the comparisons to hitler and mussolini. sticking to your first sentence: fascism is a form a government characterized by ... nationalism, one party rule, and an aggressive militant foreign policy.
Reply
anyone disagree with that? -
-
-
33%
simonsez7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Capitalism argues that the individual has the right to as many resources as they can attain, regardless of the needs of the State or the People. It's logical conclusion is, well, we're seeing it."
Reply
Partially correct except the State and thereby the people recapture a portion of the resources through taxation at every level of government, as well as job opportunities created for others.
Money, regardless of whose hands it is in, is always working to create economic activity. Disposable income is the income that accelerates an economic system.-
89%
Bkumm7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How is the definition not completely correct? Job opportunities and taxation exist (and perform the same function) under a socialist system that they do in a capitalist system. It is not those which define the system, it is what the individual is allowed or encouraged to do under the system that defines it.
Reply
-
-
-
-
83%
Spadecaller7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I had to leave for a doctor's appointment today. For those childish tea-baggers and liberal haters who accused me of running from their disingenuous interest in my definition of fascism, I now have the time to post it.
Reply
Fascism was a term originally used to describe the government of Benito Mussolini in Italy. Mussolini's fascist one-party state emphasized patriotism, national unity, hatred of (leftist) communists, admiration of military values and unquestioning obedience. Hitler was deeply influenced by Mussolini's Italy and his Germany shared many of the same characteristics.
(continued) -
100%
Spadecaller7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The tenets of a centralized totalitarian and nationalistic government that strictly controls finance, industry, and commerce, practices rigid censorship and racism, and eliminates opposition through secret police.
Reply
There have been four corporatist fascist dictatorships in the 20th and 21st centuries: Franco's Spain, Mussolini's Italy, Hitler's Germany and Bush's US. The Bush/Cheney administration exploited 9-11 to harness nationalism in a country distraught and outraged by terrorism. The Texas oilman teamed up with Dick Cheney, the former CEO of Halliburton to wage a war in Iraq, which provided no bid contracts to Halliburton and various other corporations that profited from a war in Iraq that had nothing to do with 9-11. The use of secret intelligence that did not exist helped launch an attack on a foreign country for the sole purpose of profit.
The “Patriot Act” (nationalism) breached the civil rights guaranteed in the constitution and the use of secret surveillance and torture followed. The exploitation of racism and religious bigotry kept the nation divided and polarized, which allowed the executive branch domination over Congress and the courts. Bush isolated himself from public exposure –never appearing in settings that were not highly screened. The manipulation of the courts and his appointment to the presidency by a Supreme Court that was clearly biased towards Republicans usurped the will of the American voters.
(continued)-
67%
tadair9197 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
halliburton is, indeed, a sign of fascism because the government granted no-bid contracts and gave monopolistic power to them.. the patriot act is fascist if you mean to say that an amendment protects telco companies from lawsuits over illegal spying. but, not for the reasons you cited.
Reply
-
-
100%
Spadecaller7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Secret concentration camps were set up in foreign nations. Private corporations were hired to torture “detainees”. And, the suspension of Habeas Corpus ushered in the darkest period of fascism in American history since Senator Joseph McCarthy. By the time that Barack Obama became president, the Bush administration’s policies had ransacked the economic security of the middle class and had left the nation with an unprecedented deficit, in addition to a failing economy. In contrast, during the fall of the middle class, the oil companies and the military industrial corporations reported enormous profits, Wall Street was booming, while main street was crumbling. Average Americans struggled to heat their homes, pay their mortgages, send their children to college, and pay for health care insurance or health care. Jobs had left for overseas markets where cheap labor and unsafe products were shipped back for sale in nation that can barely afford them anymore.
Reply
Fascist regimes historically utilize extreme nationaism, censorship, totalitarianism without fair representation, racism, hatred, censorship, and secret organizations that answer first to the head of the state.
Obama and left wing liberals are on the opposite end of the political spectrum. That is primarily why, McCarthy and Nixon (right wing conservatives) used the fear of communism in their efforts to gain power and political dominance. Nixon,like Bush, exploited the CIA to attack his political opponents. -
-
100%
diogenes21st7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Internet began life as a fast and definitive means of exchanging vital facts, knowledge, data and research across the Defense Department and universities. Because of this, visionaries foresaw it as a tool that would similarly educate, enlighten and improve the general intelligence of everyone around the world, uniting and lifting Mankind up to a new and better day in human freedom and cultural progress.
Reply
If anything has ever proven the lie of that promise, this thread is it. Like so many other Prop threads over the years, it is mostly nothing more than a race to the bottom of human discourse. It’s like the noise of the wind blowing into an empty can; it’s making a discernable sound, but there’s no pattern or sense to it. And the level of mindless character assassination, name-calling, distorted facts, out-and-out incorrect assertions and my-opinion-right-or-wrong-ism here is just a deafening cacophony.
First, start with the basic premise. One political party – as political parties are want to do – is excoriating the other with as much ferociousness as is possible, and some people on Prop actually accept such scattershot mudslinging as unquestioned fact, rather than as the bombastic and hyperbolic propaganda it clearly is. When Ford says GM cars are crappy, or Domino’s Pizza bashes Papa John’s, everyone understands that they’re playing a game in the ongoing attempt to win your loyalty. They are not having a reasonable, honest, fact-based dialogue designed to lift each other up to improve society. Why can’t people see this when it’s done with politics? (Or perhaps many of these posters do know it, and are just acting as willing cogs in an Orwellian machinery.)
Secondly, fascism is a specific thing, as are democracy, communism, socialism, theocracy, monarchism, anarchism, libertarianism, and so on. But, and this is an important but, it has always been associated with conservative elements in every society that has been abused by it. Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Tojo, Pinochet, to name just a few, were all right-wing demagogues, not leftist utopians. In fact, in all of these cases, fascism was born of a war with the Left, not a lovefest with it, and each and every leader of a fascist country or movement has always proudly said so (in this country, fascists in the 20s and 30s were quite proudly rightist, for example). -
-
100%
diogenes21st7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As for the people on here demanding a definition, they can go look it up. That’s what a smart, inquisitive, honest person does. Then you come back into the discussion. If you do this, you will find that fascism looks nothing like what hacks like Goldberg twist it into. It is indeed a system that promotes:
Reply
• Nationalism (things like “America First” or “My Country Right or Wrong”, which btw are not Left-wing slogans);
• Militarism (an unblinking, unquestioned support of weaponry, soldiery, limitless defense spending, and war, again not Leftist views);
• Corporate power combined with state support, not state oversight (support for deregulation, untaxed profits, wealthy and powerful CEOs and company presidents, anti-worker and anti-union stands, again none of which are Leftists);
• Unchecked government power and violence (torture, secret police, surveillance of citizens, aggressive hiding of state documents, again, not traits associated with Left-wing sorts);
• The use of fear of the “other” as a political weapon (anti-intellectual, anti-homosexual, anti-civil rights, anti-immigration, anti-fine arts, anti-foreigner, and so on, again not exactly a Left-wing agenda).
In fact, each and every one of the fascist regimes mentioned above have shared these traits. -
-
86%
diogenes21st7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So in the context of the charges leveled at Obama and liberals by Goldberg/FoxNews/Beck and so on, do any of these things sound like something a liberal Democrat would do? Is there a single bill Obama has put forth that does any of these things? Quite the opposite. He has condemned the use of torture, proposed greater regulation of corporations, proposed more spending on social programs, backed more power for workers and unions, and begun to release Bush-era “secret” documents. And not to be ignored, he also has not, as many Republicans have in past years, called for things like English-Only laws, busting unions, defunding the arts, harassing immigrants, deregulating corporate power, unchecked surveillance, making it harder not easier to vote and so on. Does any of this still sound like fascism to any of you?
Reply
And more on point, raising taxes is not ipso facto fascism, folks, Fox’s Tea Parties aside. Otherwise everyone from George Washington to Abe Lincoln to Woodrow Wilson to Herbert Hoover to Franklin Roosevelt to George H. W. Bush to Bill Clinton (and many others in between) was a fascist.
In order to not have to face the self-evident twisted logic of this and so many other distorted issues, many in our culture talk about the need to go around media and intellectual “filters.” They do this to: 1) avoid having to deal with inconvenient facts based on testable, researchable data accepted on consensus by smart, expert, trained and knowledgeable people; and 2) promote the myth that (presumably) Left-leaning experts are seeking to force a distorted agenda of progressive lies into America’s hearts and minds.
But in a healthy and working democracy or republic, it is the job of journalists, scholars, researchers, investigative committees, judges, and similar groups to investigate claims, ask tough questions, sift facts from bull and present defensible, reasonable conclusions for all of us to similarly read, investigate and test for ourselves.
Too many people today – and it’s unfortunately true that a vast majority of them are on the Right currently – show open disdain for fact-finding, journalistic research, scholarship, the scientific method, and true dialogue devoid of childish name-calling. They prefer to replace time-tested facts with unsupported opinion, replace constructive dialogue with partisan hack attacks, and put superstitious and self-serving fears ahead of human rights and true democratic equality.
And this is why this thread is Exhibit A in the failure of the Internet to lift us all up from impoverished ignorance. Instead, it is helping to chain us down with the Dickensian creepy twin tots of Want and Ignorance (and, as the Ghost of Christmas Present says, especially fear the latter, for on his brow is written doom, unless it is erased).
Otherwise, how is everybody?
More News
The Huffington Post
Submit a Story
Advertisement
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.