There must be some way to advertise some sort of logic to show the middle class whho vote GOP are being duped.

I thiought that once we showed that the GOP is fighting for the wealthy that the MC would see they aren't getting anything from the party. This didn't work.

Are they under some sort of mass hypnosis?

Maybe we need to start by kicking our Dems in the ass.
They need t fight for progressive evolution and quit trying to
work with the Repukes.

We need a Dem majority or we'll end up spinning our wheels for another 4 years. What a waste of time and money this has been.

The GOP is just a tool. Democrats, not all, but enough, are tools. The media is a tool. The 'Tea Party' is a tool. All of them serving the purpose of dividing the people and whipping one 'side' to a frenzy of hatred.

It will likely be 2018, after there has been one last 'huzzah' for the economy and after we see a number of catastrophes of various kinds, that the PTB will essentially pull the trigger on fascism. I'm guessing they'll run a woman in 2017, someone loved by the rabid right, but intelligent-seeming enough to run the country. She'll win. I'm sure they're shopping around now. After whatever tragedy strikes in 2018, the media will go into overdrive blaming the 'liberals' and 'intellectuals' because those are always the greatest enemies of fascism. You can bet the wingnuts can't wait to suit up and get their jackboots on when that day comes.

I've been regretting it since Tricky Dick ran on his Law'n'Odor platform. That's almost two generations right there.

People didn't believe the campaign warnings saying the GOP would outlaw abortion, and now abortion is illegal. They didn't believe the warnings that the GOP would kill social security, and now we no longer have this great safety net. They didn't believe the GOP would change our country into a theocracy, but now we are forced to pray every morning, noon and night.

With such a great record of dire warnings, maybe now the people will believe that a "theocratic corporate police state" is coming if they vote for the GOP.




Sigh. We are going to have control of all three branches come this time next year. We don't need fearful propaganda scare tactics to do that.

There have been long, slow steps, taken over a long time, that will lead to fascism in America. All the little things you'd expect to see go into place on the way to a fascist state have been put into place with few exceptions.

The Republicans are most likely to be at the helm when fascism takes the stage because their constituents are generally too stupid to recognize it and most likely to go along with whatever they're told. So long as they see their side as 'winning', they will jump right on that bandwagon.

The 'socialist' nation that people on the left are to stupid to recognize OR the 'fascist' nation that people on the right are too stupid to recognize?


Abortion isn't illegal. Our guns have not been banned. President Bush did not push old people to rot in the streets. President Obama has created a nation of slaves dependent on government to survive.

Face it, the doom and gloom rhetoric has not panned out.

If you haven't learned enough to figure that out for yourself by now, just think of the perception of European nations that the 'media' imposes on so many here.

I'd love to think we have nothing to worry about, but your ignorance is in evidence.

Want the straight stuff?

that show's the far-right and far-left talking points to be nothing but paranoia.

I have spent around ten years of my life living in European nations and while the utopia perception the media promotes is off base, it isn't all that bad once you understand the difference in how individual freedoms are viewed.

As I prefer facts, the "straight stuff" is all I use.

http://www.anotheramerica.org/fascism.htm



True or False:

Republican figures and media have been steadily cultivating an attitude that slogans representing patriotism are tantamount to actual patriotism. This substitution of symbols for actual understanding of the tenets of The Constitution and cultural philosophy is very popular among 'conservatives'.

This is in line with Point 1 of the Stages of Fascism.



True or False:

Republicans and the 'conservative' media fit this profile.



True or False:

Republicans and the 'conservative' media fit this profile.



Do you deny this is the current case?





Ummm... Duh?




True or False: These days the corporate media tends to favor Republicans even when they are entirely fucking stupid.




True or False: Republicans use 'A noun, a verb, and 'terrorism'/'liberalism'/'socialism'/etc.' at every opportunity.




True or False: This is a typical agenda for Republicans.



True or False: This is happening shamelessly and blatantly today.



True or False: Republicans and their corporate allies are trying to quash labor power.




True or False: Republicans and 'conservative' media outlets are sowing disdain for higher education and intellectuals.




True or False: Police are getting ever more power and peaceful OWS protestors are being abused by police.




Even though it's the weakest one, True or False: Billions of dollars have disappeared in Iraq and Trillions from the Federal Reserve.





True or False: The elections in 2000 in FL and 2004 in Ohio were heavily rigged for the Republican candidate.




All of these points line up with Republicans far more than Democrats. Fascism is in the foyer.

If you really appreciate 'facts', then you'll answer those questions. Otherwise I'll be happy to write you off as clueless.

1.
Truth: We as a nation have always held our flag in high regard, there has been no "steady cultivation" of this attitude. Mottos, slogans, symbols, songs etc... have been a part of our nations culture from its founding and claiming it's proof of creeping fascism goes against the 200+ years of our history.

So, false. Love of country has nothing to do with people disagreeing with your opinion and interpretation of the tenets of The Constitution.

2. False.
There is no "conservative" or "liberal" media brainwashing people into fascism or socialism and both sides us fear to push their own agenda. You claim the right has disdain for human rights and the right claims you have disdain for individual rights, and you both use the extremes to "prove" your point.

3. True for both sides actually. But when you get down to it, how each side defines the other sides actions is the problem. Both sides see themselves as victims and both sides claim fascism or socialism when opinion differs from their own.


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.

4. No, I do not deny that we have military supremacy. Of course, an all volunteer military that does not have any power outside of the military isn't fascism either.

5. Duh? Abortion is legal in this country and high opposition to it is primarily over the viable stage and encompasses both parties. There is no law against being a homosexual and being against gay marriage doesn't always mean one has a phobia of gays. Yes, some anti-gay legislation does come up that we must work to change, but the fact that we are doing so shows that we are progressing on the issue. Same is true of womens issues.

6. False. Support for liberals or conservative depends on the media and what is "entirely fucking stupid" is opinion only.

7. True, they do. But what is the difference between using those words and using words like theocracy, conservatism, rednecks and fascism at every opportunity?

8. False. The typical "agenda" for Republicans is to follow the Constitution as they believe it should be followed. The super religious minority part of the party are not representative of the party as a whole. If it were, there would be no 1st Amendment.

9. True and false. Yes, it can be argued that business has to much influence in government, but it can also be argued that government has to much influence in businesses. Fact is though, that government is the only entity with the power to make us do anything and there is nothing that shows Wal-Mart controls you.

10. Lack of voluntary support does not mean it is suppressed. Sure Republicans have chosen to support the individual over the union, but that hardly is proof that they are trying to quash labor any more than it means Democrats are trying to install the hammer and sickle by choosing unions over the individual.

11. False. Both sides promote higher education and intellectuals, all one has to do is listen to them to see this. The problem both sides have is that their own personal opinions and interpretations are not being taught.

12. True, the police are indeed being given too much power year by year. I wouldn't signal out OWS though.

13. True, but this has been going on for decades and both parties are guilty of it. IF this was proof of us becoming a fascist state, we would already be one.

14. Unless I have missed some investigations or new facts, the answer is still false. Ranks right up there with all the "proof" that the UN is helping steal elections for Democrats and patrolling our streets.

"All of these points line up with Republicans far more than Democrats. Fascism is in the foyer."

No, it is your opinions that claim fascism is in the foyer, just as it is some on the rights opinions that claim socialism is here. Everything you stated has to be interpreted to support your opinion in order to see fascism is here.

"If you really appreciate 'facts', then you'll answer those questions. Otherwise I'll be happy to write you off as clueless."

I happily answered them, but something tells me that since I dare disagree with your opinions of what "is really going on," you will write the facts off anyways.

Everywhere you have disagreed, you have deliberately ignored the trends and treated each as a snapshot. You have also used the very typical rightwing tactic of trying to create 'false parity' with lines like "they both do it". That's like saying a jaywalker and Hitler are 'both criminals'. Also, you've deliberately ignored the pretense that we're talking about 'Republican actors', not 'constituencies'.

Add to that your complete ignorance of events in Florida and Ohio, and I suspect you haven't done a minute of real research.

We're obviously done here.

The "trends" you see are based only on your opinion, an opinion when one gets when they look at a snapshot instead of the whole picture.

Great, the 'typical rightwing tactic' accusation when someone doesn't take your opinion as fact. Have heard it before and am sure will hear it again.

Your opinion is even less valid if we are only talking about "republican actors" not republicans themselves.

Complete ignorance of events in Florida and Ohio? As I said before, I have done research, but I may have missed the latest news. So please tell me about the factual investigation that I missed and all the facts it found that support your opinion.

Because you don't give a damn about facts.

You have done no 'research' on OH or FL, otherwise you would not be so convinced that there was not election fraud on a massive scale. No one who has done more than a few hours of research could ever honestly say that. That would mean there is only one other explanation.

The attempt to create false parity is very much a 'typical right wing tactic', just like telling someone that the only reason they point that out is 'because they disagree with you'. That's a very common wingnut tactic. I can't count the number of times I've seen it employed. So why do you do that?

It is not merely my 'opinion' that the media legitimizes morons like Palin, nor is it merely an 'opinion' that she is a moron. What those are called are 'well-founded opinions'. You seem to have a great deal of difficulty understanding how valid opinions are formed. It sometimes requires that a large number of 'facts' are processed and correlated in order to arrive at something which is 'true' but not necessarily a 'fact'.

You are playing the game of being ignorant of this process in order to set too high a bar to become 'convinced'... which you really have no intention of being anyhow.

I'll give you an example: "The Sun is Hot". Is that an 'opinion' or a 'fact'? It is an opinion. It is also a truth, but it is not a 'fact' because 'hot' is relative.

That you refuse to acknowledge that Republicans and their discernible agenda fall more into each of the 14 categories than that of Democrats, and that you refuse to acknowlege that things have been trending more towards those points than away speaks more to your intent than your ignorance.

So, what would it take for you to acknowledge any of them?

Man, your panties are really in a bunch over this.

I have done research and there are no facts from an official investigation that support your opinion of what you think happened or want to have happened. If there is, please provide them and I will admit I am wrong.

I point out false accusations and name-calling when people fall back on them when they get upset that the facts do not support their opinion. It is a common tactic for those who are so partisan that they choose not to accept the facts.

Your "well-founded opinions" of Palin are based on the fact that she holds different beliefs and values than you do, nothing else. This is the exact same thing behind the birther movement.
You seem to have a great deal of difficulty understanding just how much your gross partisanship shapes your opinions. I do not do that, facts are facts and credit where credit is due.

I did acknowledge the ones based on facts and I gave my input as to how and why the facts do not show some evil Republican or Democratic plan to change our form of government. I can, and I have, done the same thing with supposed 'trends' that point to us becoming a socialist nation.

Because there was no 'official investigation'.

And you know why too. Was the Republican State attorney general going to order an investigation? The Republican USAG?

The facts prove that OH was heavily rigged. But it doesn't matter how many I throw at you, you will simply deny the conclusion and dismiss each set of facts despite their pertinence. It's exactly the same tactic that AGW deniers use. They also make the claim that they 'researched the issue', but really they just believe what they have been told by the industries that spend millions on propaganda.

I'm terribly amused that you continue to resort to that typical wingnut tactic of saying that I only hold a low opinion of someone 'because they disagree with me'. I guess I'm a 'liberal elitist' to you? Palin is a moron. I base that opinion not on the fact that I disagree with her as you so disingenuously insist, but because she has the IQ of a grapefruit. Why does it bother you so much that I say that?


Do you understand how the facts prove that humans have influenced the environment, causing climate change?

If you can understand that, then you could possibly understand what happened in OH and FL.

Ohio has no Democrats who looked at the accusations? None of the Democrats in the House or Senate ever looked at the accusations? Of course they do and it is my opinion that they did look and there wasn't any or enough factual evidence to proceed further.
But by all means, you are free to stick with your opinion that some great Republican conspiracy kept all such evidence suppressed and all those politicians quiet.

What you say about Palin doesn't bother me at all, you can even call her a slut or prostitute for all I care. They are just words.
But we are talking about facts and the facts do not point to her being a moron, sorry. So, unless you can use something other than your disagreement with her opinions as a basis for her being a moron, I have to assume that is why you believe her to be a moron.
What is her IQ by the way?

Now we are on climate change? Ok.
As anybody with an open mind can understand, I understand how the facts prove that humans can have influence on the environment and how this could be contributing to climate change.
Do you understand that there are many variables in play with this issue and that jumping off the cliff head first into conspiracy isn't the best way to deal with the issue?
If you do, then you might have a chance at understanding why so few believe in conspiracy theories.

Okay, we have some common ground to work from.

How come 90% of the world's climatologists are 'conspiring' to create this panic?

You kind of went *poof* after my last post to you. Hope everything's alright.

Meanwhile, I LOVE that you are defending Palin's 'intellect'. One must be very creative to distract from the plethora of instances and statements from her that prove she's basically a moron across the board.

You really haven't seen any of those even though you've been here since just after Obama became the Democratic candidate for President and you also managed to average nearly 1000 posts per year? You've been here for so long and participated so much and you still aren't aware that Palin is a complete and total moron?

Really?

Do you have any reason to believe that she's actually quite intelligent? I'd love to see the 'facts' that support her being above an 8th grade level of education in practical terms.

are contributing to climate change and, if you look at the facts, the scientists for the most part are not involved in the conspiracy theories saying we drastically change overnight or we are all doomed.

I am not defending her intellect, I do not know her well enough to do so. Ideological differences, misquotes and quotes taken out of context are not valid reasons to label her as a moron.
I do not dislike or hate people because of their politics and because of this, she is just another person whom I disagree with.

I did not state what I think her intelligence and it is silly partisan BS for you to think she is not above an 8th grade level.

This is fundamental to the point of this segment of the discussion.

(We're talking about climate change, I'll get to Palin in a bit)

You have to be patient when exploring complex issues. I'm sure you're not like the climate denier fuckwads who dismiss every piece of evidence rather than seeing how they fit together. Therefore understand that the proof of fraud in Ohio is also complex and requires attention.

While I truly doubt you did more than a few minutes 'research' into it, you claim to appreciate facts. Since I always tend to give the BOTD, here are just a very small sample of them:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1091203#post3

We'll see you there.

And you're practically a living manual for wingnut tactics.

I sure hope you're alerting on these so that people can see this.

The status quo is well within his tolerance levels and is forced to barely side Democrat almost exclusively because of discomfort with the cast and characters and the anti-government zealotry, not out of any love for government but with the horsesense to know we must have one to offer any management to a host of complex systems and maintain order over the populace.

You have to be a radical regressive to have much use for the TeaPubliKlans unless you are on the caviar end of the wealth funnel and even then, there is a suicidal tendency toward eating the seed corn and needlessly stiring "the small people" and potentially disrupting commerce, that would leave a thoughtful greedhead more than a bit dubious of the integrity of the flow of wealth.

Realistically, the only actual attempt at a governing party are the Democrats. If you believe in such a function in any capacity then we are pretty much it beyond panty sniffing and dropping bombs.

That is what I see but it is hard to argue the kat can see where the TeaPubliKlans are "coming from", there is no "what the fuck" for him. Might disagree in some areas or have different logic for agreed upon areas in others but there are within the minds easy reach and closer to "reality" than someone much less far left.
His debate seems much more about execution than ideology, Jim Baker and Charles Schultz types would be fine.

I use moderate language, frames and thought patterns, just as the majority of the population does. Very few see government as the 'evil to all' as they do on FR or as the 'answer to all' as on this board and the problem both those sides have is that they believe the nation should be ran as only they say, with no questions asked. They are not the majority they wish or even think they are, they are the minority and they are wrong.

My debate is about truth based on fact, not cheerleading opinions that are based in ideology. Everybody has opinions and everybody is free to state them, but if you expect people to support them, they better be based on fact. Because if they aren't, you get shit like "Democrats are socialists," "Obama is going to take our guns" and "Republicans are fascists."

That there's one for the bookmarks.

Anyone who can deny that we've seen indications of each of those points from Republicans in America is one of three things: Profoundly ignorant, terminally stupid, or inimical to the Founder's vision.

We're headed for bad times if we don't get these corporations under control.

Wouldn't you agree?

Though I do think that some beliefs die hard, even in good people. No one likes finding out that something they love and believe in has changed, dissolved like a dream.

By Milton Mayer

I don't especially like a bi-partisan "police state".

Try electing a Democratic majority in the House and increasing the majority in the Senate. That oughta do it.

Last edited Wed Mar 14, 2012, 05:00 PM - Edit history (1)

How dare you point out the truth.

This encroaching police state has been developing for forty years now, and the Dems have aided and abetted it along the way. Clinton was a big contributor, with his handling of the War on Drugs, and the various laws he signed and/or pushed to take away our civil rights. Obama, well, can you say NDAA? And that is just the beginning. Yes, the 'Pugs have pushed this, but it has been a bipartisan effort, let's never forget that.

I have been concerned by what I see on the lefts eagerness to support the same policies and tactics that we despise in our opponents, as well as those who seem perfectly okay with the nanny state and extra judicial killings. I have been wondering if there are any true liberals anymore.

Both parties are purchased, and they are working in collusion on economic and military issues that profit the one percent.

Both parties.

You cannot fix a problem if you refuse to acknowledge it.

The move toward a corporate police state is bipartisan. You cannot fix a problem if you refuse to acknowledge it.

Imagine if Republicans had the Presidency
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=418146

Fascism would be very difficult to impose in the US for some of the same reasons that Democracy never quite got off the ground in post-WWI Germany.

After WWI, Germany had:

1) Lost an enormous war and suffered millions dead. The civilian population had gone hungry and cold because of the blockade. Versailles was perceived as a 'victor's peace,' because the Germans had no say in its terms. They lost territory, were demilitarized, and were forced to pay a large sum. When they stopped paying, parts of Western Germany were occupied by the French and Belgians. The treaty was widely despised across Germany, perceived as an ongoing national humiliation, and helped taint the government (and system) that had signed it.

No parallel at all in the US now.

2) The army carefully concealed the Germany's crumbling military position at the end of the war, thus deflecting blame for the loss onto the civilian government. Many people were not aware that the war was going so badly until it was over. Related to the first point, you had millions of now demobilized soldiers unhappy about what had happened. This was an even bigger deal in Italy. Italy felt cheated out of the territory it was promised for entering the war - it's not a coincidence that Mussolini and many of his earliest followers were disillusioned vets (as was Hitler)

No parallel in the US at all now.

3) Germany had weak Democratic traditions and was a young nation-state. This is a crucial point. As we know from our own military adventures around the world, you can't just tell a state, 'Ok, you're a democracy now. Go be democratic.' It takes a long time for the underpinnings of democracy to mature and become stable. Without strong foundations, it's easy for democracies to slide into dictatorships. This was a problem just about all of Central Europe faced after WWI. Many new states started out as democracies, but didn't finish the interwar period as them.

Definitely no parallel in the US now. We've been a democracy for over 200 years and we have a strong civil society.

4) There was no social revolution that accompanied the fall of the Kaiser. Again, it's not just about the form of the government, but the people staffing civil society. The teachers, lawyers, police, judges, etc. in the Weimar state were largely holdovers from the old regime. Many weren't particularly strong supporters of the new government. They had made their lives and careers under the old system.

Quite the opposite in the US. Our civil society is run by people who have been raised on democratic values.

5) The German currency was completely ruined by inflation in 1923. Savings gathered over a lifetime were wiped out. This hollowed out the middle class and left them vulnerable to extreme rhetoric.

No parallel so far. The dollar isn't the strongest it's been, but we're pretty much good for now.

6) There were several other unsuccessful attempts to overthrow the government in the early days of Weimar. This indicated that the new system was having problems being born and presaged future trouble. The Bavarian Commune, Spartacist Revolt, Kapp Putsch, and Hitler's Beer Hall debacle are examples of this from both the left and the right.

Nothing remotely like this is in the cards for the US right now.

7) The Great Depression. Without the Depression, it's pretty unlikely the Nazis could ever have become as strong as they did. Obviously we know that some sort of major economic calamity is never out of the cards. But remember that the Great Depression also hit places like France, Britain, and the US very hard too. Yet all of these states came out the other end as democracies. Germany didn't in large part, because it WASN'T France, Britain or the US. Democracy was not as strong their and not as capable of withstanding a major shock.

No parallel so far in the US.

8) Several powerful political parties with the stated aim of radically overhauling the system. Notably the Communists and the Nazis. It's not a coincidence that the two would sometimes vote together in the Parliament in order to stick it to the status quo. Though completely opposed to one another, they had a shared goal in the collapse of the system.

We have only two parties, both of which are completely invested in the current system.

There are many more reasons too (cultural producers disappointed in the system, the spread of anti-democratic ideologies elsewhere in Europe, flaws in the Weimar constitution, etc.). Few if any of these have parallels in the US today.

It just doesn't work. Try again.

The very first example you gave is nonsensical. So because there are no specific parallels, then it can't happen here?

Number seven is just plain oblivious. We did have a massive economic crisis and we're not out of the woods yet. One more collapse under a Republican president, and all the little steps taken to erode our rights puts us right in the maw of fascism.

I would say our situation looks more like Republican Spain, if you wanted to try for a historical analogy.

Just the first TWO fit the GOP to a TEE...

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


Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:

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.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the 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.