benwynn

Is it ok to call Republicans facists now?

Recommended Posts

 

More Than Half of GOP Voters Believe Media Is the ‘Enemy of the People’

https://www.thedailybeast.com/poll-more-than-half-of-gop-voters-believe-media-is-the-enemy-of-the-people

57% Of Republicans Say Dismantle Constitution And Make Christianity National Religion

https://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/25/57-republicans-dismantle-constitution-christianity-national-religion.html

More than half of Republicans would support postponing 2020 election.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/08/10/52-percent-republicans-would-support-postponing-2020-election/555769001/

Since Republicans see the free press as the enemy, want to dismantle the Constitution, and want to leave Trump in office without an election, it looks like they have no interest in our current form of government.

@Dog... I figure if you are going to chew up that nice pair of shoes in your thread, I may as well take a shit in the living room.

Does this horseshit work both ways? 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, benwynn said:

 

More Than Half of GOP Voters Believe Media Is the ‘Enemy of the People’

https://www.thedailybeast.com/poll-more-than-half-of-gop-voters-believe-media-is-the-enemy-of-the-people

57% Of Republicans Say Dismantle Constitution And Make Christianity National Religion

https://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/25/57-republicans-dismantle-constitution-christianity-national-religion.html

More than half of Republicans would support postponing 2020 election.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/08/10/52-percent-republicans-would-support-postponing-2020-election/555769001/

Since Republicans see the free press as the enemy, want to dismantle the Constitution, and want to leave Trump in office without an election, it looks like they have no interest in our current form of government.

@Dog... I figure if you are going to chew up that nice pair of shoes in your thread, I may as well take a shit in the living room.

Does this horseshit work both ways? 

now you are scaring me :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember, we can brand the entire party with this shit. 

If I understand Dog correctly, while some on the party don't agree with these positions and don't appreciate being tagged with them, it's too fucking bad. It's their party, so they can suck it. 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're just patriotic Americans.

The only Real Americans.

Since a majority of them no longer believe in the Republic or its Constitution they should change their party name from the Republican party to the Fascist party

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, benwynn said:

Just remember, we can brand the entire party with this shit. 

If I understand Dog correctly, while some on the party don't agree with these positions and don't appreciate being tagged with them, it's too fucking bad. It's their party, so they can suck it.

Like your grandmother said "You're judged by the company you keep".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

golf-clap.gif

Nicely done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder where burn this bitch down is on the spectrum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, benwynn said:

More Than Half of GOP Voters Believe Media Is the ‘Enemy of the People’

https://www.thedailybeast.com/poll-more-than-half-of-gop-voters-believe-media-is-the-enemy-of-the-people

That's probably wise. Start treating media corporations like friends and next thing you know they're going to think they should have first amendment rights or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The obvious difference is that there's a libertarian-sized chunk of democrats that want to be called "socialists" as either a branding strategy or through some idealized vision of that word.  I can't think of very many republicans that want to be called fascists.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

The obvious difference is that there's a libertarian-sized chunk of democrats that want to be called "socialists" as either a branding strategy or through some idealized vision of that word.  I can't think of very many republicans that want to be called fascists.

There's a libertarian-sized chunk of Republicans that want to be called libertarian, either as a branding strategy or through some idealised vision of that word. Doesn't make it right to call Republicans libertarian, regardless of what some might want.

Still, by the reasoning Dog applies to Democrats, Republicans should be called fascists. He only provided a poll showing that some view the concept favourably, not one showing that they want to be called socialists. Ben has done a good job pointing out how Dog's "logic" fucks him harder than he'd like to concede. No need to dilute that with a tangent regarding what people want to be called; neither of them presented evidence about what Democrats or Republicans want to be called.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

There's a libertarian-sized chunk of Republicans that want to be called libertarian, either as a branding strategy or through some idealised vision of that word. Doesn't make it right to call Republicans libertarian, regardless of what some might want.

You caught the obvious parody!

 

4 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

He only provided a poll showing that some view the concept favourably, not one showing that they want to be called socialists. Ben has done a good job pointing out how Dog's "logic" fucks him harder than he'd like to concede. No need to dilute that with a tangent regarding what people want to be called; neither of them presented evidence about what Democrats or Republicans want to be called.

Isn't the whole Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez experiment based on the idea that she wants to be called a democratic socialist or is that just something the media applying?

-------------------------

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-explains-democratic-socialism-on-the-late-show/

"She talked to Colbert about her reaction after winning as a first-time candidate in New York's 14th congressional district and about what her support for democratic socialism means."

or

http://www.newser.com/story/262271/democratic-socialism-surges-in-age-of-trump.html

"Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Congress' only self-identified democratic socialist, campaigned Friday with the movement's newest star, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old former bartender who defeated one of the most powerful House Democrats last month."

---------------

In other words, I really do see the Democratic Socialist movement as essentially an analog for the libertarians (political symmetry and all that) including those on the left using 'libertarian' as a pejorative much like those on the right use 'socialism' as a pejorative.  I don't see either side embracing 'fascist' very aggressively so I think Ben has missed the boat in terms of equivalences.  As monkey-poo flinging goes, I thought it missed the mark.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

You caught the obvious parody!

 

Isn't the whole Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez experiment based on the idea that she wants to be called a democratic socialist or is that just something the media applying?

-------------------------

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-explains-democratic-socialism-on-the-late-show/

"She talked to Colbert about her reaction after winning as a first-time candidate in New York's 14th congressional district and about what her support for democratic socialism means."

or

http://www.newser.com/story/262271/democratic-socialism-surges-in-age-of-trump.html

"Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Congress' only self-identified democratic socialist, campaigned Friday with the movement's newest star, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old former bartender who defeated one of the most powerful House Democrats last month."

---------------

In other words, I really do see the Democratic Socialist movement as essentially an analog for the libertarians (political symmetry and all that) including those on the left using 'libertarian' as a pejorative much like those on the right use 'socialism' as a pejorative.  I don't see either side embracing 'fascist' very aggressively so I think Ben has missed the boat in terms of equivalences.  As monkey-poo flinging goes, I thought it missed the mark.

 

 

Perhaps, but it certainly left a mark, and for many here, I think it probably hit too uncomfortably close to home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, benwynn said:

 

More Than Half of GOP Voters Believe Media Is the ‘Enemy of the People’

https://www.thedailybeast.com/poll-more-than-half-of-gop-voters-believe-media-is-the-enemy-of-the-people

57% Of Republicans Say Dismantle Constitution And Make Christianity National Religion

https://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/25/57-republicans-dismantle-constitution-christianity-national-religion.html

More than half of Republicans would support postponing 2020 election.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/08/10/52-percent-republicans-would-support-postponing-2020-election/555769001/

Since Republicans see the free press as the enemy, want to dismantle the Constitution, and want to leave Trump in office without an election, it looks like they have no interest in our current form of government.

@Dog... I figure if you are going to chew up that nice pair of shoes in your thread, I may as well take a shit in the living room.

Does this horseshit work both ways? 

The belief that the media is the enemy of the people does not demonstrate fascism (If only such a belief was common in 1930's Germany). Nor does the belief in the establishment of a national religion, foolish though it is. Support for the postponement of an election to insure election integrity doesn't indicate fascism either.

But yes it works both ways, if a majority of Republicans identified as fascists I think it would be reasonable to call it a fascist party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

You caught the obvious parody!

Well, you did serve it up on a silver platter. :lol:

 

Quote

Isn't the whole Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez experiment based on the idea that she wants to be called a democratic socialist or is that just something the media applying?

She does (at least to my knowledge) and so I don't think it would be unfair to call her a socialist. I'm sure you understand the issue with using one member of a demographic to label every member of that group.

 

Quote

In other words, I really do see the Democratic Socialist movement as essentially an analog for the libertarians (political symmetry and all that) including those on the left using 'libertarian' as a pejorative much like those on the right use 'socialism' as a pejorative.  I don't see either side embracing 'fascist' very aggressively so I think Ben has missed the boat in terms of equivalences.  As monkey-poo flinging goes, I thought it missed the mark.

Neither side is embracing libertarianism or socialism aggressively either. Nor was that even attempted by Dog in his trolling. To be frank, I think you're now bending pretzel-style in an attempt to miss the point.

Dog didn't present evidence of Democrats wanting to be called socialist, advocating to replace capitalism with socialism, etc. He merely pointed to a poll that showed just over half of 1500 Democrats polled viewed "socialism" favourably. Viewing socialism favourably is merely one attribute of what makes someone a socialist and Dog thinks showing a slim majority sharing that attribute should be applied to the entire party.

So following Dog's logic - polls showing a slim (or significant) majority Republicans have an attribute shared by fascists makes Republicans fascist... but we've seen how pathetic he gets whenever cornered on a position he's taken, so expect some pathetic attempt to weasel out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

The belief that the media is the enemy of the people does not demonstrate fascism (If only such a belief was common in 1930's Germany). Nor does the belief in the establishment of a national religion, foolish though it is. Support for the postponement of an election to insure election integrity doesn't indicate fascism either.

But yes it works both ways, if a majority of Republicans identified as fascists I think it would be reasonable to call it a fascist party.

Well, that was predictable. But let's apply the logic in reverse: Viewing the concept of socialism favourably does not make one socialist. So one cannot apply that label to the Democratic Party.

If a majority of Democrats identified as socialists, then it would be reasonable to call it a socialist party. Get back to us when you have a poll showing they identify as socialist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Well, that was predictable. But let's apply the logic in reverse: Viewing the concept of socialism favourably does not make one socialist. So one cannot apply that label to the Democratic Party.

If a majority of Democrats identified as socialists, then it would be reasonable to call it a socialist party. Get back to us when you have a poll showing they identify as socialist.

The poll did not measure favorability, it measured preference. Everyone should be happy with my compromise that we call the Democratic party a "majority socialist" party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dog said:

The poll did not measure favorability, it measured preference. Everyone should be happy with my compromise that we call the Democratic party a "majority socialist" party.

No, it didn't. You clearly did not check your source. 

The poll explicitly asked "Just off the top of your head, would you say you have a positive or negative image of each of the following? Small business, Entrepreneurs, Free enterprise, Capitalism, Big business, The federal government, Socialism".

There was no need to indicate preference. One could answer with a positive image of Capitalism and positive image of Socialism. Similarly, one could also have answered they have a negative image of Capitalism and a negative image of Socialism.

You are wrong, Dog. You chose the wrong poll to try this stunt. Man up and move on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cmilliken said:

The obvious difference is that there's a libertarian-sized chunk of democrats that want to be called "socialists" as either a branding strategy or through some idealized vision of that word.  I can't think of very many republicans that want to be called fascists.

 

I'm sure there are many Republicans in the closet..............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

No, it didn't. You clearly did not check your source. 

The poll explicitly asked "Just off the top of your head, would you say you have a positive or negative image of each of the following? Small business, Entrepreneurs, Free enterprise, Capitalism, Big business, The federal government, Socialism".

There was no need to indicate preference. One could answer with a positive image of Capitalism and positive image of Socialism. Similarly, one could also have answered they have a negative image of Capitalism and a negative image of Socialism.

You are wrong, Dog. You chose the wrong poll to try this stunt. Man up and move on.

Ok, ok...I'm not an unreasonable guy and in the spirit of cooperation... how about this . We refer to the Democratic party as the "majority favors socialism" party?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

Ok, ok...I'm not an unreasonable guy and in the spirit of cooperation... how about this . We refer to the Democratic party as the "majority favors socialism" party?

Just as soon as you show that the majority favours socialism instead of merely having a positive image of socialism. Do let us know when you have that in hand.

You fucked up, Dog. The poll cannot be honestly used to show what you want it to. In the spirit of cooperation, I'll let you crawl off with your tail between your legs. Should you choose to continue dishonestly misrepresenting the polls findings though, I feel it only fair to point out your lack of integrity doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Just as soon as you show that the majority favours socialism instead of merely having a positive image of socialism. Do let us know when you have that in hand.

You fucked up, Dog. The poll cannot be honestly used to show what you want it to. In the spirit of cooperation, I'll let you crawl off with your tail between your legs. Should you choose to continue dishonestly misrepresenting the polls findings though, I feel it only fair to point out your lack of integrity doing so.

Now who's being unreasonable? What am I doing talking to an Australian about this anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

Now who's being unreasonable.

You.

 

Just now, Dog said:

What am I doing talking to an Australian about this anyway.

Being schooled by a foreigner who actually took the time to read the source you provided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bent Sailor said:

You.

 

Being schooled by a foreigner who actually took the time to read the source you provided.

I offer a perfectly reasonable compromise and you go all stupid. The "majority favors socialism" party it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

I offer a perfectly reasonable compromise and you go all stupid.

My position was that the facts don't support your position. Your position required making shit up. Your position still requires making shit up. There was no compromise offered.

 

Quote

The "majority favors socialism" party it is.

Pointing out you're a liar it is then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

My position was that the facts don't support your position. Your position required making shit up. Your position still requires making shit up. There was no compromise offered.

 

Pointing out you're a liar it is then.

I've demonstrated a willingness to be flexible on this matter. You, on the other hand, have dug your feet in and have now resorted to the personal.  I'm losing my patience with you BS.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dog said:

I've demonstrated a willingness to be flexible on this matter. You, on the other hand, have dug your feet in and have now resorted to the personal.  I'm losing my patience with you BS.

No-one is arguing your flexibility, Dog. And yes, I have dug my feet in - I have always, and will continue to, demand someone provide facts to back their claims. I consider that a reasonable position to dig in on, regardless of how flexible you are on which falsehood you wish everyone to accept.

And frankly, no-one cares about your patience. Just as you don't give a shit about mine. You've just lost your argument and lack the integrity to man up and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

No-one is arguing your flexibility, Dog. And yes, I have dug my feet in - I have always, and will continue to, demand someone provide facts to back their claims. I consider that a reasonable position to dig in on, regardless of how flexible you are on which falsehood you wish everyone to accept.

And frankly, no-one cares about your patience. Just as you don't give a shit about mine. You've just lost your argument and lack the integrity to man up and move on.

I don't like your attitude BS, "majority favors socialism" was an imminently reasonable compromise that addressed your concerns. We're going back to "majority socialist".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:

I don't like you attitude BS

My attitude is completely irrelevant. You've never cared about my attitude before and you don't now. Even for you, that's a piss poor excuse.

 

Quote

"majority favors socialism" was an imminently reasonable compromise that addressed your concerns.

As it is not supported by facts, it didn't address my one & only concern. Your poll doesn't support your argument. 

 

Quote

We're going back to "majority socialist".

We are not. You are and you are a liar in doing so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bent Sailor said:

My attitude is completely irrelevant. You've never cared about my attitude before and you don't now. Even for you, that's a piss poor excuse.

 

As it is not supported by facts, it didn't address my one & only concern. Your poll doesn't support your argument. 

 

We are not. You are and you are a liar in doing so. 

Fuck me this is great fun but I have to get some work done. 

Don't kick your dog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

Fuck me this is great fun but I have to get some work done.

And scene. Thanks Dog. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

The belief that the media is the enemy of the people does not demonstrate fascism (If only such a belief was common in 1930's Germany). Nor does the belief in the establishment of a national religion, foolish though it is. Support for the postponement of an election to insure election integrity doesn't indicate fascism either.

But yes it works both ways, if a majority of Republicans identified as fascists I think it would be reasonable to call it a fascist party.

What form of government considers the free press the enemy, elimination of the separation of church and state, and the indefinite suspension of elections?  It doesn't sound like the one we live under now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Dog said:

I've demonstrated a willingness to be flexible on this matter. You, on the other hand, have dug your feet in and have now resorted to the personal.  I'm losing my patience with you BS.

To paraphrase Trey Gowdy “we don’t give a damn about your patience” :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Ok, ok...I'm not an unreasonable guy and in the spirit of cooperation... how about this . We refer to the Democratic party as the "majority favors socialism" party?

Great minds discuss ideas;

average minds discuss events;

small minds discuss people;

the smallest minds discuss labels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Dog said:

I don't like your attitude BS, "majority favors socialism" was an imminently reasonable compromise that addressed your concerns. We're going back to "majority socialist".

I think your problem here is that your argument is based on spite rather than fact. If your point is negotiable based on the attitude of others, you don't have one. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dog, you might want to read that as you need to hold your temper if you just took a dump on the carpet and everyone is yelling at you.

Also, don’t take dumps on the carpet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

let's say i wholeheartedly agree with the premise of both this and dog's thread...what benefit has been gained by this labeling? how will it positively affect our legislative agenda's going forward?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None. My thread is a parody of Dog's. I see no purpose whatsoever of labeling people in a group en masse based on the behaviors of a subset of the group. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I know! It's Fun With Labels.  National Socialist German Workers Party.  

Sounds like the workers paradise party.  I think it was actually quite popular back in it's heyday.  A big majority of Germans viewed this party favorably.  Maybe it's because there were so many words to choose from. 

Meanwhile, back in the states, a majority of Americans favor legalization of marijuana.   Who wants to be the Pot Party?  I have not piled on Dog, for 1 thing the fallout on the right has been dramatic and nobody wants an echo chamber but on this topic Dog is way off base.  Democratic Socialism is not the same as the Socialist Party and the butthurt over the current state of the GOP is not the fault of anyone but those who support it.

Every Dog has his day, this isn't one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, benwynn said:

None. My thread is a parody of Dog's. I see no purpose whatsoever of labeling people in a group en masse based on the behaviors of a subset of the group. 

this is a solid response right here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, aA said:

this is a solid response right here

Thank you for your attitude. It saves me the trouble of changing my argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, benwynn said:

Thank you for your attitude. It saves me the trouble of changing my argument. 

;)!

What’s in it for those who would name a group for one of its subsets?

Money?  Emotional catharsis?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dog said:

But yes it works both ways, if a majority of Republicans identified thought and acted like fascists I think it would be reasonable to call it a fascist party.

FIFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dog said:

The belief that the media is the enemy of the people does not demonstrate fascism (If only such a belief was common in 1930's Germany).

Are you being sarcastic or just dense? 

See 'Lugenpresse" and or read any article about Mussolini. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

I don't like your attitude BS, "majority favors socialism" was an imminently reasonable compromise that addressed your concerns. We're going back to "majority socialist".

When does it actually become a reasonable compromise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, benwynn said:
3 hours ago, Dog said:

The belief that the media is the enemy of the people does not demonstrate fascism (If only such a belief was common in 1930's Germany). Nor does the belief in the establishment of a national religion, foolish though it is. Support for the postponement of an election to insure election integrity doesn't indicate fascism either.

But yes it works both ways, if a majority of Republicans identified as fascists I think it would be reasonable to call it a fascist party.

What form of government considers the free press the enemy, elimination of the separation of church and state, and the indefinite suspension of elections?  It doesn't sound like the one we live under now. 

You're forgetting

  • -Glorifies the military

... and ...

  • -Claims to be leading The People toward a mythical past

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trip from rampant crony capitalism (where we are now) to fascism isn’t all that long. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Umberto Eco's Ur-Facism. How many boxes could be checked?

http://www.openculture.com/2016/11/umberto-eco-makes-a-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html

  1. The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”
  2. The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
  3. The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”
  4. Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
  5. Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”
  6. Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”
  7. The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”
  8. The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
  9. Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”
  10. Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”
  11. Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”
  12. Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”
  13. Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”
  14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

Umberto Eco's Ur-Facism. How many boxes could be checked?

http://www.openculture.com/2016/11/umberto-eco-makes-a-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html

  1. The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”
  2. The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
  3. The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”
  4. Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
  5. Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”
  6. Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”
  7. The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”
  8. The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
  9. Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”
  10. Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”
  11. Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”
  12. Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”
  13. Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”
  14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

So Trump-ism is using the ur-fascism playbook...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, benwynn said:

None. My thread is a parody of Dog's. I see no purpose whatsoever of labeling people in a group en masse based on the behaviors of a subset of the group. 

A political party is a squishy thing. You aren't required to read the platform, initial each page, sign it and return it every four years. In simple principle, yes, labeling people in the group en masse for the behaviors of a subset of group will take you astray.

However, when that subset exceeds a majority you should take notice. When they elect people based on this empirically observed ideological change then it doesn't matter what was written in the platform, you should take notice. When they remain in the party with this change as a backdrop when they don't have to, you should take notice.

Saying something isn't happening or can't happen because it would violate a principle when it actually is already happening just doesn't make sense. Yeah, these guys are fascists and indeed you are seeing reasonable Republicans head for exit (or defeated in primaries). I massively disagree with the likes of Kasich. Read his On The Issues page. Why would I agree with that? But I don't question his patriotism. I do question the patriotism of these fascists and their defenders + apologists + fellow travelers. Fuck them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aA said:

let's say i wholeheartedly agree with the premise of both this and dog's thread...what benefit has been gained by this labeling? how will it positively affect our legislative agenda's going forward?

A more accurate understanding of prevalent attitudes.  I for one was surprised to learn that a majority of Democrats preferred socialism over capitalism. Clearly there has been some evolution within the party that has not been conveyed by our current lexicon.   It is in our interest to have an accurate understanding of reality.

That said, I don't find Ben's case for a fascist Republican party to be compelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

A more accurate understanding of prevalent attitudes.  I for one was surprised to learn that a majority of Democrats preferred socialism over capitalism. Clearly there has been some evolution within the party that has not been conveyed by our current lexicon.   It is in our interest to have an accurate understanding of reality.

That said, I don't find Ben's case for a fascist Republican party to be compelling.

Dogs say the funniest things sometimes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, benwynn said:

What form of government considers the free press the enemy, elimination of the separation of church and state, and the indefinite suspension of elections?  It doesn't sound like the one we live under now. 

You're right we do'nt live under a government like that. What percentage of Republicans subscribe to all three?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dog -

If in my yacht club 75% of people say they like Lasers, would be accurate to call it a Laser oriented yacht club?

 

 

 

 

 

* never mind 75% like Donzis, 75% like 420s, 75% like Bertrams, 75% like J-24s, and 75% like exposing themselves when the tour boat goes by :rolleyes:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

A political party is a squishy thing. You aren't required to read the platform, initial each page, sign it and return it every four years. In simple principle, yes, labeling people in the group en masse for the behaviors of a subset of group will take you astray.

However, when that subset exceeds a majority you and they should take notice. When they elect people based on this empirically observed ideological change then it doesn't matter what was written in the platform, you should take notice. When they remain in the party with this change as a backdrop when they don't have to, you should take notice.

Saying something isn't happening or can't happen because it would violate a principle when it actually is already happening just doesn't make sense. Yeah, these guys are fascists and indeed you are seeing reasonable Republicans head for exit (or defeated in primaries). I massively disagree with the likes of Kasich. Read his On The Issues page. Why would I agree with that? But I don't question his patriotism. I do question the patriotism of these fascists and their defenders + apologists + fellow travelers. Fuck them.

Well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Dog -

If in my yacht club 75% of people say they like Lasers, would be accurate to call it a Laser oriented yacht club?

 

 

 

 

 

* never mind 75% like Donzis, 75% like 420s, 75% like Bertrams, 75% like J-24s, and 75% like exposing themselves when the tour boat goes by :rolleyes:

When a majority of Democrats favor socialism over capitalism a majority of Democrats cannot also favor capitalism over socialism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

When a majority of Democrats favor socialism over capitalism a majority of Democrats cannot also favor capitalism over socialism.

The fact that you can have some of both is completely beyond your black/white, good/evil comprehension isn't it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SloopJonB said:

The fact that you can have some of both is completely beyond your black/white, good/evil comprehension isn't it?

No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:

No

Then why the insistence on labeling Democrats as Socialists?  I view the Hinckley much more favorably than other sailboats, not planning on buying one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Then why the insistence on labeling Democrats as Socialists?  I view the Hinckley much more favorably than other sailboats, not planning on buying one. 

Because when you knowingly non-support a fascist train wreck like Donald Trump, sleeping at night becomes impossible without dragging down everyone around you. Comforting yourself with the contrived knowledge that everyone else is just as f'ed as you is the only way to get through it short of a massive dose of oxy. Nothing like the warm blanket of whataboutism to stave off the guilt.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If not now, when? This is kind of like the Dog question, what would it take?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Then why the insistence on labeling Democrats as Socialists?  I view the Hinckley much more favorably than other sailboats, not planning on buying one. 

I'm fine with "majority favors socialism" because that appears to be what has happened in the Democratic party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

If not now, when? This is kind of like the Dog question, what would it take?

Never and no amount. Just talked to one of my Trump supporting friends. No matter how many facts you put in front of him, he just doesn't believe it. The packaged response is "Fake News." He was completely unaware that the Steele Dossier originated with the Republicans. "If that were true, it would be all over the news. It would be everywhere," was his reaction. His response to Trump calling Omarosa a dog was, "You can't call a black person anything without it being racist." And it goes on and on.

You don't need to take people to the jungle anymore to get them to drink the cool-aid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bhyde said:

Never and no amount. Just talked to one of my Trump supporting friends. No matter how many facts you put in front of him, he just doesn't believe it. The packaged response is "Fake News." He was completely unaware that the Steele Dossier originated with the Republicans. "If that were true, it would be all over the news. It would be everywhere," was his reaction. His response to Trump calling Omarosa a dog was, "You can't call a black person anything without it being racist." And it goes on and on.

You don't need to take people to the jungle anymore to get them to drink the cool-aid.

It should be easy to take their money, then.....

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I was asking the question with respect to the OP. If not now when, what line would need to be crossed before we can call Republicans fascist? I’m clearly already there. Where is that line for other people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bhyde said:

Never and no amount. Just talked to one of my Trump supporting friends. No matter how many facts you put in front of him, he just doesn't believe it. The packaged response is "Fake News." He was completely unaware that the Steele Dossier originated with the Republicans. "If that were true, it would be all over the news. It would be everywhere," was his reaction. His response to Trump calling Omarosa a dog was, "You can't call a black person anything without it being racist." And it goes on and on.

You don't need to take people to the jungle anymore to get them to drink the cool-aid.

The Steele dossier did not originate with Republicans. There was an earlier separate investigation of Trump commissioned by Republicans which did not involve Steele..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

The Steele dossier did not originate with Republicans. There was an earlier separate investigation of Trump commissioned by Republicans which did not involve Steele..

Don't bother. Like I said in the Drip Thread...

On 8/13/2018 at 11:12 AM, bhyde said:

We're done here Dog.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, benwynn said:

 

More Than Half of GOP Voters Believe Media Is the ‘Enemy of the People’

https://www.thedailybeast.com/poll-more-than-half-of-gop-voters-believe-media-is-the-enemy-of-the-people

57% Of Republicans Say Dismantle Constitution And Make Christianity National Religion

https://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/25/57-republicans-dismantle-constitution-christianity-national-religion.html

More than half of Republicans would support postponing 2020 election.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/08/10/52-percent-republicans-would-support-postponing-2020-election/555769001/

Since Republicans see the free press as the enemy, want to dismantle the Constitution, and want to leave Trump in office without an election, it looks like they have no interest in our current form of government.

@Dog... I figure if you are going to chew up that nice pair of shoes in your thread, I may as well take a shit in the living room.

Does this horseshit work both ways? 

Funny, the polls also said Hillary was going to win...

Largest sample size in the polls linked above was less than 1400 folks.  I'm pretty sure I, by being selective in where and whom I poll, pretty easily come up with enough folks to generate such opinions and results.  I'm pretty sure you can't really take that small a sample size, and then broadly state 57% of republicans want any particular thing.  The other piece of vital data left out, is what other self categorizing questions were asked/required to be part of the results beyond "self identifying as republicans?"  In other words, were potential folks surveyed asked if they had a positive, neutral or negative feeling about the media?  Then only those who had a neutral or negative feeling would clear the filter and be counted....

Blindly trusting a poll, particularly one that says what you want to hear,  is a good way to end up embarrassed or worse... 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Crash said:

Funny, the polls also said Hillary was going to win...

Largest sample size in the polls linked above was less than 1400 folks.  I'm pretty sure I, by being selective in where and whom I poll, pretty easily come up with enough folks to generate such opinions and results.  I'm pretty sure you can't really take that small a sample size, and then broadly state 57% of republicans want any particular thing.  The other piece of vital data left out, is what other self categorizing questions were asked/required to be part of the results beyond "self identifying as republicans?"  In other words, were potential folks surveyed asked if they had a positive, neutral or negative feeling about the media?  Then only those who had a neutral or negative feeling would clear the filter and be counted....

Blindly trusting a poll, particularly one that says what you want to hear,  is a good way to end up embarrassed or worse... 

I agree on all points.  Take it to Dog's Democrat/Socialism thread. His post was serious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

You're right we do'nt live under a government like that. What percentage of Republicans subscribe to all three?

Most of them.   Based on your attitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

A more accurate understanding of prevalent attitudes.  I for one was surprised to learn that a majority of Democrats preferred socialism over capitalism.

You shouldn't be surprised. You just made it up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, benwynn said:

Most of them.   Based on your attitude.

I'm not a Republican.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, benwynn said:

You shouldn't be surprised. You just made it up.

 

No I didn't .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Dog said:

The Steele dossier did not originate with Republicans. ...   ...   ...

A-a-and there he goes again, folks.

After spinning and spinning and spinning, Dog has to fall back on a flat-out lie

-DSK

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, benwynn said:

Yes you did.

 

No I didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dog said:

I'm not a Republican.

Good for you. Did someone ask?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

Ok, ok...I'm not an unreasonable guy and in the spirit of cooperation... how about this . We refer to the Democratic party as the "majority favors socialism" party?

don't matter none.

how about this, you stop giving your votes to what amounts to evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, benwynn said:

Yes you did 

Ok...ok... For you, I made it up. For me, I saw it in a Gallup poll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Actually I was asking the question with respect to the OP. If not now when, what line would need to be crossed before we can call Republicans fascist? I’m clearly already there. Where is that line for other people?

Well - it's quite clear that many of the respondents feel that any negative appellation they want to assign to the right is OK, so fascist, nazi, repubtard, racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, intentionally deficient,  whatever slam they *feel* at the moment is appropriate, because after all, it's just the wrong half of the country they're talking about, and that half's concerns and priorities just really aren't worthy of consideration.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Well - it's quite clear that many of the respondents feel that any negative appellation they want to assign to the right is OK, so fascist, nazi, repubtard, racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, intentionally deficient,  whatever slam they *feel* at the moment is appropriate, because after all, it's just the wrong half of the country they're talking about, and that half's concerns and priorities just really aren't worthy of consideration.   

I agree. It is the wrong third of the country. But I was asking about a line. Where is that line?

I think a majority, a strong majority, of Republicans support socialism. It's just a socialism for the right sort of people. The F35 can only be seen as socialism. Numerous and useless military bases in Mississippi can only be seen as social spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Well - it's quite clear that many of the respondents feel that any negative appellation they want to assign to the right is OK, so fascist, nazi, repubtard, racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, intentionally deficient,  whatever slam they *feel* at the moment is appropriate, because after all, it's just the wrong half of the country they're talking about, and that half's concerns and priorities just really aren't worthy of consideration.   

Let's just not make the mistake of calling the right "conservative."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bhyde said:

Let's just not make the mistake of calling the right "conservative."

There's a word, starts with f, that is more appropriate. If they're gonna wear it, they should own it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bhyde said:

Let's just not make the mistake of calling the right "conservative."

I dunno - I consider myself aligned with the right, and conservative in many of my opinions.  Are you suggesting that I'm somehow not permitted by folks on the left to describe myself as such? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, benwynn said:

Yes you did.

 

Lady and Germs, I give you the Greatest! Debate! ^^^^^ ever seen on these forums!!!