>>3
OR: they just got new names.
Still the same old dichotomies... Plus, a lot of conservatism these days seems pretty fascitic... like "Borders, language, culture", and the heavy police presence...
>>8
What's wrong with borders and languages? Different countries with different laws need some sort of border and without languages we cannot communicate.
>>14
Maybe not you, but most conservatives I know...
"Fascism ( /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology.
Fascists believe that a nation requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong."
Hmmm, violence and war; sounds like US... sounds like the police...
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-01 21:02
sounds like the police
Keep in in the appropriate thread.
I like how you only copied "good" things from the introduction on fascism's wikipedia page. Let's go on: Fascism is anti-anarchist, anti-communist, anti-democratic, anti-individualist, anti-liberal, anti-parliamentary, anti-bourgeois, anti-proletarian, anti-conservative, and many fascist movements have a distinctive type of anti-capitalism. Fascism rejects the concepts of egalitarianism, materialism, and rationalism in favour of action, discipline, hierarchy, spirit, and will. In economics, fascists oppose liberalism (as a bourgeois movement) and Marxism (as a proletarian movement) for being exclusive economic class-based movements. Fascists present their ideology as that of an economically trans-class movement that promotes resolving economic class conflict to secure national solidarity. They support a regulated, multi-class, integrated national economic system.
That has historically translated into the State having a heavy hand in everything from media to economy, not unlike communism but it tries to be distinct in its own way. I guess that's the direction we've been veering but, as can be noted, there is heavy push-back involving government-socio-economic integration lately. That and no one ever really rallies around any of the fighting - half want the necessary evil to at least accomplish the stated intent of defending United States interests, and the other half just want out whether or not anything is accomplished.
violence and war
Yeah, because the United States obviously invented war and pretty much lobs bombs and soldiers at both allies and neutral countries for shits and giggles. "Violence" meanwhile means they don't even care about saving face with anyone or trying to be descent in war as a practice; violence and war for the sake of it, for the sake of producing a banner to rally around. If you think America achieves this in anyway, or is so far gone, you're the most delusional over the people who think one party is better than the other as a strict implicit necessity.
seems obvious to me. Being a member of a communist organization, associating with communists, constantly speaking in communist rhetoric, doesn't make someone a communist?
Just the same communist lies, trying to pretend that our government isn't infested with communists sorts who hate the white race and our civilization.
>>16
And what's wrong with any of those things? Also that definition is 100% bullshit. Defining fascism in marxist terminology? lol no thanks.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-02 6:33
>>17
I thought it sounded strange too. Edit the wiki article if it bothers you; I'd be liable to unintentionally different terminology mistakes.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-02 6:54
>>15
But you said I am fascist... Maybe these conservative fascists support borders and language so hard exactly because others don't, if you started to support them also except without the fascist elements then you would rob them of the claim that they are the only large organized political movement that supports them.
OMFG I almost shat my pants in laughter. Your proof is a wiki answers page about the various OPINIONS about whether or not Obama is a communist and with absolutely no references?
Calling Obama a communist pretty much proves you don't know what communism is and have never met an actual communist. Here's a hint, they don't pretend they're not communists (no seriously, go to a communist meeting or find your local communist party) they don't support Obama's capitalist measures (cash for clunkers revitalized a capitalist industry, healthcare reform's intention is to revitalize a private industry, BP was given a slap on the wrist when any socialist/communist would have used the opportunity to nationalize the oil industry [or at least try], etc...)
l2research buddy.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-02 12:03
>>20
hint: Useful idiots are not communists, they are USEFUL IDIOTS.
Your particular utopian fantasies and idiocies are irrelevant. Communism is jewish tyranny over the gentile. There is a reason why jewish bankers and big corporations love that big government.
I am well aware of the rabid communist scum. They are the result of decades of soviet and communist infiltration and subversion of our society.
Obama is barely a socialist, he's more of a one nation conservative than anything. People are ridiculous.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-13 1:24
>>28
>come from an african communist family
>associate almost exclusively with communist
>go to a black nationalist church which preaches violent inssurectiong against whites
>constnatly talk about wealth redistribution
>Revive Private auto industry
>Revive Private financial institutions
>Attempt to revive private insurance industry
>give people tax cuts every year
>give small and large businesses tax breaks
>Revive capitalist economy
Total socialist, you're right. It was all his dad's idea too, the one that didn't raise him.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-13 22:53
>>30
So you admit you actually believe using the state to force people to pay extra tax to give to Obama's corporate crony buddies is capitalism? So you admit you are wrong?
Where do you think the state gets all the money to do this shit?
Sure, the government is helping a private business, but it's taxing everyone else to do it. The state is forcing you to pay for something that doesn't really serve a purpose.
Educate yourselves, please. Capitalism is a system where the means of production, distribution, and exchange of goods and services are privately held. Under a corporatist system all of those things are privately held. So you're just plain wrong, use of government to support capitalist institutions is still capitalism. Use of government=/=instant socialism
Also absence of government is anarchy. Of course under anarchy a capitalist style economy might develop, but you might also just get a tyrannical government instead (anarchy can never last without leading to some sort of government through the concentration of power)
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-14 16:00
>>36
absence of government is governmental tyranny?
>>35
So when government controls the means of production and distribution but permits an almost entirely government run business to "own" it, that's capitalism? You delusional commies don't understand much, do you?
Absence of government creates the power vacuum which leads to tyranny.
Your claims that the government somehow controls entirely the means of production and distribution is ridiculous. Regulation does not mean total control, it's simply a set of limitations that society as a whole agrees are necessary for everyone to adopt. Also telling me I'm communist just makes you look ridiculous and unwilling to reason.
Name:
Anonymous2011-06-14 18:33
>>38
Regulation is control, how can it be anything else?
Also society? lol! When does society decide on regulation? It's the regulator, the businesses and most importantly the GOVERNMENT who decide on regulation.
Further Typical commie claim to assert that no communists exist at all.
Society decides on regulation through our democratic system, dipshit. You vote for representatives whom you hope will vote along with your interests. I didn't claim that there are no communists, just that your assertion that I am one is ridiculous, and it is.