Who are you voting for, for President?

[spc]

You're 100% correct TG, it is not socialism.   It is fascism, plain and simple. 

[trumpetguy]

Again, look up the definition.  The Cheney/Bush years were MUCH closer to fascism.  Really. 

Even if you disagree with Obama's policies, he is not trying to silence criticism.  He is not torturing or denying habeas corpus.

For reference (and an eerie reminder of the last eight years):

20 Characteristics Of A Fascist Political Party

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people's attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choicerelentless propaganda and disinformationwere usually effective. Often the regimes would incite 'spontaneous' acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and 'terrorists.' Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes excesses.

7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting 'national security,' and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elites behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the godless. A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of have-not citizens.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. 'Normal' and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or 'traitors' was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.

[trumpetguy]

For the record, I'm not a huge Obama fan.  I personally think he is Bush lite. 

We should be out of Iraq and Afghanistan by now.  We should have Single-Payer Health Care on the table.  We should be helping people more and corporations less.  We should not help ANY corporation who has moved jobs out of the US until they agree to move them back.  We should be rid of "Don't Ask; Don't Tell."  Etc, etc.

[quiktaco]

For the record, I hate Bush as well.  He was a closet socialist (with fascist tendencies).  I do however, think the war was a necessary evil.  Many things about it were not necessary, and many things about it were very deceiving to the American public, but overall, I feel that it has done much more good than bad.

As for the 20 Characteristics of a Fascist Political Party, I don't really know how to respond to that.  Yes, those may be characteristics of it, but many of those are standard things that everyone who is a citizen of a country should do/ feel/ whatever.  Like, #1, #3 (when there is an actual enemy), #4 (that's what the government was originally intended for - to protect it's people and uphold the constitution, nothing more.  If you ask me, we could do with the government being nothing but a military, and supreme court - much better court than the joke it's turned into though), #7 (when it's necessary), #8 (that's a whole other topic that's been discussed a lot in this thread), #12 (when it's there, it needs to be dealt with - not ignored).

I don't know what happened to #15 through #20...maybe you just didn't like those so you didn't include them.

[trumpetguy]

I did delete 15-20 (they were from a different original source and I didn't want to take that much space).

Here they are if you want (they're also a little weird):

15. Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say. In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view -- one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. 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. Because of its qualitative populism, Ur-Fascism must be against "rotten" parliamentary governments. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

16. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in Nineteen Eighty-Four, as the official language of what he called Ingsoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. 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. But we must be ready to identify other kinds of Newspeak, even if they take the apparently innocent form of a popular talk show. [When fascism is employed in a society with democratic tradions, one strand of Newspeak is to use the traditional words, like "freedom," but to give them new meaning. This strategy is also employed when new programs are initiated. --Politex]

17. [As opposed to Ur-Fascism,] 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. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason. Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural 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.

18. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration. That is why 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. In our time, when the old "proletarians" are becoming petty bourgeois (and the lumpen are largely excluded from the political scene), the fascism of tomorrow will find its audience in this new majority.

19. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle. Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such "final solutions" implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament.

20. [The Ur-Fascist leader presents himself as the heroic representative of the characterists of fascism. As such, his image is ubiqutous in the media, and is often photographed in costume in conjunction with images or people that represent the fascist characteristics noted above. --Politex] Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons -- doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.

[quiktaco]

Got it...weird.  I agree completely.  Thank you for posting the rest though.

[trumpetguy]

As for the 20 Characteristics of a Fascist Political Party, I don't really know how to respond to that.  Yes, those may be characteristics of it, but many of those are standard things that everyone who is a citizen of a country should do/ feel/ whatever.  Like, #1, #3 (when there is an actual enemy), #4 (that's what the government was originally intended for - to protect it's people and uphold the constitution, nothing more.  If you ask me, we could do with the government being nothing but a military, and supreme court - much better court than the joke it's turned into though), #7 (when it's necessary), #8 (that's a whole other topic that's been discussed a lot in this thread), #12 (when it's there, it needs to be dealt with - not ignored).

There is a clear difference between being proud of your country and an insistence on public displays of patriotism.  When someone faces criticism because they didn't wear the flag lapel pin that day, we are concerned with the wrong things.

There is a clear difference between identifying an enemy and scapegoating.  We attacked Iraq because Bush falsely tied Saddam to 9/11 and to WMDs.

There is a clear difference between defending our country and the "supremacy" of the military.  We use a majority of our budget on military and on the interest to pay for borrowed military spending.

There is a clear difference between defending our country and using a war and "security threats" as an excuse to do a bunch of secret investigations or torture or other illegal acts.

There is no question that the right wing has used religion (their version of it, anyway) as a way to whip the masses into a frenzy, despite the fact that their actions are anything but religious (war, torture).

There is a clear difference between law enforcement and obsession with crime and punishment.  

In all of your "examples" and in many you didn't cite the actions of the past administration (which Obama now has to clean up) crossed the line.

I may not like Obama's policies much, but he's no fascist.

[quiktaco]

There is a clear difference between being proud of your country and an insistence on public displays of patriotism.  When someone faces criticism because they didn't wear the flag lapel pin that day, we are concerned with the wrong things.

     • I agree to a point, but when many other aspects of his life has pointed to anti americanism, then not wearing the flag was another easy thing to point out, since all previous presidents in recent history have done so.

There is a clear difference between identifying an enemy and scapegoating.  We attacked Iraq because Bush falsely tied Saddam to 9/11 and to WMDs.

     • I agree that there is a difference.  However, Saddam, as the mass murdering dictator/ terrorist that he was, he WAS part of this war.  As far as WMD's, that could be debated forever.  Just cause they were never found, doesn't mean that they didn't exist at one time.  I still can't find some of my socks that I know went into the dryer.

There is a clear difference between defending our country and the "supremacy" of the military.  We use a majority of our budget on military and on the interest to pay for borrowed military spending.

     • Maybe I'm not seeing what you are calling supremacy.  Like I said, the government, and it's budget should do nothing else but defend the country and defend the constitution.

There is a clear difference between defending our country and using a war and "security threats" as an excuse to do a bunch of secret investigations or torture or other illegal acts.

     • I don't think all these threats were not real.  And to comment further, I'd need to know what secret investigations and illegal acts you're referring to.

There is no question that the right wing has used religion (their version of it, anyway) as a way to whip the masses into a frenzy, despite the fact that their actions are anything but religious (war, torture).

     • First off, war is religious.  God led many people to war, and still does.  Specifically pertaining to current wars and such...  The war between 'babylon' (which is iraq) and the Israeli's, is a war that was prophesied in the bible.  It is the beginning of the end.  Those fighting for the Christian/ Jewish Bible and those fighting against it.    More toward the bottom, explaining the exact prophecies.

There is a clear difference between law enforcement and obsession with crime and punishment. 

     • I'd need you to be more specific with what your are referring to as 'crime and punishment'.

In all of your "examples" and in many you didn't cite the actions of the past administration (which Obama now has to clean up) crossed the line.

I may not like Obama's policies much, but he's no fascist.

     • I didn't cite many of them, because I agree that those are wrong, and didn't find any good in them.  I agree that the line was crossed way too much with Bush.  He was not a good president.  However, what 'cleaning up' Obama is going to be doing, is not going to be good for this country.  He's going to try to make friends with the enemy.  But the enemy only wants to make friends so that they can kill us easier.



     • It is because you do not know Jesus, and I am afraid that you never will.  And you will say that my mind is warped and I'm in a fairy tale land.  But I will say that you have a too simplistic thought of how things work, because you are not looking at the whole picture, of which IS religion.  Read this next part about some prophecy that's in the bible, and how many of it has already happened, and how the rest will soon happen.



This is about the Biblical Prophecy of Iraq and concerning the current and future wars over there.  Choose your side.

The Bible warns of a coming judgment upon Babylon (modern Iraq) and says Iraq (Babylon) will rise again as a great "global economic" and "global religion" center ... and then will be utterly destroyed and left uninhabitable.

In the Old Testament (Tanakh), great prophecies against Iraq (Babylon) are found in the books of Isaiah 13:1-22 and Jeremiah 51:1-64 ... and also in Zechariah 5:1-11 (where Babylon is called by its ancient name "Shinar".)  In the New Testament we find a fearful prophecy against "Mystery Babylon" in the book of Revelation chapters 17-18 (in the Bible a "mystery" is something that had not yet been revealed in Scripture.)

The Bible warns the prophecies against Iraq (Babylon) will be fulfilled in 3 Phases . . .

PHASE 1:  Iraq (Babylon) would be invaded and conquered by a coalition of many nations led by a nation and leader from "a far country"... "the end of heaven" (the opposite side of the Earth)  ... This Bible prophecy does not describe the Persian (and Medes) invasion of Babylon when Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon in 539 BC (the Persians diverted the Euphrates river and entered Babylon through the river bed gates on the night of October 12 without damaging the city ... many of the citizens did not even know they had been conquered for several days) ...

But, this Bible prophecy does (very accurately and remarkably) describe the Gulf War I + Gulf War II invasions of Iraq (Babylon) ... and remember, Saddam Hussein even described himself as the new Nebuchadnezzar (the famous ruler of ancient Babylon) ...

PHASE 2:  Iraq (Babylon) will then rise to become the great economic and religious center of the world ... filled with evil and wickedness ... The "Woman" of Revelation 17:1-18 and Zechariah 5:1-11 ... "The Woman who rides the Beast"... "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" ... is the coming evil and powerful religious system which will rise along with a powerful and evil "centralized" political-economic system under the leadership of the coming Antichrist (a powerful and popular world leader who will rise ... a Satanic empowered counterfeit Messiah.)  The Bible warns at the time of the coming Antichrist and just before Armageddon, Iraq (Babylon) will become the economic and religious heart of the world.  The coming Antichrist (who will rise in power over 10 nations which we are told were all once part of the ancient Roman Empire) will shift the center of the coming "global economic" system and the center of the coming enforced "global religion" ("the Mother of Harlots" ... "The Abominations of the Earth" ... study Revelation 17:1-18 and Zechariah 5:1-11) to Iraq (Babylon) under his control and under the control of his powerful "religious" partner ..."the Second Beast" of Revelation 13:11-12.) 

As a note, it now appears the world is busily preparing the way for this Phase 2 . . .

PHASE 3:  Southern Iraq (Babylon) will be utterly destroyed ... left uninhabitable ... forever!   The Bible warns Iraq (Babylon) ..."Shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah" ... "it shall never be inhabited" ... "neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation" ... "Babylon will become a heap of rubble" ... "haunted by jackals" ... "it will be an object of horror and contempt" ... "without a single person living there." 

Note:  This will take place at the time of the coming "Apocalypse" and Armageddon.

[trumpetguy]

I will not debate or discuss religion.  We have a constitution which is supposed to guarantee that religion is not a part of the government.  You have NO knowledge of my religion.  Zero.  To make a statement like you made is very self-righteous.

Like I said at the beginning of the thread revival, those who agreed before will agree now!  I'm glad we reached common ground on a couple of things, but we're far apart on others.  That probably won't change.  Let's leave it there and remain friends! 

[quiktaco]

I will not debate or discuss religion.  We have a constitution which is supposed to guarantee that religion is not a part of the government.  You have NO knowledge of my religion.  Zero.  To make a statement like you made is very self-righteous.

Like I said at the beginning of the thread revival, those who agreed before will agree now!  I'm glad we reached common ground on a couple of things, but we're far apart on others.  That probably won't change.  Let's leave it there and remain friends! 

Sounds good.  However, I don't see it as self righteous to make a statement like I made.  By what you have said in this thread, I have come to the conclusion that you do not know Jesus.  If you do, then great!  But then, I hope that you will see that a lot of your positions are fighting for the wrong cause.

[The Buddha]

I think we were offered a choice between communist and communist this election season.

We opted for communist.

Thanks god, the other commies were worse. The one we have was like Russia in the 70's, and the one that lost was like russia in the 60's.

I dont know why we cannot organise and protest like Iranians are doing right now, and like so many many countries have done for many many years.

The powers that be will contend that that will descend (WTF descend ... we'll see what it becomes and we'll decide if it descended or ascended) into anarchy. Sorry, that is how cowards judge the will of the people.

As soon as a protest voice is heard, there will be threats of "chaos and anarchy" and as though that oughta keep us from speaking up.

Cool.
Buddha.

[quiktaco]

I think we were offered a choice between communist and communist this election season.

We opted for communist.

Thanks god, the other commies were worse. The one we have was like Russia in the 70's, and the one that lost was like russia in the 60's.

I dont know why we cannot organise and protest like Iranians are doing right now, and like so many many countries have done for many many years.

The powers that be will contend that that will descend (WTF descend ... we'll see what it becomes and we'll decide if it descended or ascended) into anarchy. Sorry, that is how cowards judge the will of the people.

As soon as a protest voice is heard, there will be threats of "chaos and anarchy" and as though that oughta keep us from speaking up.

Cool.
Buddha.

Well said.  It's sad that we really don't have more of a choice.  I guess they're out there, but there's basically no chance of them winning the elections.  It's all up to the powers greater than the presidency.  Who they want in office is who they back, and the media backs, and that is who wins.

I don't think we organize like other countries, because too many people get brainwashed too easily.  Just look at the sheep that followed Obama like he not only was the best thing since sliced bread, but WAS sliced bread reincarnate.

[yamahonkawazuki]

TG i guess ill never know your religious affiliations if any, that i can deal with, BUT ever consider that lack of WMD's may have been tied to maybe faulty information by the likes of say maybe teh CIA, aka somehtign the president has no way to investigate? ( just a posibility my friend,) also the yellow cake which WAS found, can be used to manufacture some WMD's. also this possibility hussein ( saddam) could have had them moved or concealed REALLY well, to the point where theyve yet to be found or moved to a friendly neighboring country? its within hte realm of possibility. also i do not belive that stripping military funding WHILE at war is a good idea, for a while we were paying for previous cuts, ( maybe still are . who knows) nehow take care my friend look forward to debates int eh  future. you are one of a few liberals, that is willing to discuss WITHOUT resorting to name calling. which i like. i cannot stand people of any political affiliation that does this. no matter who they say they are. ya know?

[trumpetguy]

I really detest the name-calling part of "political debate."  It avoids real debate!

[yamahonkawazuki]

Yes sir it does, tis something i detest as well, ive seen very few debates ( on forums mostly ) where name calling did not erupt when that happens, might as well forget about the debate as it was, cause it is no more.

[jserio]

I'm still of the opinion that the individual vote is nothing more than a charade to allow people the illusion that they are making a difference in how their govt is run. if we really, wanted absolute change, we'd have to do it the hard way, forcefully, like many other countries have done. just my opinion though.

[yamahonkawazuki]

i hear ya and sadly agree

[quiktaco]

Finally people are starting to get it

[yamahonkawazuki]

indeed

[jserio]

i really don't think the situation would be much better or any different if mccain had won.