Why not refer to "conservatives" as fascists?

[Velleity]

From Wikipedia:

Quote:Fascism (play /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2] Fascists seek to rejuvenate their nation based on commitment to the national community as an organic entity, in which individuals are bound together in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood.[3] To achieve this, fascists purge forces, ideas, people, and systems deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration.[3] 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.[4] It advocates the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy (such as eugenics).[5] A fascist state's government is led by a supreme leader who exercises a dictatorship over the fascist movement, the government, and other institutions of the state.[6] Discipline and obedience to the leader is demanded by the fascist movement to followers and subjects of a fascist state and is promoted through encouraging comradeship and commitment of followers and subjects.[7] Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the fascist state.[8]

Fascism promotes violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[9] It views conflict as a fact of life that is responsible for all human progress.[10] It exalts militarism as providing positive transformation in society, in providing spiritual renovation, education, instilling of a will to dominate in people's character, and creating national comradeship through military service.[11] Fascists commonly utilize paramilitary organizations for violent attacks on opponents, or to overthrow a political system.[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

"Conservatives" most definitely have the "purge forces, ideas, people, and systems deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration" thing going. I am not the first one to recognize this feature of "conservatism" as it was brought out quite well in the old BBC "Power of Nightmares" series.

What about "conservatives" isn't fascist?

[Willinois]

There should be some other name for the tea party/Koch brothers movement. It's not normal conservatism. Fascism might be the best name for it but that word has too much historical baggage.

[Velleity]

(10-24-2011 02:59 PM)Willinois Wrote:  There should be some other name for the tea party/Koch brothers movement. It's not normal conservatism. Fascism might be the best name for it but that word has too much historical baggage.

It's no worse than "communism" or "socialism".

If they're not fascists then they ought to be required to distinguish themselves. As far as I am concerned the historical baggage is well earned. Why let them off the hook?

[Willinois]

(10-24-2011 03:28 PM)Velleity Wrote:  

(10-24-2011 02:59 PM)Willinois Wrote:  There should be some other name for the tea party/Koch brothers movement. It's not normal conservatism. Fascism might be the best name for it but that word has too much historical baggage.

It's no worse than "communism" or "socialism".

If they're not fascists then they ought to be required to distinguish themselves. As far as I am concerned the historical baggage is well earned. Why let them off the hook?

So you think they're as bad and Hitler and the Nazis?!?!!

And that's when the conversation comes to a halt. It makes discussing them rationally more difficult by setting up that easy straw-man rebuttal.

[Velleity]

(10-24-2011 03:37 PM)Willinois Wrote:  

(10-24-2011 03:28 PM)Velleity Wrote:  It's no worse than "communism" or "socialism".

If they're not fascists then they ought to be required to distinguish themselves. As far as I am concerned the historical baggage is well earned. Why let them off the hook?

So you think they're as bad and Hitler and the Nazis?!?!!

And that's when the conversation comes to a halt. It makes discussing them rationally more difficult by setting up that easy straw-man rebuttal.

Hitler did not invent fascism and Nazi-ism was not the only variety. I didn't say they were Nazis. I said they were fascists because it seems to me they meet the definition of fascists in every way.

I would be pleased to see them rebut the accusation. Specifically I would love to see them renounce their clearly fascist ideas about "purg[ing] forces, ideas, people, and systems deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration." This would mean that they would be free to compromise with us and every other citizen of the U.S. and to work together to solve our problems.

But I don't see them ever doing this, at least not this generation of fascists. As they have become more radical and extreme they have forestalled the possibility of working with us to solve any problems. In fact they have gone even further by not even agreeing to implement their own ideas.

So what exactly do we have to lose by identifying them as the radicals that they are?

[Willinois]

(10-24-2011 03:47 PM)Velleity Wrote:  

(10-24-2011 03:37 PM)Willinois Wrote:  So you think they're as bad and Hitler and the Nazis?!?!!

And that's when the conversation comes to a halt. It makes discussing them rationally more difficult by setting up that easy straw-man rebuttal.

Hitler did not invent fascism and Nazi-ism was not the only variety. I didn't say they were Nazis. I said they were fascists because it seems to me they meet the definition of fascists in every way.

Yes, you and I both know that. But, that's as far the conversation will get with most people. Suddenly, we're giving people history lessons and arguing about Nazis instead of talking about the modern conservative movement. It doesn't seem like a very effective way of having a conversation about modern conservatives, even if you are right.

[Velleity]

(10-24-2011 08:10 PM)Willinois Wrote:  

(10-24-2011 03:47 PM)Velleity Wrote:  Hitler did not invent fascism and Nazi-ism was not the only variety. I didn't say they were Nazis. I said they were fascists because it seems to me they meet the definition of fascists in every way.

Yes, you and I both know that. But, that's as far the conversation will get with most people. Suddenly, we're giving people history lessons and arguing about Nazis instead of talking about the modern conservative movement. It doesn't seem like a very effective way of having a conversation about modern conservatives, even if you are right.

If they would nix their fascism I would have no need to refer to them as fascists. That's kind of the point.

[KonaKane]

(10-24-2011 08:10 PM)Willinois Wrote:  Yes, you and I both know that. But, that's as far the conversation will get with most people. Suddenly, we're giving people history lessons and arguing about Nazis instead of talking about the modern conservative movement. It doesn't seem like a very effective way of having a conversation about modern conservatives, even if you are right.

This of course assumes that you can get anywhere in an honest conversation with a hardened wingnut. Which, of course, is impossible.

Reserve your intellectual energy for those who are still open to thinking. Otherwise it's a waste of that energy and just raises your blood pressure.

[There Is No Spoon]

I've been calling them fascists for some time now. When I explain to others why they should be considered so, they make the "they aren't Nazi's" argument. I calmly point out the difference between fascism as a philosophy of governing and that one particular example.

[Julie]

While I completely agree that the term 'fascist' is applicable I also believe it's a word that would cause people to tune out. Perhaps 'extremists' might be more helpful in keeping people tuned in.

Just a thought.

Julie

[MzShantal]

(10-30-2011 07:43 AM)Julie Wrote:  While I completely agree that the term 'fascist' is applicable I also believe it's a word that would cause people to tune out. Perhaps 'extremists' might be more helpful in keeping people tuned in.

Just a thought.

Julie

If it looks like a duck, walk like a duck and quacks likw a duck, guess what? IT'S A DUCK!!!

[Velleity]

(11-03-2011 11:16 AM)MzShantal Wrote:  

(10-30-2011 07:43 AM)Julie Wrote:  While I completely agree that the term 'fascist' is applicable I also believe it's a word that would cause people to tune out. Perhaps 'extremists' might be more helpful in keeping people tuned in.

Just a thought.

Julie

If it looks like a duck, walk like a duck and quacks likw a duck, guess what? IT'S A DUCK!!!

Welcome to DFP MzShantal.

Agreed, but do you think there is there a time to call a duck a duck and a time not to? Or do we just keep calling a duck a duck?

[Cha]

Facism works for me and has for a quite awhile..as far back in the daze of bush-cheney I looked it up in the dictionary and found they meet the criterion for the F word.

"Conservative" is a big stupid euphemism that means THEY LIE. They succeeded in making Liberal a dirty word for some time and now they've made conservative mean something else than what it stood for.

fas·cism/ˈfaSHizəm/Noun: 1.An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
2.(in general use) Extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&h...-1.2.1l4l0

You think Kochs don't want to be the big facist Dic?

[Velleity]

(10-31-2011 02:20 PM)Cha Wrote:  Facism works for me and has for a quite awhile..as far back in the daze of bush-cheney I looked it up in the dictionary and found they meet the criterion for the F word.

"Conservative" is a big stupid euphemism that means THEY LIE. They succeeded in making Liberal a dirty word for some time and now they've made conservative mean something else than what it stood for.

fas·cism/ˈfaSHizəm/Noun: 1.An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
2.(in general use) Extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&h...-1.2.1l4l0

You think Kochs don't want to be the big facist Dic?

I think the shoe fits. I see where you're going with the demonization of the word liberal. I would add to that the "conservative's" bastardization of the words socialism and communist.

The only problem I am having right now is that I generally shy away from retaliation and I would like to use the word "fascist" on them not as retaliation but rather to clarify and shine a bright light on what "conservatives" really are.

They have as part of their DNA a tendency to deceive, defraud, and disinform. I would like to strip them of that particular dysfunction, if I could.

[Cha]

It's not in "retalitation". I just thought of that when I posted..I've been calling them fascists for years because that's what they are.

[Velleity]

(11-01-2011 01:06 PM)Cha Wrote:  It's not in "retalitation". I just thought of that when I posted..I've been calling them fascists for years because that's what they are.

Sorry Cha, I did not mean to accuse you of retaliation. I was just thinking out loud, er... on the keyboard. You gave me food for thought is all.