If another great depression happened within in this decade.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

would the united states become more liberal or conservative? Would the spirt of eugene debs,William Jennings Bryan, and bill haywood be revitalized? or would the united states of america simply turn into a fascist dictatorship where tea party members have bullied their way into power?

Before anyone answers i think it would be important read this:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitlerdemo.htm

Hitler never had more than 37 percent of the popular vote in the honest elections that occurred before he became Chancellor. And the opposition among the 63 percent against him was generally quite strong. Hitler therefore would have never seen the light of day had the German Republic been truly democratic. Unfortunately, its otherwise sound constitution contained a few fatal flaws. The German leaders also had a weak devotion to democracy, and some were actively plotting to overthrow it. Hitler furthermore enjoyed an almost unbroken string of luck in coming to power. He benefited greatly from the Great Depression, the half-senility of the president, the incompetence of his opposition, and the appearance of an unnecessary backroom deal just as the Nazis were starting to lose popular appeal and votes.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

in the event of socioeconomic collapse that is caused by a lack of supply you have mad max, but when it occurs because of a lack of demand it will probably cause civilians to start re-claiming the land, factories, and various idle resources.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

And the Tea Partiers aren't fascist.

I don't use the word lightly....but they're certainly the closest to a fascist movement the U.S. has had in a long time.

Misleading language, as they are not even remotely close despite being the "closest".

And by the way (not directed at you specifically, Franzl), fascism is not necessarily right-wing. Hitler nationalized industry after all.

Yeah they're so fascistic the Libertarian Party promoted them from the beginning.

The tea party uses fascist tactics, but in the end they might simply be authoritarian instead of fascist. I on the other hand know a lot about fascism in a philosophical and psychological sense. One of the key elements of identifying a fascist movement is looking at how the movement acts towards their opponent(it is crucial that they have one,or create one), and how they respond to criticism. For example both the tea party and the nazi movement have something in common with labeling/attacking their oppent in order to gain support. For example the Nazi's labeled anyone who was a detractor as a jew/socialist/communist in order to build support, and tea party members often do the same thing when they call someone a socialist. To both groups it does not matter wether or not the person is a socialist or not,but it instead it just simply matters that members have an opponent that they can hate, and attack. Thus both the tea-baggers and nazi's often rally support by creating something that they can attack and be aggressive towards.

It is also important to note how a movement will respond to criticism. For example in the authoritarian personality it is noted that right-wing extremists, fundamentalists, and nazi's often become defense aggressive when they were criticized. For example if I point out to a tea-bagger that I disagree with their tactics, and suggest that they should become more civil, they may either call be a socialist or justify their actions because of socialism.

In the end if anyone is interested in fascism I would be delighted to answer any questions. Secondly is anyone familiar with karl poppers understanding of fascism? I am curious  because I here he had some interesting views that broke with the traditional Epistemology behind the subject.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Every movement has misguided loudmouths who don't understand that shouting your opponent down makes you look bad. That in itself doesn't actually mean anything. Unless you're going to say some of the people at the anti-War protests several years ago (and still, but to a lesser extent) were 'fascist' in their tactics too. The closest to 'fascist' leadership this country has had the last few decades IMO is pretty much Bush and even then I would say it was hyperbole and totally inappropriate to call him one.

//Every movement has misguided loudmouths who don't understand that shouting your opponent down makes you look bad.//
well obviously, but the tea-baggers will often use signs as well to convey their hateful messages. Secondly the action in itself may be uncivil, but more importantly if the result of the action helps to rally their troops I would find it a little disturbing. Gaining support through tactics of aggression, and purposely directed hate is the foundation on which fascism is built upon.

//That in itself doesn't actually mean anything. Unless you're going to say some of the people at the anti-War protests several years ago//
Then perhaps some of the war protestors did have some kind of fascist element within them? I wouldn't be surprised.

Finally I also forgot to mention the anti-progressive/modernist/cultural superiority  stance that both the nazi's and tea baggers have in common. Obviously this is only one element of the tea party, but this element of the tea party is heavily supported and could easily gain control and become the entire movement. Thus I am hoping that particular non-fascist elements of the tea party not only condemn the fascist element,but also realize that the formation of a political syllogism is best expressed in a progressive manner instead of negative, and hateful tone. Thus the tea party may in fact be on the verge of becoming the fascist party in america,but if the economy continues improving than things might potentially change.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

why should we rely on what Mussolini wrote(probably ghost written)? many of the things he wrote are interchangeable across ideologies?

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Well, no. But it was written in 1932.

EDIT: regardless, it's a mistake to analyse ideological tracts when looking at fascism; in part because there just aren't many, but also because they tended to be mindlessly vapid, largely a collection of slurs on other ideologies and justifications for whatever the fascist organisation in question was doing at the time. A violence-and-action fetish and an obsession with national decline-and-rebirth were (are, whatever) more important than attitudes to the 'state' (complicated *anyway* as not everyone agrees on the meaning of 'the state').

wow that is a very good definition of fascism and shows that your approach to history may involve the field of meta history.

Finally socioeconomic collapse may or may not happen in our life time,but it has happened a lot in history. In the end we could all speculate what the results of a socioeconomic collapse, but since so much of this involves guess work than it wouldn't be to far to assume that a socioeconomic collapse could lead to a utopia.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Well, no. But it was written in 1932.

EDIT: regardless, it's a mistake to analyse ideological tracts when looking at fascism; in part because there just aren't many, but also because they tended to be mindlessly vapid, largely a collection of slurs on other ideologies and justifications for whatever the fascist organisation in question was doing at the time. A violence-and-action fetish and an obsession with national decline-and-rebirth were (are, whatever) more important than attitudes to the 'state' (complicated *anyway* as not everyone agrees on the meaning of 'the state').

wow that is a very good definition of fascism and shows that your approach to history may involve the field of meta history.

Finally socioeconomic collapse may or may not happen in our life time,but it has happened a lot in history. In the end we could all speculate what the results of a socioeconomic collapse, but since so much of this involves guess work than it wouldn't be to far to assume that a socioeconomic collapse could lead to a utopia.

We've had several depressions throughout our history and we're overdue for one. I hope it doesn't happen but if it does it will be due to high taxes, inflation, and government intervention combined with political promises resulting in debt. Utopia? Dream on

the past few decades have seen some pretty big lows for inflation, and secondly core inflation has been on a downward trend for months now.