Is the Republican Party fascist?

[J.R. Brown]

Tell me if this doesn't sound like the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, which has control of the party right now.

This is from the Oxford Dictionary of Politics.

Genuinley fascist ideologies are:
MONIST: based upon the notion that there are fundamental and basic truths about humanity and the environment which do not admit to question.

SIMPLISTIC: In the sense of ascribing complex phenomena to single causes and advancing single remedies.

FUNDAMENTALIST: Involving a division of the world into 'good' and 'bad' with nothing in between.

CONSPIRATORIAL: predicated on the existence of a secret world-wide (in our case nationwide liberal) conspiracy by a hostile group seeking to manipulate the masses to achieve and/or maintain a dominant position.

[A18]

By that kind of logic, just about every wartime president was a fascist.

[Jake]

I'm a fascist, I don't know if the party shares my beliefs though.

[dazzleman]

Tell me if this doesn't sound like the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, which has control of the party right now.

This is from the Oxford Dictionary of Politics.

Genuinley fascist ideologies are:
MONIST: based upon the notion that there are fundamental and basic truths about humanity and the environment which do not admit to question.

SIMPLISTIC: In the sense of ascribing complex phenomena to single causes and advancing single remedies.

FUNDAMENTALIST: Involving a division of the world into 'good' and 'bad' with nothing in between.

CONSPIRATORIAL: predicated on the existence of a secret world-wide (in our case nationwide liberal) conspiracy by a hostile group seeking to manipulate the masses to achieve and/or maintain a dominant position.

This could describe some of the far right.....as well as the far left.  Many Democrats have a philosophy that matches those descriptions.

In any case, there's a lot more to fascism than what's contained in those definitions.  It generally involves the killing of many thousands, if not millions of people, and large scale murderous military aggression for the purpose of plunder and conquest.  Neither party in the US advocates anything close to these things, so it's shameful to be ascribing those beliefs to one of our parties.

[opebo]

Yes.  And much of the old fashioned 'populist' Democrat Party was fascist in tendency as well.  The only non-fascist American political groups I can think of are the liberals, libertarians, and perhaps some greens and other minor groups.

[J.R. Brown]

Tell me if this doesn't sound like the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, which has control of the party right now.

This is from the Oxford Dictionary of Politics.

Genuinley fascist ideologies are:
MONIST: based upon the notion that there are fundamental and basic truths about humanity and the environment which do not admit to question.

SIMPLISTIC: In the sense of ascribing complex phenomena to single causes and advancing single remedies.

FUNDAMENTALIST: Involving a division of the world into 'good' and 'bad' with nothing in between.

CONSPIRATORIAL: predicated on the existence of a secret world-wide (in our case nationwide liberal) conspiracy by a hostile group seeking to manipulate the masses to achieve and/or maintain a dominant position.

This could describe some of the far right.....as well as the far left.  Many Democrats have a philosophy that matches those descriptions.

In any case, there's a lot more to fascism than what's contained in those definitions.  It generally involves the killing of many thousands, if not millions of people, and large scale murderous military aggression for the purpose of plunder and conquest.  Neither party in the US advocates anything close to these things, so it's shameful to be ascribing those beliefs to one of our parties.

I'm talking about fascism as a political ideology. Murderous military aggression for certain groups come from that ideology. It doesn't happen right away, but over time, it comes down to that kind of extremism.

I would also have to disagree with you that extreme leftists could be classified as a fascist. Most extreme liberals don't believe in a hierarchial form of government. They believe in a more socialistic form, which a lot of people, for some strange reason, associate with fascism. Probably because the Soviets and the Nazis were allies at one time and both our enemies. The Soviets were closer to fascism than pure communism.

[Citizen James]

No, but it could be argued that certain elements are (particularly the neo-conservatives).

Fascist doesn't really have all that solid of a definition, but there are generally certain charactaristics which are frequently used to describe both.

Ultra-nationalism - the belief that all other nations must bend to your country's will (see the PNAC manafesto for an example as it applies to neo-cons).

Millitarism - the belief that the millitary is not just for defense and deterence, but an active instrament of an agressive foriegn policy.

Authoritarianism - the belief that the government is above question; that any who question the motives or policies of leaders are traitors.

Corporatism - automatically siding with corporations in situations where there is a conflict between the desires of buisness and the public good.

Fortunately, I have at least seen little sign of the even worse form of fascism, nazism,  from the neos - though they show a hatred for gays, socialists, liberals and unions (and the hatred of gays is more a matter of pandering to their allies in the religious right than ideological); they show no intent for mass murder and as far as I can tell and at least don't hate Jews or gypsies.   I also don't see any bent toward social engineering.

Frankly, given their authoritarian bent, I have a hard time understanding anything more than a lukewarm approval of Bush from the libertarians here.  Anyone care to explain that?

[John Dibble]

Frankly, given their authoritarian bent, I have a hard time understanding anything more than a lukewarm approval of Bush from the libertarians here.  Anyone care to explain that?

Possibly because we despise lots of government programs like many Democrats such as Kerry want. Bush is bad about them too, but not quite that bad. Economic authoritarianism isn't very good either.

Plus, I try to maintain my grip on reality - Bush isn't as bad as you think he is. If you convince yourself that Bush is always bad, you'll tend to miss any good points he has. For instance, he did get some brownie points for initiating partial privatization of SS(libertarians generally support full privatization, but some is better than none). I know many Dems don't support it, but we do. Basically, if Bush does something good, I note it and change my opinion of him.

Another thing, I was once a Bush hater - much more left wing than I am now(something like a -6 economically on the political compass). When I switched to the LP during the election, I wasn't really bound by my Bush hate anymore - to me both major parties weren't offering any candidates of real value. Since I no longer was in the left group mentality, I could objectively view the two candidates much better, and I came up with Bush being the lesser evil of the two(Kerry came off as a phony to me, like a used car salesman who's selling something you don't really want, while Bush, though misguided, was more honest about what he wanted to do, at least in my view, among other differences they had).

[Jake]

Just a note, our most fascist president this century was a Democrat.  The president who ordered the most deaths was also a Democrat.  So were the presidents who entered the 4 largest wars of the last century.  Where the hell have those patriots gone?

[dazzleman]

I would also have to disagree with you that extreme leftists could be classified as a fascist. Most extreme liberals don't believe in a hierarchial form of government. They believe in a more socialistic form, which a lot of people, for some strange reason, associate with fascism. Probably because the Soviets and the Nazis were allies at one time and both our enemies. The Soviets were closer to fascism than pure communism.

Here, I don't know what you're talking about.  Socialism requires a hierarchical form of government.  Government that supports you controls you; there's no way around it.  The government that is powerful enough to give us everything we want is also powerful enough to take from us everything we have.

Are you suggesting that many liberals don't see a vast conspiracy by a hostile group (the religious, as opebo calls them) to manipulate the masses?  Please, I've heard so many Democrats arguing this point, that Republicans manipulate the masses into voting against their own interest through hate propaganda.

As far as pure communism is concerned, there is no such thing.  And any time that has been the goal, the result has been something so close to fascism as to be indistinguishable.

With all due respect, I think you're blowing out a lot of hot air.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Just a note, our most fascist president this century was a Democrat.  The president who ordered the most deaths was also a Democrat.  So were the presidents who entered the 4 largest wars of the last century.  Where the hell have those patriots gone?

Defeating the Nazis and Fascists makes you fascist?

[A18]

Just a note, our most fascist president this century was a Democrat.  The president who ordered the most deaths was also a Democrat.  So were the presidents who entered the 4 largest wars of the last century.  Where the hell have those patriots gone?

Defeating the Nazis and Fascists makes you fascist?

I think he was talking about throwing Japanese Americans in internment camps, trying to pack the courts, and centralizing all authority in the executive branch to that maximum extent the Supreme Court would allow.

[J.R. Brown]

I would also have to disagree with you that extreme leftists could be classified as a fascist. Most extreme liberals don't believe in a hierarchial form of government. They believe in a more socialistic form, which a lot of people, for some strange reason, associate with fascism. Probably because the Soviets and the Nazis were allies at one time and both our enemies. The Soviets were closer to fascism than pure communism.

Here, I don't know what you're talking about.  Socialism requires a hierarchical form of government.  Government that supports you controls you; there's no way around it.  The government that is powerful enough to give us everything we want is also powerful enough to take from us everything we have.

Are you suggesting that many liberals don't see a vast conspiracy by a hostile group (the religious, as opebo calls them) to manipulate the masses?  Please, I've heard so many Democrats arguing this point, that Republicans manipulate the masses into voting against their own interest through hate propaganda.

As far as pure communism is concerned, there is no such thing.  And any time that has been the goal, the result has been something so close to fascism as to be indistinguishable.

With all due respect, I think you're blowing out a lot of hot air.

Socialism is supposed to be a system in which there is no inequality, everyone is equal. You're thinking of Soviet socialism where the state controled the distribution of wealth.

Yes, our side does have a few consiracy theorists out there, but the leaders of your party think there is a liberal conspiracy in the media, the courts, and anything else they can think of.

[John Dibble]

Socialism is supposed to be a system in which there is no inequality, everyone is equal. You're thinking of Soviet socialism where the state controled the distribution of wealth.

Socialism in this form(not the European welfare state type socialism) can only possibly provide equal mediocrity and poverty.

[Jake]

Just a note, our most fascist president this century was a Democrat.  The president who ordered the most deaths was also a Democrat.  So were the presidents who entered the 4 largest wars of the last century.  Where the hell have those patriots gone?

Defeating the Nazis and Fascists makes you fascist?

I think he was talking about throwing Japanese Americans in internment camps, trying to pack the courts, and centralizing all authority in the executive branch to that maximum extent the Supreme Court would allow.

Exactly, sounds like the guy he was trying to remove from power.

[dazzleman]

Socialism is supposed to be a system in which there is no inequality, everyone is equal. You're thinking of Soviet socialism where the state controled the distribution of wealth.

Yes, our side does have a few consiracy theorists out there, but the leaders of your party think there is a liberal conspiracy in the media, the courts, and anything else they can think of.

The only way to have total equality is for the government to confiscate wealth on a large scale and control its distribution.  That requires a very powerful and hierarchical government.  It sure won't happen on its own, so these academic distinctions that you are making are without practical effect.  And I'll add that total equality can only take place at a very low level of wealth/standard of living.

[J.R. Brown]

Just a note, our most fascist president this century was a Democrat.  The president who ordered the most deaths was also a Democrat.  So were the presidents who entered the 4 largest wars of the last century.  Where the hell have those patriots gone?

Defeating the Nazis and Fascists makes you fascist?

I think he was talking about throwing Japanese Americans in internment camps, trying to pack the courts, and centralizing all authority in the executive branch to that maximum extent the Supreme Court would allow.

How about throwing Arab-Americans into camps without charging them with a crime right along with criminal terrorists just because they are Arab. Suppression of African-American voters in Florida to gain control. Tearing down the Judiciary with false conspiracy theories.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Just a note, our most fascist president this century was a Democrat.  The president who ordered the most deaths was also a Democrat.  So were the presidents who entered the 4 largest wars of the last century.  Where the hell have those patriots gone?

Defeating the Nazis and Fascists makes you fascist?

I think he was talking about throwing Japanese Americans in internment camps, trying to pack the courts, and centralizing all authority in the executive branch to that maximum extent the Supreme Court would allow.

He gave World War II as a reason for fascism.

[J.R. Brown]

Socialism is supposed to be a system in which there is no inequality, everyone is equal. You're thinking of Soviet socialism where the state controled the distribution of wealth.

Yes, our side does have a few consiracy theorists out there, but the leaders of your party think there is a liberal conspiracy in the media, the courts, and anything else they can think of.

The only way to have total equality is for the government to confiscate wealth on a large scale and control its distribution.  That requires a very powerful and hierarchical government.  It sure won't happen on its own, so these academic distinctions that you are making are without practical effect.  And I'll add that total equality can only take place at a very low level of wealth/standard of living.

That's true. Social equality is unattainable in a country that values power and wealth over charity and also in a country that wishes to force social equality on you.

[The Duke]

Tell me if this doesn't sound like the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, which has control of the party right now.

This is from the Oxford Dictionary of Politics.

Genuinley fascist ideologies are:
MONIST: based upon the notion that there are fundamental and basic truths about humanity and the environment which do not admit to question.

SIMPLISTIC: In the sense of ascribing complex phenomena to single causes and advancing single remedies.

FUNDAMENTALIST: Involving a division of the world into 'good' and 'bad' with nothing in between.

CONSPIRATORIAL: predicated on the existence of a secret world-wide (in our case nationwide liberal) conspiracy by a hostile group seeking to manipulate the masses to achieve and/or maintain a dominant position.

Monist: Global warming is backed by irrefutable science, anyone who questions it is stupid and cannot admit to the reality.

Simplistic: The bad is the result of corporations, we must reduce corporate power.

Fundamentalist: Bush is Hitler, the incarnation of evil in the modern world.  I like Dean, though.

Conspiratorial: Bush invaded Iraq because he is secretly controlled by oil companies and financiers, like Halliburton and Carlyle Group.

See?  This game is fun!

Socialism is supposed to be a system in which there is no inequality, everyone is equal. You're thinking of Soviet socialism where the state controled the distribution of wealth.

If the government doesn't redistribute the wealth, who does?  It seems you're trying to draw a very gray line.

[John Dibble]

Socialism is supposed to be a system in which there is no inequality, everyone is equal. You're thinking of Soviet socialism where the state controled the distribution of wealth.

Yes, our side does have a few consiracy theorists out there, but the leaders of your party think there is a liberal conspiracy in the media, the courts, and anything else they can think of.

The only way to have total equality is for the government to confiscate wealth on a large scale and control its distribution.  That requires a very powerful and hierarchical government.  It sure won't happen on its own, so these academic distinctions that you are making are without practical effect.  And I'll add that total equality can only take place at a very low level of wealth/standard of living.

That's true. Social equality is unattainable in a country that values power and wealth over charity and also in a country that wishes to force social equality on you.

Social equality is just plain unattainable. If you think otherwise you are kidding yourself. The only equality I really concern myself with is equality of rights, which is attainable if you don't make up ridiculous fake rights like the 'right' to healthcare.

[J.R. Brown]

Tell me if this doesn't sound like the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, which has control of the party right now.

This is from the Oxford Dictionary of Politics.

Genuinley fascist ideologies are:
MONIST: based upon the notion that there are fundamental and basic truths about humanity and the environment which do not admit to question.

SIMPLISTIC: In the sense of ascribing complex phenomena to single causes and advancing single remedies.

FUNDAMENTALIST: Involving a division of the world into 'good' and 'bad' with nothing in between.

CONSPIRATORIAL: predicated on the existence of a secret world-wide (in our case nationwide liberal) conspiracy by a hostile group seeking to manipulate the masses to achieve and/or maintain a dominant position.

Monist: Global warming is backed by irrefutable science, anyone who questions it is stupid and cannot admit to the reality.

Simplistic: The bad is the result of corporations, we must reduce corporate power.

Fundamentalist: Bush is Hitler, the incarnation of evil in the modern world.  I like Dean, though.

Conspiratorial: Bush invaded Iraq because he is secretly controlled by oil companies and financiers, like Halliburton and Carlyle Group.

See?  This game is fun!

Socialism is supposed to be a system in which there is no inequality, everyone is equal. You're thinking of Soviet socialism where the state controled the distribution of wealth.

If the government doesn't redistribute the wealth, who does?  It seems you're trying to draw a very gray line.

What happened to a free market, where everyone earns their own wealth?

Monist: God created man and woman, homosexuality is unnatual. (Social environment not the natuarl environment)

Simplistic: Religious Right (every position that they take is simplistic and the Republican Party takes their political ques from them)

Fundamentalist: Christians good, Muslims bad.

Conspiratorial: Liberal judges are trying to change the values of this country.

You're right. this is fun

[The Duke]

Tell me if this doesn't sound like the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, which has control of the party right now.

This is from the Oxford Dictionary of Politics.

Genuinley fascist ideologies are:
MONIST: based upon the notion that there are fundamental and basic truths about humanity and the environment which do not admit to question.

SIMPLISTIC: In the sense of ascribing complex phenomena to single causes and advancing single remedies.

FUNDAMENTALIST: Involving a division of the world into 'good' and 'bad' with nothing in between.

CONSPIRATORIAL: predicated on the existence of a secret world-wide (in our case nationwide liberal) conspiracy by a hostile group seeking to manipulate the masses to achieve and/or maintain a dominant position.

Monist: Global warming is backed by irrefutable science, anyone who questions it is stupid and cannot admit to the reality.

Simplistic: The bad is the result of corporations, we must reduce corporate power.

Fundamentalist: Bush is Hitler, the incarnation of evil in the modern world.  I like Dean, though.

Conspiratorial: Bush invaded Iraq because he is secretly controlled by oil companies and financiers, like Halliburton and Carlyle Group.

See?  This game is fun!

Socialism is supposed to be a system in which there is no inequality, everyone is equal. You're thinking of Soviet socialism where the state controled the distribution of wealth.

If the government doesn't redistribute the wealth, who does?  It seems you're trying to draw a very gray line.

What happened to a free market, where everyone earns their own wealth?

Monist: God created man and woman, homosexuality is unnatual. (Social environment not the natuarl environment)

Simplistic: Religious Right (every position that they take is simplistic and the Republican Party takes their political ques from them)

Fundamentalist: Christians good, Muslims bad.

Conspiratorial: Liberal judges are trying to change the values of this country.

You're right. this is fun

Your thread's poin is that the Republicans are fascist for having the four qualities above.  Proving that Democrats have them as well disproves that idea, unless you believe both parties are facist.  Showing that Republicans have the qualities that fit your arbitrary definition of facism does not affect this, since I have already accepted that elements of th GOP have these allegedly facist qualities.  My point is that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

As for distribution of wealth, you said socialism is a system where wealth is distributed equally, but Soviet communism is where the government takes earned wealth and redistributes it.  Unless your brand of socialism has a mechanism for distributing wealth other than the government, then there is no meaningful distinction between the two terms.  Is the wealth equally distributed by magic fairy dust?  If your using either a progressive income tax or social welfare programs to redistribute te wealth, your no different in nature than the Soviets at least the way you've set the question up.

[Lunar]

None of those characteristics defines fascism, I think our entire society as a whole mirrors those ideas.  They all represent generic liberal criticisms of Bush's ideology, but it is often crap that exists just as much on the Democratic side but in different forms. 

I'd also like a link to your source.

MONIST: People prefer faith to uncertainty. 

SIMPLISTIC  People like simple catchphrases to address complex situations.   What do you think you were doing with your topic question/post?

FUNDAMENTALIST:  *gasp* People like to exclude others.   

CONSPIRATORIAL:  People like to blame others for problems.

[PBrunsel]

Oh yeah, everyday I wear my millitary uniform, salute the Swatstika with a stiff arm, and sing "Deutchland Uber Alles" with great vigor. I am a looking forward to April 20th, David Duke and I are going to celebrate Hitler's Brithday by jeering some rabbis.

What a stupid question.