Reply #41: ...

[Bronyraurus]

"5. To me, as I look deeply and reflect on our mindset historically, I see our present government as extremely sexist, in the sense that even though we have women in powerful positions, their thoughts and actions are those of traditional males. The 21st century is vastly different than the 20th with respect to tradition. This is especially applicable to Rice-I can't thing of a single male friend who is not more feminine in their thinking and being than she is. Where is the female voice in american politics? It hardly exists formally. An honest debate going on within our government with voices echoing Cindy Sheehan would indicate the presense of the female voice in our culture. We've got a long way to go before this happens."

I don't buy that men and women are SO different that their actions can be male or female. Yikes!

"8. Well, it was religious voter turnout which led to the present administration. They successfully framed the debate to get singel issue religious voters to the polls which was a precondition to their plans. Since then, we've seen the war on terror increasingly framed in terms of a war against radical islamists and evildoers. George W. even stated that God told him to wage war on Afganistan and Iraq!"

That's the problem of having a democracy when some voters are morons. And the war on terror, such as it is, IS a war against radical islamists. The evildoers and god crap are sops to the religious right, which in the context of this question, helps to fulfill the definition. But I haven't seen enough of it to make me freak out.

"10. What kind of power does labor have in America? Almost zero at this point. Unions have little power and every year it shrinks further. Where was labor power during the mass oursourcing of manufacturing and technology jobs over the last decade? Where are the solid middle class jobs that America was known for as little as 20 years ago? Going, going, soon to be gone."

But the government didn't wreck labor, cheap labor in Mexico and China did.

"11. This one is pretty subtle in America. Think about global warming. What is the whitehouse position in relation to scientific concensus? When's the last time you saw a Noam Chomsky interview during prime time? See, there is no need for this in the 21st century. Today, intellectuals are simply unable to get their messages to the masses. I'm constantly blown away by the wealth of knowledge and wisdom that exists both here at DU and elsewhere, but unless some galvanizing event occurs like a new boston tea party, there is simply no need for such a formal policy by our government."

I don't know, I read the New Yorker and the Atlantic and I get my share of good academic opinion there. I just don't see it. And Noam Chomsky would never be on TV because people generally are too dumb or disengaged to want to hear that level of political argumentation. Or this level, for that matter.

"In conclusion, America is not so much a traditionally fascist nation, but rather we're redifining fascism for the 21st century."

Well, that's an argument, but it's also more or less a confirmation of my own argument. I have a real reaction against arguments that this government is comparable to the Nazis, Mussolini, etc... And as cliched as it is to say this, 6 million Jews, 40 million Russians, and millions of others would testify to that.