The corporate take over of this country is over

[nadinbrzezinski]

we call that fascism...

And "our leaders" enabled this

That is all

[kohodog]

1. Dear Leader...

Orwell was right.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. We have some choices, but I wonder if we have the spine?

[BeHereNow]

20. Americans, as a rule, have no spine.

They still cling to the thought that there is
a two system.

As if.

I would like to hope, but after 2006 and the
obviously inertia of the so called democratic leadership-
I really can not allow myself to.

BHN

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. It is worst than that, they will cling to the illusion that they are still free

Like oh Germans did...

[BeHereNow]

30. Ever listen to the callers on C-Span's Washington Journal?

It's PATHETIC.

Not to mention DEPRESSING.

You are right, except I would use the word
"deluded" to describe the mental state of most
Americans.

It can't happen here?
Already has.

BHN

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. No need to, there is plenty of that here on good ol' DU

we have been screaming for a while

I feel like a citizen in the Germany of 1938... even probably '39, the summer of '39

[BeHereNow]

47. DU is mild compared to the C-span callers...

Yes I agree with you, plenty of denial right here-
But the DELUSIONAL abound during the call-in segments
on Washington Journal.

I figure it's a good way to track just how far
gone it all is.

And trust me, it's way down the pipe.

BHN

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. Used to listen to them in Hawaii, but not anymore

and they were delusional... and what we see here, is a continuation of the same denial

[Echo In Light]

192. Decades worth of corporate/state propaganda has that result on the public mind

Especially when the open system largely serves to reinforce the prevailing establishment ideology. Much of the indoctrination into a specific mindset occurs through the daily fabric of the culture i.e. entertainment, cultural pastimes and aims, etc

[AuntPatsy]

248. You are so right, so many that I have attempted to reason with just refuse to believe

just exactly what this country has turned into, blows my mind, far too many simply say "well what can I do?" so it is just easier for them to be lazy and ignorant and do nothing instead of finding a way to do something to stop this madness...far too many citizens in that frame of mind...far too many.

[justaregularperson]

251. One HUGE difference.. TECHNOLOGY and SCIENCE. Please read and reply

The types of fascisms that occurred in the early 1900s had a lot to do with the newly understood science of mass control. That is the one thing that differed. All dictatorships since then have exploited this science. You can draw a direct line between mass control science (propaganda and the like) and Fascism and other repressive governments..


There is a HUGE difference between now and then. Fascism will look VERY different in this age.


We are building to technology that has, and will, vastly further enable, control in ways that Hitler could never have dreamed! The science of persuasion has been vastly improved.

One of the problems with a discussion like this is that ultimately, science and technology have fundamentally changed the face of tyranny so it is less recognizable. I do not think we are at the moment in a control state. But we came very close at the launch of the IRAQ war. Even more concerning though, is that the absolute consolidation of control is continuing even during this period of increase awareness.

Let me ask this? Where are all the privacy laws and restrictions that are needed to keep technology and science from using the new and very powerful engines that are being implimented?

Make no mistake, we are in VERY dire straights. Just because the final programs are not in place does not mean it is wise to wait for the machinery of the modern survelliance state to really kick in. Like many of you I also live in HOPE that Obama has a "secret" plan to reverse things (it has to be secret, because as much as I like him, so far he has not indicated that he understands the complete depth of the protections that will be needed to stop the march toward a control society).

Most who work in technology understand what a dangerous point we are reaching.

And to those naysayers, you really are enabling. If you are not seriously alarmed you are not completely aware. In this age the propaganda is so powerful that many of the enablers will be those who think they are more enlightened. They could keep much of the rest of us pacified until it is too late.

[AuntPatsy]

252. We are nothing more than guinea pigs at this point in today's technology world...

[Cleita]

3. It's not your fault or any of our faults here who from the beginning

tried to educate people on what was going on. We did our best in spite of cheating and greedy politicians to try to do what was right and try to get the will of the people heard by working through the system. It seems we have found out the system is broken so I guess it's time to go underground and prepare for the revolution that is coming because it is coming.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. That will come, and it is time to prepare for the resistance, indeed

[bdamomma]

9. if they keep on pushing, we need to push back period.

cuz they are treating us with such disdain and total ignorance.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. It is time to revise tactics

the hour grows late

and it does indeed feel like the worst is yet to come

[MuseRider]

31. I can't for the life of me

figure out what else we have at our disposal to do. We did everything, everything that can be done. Some of us then went on to focus locally. We founded organizations, we joined organizations and decided to work on separate issues that complimented each other and frankly, we have done pretty well. The reality is that when the big jack boot comes down it will make all of that pointless. We are too far gone for that to even matter. I abhor the thought of violence and will not entertain that in my mind although others may. Even so, they have their private military and how on earth could we ever survive that?

I guess I am saying that we all need to really think long and hard about what we can do without, what we can provide and brain storm strategy because we are not important now and before long we will be completely expendable. Every last one of us, not just those of us caught in some natural catastrophe.

The most frightening part in my warped little mind is that our government was the only thing stopping the globalist leaders, the secret ones who I fear (including some of our own), from using us up and now we don't even have that.

So, how do we revise tactics? I am at a total loss and I have been thinking about just that for so long. Nothing comes to me. Any ideas?

OK, I have now let my paranoid little mind run wild.

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. Your mind is not paranoid, but it is time to think how to survive the coming

horror

Some will choose open resistance and all that means

Some will choose more quiet resistance....

But it is time to realize that there is only one thing left, and that is resistance

Ghandi is one way... and it works when the whole nation gets behind it

So do other means...

And I will leave it at that... not that our friends at NSA are not getting a chuckle or two

IN fact, speaking the truth is in itself a revolutionary act

War with Iran is coming and perhaps then the WORLD will finally act... and they will have to skin this cat too, and the cat ain't gonna like it either way

[MuseRider]

50. Let them laugh.

Let those NSA fuckers laugh. After all, most of them will be in no better shape than any of us. Only the higher ups will survive intact. Sorry, but of all the things I think this makes me the angriest, at least at this moment :(. There are so many things that you can't even cycle through them in one day even if you stay mad all day.

Ghandi would certainly be my leader in resistance. The biggest difference I see is that we are fighting our own countrymen. Not another country here on our soil who are mostly reluctant to shoot us but our own countrymen who work outside of our laws who would not hesitate to do whatever needed done to stop us. Again, violence is not my thing. Others may choose that but not me. Maybe it will take that kind of bravery, to stand up to that. Dunno.

Having the world have to deal with us could be a real big problem. Whew. Did you ever even imagine that kind of thing here?

I have to believe that if we do Iran the rest of the country will revolt. Have we ever had an administration go so hog wild on warring? This is so jarring that I can't help but think all the people would be freaking out about it. One lone little pissant of a so called leader is taking the our country to war again? Does not sound like anything that this country is really prepared to accept. I have been wrong far too many times to say any of this with certainty sadly.

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. At this point the only thing, outside of violence, that may work

is a national strike, where EVERYBODY joins.

The chances of that happening are actually worst than me winning the lotto

After all, first you need to get through the resistance that things are that bad

The two other options are surrender and active combat. The latter I don't like either

But it may come down to that...

Or the world skinning this cat, and none of us is gonna like it, And if the world does it, those at the top ain't gonna skate either... but what is coming scares me shitless

The point when we will have to decide to shut up is very near indeed

[MuseRider]

54. Shutting up is damned near impossible

for me. Not only am I am bit of a chatterbox, I am a pissed off American chatterbox who refuses to let the notion of this country go. Especially to the likes of GWB and Co. Not in this fucking lifetime will I ever shut up.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. Then you are part of the resistance

and by default one of those people that will be targeted

So you will have to choose your form of resistance

Hey, my biking instead of driving is not only a form of saving money, but if you think about it... a form of resistance... not playing the game of consumption

[MuseRider]

57. Well,

I choose to share. I choose to live communally with all who wish to share the load. It sounds like you are much the same. You are sharing our diminishing resources by not using what you don't need.

I don't mind the target thing. I am so innocuous, in such a small pond but yes, I do have a very big mouth and no problem using it when I see things going wrong.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. It goes beyond that

since not consuming is actually a form of economic resistance...

As I said resistance comes in many forms, not only the ever so popular ammo box (even if it may come to that)

As to being a target... many people disappeared in Soviet Russia for making the wrong comment at the wrong time... as well as Germany... and Chile, and Argentina... I could go on

We are quickly reaching that point

Many realized that they had to watch what they said... and to whom.

I have done things already that I know I'm a target, so I live it... but many, yes even you, will have to decide when the boot falls down... and I fear it will.

And truth be told, it scares me shitless, but I signed my death warrant in 2002... so these days I live day to day knowing that when the time comes it will be fast... the clampdown that is

[MuseRider]

68. It is frightening

We did not ask for this but this is what we are left to deal with. Many have done this before, we can do it too.

I guess I feel so unimportant and in such a small place that I can't really worry too much but I do know that I will never shut up. I was raised never to have an opinion and to expect to be beat within an inch of my life if I dared to speak. I will never go back there again, ever. That boot is not somewhere I will ever quietly accept living.

I can go to ground quite easily. I know how and can be quite independent.

I am not taking this lightly as it might sound. I am simply old enough to know my children can do well without me so whatever comes now comes and I do not have to worry about them.

I don't know what you did in 2002 but I certainly hope that is not true. We need thinkers, you are one of them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

73. I wrote an Amicus Brief to the USSC over the Hamdan Case

to the USSC...

And I debated, knowing the history of fascism, for hours, whether to press the send button

When that was done I knew it was done... and if and when things got hairy, have passport ready... if need be

I don't have kids, but worry bout my nephews. (and my parrots, they are the "kids")

But I had a duty to speak out.

[Two Americas]

218. no we aren't

Sorry to be pestering you, since I mostly agree with your thoughts, but I want to counter something you said - "we are fighting our own countrymen."

No we aren't, not necessarily. It is a right wing lie that half the people are against us. It is also a lie that because "they have all of the weapons" or that they "have all of the money" that those things somehow present an insurmountable, or even significant obstacle. It is also a lie that the only alternative to what we have been doing is violent revolution.

It is those false ideas that are holding us in bondage. We have no excuses, when you look at what people in the past were able to accomplish with far fewer advantages than we have. We lack clarity, courage and commitment. That's all.

By the way, we have had many administrations much more "hog wild on warring" than this one.

Violence may not be "your thing," but I wonder how you feel about self-defense and about protecting the innocent from violence? If everyone peacefully submits to chains, is that then "peace" and a good thing? Or are there times that call for resistance and self-defense?

[Two Americas]

we have hardly tried anything

I can't see that we have even started or tried anything yet.

We are asking for the impossible, so it doesn't matter how we go about that and of course nothing has worked. We ask for certain effects - an end to what is happening in Iraq, restoration of the middle class and the public resources and public infrastructure and the Constitution - all of which absolutely demand a radical political solution, yet we caution against, resist and reject any hint of a radical approach. We are afraid to even talk about it. We are afraid to even admit that we are afraid. "OMG no no no not a violent revolution??" as though that were the only alternative to our disjointed, disorganized, groveling and weak approach. Violent destruction of the people and the country are OK, I guess, but any talk of resistance to that would be just too radical. Better to play it safe and "work within the system" and "be realistic and practical" - AKA be weak and cowardly and refuse to challenge the system in any way.

We are descended from the people who fought against slavery, who fought for workers' rights, who fought for the right for women to vote, who fought the War Against British Corporations (otherwise known as the American Revolution.} We have an abundance of examples to look to for ideas and inspiration. It our courage that is missing, not a new and revised "to do" list that we can hang on our refrigerator.

We are looking for an easy way out, for a clean and safe and gentrified solution, so we stay within very narrow paths and then say "we have tried everything." Yes, we have tried everything given that we are not very serious about this and are completely unwilling to try anything that might actually succeed.

I talk directly to the congress members and their staffs all the time - have for years. Can't understand why more people don't. What they tell me is that they are deluged by these various mass actions, and harangued and pestered, and that those approaches are completely useless and ineffective. So much for the "everything" that we have supposedly tried.

You would be surprised how many politicians - I am talking Senators and governors here as well as reps - want to or are at least willing to move far to the left. They can't, not because of the general public nor because of the Republicans nor the media, but rather because we, the liberal activists won't let them.

They can't "stop the war" or any of the other liberal causes until and unless they can take a much more radical stance. They can't take a more radical stance, because the liberal activist community blocks that. We don't have their backs. We do not have the people's backs. We don't even have each others' backs. We say that the Democratic party politicians don't have a spine because they won't so for us that which we ourselves do not have the spine to do. They are representing us perfectly - spineless.

You can't make a war go away if you don't tackle the corporate interests that drive it. Liberal activists ask the impossible of the congress critters - end the war without rocking the boat. Same with all of the other liberal causes. What we as liberals SAY we want in every area would absolutely require a revolution (not armed or violent necessarily) yet too many of us are deeply opposed to any such radicalism. We are living in a fantasy world, putting the elected reps in a bind, sabotaging the political process, stopping the political left from being effective or even forming, and selling out the working people.

[nadinbrzezinski]

145. Why I said we need to change tactics

a NICE national strike would be a nice beginning

And we've tried, but apart of me and two of my neighbors, people just don't do it And it is for fear of getting fired.

Valid, yes, but if 20% of the people stay home, it becomes a little difficult to fire all... and if fifty percent stay home the country comes to a halt

That is rocking the boat

[Dogtown]

201. Muserider

(and what a lovely nick that is!)

If violence is thrust upon us, as it may well be, we'll do what every Resistance has done since our species 'evolved"; we'll resist.

Some will fight, and many of us have been trained to. Trained by our police agencies, our military, our prisons.

Some will have to help with logistic support.

Some will poke their sabots into the machine.

It's true they own the mechanisms that can be used to oppress us, but our last 3 or 4 "wars" have taught us the profit of guerrilla struggles.

I fear what will happen if McCain "wins" this election. War with Iran/Syria/North Korea/et al seems inevitable in that scenario, but I doubt this country could survive that war. Conscription alone would cause revolt.

I have more fear of their return after this election, even if they lose now. Many of us thought their back was broken after Nixon, but they came back with Reagan and the two Bush's. They've taken over the opposition party like a virus, subverting it's political DNA to a different purpose. They won't give up and at every opportunity they erode our nation's integrity. I could not envision the conditions that exist now after Nixon was exposed, but it hasn't even slowed them appreciatively. *THAT'S* a much scarier prospect than an unlikely insurrection.

At least in my view.

:hi:

[Two Americas]

90. that is the key right there

The rigid adherence to the same weak and ineffective tactics, that we see expessed right here every day, is what seems most dangerous and foolhardy to me right now.

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. Yep but problem is most folks are not ready to admit

we are there

[Two Americas]

215. just the intellectuals

It is mostly the intellectuals and activists, especially white professional people, denying this, I think. Certainly minority people are not, poor people are not, immigrants are not, blue collar people are not, rural people are not, the unprecedented number of people imprisoned are not, activists in Latin America are not.

[nadinbrzezinski]

225. Then you have to ask WHY

[Two Americas]

231. comfort

No sophisticated explanation is needed. Those who are personally doing fairly well have no sense of urgency.

Status is another part of this. People have much invested in the social status they have achieved, and do not want to see that as sullied in any way by contemplating a corrupt system to which they owe their status.

Then, higher education trains us to be dispassionate observers rather than actors, so we become disconnected and aloof.

Then there is the "house Negro" phenomenon - we receive our privileged status, trinkets and security to the degree we are willing to promote "master's" agenda - the needs and desires of the wealthy and powerful few. Most employment opportunities open to intellectuals involve selling and defending the ruling class agenda, or at least are never inconsistent with that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

232. Remember it has been those same intellectuals who have led the fight

in the past...

I take comfort, i know ironic, in the knowledge that no evil last forever

[Two Americas]

237. sure

One in a hundred? One in a thousand? I would say it may be one in 10,000. But we use one stellar example to justify the entire group, just as we use one example of idiocy from a blue collar person to justify our slanderous and condescending view of all of them. If one intellectual is good, then we all are. If one blue collar person is bad, then they all are. We see that expressed every day at DU. That is not leadership, it is aristocratic arrogance.

To say that intellectuals have led the fight in the past means nothing, other than to illustrate what we should be doing now. It is like saying "carpenters have built barns" or "farmers have grown food." Leading the fight is what intellectuals are good for. We are leading the now, actually, but the problem is that we are fighting for the wrong side.

Right now the working class is decapitated in this country, because all of the intellectuals in the working class (all of us) have been bribed and compromised and speak for the upper class almost exclusively. There is no one to speak, write and organize on behalf of the working class. Every other job is being handled. Farmers are growing food, and would gladly feed resistors. Carpenters would gladly build the podiums from which we could speak. Nurses would treat our wounds, teachers and daycare workers would watch our kids, elder care workers would look after our elderly parents. Everyone in the working class is doing their job, except for us.

[nadinbrzezinski]

242. Having a clear view of a local union, I'd not go that far as to say labor is

doing its job either

But intellectuals have led before and still do... and leaders are far and few no matter what call in life

[Two Americas]

254. agreed

But there is an insurgent labor union movement around the country flaring up here and there, seeking to overthrow the complicit leadership, which over the last 30 years has completely given up the struggle and funneled all of their efforts into electing Democrats - the exact same mistake that many here urge us to do. The union leadership has been "being realistic and practical" and "working within the system" and avoiding "class warfare." Since Democrats know before elections that they can count on union support, they do not need to fight for the cause of labor. They get the support no matter what they do; after all, they are "better than Republicans," which is about as low as the bar can possibly be set. This is like awarding the Super Bowl to a team before the season starts, and then hoping they will play hard and do well because of that. Or, as I have said many times, it is like excusing the lack of performance by fire fighters by saying "at least they are better than the arsonists."

[MuseRider]

11. Yes it is.

I am hunkering down getting my gardens in order and keeping the farm in good shape for sharing and bartering, just in case...just in case. Besides, it is good neighboring anyway.

It is going to get much worse. I keep wondering how much worse it will be before enough people wake up and rise up. I never thought it would last this long but then I thought that we still at some press that would cover things as they started to unravel and representatives who when they found themselves in control would listen to us and do the right thing. We are superfluous to them now. Nothing but the "little people" and they pat us on the head and sell us right down the river.

Boy was I ever stupid to think that. :blush:

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. Hey last weekend was a PURRFECT example of how much they care

bout us

The midwest if flooded, but a great newsman died :sarcasm:

And we had people actually justifying that crap, proving Big Brother propaganda works

I need to go get me patio vegies tomorrow

[bluesmail]

4. It's difficult for me to accept. It just gets easier when I read DU.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Bear witness, take notes, get ready...

we tried.

The Declaration of Independence comes to mind at this point

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

[Occam Bandage]

6. There's quite a bit left to lose.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Citizen please do review the fourteen points of fascism

or the excellent work by Naomi Wolf

The time is almost over

[bdamomma]

12. haven't we reached all fourteen points of fascism now.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. If we haven't, we are so damn close

ah this is how those awake in Germany felt in 1938 I guess

[Occam Bandage]

16. The "fourteen points" were drawn up to make a point about our current government.

They are not used in any context but to declare America fascist. You will not find any use of that term and those "points," except when as applied by Western liberals (and occasionally extreme libertarians) to George W. Bush. They're no more useful or more meaningful than any of the hysterical right-wing claims of American "socialism" or "anti-Christianity."

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. You sure of that? Here is a little history lesson for you

Proffesor Britt wrote these things in reference to GERMANY AND ITALY...

NOTE: The above 14 Points was written in 2004 by Dr. Laurence Britt, a political scientist. Dr. Britt studied the fascist regimes of: Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile).

By the way I will recomend that you also consult

They thought they were free as well

"What no one seemed to notice. . . was the ever widening gap. . .between the government and the people. . . And it became always wider. . . the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting, it provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway . . . (it) gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about . . .and kept us so busy with continuous changes and 'crises' and so fascinated . . . by the machinations of the 'national enemies,' without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. . .

Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, 'regretted,' that unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these 'little measures'. . . must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. . . .Each act. . . is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow.

You don't want to act, or even talk, alone. . . you don't want to 'go out of your way to make trouble.' . . .But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That's the difficulty. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves, when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. . . .You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things your father. . . could never have imagined." :

From Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free, The Germans, 1938-45 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955)

[Occam Bandage]

21. Yes, he wrote them in reference to Germany and Italy, to make a point about America.

You will not find any--and I mean any--use of them anywhere in academia, in political life, in anywhere whatsoever, excepting when angry liberals and libertarians get hyperbolic and call Bush a fascist.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. So do tell me exactly how we are not that close

and many observers don't agree with you

I also notice you ignored the little reference to they thought they were free

I guess you still think you are free since you can still ahem, post.

The fourth amendment was gutted today, the only reason we have the great writi are five justices in the USSC

Yes, it is THIS CLOSE

Enjoy this so-called freedom and the illusion while you can

Oh and I now fully realize how the few who were awake felt in the germany of 1938

:banghead:

Oh wait, they are on my team... who cares?

If you have cable tune in to Countown Turley coming up

[Occam Bandage]

29. "Many observers?" I suppose they're allowed to disagree.

It's a free country, after all.

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. Was a free country,

I will correct you on that one

But if you prefer to live with that illusion, so be it

[Occam Bandage]

38. And if you prefer to live with the illusion that the ills in government and society

are new and interesting developments, then go for it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. Not even Adams suspended the Fought Amendment

thanks for playing

Nor did he even try to go after the Great Writ

[Occam Bandage]

46. Nope. Neither has Bush. Bush has declared that the Constitution does not hold jurisdiction

over a type of person that did not exist in American law before 2001. Some justices believe he is correct. Fortunately, more believe he is incorrect. (If you're looking to declare Bush fascist, I'm not sure why you'd point to a situation in which he was soundly rebuffed by the Supreme Court. Dictators don't usually let the courts tie their hands.)

If you want to claim corporate takeover, though, you're a bit late to the party. That happened back in the late 1800s. You might have just noticed it, though. Everyone thinks things they discover are new and interesting.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. Ah the famous OPINION in the court case?

And the new class was INVENTED BY BUSH.

Oh well... have a good life in your "free country."

[tom_paine]

59. Don't bother with that one, nadine. He's a Griefer.

Notice how he ignored Gonzales' statement that the Constitution gives us no right of habeaus.

Think about this: Inverted Totalitarianism was created JUST FOR HIM and millions like him. The Bushies knew that even HE (and the millions like him) wouldn't fall for classical totalitarianism in it's old, brutal form.

So the snake sheds it's skin, rebrands, remarkets and tries again.

And succeeds. Succeeds beyond it's wildest dreams. Intelligence without consciousness is in some ways worse than no intelligence at all. We see it every day and in every way.

People like good ol' Bandage might be intelligent, might be very intelligent, and yet, without consciousness, it is nothing in the face of tyrants with a few new tricks.

Intelligence without consciousness is a flat square that cannot conceive of a third dimension. Intelligence without consciousness is watching a play without understanding there are dozens of things happening behind the stage curtain, is not even understanding the curtain exists and thinking the stage is all existance.

Oh, if only the Bushies would be so kind as to march down the street, swastika flags flying, beating people on the streets, THEN a guy like Bandage would notice. THEN he'd be awake.

But they are too intelligent for that, our Bushies.

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. The new form though will have to ultimately shed some of its skin

and take some of the old familiar forms, as more and more of us awake and take the red pill, instead of the blue pill

:-)

[Occam Bandage]

65. The new form is called "government." We've had it for a while.

It's existed in its corporate-controlled, dissent-squelching, labor-busting, "traitor"-imprisoning, jingoistic, war-profiteering current state since, oh, about 1880.

[tom_paine]

72. I can't fully disagree with that. However, it misses the point.

Sure, there have been some terrible things which went on, the Palmer Raids, Manzanar andthe rest of the Japanese internment, pretty much everything J. Dresswearer Hoover did ESPECIALLY ignore the mob because they were corrupting and neutralizing the Lefty Unions, thus doing HIS work, and all of that.

The difference is, through all of that, our core documents and our core beliefs remained the same.

The difference is The War on Terror has no end! Thus, other "wartime conditions" that ended with victory inthe past, will NEVER end today.

That's exactly why the War on Terror was "declared" in the way it was, to give tyrants open-ended unchecked power.

You seem to have a fine grasp of history, so you tell me, has Congress ever been so weak, and so cowed? Or so reluctant to prosecute huge felonies openly performed? (I recognize that such large numbers of such high-crimes have never before been committed by any previous administration, and thus there may be no historical analog to that question)

So you are technically correct yet so very wrong when it comes to the Big Picture.

[Occam Bandage]

86. "our core documents and our core beliefs remained the same."

Tell that to the hundreds of Americans who were imprisoned for "sedition" because they spoke out against World War One. Tell that to the tens of thousands of Americans crippled, beaten to death, or imprisoned because they felt like getting paid for working. Our "core beliefs" are largely pleasant fantasies of history; it is for that reason that every successive generation believes that the current government (so long as they are not supporting the party in power) is an atrocity that stands against everything America has ever been. Things aren't great now, but there's simply no comparison to the turn of the previous century for abuse, corporatism, and tyranny (nor were any of the years in between particularly sweet.)

As for Congress? The answer is yes: in every single session for the last half century, before which there have not been studies on successful votes against the wishes of the President. This Congress is historic in its opposition to Bush, measured by number of times the Congress has cast a majority of votes opposite to the President's stated wishes/demands. As for effectiveness? They're not great, but keep in mind that this Senate has also set an all-time record in number of filibusters, and this White House is also at historic numbers for vetoes and threatened vetoes of Congressional bills.

As for prosecuting felonies? The answer, again, is yes: in every single other session of Congress, dating through the Gilded Age. This Administration is simply historically inept at covering up the sausage factory (among many other things they are historically inept at).

[tom_paine]

99. I do not argue that terrible things happened to people. But I do disagree

that our "core beliefs" are largely historical fantasies. Call me naive if you wish, but the people that did the Palmer Raids, however vile their intent, did not go around trying to saythat the Constitution allowed them to sweep people up off the streets without due process.

They just did it. To me, that is a key difference. All those terrible things happened, but the Constitution/Bill of Rights was left alone (even if it was ignored) to be the "rubber band that snaps back" after the madness passed.

Like the difference between a field-level commander deciding to torture a prisoner because a "ticking time bomb" was going to kill some of his people and the Executive Branch writing torture as legally-acceptable national policy.

In both cases, someone got waterboarded (for the purposes of the analogy), but the long-term implications of one is nil and the other total, so to speak.

THIS is the nuance I am trying to communicate to you, how you can be both technically right and wrong at the same time.

Regarding Congress, that's quite a bold statement. So bold, in fact, I would need to see some data to fully believe it. The prosecuting felonies may be non-applicable. As I said before, has ANY administration performed this many felonies. Can you really find historical analogues to Seigelman, Minor, Georgia Thompson, and many others? here I am going to be a stickler. They have to be Rich, Powerful White Men because I think we both agree that we have been falsely imprisoning poor, powerless issenters since long before Sacco and vanzetti.

But that's another key difference between the Bushies and those who came before. Other administration may have punished dissenters unjustly, but they NEVER went after their own class, so to speak. They never used, as far as I know the law to intimidate their own.

To do so is to revert to the Roman Form of Politics, IMHO. If you have any examples of this pre-Bush, please tell me and cite links.

Thus, I do NOT believe our core beliefs are hisorical fantasy. We may not have always kept to them, but they were always there, pretty unchanged. Now the Bushies seek to change them, and that is the difference.

[nadinbrzezinski]

102. Another key difference, when we water-boarded people in the past

the order did not come from above and the soldiers responsible faced a court martial (See Philippines Campaign, Spanish American War)

This time the order came from on high, at least SecDef... and only a few troops faced the music, to try to allay the public

[Occam Bandage]

64. And Gonzales' insane statement was soundly rebuked by the Supreme Court.

The only difference between Bush and every Presidency before him is that he is worse at hiding what he does. I like your "stage" analogy, though. Here's how I see it:

We're at a play. You see a stagehand briefly poke his head on stage from the left wing. Later, you hear a crashing noise as a ladder falls. You say, "hey, wait! This is all a big lie! Can't you see it's a big lie!? THIS IS THE WORST SCAM THAT HAS EVER BEEN FOISTED ON ANYONE! THEY'RE CON ARTISTS!"

I say, "yeah, no shit it's a lie. That's what theater is. It's a lie. Yes, they take our money by lying to us. The only difference between this and any of the plays you happily watched beforehand is that this production crew is completely incompetent at disguising that."

[tom_paine]

84. Nice analogy, but still missing the point.

Just a couple reminders:

Habeus corpus was restored by a single vote. 5-4. Which means that if McBush gets in (and I still think the Bushies are going to steal it for him no matter who we Little People vote for)
then the right of habeus corpus, more than 800 years old and a cornerstone of western jurispruidence, will be no more in Amerika.

Now to your counter-analogy:

I believe it is way off because the Bushie Crimes are different, mostly in their scope and long-termedness. From turning DOJ - Civil Rights into the Department of Minority Intimidation and Voter Suppression to privatizing our voting systems so that it is actually illegal for a government inspector to check electronic voting machines for errors or cheats, and everything in between, we are not just witnessing run-of-the-mill stuff but long-term suppression of the things which hold our nation together, includingthe Constitution and Bill of Rights.

I know, I know, there has been election fraud before, but technology magnifies the scope of what a single team of people can do in that area the same way as computers have turned gerrymandering into something infinitely more dangerous than what it was when people were "guessing" as they drew their gerrymanders. Just as modern technology makes blanket surveillance of the entire populace "doable" when for eons it would have required huge amounts of manpower to achieve the same goals.

You seem to think that there is nothing new under the sun, that we've seen it all before and therefore it shall pass. I wonder if the Roman Citizenry thought that when Caesar came along? After all, they'd just been through a succession of would-be dictators, from Sulla and Marius to Crassus, and the Republic still endured.

Maybe you're right. I and most DUers would be much happier if you were right.

But the lesson here is that eventually, Caesar does come along and the Republic DOES eventually fall.

The lesson is that technology can change things once thought impossible to "doable". The point is that you tell Caesar from Sulla, Marius or Crassus by the way he is permanently restructuring power.

But I have probably wasted my time, plus I didn't listen to my own advice.

Nevermind. Everything is OK. Nothing unusual to see here. Move along.

[Richard Steele]

179. True that. nm

[Runcible Spoon]

247. "Intelligence without consciousness is a flat square"

eloquently put. thank you for weighing in on this thread; I'm still nursing too many wounds to get into another one. I AM actually very sensitive and I can only take being called horrible things (troll, traitor, defeatist, etc.) for so long before it does hurt. That's why I love what you say about consciousness, and I would add compassion as a facet of that awareness.

[MedleyMisty]

26. Okay, let's accept that.

But how does that make it any better? Even if they are just a comment on our government, are those 14 things good? Are they what you want in a government? Do they promote democracy and freedom?

How is it hyperbole to say that we're fascist? I suppose it can depend on how you define the word - would you prefer corporate oligarchy?

[Occam Bandage]

32. Most of those 14 are hardly binary, but are things that exist in degrees in most governments.

Obviously they're all bad, and obviously I'd rather they be lessened. If this were a discussion on negative traits in American governance, and what to do about them, yeah, sure, great, I'd be aboard.

However, to claim that "the takeover is complete"--that is to say, that there are literally no rights left to be stripped from Americans--is not only counterproductive, not only likely to alienate people that might otherwise be somewhat receptive to your message, it is absolutely fucking insane.

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. Do you even understand the implication of this law as it pertains

to CORPORATE responsibility?

Oh never mind

[tom_paine]

88. The difference between truly Free Nations and Totalitarian Nations

(even this newfangled relatively non-instrusive, non-brutal form called Inverted Totalitarianism) is that in a free nation, laws and the rights of the people HAVE to be observed (not perfectly, perfect application ofthe law is an impossibility, but I am speaking of getting close as we can, realtive to those societies that have come before us) due to the strong nature ofthe system of checks and balances, as well as a strong, independant, investigative Free Press to also check corruption.

Free Nations HAVE to, Totalitarian nations with weakened or no system of checks and balances (like current America) and a weak, toadying, incapable-of-investigation Corporate-Controlled Press, only give the rights because they WANT to, not because they have to.

No one has said "that there are literally no rights left to be stripped from Americans". Though, in a technical sense that is true. In a legal sense, also, because if you add up PATRIOT and MCA and the rest, we don't. The only reason we seem to have something left is because it is not feasible for the Bushies to start rounding up dissenters. They grant us these rights not because they have to, but because there are just a few lines they cannot yet cross, such as sweeping up dissenters and labelling us as Unlawful Enemy Combtanats.

Legally, there is nothing to prevent them from doing that right this second, plus the Detention Camps have already been built. But the practicality of doing so does not yet exist. In fact, as a friend opined to me once, "I won't believe it until White people start getting sent to the Gulag."

If I had to synopsize what most of our fellow American Subjects "think" freedom is, that would be the line.

Thus, the Bushies do not dare "squeeze their fists" in that way, even though they could if they wanted to. That would risk losing everything they've gained. Plus they can do darned near anything else and it won't make an impression on the "I won't believe it until White people start getting sent to the Gulag" Crowd.

But I agree with nadine. The takeover IS complete, and now we wait for the whole closetful of other shoes to drop. There is still the possibility that Obama will win, and will take steps to restore liberty. There is also the chance that, like Bill Clinton, Obama may be allowed to sit upon the throne yet will do nothing that disrupts the current status quo and leaves all the engines of Bushie Tyranny in place for Jeb or George P. to pick up again as if they'd never been gone.

But I have to be honest here, the thing that you seem to believe most strongly, that there is nothing out of the oridnary going on and this is just another tribulation-filled period in history like a dozen others, I think THAT is the least likely to be true, though it is certainly possible.

[Two Americas]

219. so what?

Most governments are tyrannical.

Granted that this is not binary, and that the truth is somewhere in between, the question becomes upon which side of the issue should we worry about erring?

It is obviously the case that it could never be said with complete certainty that "there are literally no rights left to be stripped" so you are postulating a nonsensical standard here. Your aloof and blase attitude about this issue is stunning.

The only people being "alienated" by this talk are people in a tiny segment of the population, disproportionately represented here, of relatively upscale and well-off educated liberals. I believe that they will be alienated from any politics of resistance or defense of the working class, so it doe not matter what we say to them, and they are too few to worry about.

"Otherwise be somewhat receptive to your message?" You have to be kidding. This is not some sales pitch.

[kath]

23. For those who read, check out Naomi Wolf. Nadine mentioned her book, an excerpt of which

"10 steps to Close Down An Open Society" (part of her book "The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot") is available here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment

[libnnc]

77. second that suggestion

...tipping points


we're there...

[Greyhound]

129. Don't bother.

This bridge dweller is a plant or a buffoon.

A cursory search of it's spew is sufficient to establish the agenda.

Nothing to see here, good consumers, move along...

[trickyguy]

240. You're right about the book. I read it three times..

and after reading this post and these threads at DU I certainly think

that I understand what really is going on, as frightening as it is to actually read.

I teach piano. I don't own a gun. And I'm terrible at confrontational aggression.

Would be glad to go on strike for a day. Even for a week.

Guess I'd better get started on that vegetable garden. Or is it too late for that?

[Two Americas]

220. for whom?

For you? There are millions who have nothing more to lose. Your persistent arrogance and self-centeredness on this thread continues to amaze me.

[kentuck]

15. A big part is our own fault..

When we allowed our elected representatives to give themselves their own pay raises. What incentive do they have to care about how the rest of us are struggling if all they have to do is give themselves a big raise to make up for any shortfalls they may have financially? That is a big part of it, in my opinion.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Of course and those who say but I am not guilty

yes, yes we are, collectively

[stillcool]

17. Oligarchy by Default..

is what Ferdinand Lundberg called it in his book "The Rich and the Super-Rich" available on-line for free download as well as lots of other gems at the following website:
http://www.soilandhealth.org/03sov/0303critic/0303socialcriticism.html

Lundberg, Ferdinand. The Rich and the Super Rich. New York: Lyle Stewart, 1968.
Seventeen

OLIGARCHY BY DEFAULT



Latter-day discourses on the economic system as something separate merely because it can be analytically isolated, bypass the inescapable fact that there is always present a politico-economic system: government with economic ramifications, an economy with political ramifications. Governments and economic systems are never separate; they are opposite sides of the same coin. As experience shows, their leading personnel are interchangeable. Such being the case, in any study of economic and financial affairs we are invariably concerned with some sort of system of coercion and repression. For all government is universally conceded to rest at bottom on systematized collective coercion and repression.

Such coercion and repression, to be sure, are necessary. Without them life, in the words of a famous dictum, would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." Without them anarchic individual coercion would prevail in a social jungle.

In the long, turbulent course of history many cushions and restraints were developed within governmental systems to protect the populace from their fierce protector--that is, to soften some of the more outrageous aspects of coercion the engine of government itself made possible. For the instrument of government was usually freely used by rulers--"the insolence of office," "power corrupts," "to the victor belong the spoils"--for ulterior and wholly private ends. Today, in the celebration of particular systems of government, one finds that it is the imperfect restraints against self-serving rulers and their friends that are really celebrated--Constitution, Bill of Rights, written laws, half-measures of social support, the development of equity in law, and the like.

Nevertheless, after all the fine print has been duly perused and applauded, coercive power (soothingly designated as sovereign power) remains and is properly suspect. Behind their bland masks the most civilized of governments retain all the powers of any despotism, their application duly prescribed (and the prescriptions not infrequently violated). Taking into consideration all governmental powers and their usual application, there are in fact no genial governments at all. And in the interstices of even the most finely meshed restraints (those of the United States probably being less finely meshed than those, for example, of England, France or Sweden) there is much room for one-sided self-service by the rulers and those with clandestine privileged access to them. While one might balk at assenting to the proposition that government is the executive committee of the ruling class, it is a demonstrable fact that it is peculiarly at the service of the upper economic class, which accordingly is warrantably regarded as in effect a ruling class.

Lest such an observation be thought by provincials to give this exposition an unholy Marxist aura, let us in reverential solemnity quote such an austere Establishmentarian as Woodrow Wilson, who said (Franklin D. Roosevelt later concurring) in words as valid today as when first uttered:

"The masters of the government of the United States are the combined capitalists and manufacturers of the United States. It is written over every intimate page of the record of Congress, it is written all through the history of conferences at the White House, that the suggestions of economic policy in this country have come from one source, not from many sources. The benevolent guardians, the kind hearted trustees who have taken the troubles of government off our hands have become so conspicuous that almost anybody can write out a list of them. . . .

"Suppose you go to Washington and try to get at your government. You will always find that while you are politely listened to, the men really consulted are the men who have the biggest stake--the big bankers, the big manufacturers, the big masters of commerce, the heads of railroad corporations and of steamship corporations. . . . The government of the United States at present is a foster child of the special interests." 1

For the alleged violation of some of its peculiar, even minor, mandates any government whatever will execute any high-minded offender whether he be Jesus, Socrates, John Hus, Servetus, Thomas More, Joan of Arc or John Brown. Socrates was executed by a far more democratic system than any now even claims to be and in a more refined system of civilization than that of any modern country. Under threat of durance vile all governments require the payment of taxes, even unfairly apportioned taxes as in the United States with its packed poor-boy legislatures.

Again, any government even in a trivial or doubtful cause such as Vietnam may place the lives of its younger male citizens in extreme jeopardy by coercing them into the armed forces under the claims of routinely invoked patriotic duty and sending them into kill-or-be-killed situations. Most Americans have been astonished in recent years to see what was always known to the informed: that the president alone can send existing armed forces anywhere without consulting anyone, least of all the public or Congress. He could order an overnight assault against any country, thereby precipitating general war. He could, in full constitutionality, order all of the armed forces into the depths of the Congo and nobody could legally halt the operation. Congress, it is true, could refuse the money to continue the operation and thus be in the position of refusing to support helpless men who had only obeyed legal orders. And this is only a very little of what a fully constitutional American president can do--without consulting anyone.

Most of what a president does not ordinarily do--such as send secret police to citizens' doors late in the night--he does not do because he does not want to. He can do this sort of thing quite legally; there is no law saying at what hour police may call. And such a personally likeable man as President John F. Kennedy did indeed send out nocturnal police visitors in the squabble over steel prices.

Government power, wielded by officials, individual human beings, is evidently great power over others, not necessarily for others, and anyone who wields it, smiling or not, or has ready access to the wielders obviously has great power far beyond that of any man in the street. Moreover, this power with modern techniques is far greater than it ever was. By means of modern methods of communication, government can put its agents into action anywhere in a matter of minutes. It has been credibly reported that President Johnson, with far more power at his fingertips than all presidents combined up to Harry Truman, and more than either Truman, Eisenhower or Kennedy, personally designated overnight targets in North Vietnam for powerful air squadrons waiting to take off from remote, dawn-shrouded airfields. We possess today, in brief, pinpoint government. It can even listen in on conversations anywhere, and freely does so despite denials. It freely uses internal spies, especially in the matter of taxes on obscure citizens.

[Mojorabbit]

224. Thanks

I am saving this to my desktop as a reminder for the next time I get too idealistic.

[T.Ruth2power]

24. Lock, stock and barrel

Both parties are completely controlled.

Both parties controlling elements are millionaires, lobbyists, fund-raisers, careerist apparatchiks, consultants, and corporate lawyers.

K&R

[TahitiNut]

27. Isn't it strange that Ralph Nader was more right than wrong??

:hide:

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. Won't get tomatoes from me

but Kucinich has also said it recently

As is I just threw out the tomatoes... made me sick!

[Occam Bandage]

34. Excepting as regards the one thing he could have done to stop it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. And the USSC had nuthing to do with it and all them Jews voted fer Buchannan

chuckle

[Occam Bandage]

69. There are multiple sufficient combined causes here. But for the SC, Gore

would have been President. But for Jeb purging the voter rolls, Gore would have been President. But for a bunch of old folks who couldn't read a ballot, Gore would have been President. And yes, but for Ralph Nader keeping his name on the ballot, Gore would have been President.

[nadinbrzezinski]

74. and if the votes were COUNTED he would have been president

not only did the News Consortium found this on September 10... ah pre 9.11 thinking

But it is a fact that Nader has a lot less of a boogey man role than those who refuse to see the BIG picture like to pain.

BIG PICTURE, STRATEGIC THINKING... connecting dots

[Occam Bandage]

92. I'd file that "but-for" under the Supreme Court "but-for."

[MuseRider]

36. I said that

just this morning. :hi:

[Individualist]

35. ...and the voters keep returning the enablers to office.

As long as this continues, nothing will change.

[MuseRider]

39. And as long as we do not

demand honesty and allow so much pandering that we do not know who we are really voting for. Make them a star and that is all we need. A few talking points and jingos and we are good to go. Make us feel good even though things are really bad and we are theirs for the taking. We are so easy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. Yep, here is a thread of mine on this

there is a sucker born every day indeed

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3486679

[MuseRider]

52. That is a damned good thread.

Your OP is exactly how I feel. Been voting too long to not recognize the game now. Too bad I did not see it long before now. Those letters mean nothing. I no longer have a letter because the letter I identified with no longer even begins to support what I wish to see happen.

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. It is time to vote them out, that is one PEACEFUL resistance

sp

[Rex]

44. Nobody know why gas prices are going up, but leave it to commercials

to exploit it to make a buck. :eyes:

[ladjf]

56. This has turned out to be a great thread. The posters are so

angry that they can barely write plain sentences. It has become an almost poetical expression of
the grief about what has happened to our beloved Country and its people.

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. True... but I hate this form of poetry!

Damn they make it so clear that they are part of the problem

[tom_paine]

62. Sometimes I think the movie "the Matrix" was simply squeezed out by the Ideosphere

because it had become ripe enough, so to speak, to be born.

It didn't matter who wrote it or if it ever saw the light of day, but it was born out of reality.

Oh, not that stuff about humans being used as batteries or the world actually being a computer-generated hologram or machines taking over or any of that sci-fi crap.

But the root idea, that media saturation and technology could now create a womb of False Reality so complete it seems real, that is an idea born straight out of yesterday's reality. An idea, I believe birthed in the metaphorical Ideosphere becuase, while many Bush-like tyrants from Hitler to Brezhnev may have desired that effect, media sophistication and saturation was not great enough for them to actually weave a 100% False Reality Bubble.

Now they can, and I have no doubt all the tyrants down in hell are smiling jealously at the achievements of the Bush Family.

This is undoubtedly a small taste of what it felt like to be one of the few people who could "see" in 1938 Gemany, absent the violence (for that I am grateful, as long as it lasts).

Personally, I am very glad that the Bushies are pursuing this kinder and gentler version called Inverted Totalitarianism.

OTOH, I am depressed because it is so very successful at camoflauging itself in plain sight. Because if the Bushies had come at us the old-fashioned way, millions more would be awake who now sleep. A no-win, because thousands upon thousands would be beaten or dead who are now alive and unharmed, myself among them, thus proving there's no "good way" to descend into tyranny.

Man, oh, man, sometimes I wish I had taken that blue pill.

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. You know what bothers me? They did come in the old ways

the Brooks Brothers kids in Florida in 2000 were not different from the Brown Shirts

It was just so short that people's brains didn't make the connection

And what happened at the DNC rules meeting was a shadow of that

I hope people wake up SOON... and realize that there is very little they can do right now that is "normal" and we need to change tactics

[MonkeyFunk]

63. Why on earth do you still live here

if you're convinced that we've become a fascist country?

[Occam Bandage]

70. OP likes to claim a kinship with politically-aware Germans in the 1930s.

I, too, wonder why OP doesn't follow in their footsteps and emigrate. Unlike in Nazi Germany, it is quite easy to do so.

[nadinbrzezinski]

75. It WAS in Nazi Germany UNTIL 1937

Oh well...

And seriously, why is it that the DENIAL crowd cannot see what is in front of their fucking noses?

I forget, Hitler took over and all the camps were opened overnight... POOF...

:sarcasm:

[MonkeyFunk]

85. well if you feel that way

you really should get the hell out of here. I don't know how you can stand it here.

[Occam Bandage]

87. I can only wonder why someone would willingly stay in a country they believed was fascist.

[tom_paine]

109. Really? You can only wonder? I always thought you were quite intelligent,

even when we disagreed or you smeared me and I sneered back.

Read post #107. Then tell me you don't understand.

[Two Americas]

216. interesting remark

Because not everyone has bought into the right wing libertarian "looking out for number one" anti-social mentality. Because some people care about more than just saving their own skin.

Because not everyone has the resources and skills that you do, and so may not have the option of leaving the country. I assume that you do, or this would have occurred to you.

But most importantly, because people such as yourself mock and ridicule anyone who tries to sound the alarm, and contribute to the denial and complacency.

Live in a privileged bubble is you like, and look down your nose in contempt at the rest of us. However, it is morally wrong to lull other people about this. I also cannot understand why anyone would put the time and effort into this that you do, in less in fact you know that what the others are saying is true and are trying to suppress that knowledge and maintain your own state of denial.

I find what you are doing on this thread morally repugnant, beyond it being illogical and abrasive and arrogant.

[skooooo]

79. it's more fun..

...to sit around and be dark. Some people think it makes you cool.

[NeedleCast]

114. Easily The Best Reply In This Thread

[tom_paine]

155. Only someone very young would think that, I believe.

There are many great posts on this thread, and those on both sides of the debate made some excellent, thought-provoking points.

Grow up.

[tom_paine]

154. You think this is FUN?!? You think we are juveniles playing games?

I have long ago ceased to give a fig about being "cool". FUN?!? My God, what I wouldn't give to live in pre-2000 America just for one day! What I wouldn't give to not give a shit about politics again, confident the system was working well without me having to bother with citizen particpiation!

I'd like to say more, but your clueless and juvenile comment warrants no more wasted time on my part.

[cali]

188. it's about being a secular apocalyptic. No different really than

the religious kind. The psychology is essentially the same. It's about delusions of grandeur (I see the TRUTH, and any stupid peasant who doesn't agree with me is a 'good german' who doesn't know a scrap of history'.

it's about hyperbolic bullshit and an inability to see nuance and complexity. Anyone making the U.S. today is Germany in 1939 argument, doesn't know jackshit about German history.

The OP is typically hysterical and mindless.

[skooooo]

194. best post in thread...

...easily!

[Two Americas]

223. dramatically false

You say that there is no valid comparison between Germany in the 30's and the US today. That is so obviously false, that it is hard to know where to begin. You are able to say that and imagine that you have some credibility for one reason only - we know what happened there AFTER 1939 and that colors everything we think about that. There is a glaring gap in your knowledge. You need to read descriptions from the 30's about how it looked then from the inside, not subsequent hindsight accounts about the 30's.

What was being done in Germany in the 30's that has not been done here? What cause for alarm did the every day people in Germany have in the 30's that is missing here today?

This is very dangerous. You are asking us to compare the two from the viewpoint of hindsight. We cannot afford to do that. Your sentiments are oppositional to every principle of the enlightenment and upon which this country was founded, and also betray a deep and profound ignorance about history. Your remarks also have a severely reactionary political effect, and tend to be divisive and destructive. In short, they are indefensible on any level.

[cali]

262. Sorry, you are flat wrong. First of all, I have

two Masters in history and I'll put my knowledge of that period, gleaned through both primary and secondary sources up against yours any fucking day of the week. It's clear you don't have a clue about German life from say 1935 to 1940. Not a fucking clue.

What was being done in the 1930s that hasn't been done here? Educate yourself; I'll start you off:

Aktion T 4- The murder of thousands and thousands of disabled German CITIZENS. Over a quarter of a million were exterminated. You do consider the disabled to be citizens, right? A T4 began in earnest in 1939. Care to show me the analogous event under bushco? And if you think Katrina is the answer: FAIL.


Krystallnacht: Took place in 1938. Some 91 Jews were murdered. Some 30,000 were arrested and deported or sent to camps. Not to mention the huge amount of damage done to property. Care to show me the analoguous event under bushco?

The Nuremberg Laws of 1935. Care to show me the analogous event under bushco? Do you even know what the Nuremberg Laws did?

The persecution and torture of gay men started in 1933. That's right, 1933. And it went on unabated through the 1930s with thousands prosecuted and sent to camps for being gay.

And here's just a bit from Wiki:

"Throughout the 1930s, the legal, economic, and social rights of Jews were steadily restricted. Friedländer writes that, for the Nazis, Germany drew its strength for its "purity of blood" and its "rootedness in the sacred German earth."<116> In 1933, a series of laws were passed to exclude Jews from key areas: the Civil Service Law; the physicians' law; and the farm law, forbidding Jews from owning farms or taking part in agriculture. Jewish lawyers were disbarred, and in Dresden, Jewish lawyers and judges were dragged out of their offices and courtrooms, and beaten up.<117> Jews were excluded from schools and universities, and from belonging to the Journalists' Association, or from being newspaper editors.<116> The Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung of April 27, 1933 wrote:

A self-respecting nation cannot, on a scale accepted up to now, leave its higher activities in the hands of people of racially foreign origin … Allowing the presence of too high a percentage of people of foreign origin in relation to their percentage in the general population could be interpreted as an acceptance of the superiority of other races, something decidedly to be rejected.<118>

In 1935, Hitler introduced the Nuremberg Laws, which stripped German Jews of their citizenship and deprived them of all civil rights. In his speech introducing the laws, Hitler said that if the "Jewish problem" cannot be solved by these laws, it "must then be handed over by law to the National-Socialist Party for a final solution (Endlösung)."<119> The expression "Endlösung" became the standard Nazi euphemism for the extermination of the Jews. In January 1939, he said in a public speech: "If international-finance Jewry inside and outside Europe should succeed once more in plunging the nations into yet another world war, the consequences will not be the Bolshevization of the earth and thereby the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation (vernichtung) of the Jewish race in Europe."<120>"./

Are there accurate analogies comparing the U.S. of say 2001-2008 to Germany between 1933 and 1941? Sure, but they aren't the ones you make. One could compare the rising tide of Nationalism here to that era, but one would have to be careful in doing so. One could also compare corporate collusion.

You really need more knowledge of the period than you have.

[Two Americas]

267. right

Degrees in history are fine, but prove nothing. Certainly they earn you a seat at the table, and consideration of your remarks. I will refrain from touting my bona fides, and let my arguments stand on their own, and I will overlook your relentless bullying and hostility.

We are not talking about which laws were passed - now there is the prejudice of a history education, the obsession with facts about legislation and events and activities of the powerful, to the exclusion of the history coming alive or being real on a daily personal level for a person - we are talking about the day-to-day experience of the average person here and comparing it to the day-to-day experiences that people are relating here from today in the U.S. That is the argument people are using - they look out the window and see no storm troopers (or variants on that theme) and so mock and ridicule those who say we are in grave danger, similar to the danger people were facing in Europe in the 30's. A history degree is woefully inadequate, and perhaps even a hindrance, for addressing that subject.

Just one source - Klemperer's diary - proves your contention false. Clearly, regardless of what laws were passed, life could drag on routinely for over a decade for a highly visible and well-known Jewish person, and haggling over the price of butter went on as though nothing had changed. The prejudice and bigotry against Jewish people existed before and outside of any law being passed, and most of the daily persecution came from hundreds and hundreds of petty decrees, which is a blind spot for history-degreed people, as opposed to true historians, as they focus on the larger more dramatic events (as seen with an aristocratic ruling class bias) to the exclusion of the direct experience of the peons. Nothing about a history degree affects the class prejudice that a person brings to the discussion, in fact it can reinforce and strengthen just those prejudices.

A particularly telling in Klemperer's accounts is the observation that as late as 1944 when the Gestapo hauled away yet another person from the Dresden ghetto, after thousands had already disappeared, he would hear his neighbors say "what did he do wrong? He must have done something wrong. They wouldn't just arrest him for nothing." If that does not demonstrate the validity of my thesis for you, I think that you are determined to ignore the truth about this no matter what evidence you see.

The laws you cite are completely consistent with a pattern of exclusion and persecution of Jewish people throughput history and across Europe. You may know the "facts" from your touted formal education, but you are seriously blind to context and to the human element, and this is a common shortcoming in formal education.

[MonkeyFunk]

263. yay

we're back to agreeing!

[Name removed]

211. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Leopolds Ghost]

214. Occam Bandage doesn't like the armed forces but tells us "love it or leave it"

Interesting mix of beliefs you have.

[MonkeyFunk]

221. stop lying

nobody ever said "love it or leave it".

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

89. Maybe you'd be good enough to review the 14 points of fascism...

...and tell us which ones have not been satisfied here in the U.S.?

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm

Does the 'why do you still live here' rhetoric never get tired?

Is that your pat response for anyone who doesn't drink the koolaid?

[Occam Bandage]

91. 16. The "fourteen points" were drawn up to make a point about our current government.

They are not used in any context but to declare America fascist. You will not find any use of that term and those "points," except when as applied by Western liberals (and occasionally extreme libertarians) to George W. Bush. They're no more useful or more meaningful than any of the hysterical right-wing claims of American "socialism" or "anti-Christianity."

[nadinbrzezinski]

95. Ah cool, refreshing COOL AID... we just went through all his above

nt

[Occam Bandage]

98. It's spelt with a K.

(and you'll note I left the post number in, so one could hop up and see the above conversation.)

[nadinbrzezinski]

103. I know, but I chose to spell it with a C, sorry

was waiting for that

:evilgrin:

After all we ignorant fools for whom this is ESL, have no idea of what the country stands for or how far up a creek without a damn paddle we are

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

104. So rather than dispute...

...that conditions in the U.S. now satisfy the 14 points of fascism, you simply dismiss them as not meaningful?

Not very compelling, Occam, and not very surprising either.

[Occam Bandage]

106. Sure, they "satisfy" them. So do most governments. They're meaningless.

It's the political equivalent of a horoscope--it's meant for people to look at it and go, 'wow, this applies especially well!'

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

136. "...it's meant for people to look at it and go, 'wow, this applies especially well!"

Obviously the description of symptoms of a condition, be it the fascism that plagues nations, or the hemorrhoids that afflict assholes, is not written down for no reason -- it's done for the purpose of application to a particular situation or set of circumstances. This does not argue for the written description of the symptoms being useless or meaningless.

The 14 points of fascism are both useful and meaningful -- they help us identify the problem, and what we're dealing with, just as the written description of hemorrhoidal symptoms does for someone with a painfully swollen ass:

http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/hemorrhoids/#symptoms

[Occam Bandage]

139. The problem is that it applies equally "well" to virtually all large nations across the globe,

whereas diagnostic criteria for hemorrhoids do not apply to all assholes.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

146. The fact that these 14 points of fascism may or may not be...

...rightly applied to other nations as well, also does not argue for there being useless or meaningless.

Your rhetoric is illogical.

[Occam Bandage]

148. If they can be equally well applied to all modernized nations on Earth, then

you are left with two options:

1. They are meaningless and not useful for diagnosing fascism.
2. All nations are fascist, in which case the term 'fascism' is not meaningful or useful for distinguishing political systems.

[nadinbrzezinski]

153. PRoblem with the logic, they are not applied to all nations at the same time

For example. France is NOT a fascist state right now but Italy is well on its way...

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

158. The 14 points of fascism most certainly DO NOT...

...apply equally well to all modernized nations on Earth.

You are disingenuously introducing a false hypothetical as fact in a desperate attempt to defend an indefensible position. This is the tactic of a con artist or a shill.

[tom_paine]

165. Very true. I was going to bring that up but it got lost in the other stuff.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Occam Bandage]

181. Only in a matter of degree do they differ. Name a state, I'll apply the 14.

[nadinbrzezinski]

182. you're on Mexico

(Ok unfair advantage, I know her politics extremely well... and I can tell the tendencies are towards a FAILED state, not a fascist state)

[Occam Bandage]

183. Mexico? That's a pretty easy one.

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism

Check. Mexico possesses flags.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.

Yep. The Mexican judicial system is corrupt and uneven, and any 'reform' policies are jokes.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause

Actually, I'd like you to find a government with elections where the party in power doesn't blame all of society's ills on people hindering them.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism

Check. The Mexican military is frequently used in domestic affairs, especially as regards the ever-expanding "drug war."

5. Rampant sexism

Yep. Mexico is comprised of people. Therefore, sexism everywhere you look.

6. A controlled mass media

Reporters without Borders ranks Mexico 132/168 in freedom of the press. Check.

7. Obsession with national security

Especially as regards the drug war, yes.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together

Freedom of religion is uneven at best in the South. I'll give it to 'em.

9. Power of corporations protected

Hello, NAFTA.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated

How are you, NAFTA?

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts

Mexico's funding of the arts is minimal at best. 11/11 so far.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment

There's a gimme.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption

Ahahahahahahahaha. Hahaha. Ha. Ha. Yes.

14. Fraudulent elections

Mexican elections make American ones look absolutely pristine.


So, yeah. 14/14. Mexico is fascist.

[nadinbrzezinski]

185. WRONG, but let not that stop you

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism

Check. Mexico possesses flags.

And an anthem and all that, the only close one you got

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.

Yep. The Mexican judicial system is corrupt and uneven, and any 'reform' policies are jokes.

Not quite, depends on WHERE in mexico, If you were taling of the SOUTH WEST, you;d be right... but you also have many a police now under the careful eye of FEDERAL authorities.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause

Actually, I'd like you to find a government with elections where the party in power doesn't blame all of society's ills on people hindering them.

That is why the Mexican LEFT took over CONGRESS to press their views.. you don't KNOW Mexican Politics, at ALL

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism

Check. The Mexican military is frequently used in domestic affairs, especially as regards the ever-expanding "drug war."

And the Mexican Military is NOT at the center of society, nor are there action figures for Mexican troops. There is deep distrust of the force and the ONLY model of a Mexican Military Vehicle is a FAM Jet... and that one IS OLD, as in Ancient

That said, the FAILURE of the Mexican Military to control the different factions (drug cartels) is pointing towards a FAILED STATE... not me saying this but STRATFFORD, not that this was news to me

5. Rampant sexism

Yep. Mexico is comprised of people. Therefore, sexism everywhere you look.

Specifics please, see you can't

And by the way now you have FEMALES in the Air Force Academy and all MOS are now open to Women. There has also been a wide spread opening of the society to women in different jobs, but I am sure you knew that

6. A controlled mass media

Reporters without Borders ranks Mexico 132/168 in freedom of the press. Check.

And we are not doing that much better... that said, THEIR PRESSS is not controlled by the state but fear of the Drug Cartels see failed state and Stratford.

7. Obsession with national security

Especially as regards the drug war, yes.

Not really, outside of some border areas you are wrong... not that you'd know that

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together


Freedom of religion is uneven at best in the South. I'll give it to 'em.

WRONG AGAIN, There is full separation of church and state and freedom of worship and religion in Mexico, going to at least the Guerra de Reforma in the 1850s and several articles in the CURRENT constitution... Again, not that you'd know that

9. Power of corporations protected

Hello, NAFTA.

Give you that

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated

How are you, NAFTA?

WRONG, the labor movement in mexico is actually STRONGER than in the US... though facing the same problems as their north american counterparts. I bet you didn't even know there was a Union movement down there. Don't confuse Colombia with Mexico

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts

Mexico's funding of the arts is minimal at best. 11/11 so far.

WRONG AGAIN, Mexican Universities (public system) is ill founded since we have a right wing government, but still has some world class institutions see Colegio de Mexico for example... and people can attend without having to pay an arm and a leg

12. Obsession with crime and punishment

There's a gimme.

SO mexico has a death penalty and a rougher legal system than the US? REALLY? Didn't know that, and that is news to me.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption

Ahahahahahahahaha. Hahaha. Ha. Ha. Yes.

YES, not worst than here though

14. Fraudulent elections

Mexican elections make American ones look absolutely pristine.

Actually Mexican elections, given OH and other recent events are CLEAN in comparison


So, yeah. 14/14. Mexico is fascist.

WRONG, according to Stratford Mexico is on its way to a failed state. It has SOME tendencies towards a Fascist state and a RIGHT WING Chicago School trained President but a FUNCTIONING CONGRESS. Now if you had done this exercise in the 1970s, you'd be able to hit more of them accurately

Try again in another decade though as nothing stays static ever

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

187. First you claim the 14 points of fascism can be...

..."equally well applied" to ALL modernized nations -- now you say "Only in a manner of degree do they differ."

Which is it, Occam?

By your non-logic we could also say the symptoms of hemorrhoids can be "equally well applied" to every asshole and that "only in a manner of degree do they differ," and therefore the symptoms of hemorrhoids are "meaningless."

What is meaningless is your silly, illogical rhetoric.

[Occulus]

204. Mali. n/t

[tom_paine]

107. Allow me to answer. Because I will NEVER run from totalitarians, from tyrants.

I and lots of others here. We will NEVER let this beautiful nation be taken from us, no matter how ugly it gets. We are here to STAY!

Like the French who stayed to oppose Napoleon, like the Germans and Jews who stayed behind in Germany, some to resist quietly or in other ways, we may be stupid and we may pay in any number of ways for our stubborn refusal to run...so be it.

I am trying to keep my temper because it pisses me off to no end to hear bullshit like that. I refuse to leave for the same reason I won't let a bully move into my home and kick me out.

You may say it's pride, and maybe it is. But whatever it is, IT IS.

Get a clue. And shove your insulting question. And maybe, just maybe, try to understand why someone would NOT run away from the shadow of totalitarian darkness, even though it is personally costly or may become so someday. Maybe because what the Founding Fathers created here is so unique (at least it was until after WWII - not totally unique but VERY unique) and so incredible that it's worth it to stay despite the risks.

To paraphrase an old Civil War special I once saw "...but what the Rebels didn't figure on was that 1 in 5 Billy Yanks was an immigrant. They had travelled halfway around the world in pursuit of an idea, and they felt that if the Union was broken, then something like that might never again be created. It was an idea worth fighting for, worth dying for."

Read the Declaration. READ IT! AGAIN! and AGAIN! If, after you read it five times in a row, you STILL can't conceive of why nadine, I, and millions like us won't leave, then there is no hope for you.

These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will at this time, shrink from the service of their country. But they that stand it now deserve the thanks of men and women yet to come...

[Occam Bandage]

111. So, are you suggesting that the Germans who emigrated are cowards compared to you?

[tom_paine]

118. OMG. Way to deflect the discussion to the personal! THAT'S the old Bandage I've come to know!

No, I am suggesting nothing of the sort, thank you very much. They were in graver personal, physical danger. Further, I can't fault anyone for running in the face of something like that.

Hell, in the face of such imminent physical and personal danger, I might have run, too. I like to think I wouldn't, but that is something no one can know until the imminent physical and personal danger is there staring them in the face.

So no, that is NOT what I am saying. First, I am saying you do a hell of a job in deflecting the debate when you want to.

Second, I am saying that I do not judge the people who ran from Nazis, and that I might have done the same in their shoes.

What I AM saying is that others looking at those who stayed might think they were stupid for doing what they were doing, but those who stayed had their reasons.

I am trying not get pissed off, but you putting words in my mouth, shitty vile words at that, is making me see red.

Generally, this has been an enjoyable conversation and exchange of ideas, but when you play bullshit games like that you make me regret not putting you on ignore the first time you pulled that sneaky shit.

[BeHereNow]

120. DON'T use the ignore button- it is far more entertaining to watch!

You know where this is going after all your time on DU-
sit back, enjoy the show!

BHN

[Occam Bandage]

126. "They were in graver personal, phsyical danger."

That's all I was asking for, really. Yeah, it was a low blow, but after going back and forth with a pack of snarling mongrels downthread, I hope you'll forgive me for inducing you, in an unfair manner, to say the next step rather than saying it myself.

The issue in question was Nadin's claims of kinship with Germans in 1938. I think that is a ridiculously bad argument--it's an emotional sledgehammer that's utterly removed from reality. I indirectly pointed out that the situation in 1938 was extraordinarily dire, and that many people who saw the gravity of the situation fled their country. You deflected it in a somewhat-pompous manner, in my eyes, by saying that no, you would stand and fight!

Well, no. I mean, that's great if we're talking about like voting and protesting and shit--I don't mind people recognizing the power of the individual in democracy--but those are options that people in 1938 Germany didn't have. Their options were "go along with it," "flee at personal risk," or "fight and die." If the situations are comparable, as Nadin suggests, then your post was indirectly calling German refugees cowards. The only way in which your post is not obviously reprehensible is if the situations are in fact nothing alike.

[nadinbrzezinski]

130. EARLY 1938 or LATE 1938

yes things moved THAT FAST

[Selatius]

134. You couldn't vote by then. The US is more like Germany 1933 going into 1934.

Of course, a smart authoritarian wouldn't need to roll the ball all the way to 1939. He can still maintain a semblance of control at 1935 or perhaps even earlier. The illusion of a Republic has become important as a way of social control, much more important than 60 years ago.

[nadinbrzezinski]

138. Which is exactly the point many of us have made

there are valid comparisons to Nazi Germany, but... this is fascism 3.0... why some things have not been removed

To compare anything 100% to a past event, well as the saying goes, the first time it is a tragedy, the second time it is a comedy... not that his has been a comedy..

And the last election was held in 34 iirc, and were provincial,not federal

That said, the only reason why we use Germany is that if I started to use comparisons to Chile, in some ways a more proper model or Franco's Spain, again a few more parallels, or even Italy... people just don't get it

For those who are FULLY familiar with the Mexico of the 1970s, the Bushies took lessons from the PRI... and how to use the state in new and interesting ways while maintaining an illusion. You think I could make those comparisons and people would FULLY get it?

[Selatius]

142. You could try Chile. Lots of folks here seem knowledgeable about what we did in Chile.

There's even documents and a sound tape from the Nixon White House over US involvement with Pinochet there.

[nadinbrzezinski]

149. We've tried, and it does not work

Chile is in another planet

Hell, of all the members of the Axis JAPAN fits us better, due to the system of cooperation between industry and the state... but again, people are not familiar, not do they want to be familiar with it

But somehow people bristle at Germany, which I will remind you, still has way too many parallels for comfort, since they are Authoritarian states

[tom_paine]

150. Well said, sir.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[cali]

189. Oh for the love of accuracy and reason. The Nuremberg Laws were

passed in 1935. 1935. Only a couple of years after Hitler seized power. Things in Germany were not OK up until 1938. That's utterly false. The government had complete and total control over the press by 1936. You really need to read some history.

[Mojorabbit]

229. The govt

here is three quarters of the way there in this aspect. Witness your nightly televison news.It does not have to be done exactly the same now as it was then. The internet put a wrinkle in it but I am sure that will be eventually be taken care of.

[Two Americas]

269. not true

Goebbels, in his extensive diaries, much of which survived, is still complaining about his lack of control over the press as late as 1941. Why would he complain about that if your contention were true? He would not. You are presenting a cartoon-like view of the history from the era - "these laws were passed and freedom ended." Real life is not so nice and tidy and simple, and giving this simplistic view the imprimatur of presumed authority because of your formal education does not alter this. Your interpretation of the facts may well be flawed, no matter how many facts you know. By the way, let's not over-rate the value of a college education, shall we? I don't see any connection between the increasing number of people walking out of institutions with degrees in hand and people's ability to reason or use critical thinking skills or apply their education to any useful purpose. Make your arguments in such a way that they can stand on their own.

Yes, in theory according to the authority granted to the regime by the laws that had been passed, the German government had the option, with little if anything to stop them, of exercising dictatorial power over all aspects of German life. we know that the Enabling Acts were dangerous, because we have the benefit of hindsight and know subsequent events. The potential for abuse was introduced by the laws, the widespread application of them came later. Does that tell us that since we have yet to see - although it can be seen by anyone willing to see it - the widespread application of dictatorial powers in this country, that therefore we should not be alarmed? You are applying one standard to Germany in the 30's, and a contradictory standard to conditions here today.

Of course things were not OK in Germany until 1938, or as I have been saying until 1941. We are saying that they appeared normal to many of the people on the inside, until and unless they were directly affected.

You are refuting your own argument with this absurd and dangerous line of reasoning. With the laws that have been passed recently in this country, and with the growth of the police state apparatus and a compliant judiciary, there is little standing in the way of the government here exercising dictatorial power over all aspects of American life. The fact that the government here has to one degree or another not exercised that power, or has exercised it against a small percentage of the population, or has not exercised it in flamboyant or dramatic ways, or the times it has exercised it have not received attention or scrutiny from the press, tells us little or nothing because the exact same thing was true throughout the 30's in Germany. That is the point I am making, and your remarks fully support my point.

Are things identical here today with the way things were in Germany in the 30's? Of course not. The germans invaded Poland, pour government invaded Iraq, on very similar pretexts. The Germans persecuted Jews as "foreigners," we persecute Arabs and Muslims. The Germans rounded up thousands of Jews without warrants with paramilitary forces, we have rounded up HUNDREDS of thousands of Latin American people without warrants or the benefit of due process by paramilitary forces. The Germans treated Slavs as second class citizens, we treat African Americans and other people of color as second class citizens. The Germans created new police and paramilitary forces within the government, our government is creating privatized para-military organizations - and of course the Nazis rose to power on the back of privatized armies.

Germans mostly obediently got into line without being coerced to do so, and so are most Americans today. Germans accepted the legalistic nonsense used as pretexts for persecution and detention, and we read Americans right here accepting similar arguments from our government when the issue of immigrant rights comes up.

But why does it need to be the case that conditions in Germany in the 30's and conditions here today need to be seen as identical before we can become alarmed? The prime lesson of the German experience, is that it is never too early to become alarmed, that there is no such thing as being too vigilant, that seemingly benign and innocuous things can lead to horrific consequences, and that the sooner you stand against the tyranny the better. Why would you argue against that? Why should we believe that you would not have argued the same line in Germany in the 30's? I believe that you would have, from reading hundreds of your posts.

It could be successfully argued, I am convinced, that the German people in the 30's had less overt and obvious evidence of the coming danger than people today do here, and that we have less excuse for complacency and denial than they did. That is something that should alarm all of us. Do you deny that this is the case?

[Two Americas]

235. June 1941

Howard K. Smith, in his memoirs "The Last Train from Berlin" said that things were fairly normal until June of 1941, and that it was easy, very easy, for the average citizen to think that everything was fine. Sure, they knew their was racism being promopted (and we do not?) and hatred toward "foreigners," which is to say "non-Germans," and that some had been rounded up (far fewer than have been rounded up here) and detained (800,000 here domestically so far), and that there were rumors of torture and abuses of prisoners (we have more than rumors here), and that the administration had made a lot of war-like noises (as ours has here), and there had been a questionable invasion of a small country (Poland, or Iraq?), and that laws had been passed that abrogated fundamental civil rights (but no worse than here), and that the policing agencies had grown in size and power (very similar to what is happening here) - however, according to many, many first hand observers, none of that affected the daily lives of the vast majority of the citizens, and there was very little alarm or worry. The average German went to their job, had their coffee, said what they wanted to say, and were not harassed or bothered by the authorities, and had little daily first hand evidence that anything was seriously wrong, let alone imnagining the nightmare that was about to unfold.

As late as 1941, even Goebbels, in his personal diary which he had no expectation would ever be published, was complaining because newspapers were printing critical articles about the regime and was wondering what if anything he could do about that. There is also no sense in his entries that he - perhaps the second most powerful person in the country - had any idea about the coming total destruction and mass murder that was just months away. There is a banality to evil, and a complacency and denial throughout a society, and things can get out of hand very quickly before anyone can react. Once they start to freact, they realize that everything they need is already gone. Once forces are set into motion, it is very hard to stop them, and by the time it is very obvious that something is very wrong it is far, far too late. If we have not learned that lesson from recent history, we have learned nothing.

We judge the German experience by what happened after June 1941 - long after it was far to late to stop what was coming.

[cali]

261. This may be one of the most ignorant posts I've ever read on the subject.

Incredible. First of all, German Jews were Germans until the Nuremberg laws were enacted. Secondly, I suggest you do some reading outside of Howard K Smith. Try reading "Diary of A Man in Despair", for a feel of how oppressive Germany was under the Reich during the 30s. To claim that life in Germany up until 1941, was normal for the average citizen, is just absurd. You make revisionist claims with no evidence whatsoever. And you couldn't be more in error. Millions had perished under the Reich by 1941.

I'm so sick of people who know jackshit about history and expound on their own delusions as if they were fact.

It's pathetic.

[Two Americas]

266. that is rare

More than one response from Cali, although it is the usual insults and attacks. I must have hit a nerve this time to earn the double dose of venom.

Do you have anything to offer, or do you just see it as your job to patrol the board night and day tearing others down?

You have no way to know whether or not I am ignorant on this subject, but it is a useful debate technique that you employ often - accusing people of being ignorant. I happen to be extremely well read on the subject, but we are not comparing knowledge here we are interpreting knowledge. When the way someone interprets knowledge makes you uncomfortable, you accuse them of lacking knowledge. Since the other readers have no way to assess your claim, your hope is that it will stand and lead the gullible to discredit and dismiss what your opponent is saying. usually it is an opponent of your choosing, and usually you do a mean-spirited hot and run - hundreds and hundreds of them day after day - and then run for cover.

Smith is not my only source, as though that mattered, but he is a good source on this particular issue, and one that is not well known. I am mentioning particular titles that I think would be of most value to the casual student of the era.

How about Victor Klemperer? His well-written and extensive diary survived, and gives us an amazing and unique view into what life was like throughout the 30's and during the war in the Third Reich. That is one chilling feature about his observations into daily life - how normal it all was and how easy to was to be in denial.

Ironic that you would mention Friedrich Reck-Malleczewen, since his observations about the banality of evil, and the pervasiveness of bullying and thuggisheness have so many parallels to our own times - which supports my thesis and contradicts yours. As I said, it is the interpretation of knowledge that matters, and you have not made the case that your interpretation is any more valid than anyone else's. You read the same book and came to an opposite conclusion from the one I did. I think he has a distinctly aristocratic bias, and hos focus on the leadership reminds me of the same aristocratic tendencies of many liberal critics of the political situation here. It does not surprise me that this book would appeal to people who also take an aristocratic view of the right wing phenomenon here. I would question the power and usefulness of that view, in both cases. The important thing about the Nazis was not that they were buffoons, just as the important thing about "Bush" et al is not that they are buffoons. You make the same mistake about the right wing phenomenon in this country, in many of your posts I have read, that the author of the Diary of a Man in Despair made about the Nazis. The error involves interpretation, and the unexamined cl assist prejudices and bigotry that skew the author's interpretation, the same classist prejudice and bigotry I have seen from you so often. In fact, your arrogant and condescending responses to me on this thread are perfectly in character with that and excellent examples of your prejudices and bigotry - hateful and bullying - that take precedence for you over any attempt at intelligent discussion. The unwashed masses here are just SO beneath you, that you just cannot be bothered with them other than to spew one liners and hurtful and malicious attacks against people.

One of the horrors of the Nazi era is just this - that people did accommodate themselves to it, justify it, rationalize it, deny it, and attack dissidents as "pathetic" and "ignorant" and as "alarmists," and that day-today life did go on fairly normally for people and that millions of people had not yet been directly affected in obvious and dramatic ways by the regime being in power. Of course they were living in an insulated world, had been gradually acclimated to a police state, and looking from the outside or with the benefit of hindsight, we see the truth that they were not seeing. That is the point. Are you disputing that? I do not think you are on firm ground if you are, and I can draw form about a hundred sources to back up what I am saying if you are sincerely interested in discussing this subject in an intelligent and calm manner.

In summary, were I a resister in the 30's in Germany, I cannot imagine anyone whom I would trust less to have my back than I would you. Likewise today. I am convinced that in that era, you would be arguing the same thing you are here and today - mocking and ridiculing those sounding the alarm and saying "this is nothing like what the Turks did. I can't believe how ignorant and pathetic you people are Where are the mass graves? Where is the reign of terror?" And, as I said, in the 30's in Germany you would have had an audience for your remarks, because of the persistent human tendency to deny horrific truths, and because of the relative benignity of the regime in terms of the daily lives of the average citizen, just as you do here today, because the signs of totalitarianism were not obvious and overt to the people living in Germany in the 30's, and the mass murder and destruction of the country was yet to come.

The chilling and truly horrifying thing is that the trains DID run normally, regardless of cargo or destination or purpose, that the schedules WERE kept, that the tonnage was logged, jobs WERE performed in a hum-drum routine and methodical and normal way. Do you deny that? The film "Showa" has example after example of everyday people talking calmly about their roles in the Holocaust, going about their jobs as though nothing were unusual or alarming, and hearing it first hand from particpants makes the routine normalcy of the whole thing painfully and sickeningly obvious. Do you deny this?

It is easy to be on the right side of history when you are looking through a rear view mirror. It is much more difficult, and takes a great deal of moral courage, to place yourself into the time in question and to then see what side of history you are on today. You are speaking for complacency and appeasement and denial, and I am certain that you would have been doing the same thing in the 30's.

[tom_paine]

144. But that is what I have been trying to tell you, that the situations can be unalike

in areas such as violence and personal danger, yet STILL be extraordinarily similar.

I don't know if you have read up on Inverted Totalitarianism, this newfangled invention, this shedding of the old snake's skin, followed by rebirth, rebranding, remarketing.

If you have the time and are genuinely interested in debate, please read this article:

http://www.truthdig.com/arts_culture/item/20080515_chalmers_johnson_on_our_managed_democracy

(I will also read any link you send to me, if you wish, so that our info exchange not one-sided)

Let me state first that I do not agree with all of Wolin's assertions about American History, but I do believe he has delineated this "new creation" excellently.

I would also like to add my thoughts on Inverted Totalitarianism, that it is something of a hothouse flower, only able to be created in nations with extraordinary wealth and with modern-levels of media-saturation, allowing this managing of democracy withOUT classic totalitrian oppression and brutality.

I will also add that I believe, under severe stress, like economic or ecological catastrophe, Inverted Totalitarianism will rapidly revert to it's classical roots and methods.

If you combine those two, the existance of Inverted Totalitarianism with it's capacity to revert to original forms under severe stress (this is speculation, since we are the first true Inverted Totalitarianism and we have not yet suffered that kind of national long-term severe stress), then perhaps even if you don't agree, you can better see where the "snarling pack of mongrels", myself included, are coming from.

Last but not least, add to all of that the fact that, legally, we aren't all that different from Nazi Germany now, though the lack of application of these new draconian laws keeps that fact from being obvious. Legally-speaking, I am referring to PATRIOT, MCA, and all the rest, at least a half dozen that I don't have total recall of at this moment (oh yeah, one is the one authorizing use of inmate slave labor as well as the Pentagon Plans - I've seen the DOD documents right off the DOD website - for Slave Labor Camps, raise the eyebrows a bit) and maybe you can see a little bit, even if you don't agree of why we feel that, legally, our nation could be turned into a near mirror of Nazi Germany, simply by enforcing the laws now on the books. Oh, and let's not forget the doctrine ofthe Unitary Executive. I can't seem to find any difference between that and Fuhrerprinzip, other than cosmetic and semantic. Perhaps you could help me there.

As a practical matter, enforcing these new laws to the fullest may not yet be feasible. The very attempt might cost the Bushies control, especially in the absence of some great catastrophic shock to our national nervous system. But even if it is not practical, the very existance of these laws, of the capability to fill up the camps - almost as bad if they are "merely" Slave Labor instead of overt Death Camps -, of the ability to arrest ANYONE and designate them as Unlawful Enemy Combtanat, throwing them in prison indefinitely (one SCOTUS vote away) without a trial, is troubling to say the least.

More troubling is that it would all be 'legal' as the new laws now stand, though they remain unenforced.

I have tried to explain as best I can what many of us are thinking. The fact remains that, whether or not they choose to do so, it is now legal by the letter of the law for any and every DUer to be designated an Unlawful Enemy Combatant and detained indefinitely. Excuse me, we are one McCain pResidency away from the "detained indefinitely" to be legal, but the rest is legal RIGHT at this moment! And as we can see, the Bushies can stretch out detainment to near-indefinitely even WITH habeaus corpus.

The only reason it hasn't happened is that the Bushies have chosen not to do so. It's legal, so it must be their choice, though I think practicality dictates here. If they thought they could do this now without large numbers of Americans revolting in disgust at such an idea, they'd do it.

But either way, the situation, while VERY dissimilar in imminent phsyical danger levels, is VERY similar in legal terms.

I can't explain it any better. We will have to agree to disagree. Please read the article on Inverted Totalitarianism.

[Occulus]

205. *plonk*

Buh-bye.

[nadinbrzezinski]

112. Beautiful

:patriot:

You know what some of these arguments that try my soul remind me off?

Torys

[Two Americas]

143. WTF?

I mean, WTF? Did I mention WTF?

You AREN'T saying "America love it or leave it." You just can't be.

Did I say WTF? Really. WTF?

[MonkeyFunk]

159. You're sputtering

I said no such thing. I just don't understand how if people truly believed we had become a fascist nation, they wouldn't make every effort to get out to save their own lives.

Frankly, I think the constant claims that we're a fascist country to be stupid. Today, I got up, bought coffee, went to work, did my job, went out to dinner, came home. At no point in the day was I apprehended, questioned, imprisoned, frisked or asked to show my papers. Nor did I witness any of those things happen to anybody else.

My day-to-day life is little different today than it was 8 years ago. I can still bitch about the government on the internet, I can still stand on a street corner and protest, I can write letters to the editor. I could, if I were inclined, go to any church I wish with no need to hide it. I can put bumperstickers on my car calling Bush a chump. Soldiers aren't quartered in my house.

One of the big differences between today and 8 years ago is that today I can marry my partner if I want to.

I think it's just some sort of childish symbol of "lib-cred" to cry about fascism, and it's usually done by people who are woefully ignorant of history.

[Two Americas]

193. never mind that

It does not follow that if a person thought this were a fascist state that they therefore would leave. I know that you did not say "America love it or leave it" or I would have given a more serious response rather than "sputtering," but nevertheless you responded in a very similar way to the right wing "get out if you don't like it" talk, and I don't think that was an accident.

Yes, there is a class of people in this country who go about their lives just as you described yours, with no obvious signs that anything is dire ir that there is anything to fear. So what? That has also been true in every totalitarian country in history as well. I would recommend William Shirer and Howard K. Smith, and also Victor Klemperer as a start, but there are dozen and dozens of works illustrating just how normal, banal, and calm things were in Germany right up until 1941 when the invasion of Russia started producing massive casualties and shortages- for some, perhaps most. Millions of Germans could have said exactly what you are saying here, long after serious resistance had become very difficult and catastrophe had become inevitable. I read one diary by a resistance leader in Berlin, who said that it was not until the first British bombs fell on her block in 1944 that she finally stopped denying the full reality of what had been happening in Germany. She hadn't even realized that shge was in denial, or could be. You see, life had just been going along pretty normally for her, just as you described your life.

Besides, with such a compliant house Negro class - "I got up, bought coffee, went to work, did my job, went out to dinner, came home. At no point in the day was I apprehended, questioned, imprisoned, frisked or asked to show my papers. Nor did I witness any of those things happen to anybody else."- why would the government need to use more draconian means on you? But certainly you read the news, and you have no excuse for not knowing that you are privileged and that millions are in brutal jail conditions for victimless crimes, that the government has adopted a policy of torture, has committed war crimes, has staged para-military raids and illegally arrested and detained 800,000 people, that the media has been consolidated in a few hands and the general public is getting a steady diet of propaganda, that the Bill of Rights is for all practical purposes null and void, and on and on. The fact that you can go about your life in peace in the midst of this is evidence of your privilege and your denial, not a refutation of those sounding the alarm.

I don't agree with nadin's use of the word "fascism" because it doesn't have much meaning. However, I don't know what word could be used with scoffers such as yourself that you would accept.

Glad that life is good for you. You might want to look around at how others are faring before you tell people they are being alarmists.

[MonkeyFunk]

195. But I don't "go about my life" ignoring these issues

I'm saying I, and others, go about our lives largely the same way we did 8 years ago. That's an argument against the notion that we've become a fascist country. You want to turn it into an argument that I simply ignore the fascism all around me, but that's just not the case. There simply isn't fascism all around me.

as for the OP, I wasn't saying "If you don't like it, leave". I was saying "If you honestly feel this has become a fascist country, then why on earth wouldn't you leave to save your own life?"

It's my way of putting her position against the wall to make people realize that she's exaggerating and using hyperbole. She doesn't REALLY believe we've become fascist - if she did, she'd leave. She just thinks it makes her more of a liberal to scream "fascism".

[Two Americas]

197. yes you do

You ignore the implications, and are hypercritical of any little error by those who are trying to see the bigger picture and warn their fellow citizens.

They are not fucking "issues," they are human beings and we are all in the same boat. Some are insulated, as you seem to be, and in denial. But you are among the few, the lucky ones.

Just because the things in your immediate vicinity are relatively pleasant for you, that does not mean that tyranny is not all around you. I think that the degree to which each of us is complicit in advancing the tyranny is the degree to which we are granted the privilege of being at relative peace and ease about things.

The closer to the nerve center of the tyrannical empire one is, and the more obedient service one is rendering to it, the less one will "see" it all around them.

Being able to marry your partner is not a privilege to celebrate by the way, and to then say "life is good," it is a right and rights require fighting for. A few little privileges here and there to round out your life of privilege and ease is not what the fight is about. There are people suffering hideous persecution and abuse, every day, for being different in various ways. If your right - or government granted privilege as you seem to see it - in any way alleviates the suffering and persecution of those people then we will have cause to celebrate. But for you to fully become equal to the other gentrified privileged few by adding a handful of things that are now missing in your life but are no great cause for alarm, in your view, while millions have nothing at all, is not anything that you should expect any of the rest of us to be worried about too much. Any idea what life is like for poor GLBT people, or those who are in prison, or homeless, or in combat zones?

As for the running away thing, that you assume - in true right wing "personal responsibility" libertarian fashion - would be everyone's first and only thought, some have more commitment to what is right and to the well-being of their fellow humans than they do to saving their own skins. That may seem quaint and obsolete to you, but not all of us have bought into the Ayn Rand doctrine yet.

What was it Jefferson said again? I do not think it was "liberty requires eternal complacency."

[justaregularperson]

250. You would have been comfortable in USSR then also

Americans really need to travel more and ask more questions of people from other countries. We are so blinded by our propaganda.

I have had many discussions with my Russian friends and family. Life in the USSR also appeared "normal" in most respects. That does not imply it was a free democracy in any form.

[nadinbrzezinski]

257. Yes they do... welcome to DU

:-)

And well said

[MonkeyFunk]

265. I've traveled a fair amount

never been to Russia, tough.

Not sure I understand your point. Are you saying people in the USSR had the rights I can enjoy today? I can post here on the internet that the President is a punk. I can stand on the streetcorner with a sign saying Cheney's a criminal. I can write to my congressman, I can write a letter to the editor, with no fear of retribution.

Was all that possible in the USSR?

[Leopolds Ghost]

213. Do you REALLY believe he's a Clinton supporter now?

I mean Clinton was totally opposed to this bill, right?

Whereas MonkeyFunk was spamming every FISA thread trying
to get them SHUT DOWN with comments like "Let it sink."

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

191. ........

[Swamp Rat]

67. We have been scheduled for termination.

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. I will not go into that gentle night peacefully

I can guarantee that

[Swamp Rat]

76. Many of us won't.

Whereas, the cowardly bootlicking brainwashed deniers will.

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. I suspect denial is easier psychologically and unlike the first time around

we've seen this movie before

[MaraJade]

80. I sincerely hope that you are right. . .

(fingers crossed)

I REALLY hope that you are right or we are all toast.

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. That we are living Fascism 2.0 Or is it 3.0?

I don't know why you are hoping for that

[Initech]

81. I'm ready for a Bolshevik style revolution at this point.

I think four years of John McCain will be the breaking point.

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. Revolution perhaps....

and TPB may not let grandpa get elected precisely because things are so fucked up

Read on Disaster Capitalims

[BeHereNow]

93. Better read HR 1955 before you say that on the "internets"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2386942

BHN

[Occam Bandage]

94. HR 1955, which does nothing more than to

establish a completely powerless commission to study whether terrorists are using the Internet?

Yeah, scary shit :eyes:

[nadinbrzezinski]

96. Under all the totalitarian legislation YOU TOO could be declared

a terrorist, ergo an enemy combatant

Some people get it, some don't

[BeHereNow]

101. Methinks this is not just "some people"

Methinks this one will be interesting to watch.
BHN

[Occam Bandage]

108. HR 1955 does not change the definitions of "terrorist."

[BeHereNow]

100. You are making a fool of yourself at this point OB.

You clearly have NOT read the bill.
Maybe you want to quit before you make a fool of yourself any further?
BHN

[Occam Bandage]

105. Indeed I have. Please tell me which language authorizes anything beyond that.

Also: Thought I was on ignore?

[BeHereNow]

110. I never said I put you on ignore.

I said I would ignore you-
I wont put you on ignore because I don't want to miss
your inevitable fate.


:popcorn:

BHN

[nadinbrzezinski]

113. He's been around for quite a while, so I doubt it

just gets close to the line

Pass more

:popcorn:

[BeHereNow]

116. Amazing isn't it, or perhaps shameless is a better word.

As Leonard Cohen sang-
"Everybody knows."

BHN

[Occam Bandage]

115. Good luck with that!

[BeHereNow]

117. I'm patient and familiar with the routine.

As are others watching.
BHN

[Occam Bandage]

121. So am I! Here's how it goes with most people:

1. You post something bombastic, overblown, and irrational
2. I disagree in my usual, er, charming manner.
3. We go at it for a while.
4. You claim I'm a freeper or a sellout or an employee of the Democratic party, and insinuate I will be tombstoned.
5. That post is usually deleted.
6. You try again, only a bit "sneakier."
7. We go our separate ways.
8. I am not tombstoned.
9. (Sometimes you are! That's always my favorite.)

[BeHereNow]

123. Do you have an agent? You are very entertaining!

Thanks!
I can't wait to see the next episode!

BHN

[BeHereNow]

203. So, YOU ARE SAYING YOU ENJOY IT WHEN TRUE DUers ARE TOMB STONED?!?!?!?

Every sincere DUer enjoys the elimination of a troll-

You on the other hand just admitted to relishing the scenario
of a non-troll member being tomb stoned.

"8. I am not tombstoned.
9. (Sometimes you are! That's always my favorite.)"

That's quite an admission and as close as I've seen
you get to revealing your true nature and motives.

I do hope Skinner, Elad and EarlG take note of
your declaration.

BHN

Edited to add your honest words.

[BeHereNow]

249. You haven't answered my question about enjoying seeing real DUers get tomb stoned.

Crickets....

I, and I am certain others, would love to hear you elaborate on
that statement.

Waiting.

BHN

[BeHereNow]

270. Still no response to stating you enjoy a legitimate DUer being tomb stoned?

Crickets.
Perhaps you revealed your true nature more than you intended to?
Your silence on the subject, since you posted about it, is more than interesting to note.
BHN

[BeHereNow]

272. Still waiting for your justification about wanting legitimate DUers to be tomb stoned.

Still no reply?

Thought so.

BHN

[BeHereNow]

273. Waiting for clarification about your wanting to see legitimate DUers tomb stoned.

How convenient that you have no more to say on the matter.
Why is that?

BHN

[TheWatcher]

274. A Good Shill Never responds when he is cornered like a Rat.

Although I do notice he has been conspicuously absent from the Board the last few days.

Maybe he finally cut himself with The Razor too deeply? :rofl:

[BeHereNow]

275. Methinks so...

What the hell are you doing up at this hour?
Perhaps like me, contemplating .... exactly.
BHN:loveya:

[TheWatcher]

277. You have a very good intuition. :)

Yes, I am doing just that exactly. I'm having a bit of a fitful time relaxing tonight, although I will admit to being naturally Nocturnal.

Tonight's perplexities reside around the Economic prospects we are currently facing.

I posted in another thread I think we will know by September how bad things will get and how fast.

Did you hear that rumor this morning about the United Nations?

Apparently foreign employees at the UN have been transferring money out of their accounts at the UNFCU and other Banks in the city. In fact, rumors also suggested there has been such a big rise in those transfers that there is now a 24 to 48 hour delay in getting everything processed, due to the system being overwhelmed. I wonder what in the heck could be going on to cause this all of a sudden? That is assuming the rumors are true.

So I stress, it's just a rumor until it gets better vetted.

Hope things are well in your world tonight, dear Radical. :)

:hug:

[BeHereNow]

131. My GAWD! Your one liners are MIND boggling in their brilliance.

But, just out of polite curiosity, do
you know any other routines?
That one is getting a little stale...

Just some constructive criticism.
It's important for an artist to have a diverse
repertoire you know.
Otherwise, the audience gets bored quickly.

BHN

[Occam Bandage]

133. A fine example of l'esprit d'escalier.

Perhaps if you leave the offending post to percolate in your mind a bit, you'll come up with the witty rejoinder you were looking for on the first attempt.

[tom_paine]

128. Don't mention Bolsheviks to me. They are as bad or worse as the Bushies.

Though I take your point. Let us all pray it does not come to that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

132. Tom bolsheviks and bushies are cut from the same piece of cloth

or have you forgotten how many of them were Trotskytes in their youth?

(And not exactly the same thing as they broke from the Stalinist version)

[NeedleCast]

119. Behold!

Fatalism.

[nadinbrzezinski]

125. First step in the 12 step program is admitting there is a problem

this is not different

And Houston WE DO HAVE A PROBLEM

[nadinbrzezinski]

122. observation time

never mind that I have some folks on this thread on ignore, yes you know who you are...

It is clear that every time we have the Congress do something stupid... that gives MORE POWER to the Corporations, we have the usual types show up

They have the usual Talking Points, including the ever so popular, in no particular order

1. Things are not that bad

2.- This is not fascism... I mean (insert reason here)

3.- Things have been worst in (insert period of US History)

And the ever so lovely...

4.-why don't you leave then?

These are not all inclusive by the way...

And it is also quite obvious that very conservative, read Blue Dog\ DLC democrats, need to disparage what is going on, which is the most serious emergency (from the point of direct attacks to the Constitution) since Adams... who indeed had a direct frontal attack (Alien and Sedition Acts)

Yes, we have had horrible things happen between 1798 and 2000... but what has happened over the last seven years has followed a method, best understood by Naomi Wolf and Naomi Klein. It is setting the way for Disaster Capitalism and in my view the end of the Republic, which arguably died in 2000

But the need of some to actually defend and to come into these threads predictably, is quite impressive.

By the way admins, my ignored poster promised that she'd follow me like a puppy dog, even if I put her on ignore... since she wanted to show to the world (or at least DU Denizens) how stupid I was. And to her credit she has kept her promise and I kept my promise to mostly not talk to her. So this is not a call out, just a note that she is here.

Oh and to answer one of your questions you gentle souls, you tory you... one reason we don't leave is lack of money... the other, not that you'd understand it, is a sense of duty

Some of us have already taken risks... and will continue to take them... in the full knowledge of that that may mean

But you are not unlike the Tories of old... or the chickenhawks today. You spin... like Burke, and spin some more.

By the way, there is this little oath some of us took about enemies both foreign and domestic, take your cue of what that means... and look up the word HONOR in the dictionary.

[BeHereNow]

124. Well, in "it's" defense, that other board is no longer up.

and hey, you have to admit, it is sort of fun to watch.
BHN

[nadinbrzezinski]

127. Yeah, it used to anger me

these days it is actually comedic

Same talking points as rome burns... around them

[NeedleCast]

135. The Results and Posts In your Hyperbolic OPs

are only as predictable as your weekly doom and gloom thread.

I agree that the responses of many who disagree with you are totally predictable. Mostly because they're right.

I'd propose that instead of starting another OMG FASCISM thread every week or couple of weeks that you just print a few out and read them to yourself when the urge to tell us all how far we've fallen down the well of fascism comes upon you. You can pat yourself on the back for your incredible insight and be secure in the knowledge that if you had really posted a thread, that the people who disagree would all just make a bunch of predictable responses. That way you don't have to fret over the predictableness of all the ignorant savages responding to you.

I predict your response will be to point out that my response is predictable, so I'm off to bed.

by the way, there is this little oath some of us took about enemies both foreign and domestic, take your cue of what that means... and look up the word HONOR in the dictionary.

Mmmmmm, I do love it when you get all GI-Joe though. As I've said before, your obvious desire for there to be fascism here so you can oppose it is...interesting.

[Occam Bandage]

137. While I usually try to refrain myself from tacking on "me, too!" replies...

Yeah. What you said, especially about the GI-Joeism on display. It reminds me of the paranoid NRA members who obsessed over coming Communist invasions they could heroically oppose.

[nadinbrzezinski]

141. GI Joe? Hmmm... ever served in uniform?

Don't think so.

By the way you do know what OATH I am referring to? Of course not!

[Occam Bandage]

147. Nope! Don't much agree with the current mission of the armed forces.

Why do you ask? (Oh, and, er, why would you think that there would be anyone in America who was not aware of the oaths of enlistment/office?)

[nadinbrzezinski]

152. There you go... but you call me GI Joe

which is another predictable response, we go down to insults

Thanks

And for the record, I didn't serve in the US Military... before you claim I did

[NeedleCast]

151. Yes

Five years Army with a combat tour in Afghanistan. I was with Bravo Co. 532nd out of Camp Hump in Korea when 9-11 happened and got detached to go to Afghanistan within a few days of the US military having boots on the ground there because at the time I was one of a handful of people in the army with experience running Predator missions (experience I gained in theater during the whole Kosovo "thing.") Believe me, that was clusterfuck central trying to get all our shit un-assed, figure out who the enemy was and trying to deal with Northern Alliance warlords telling us they're happy to see us then stealing all our shit.

So yeah, not only do I knot the oath you're referring to, I've taken it. How about that?

And yeah, I still think you're whole wanna-be V is for Vendetta hyperbole is just as childish as your regular doom and gloom OPs.

[nadinbrzezinski]

156. Hey V for Vendetta, COOL now I can become V

thanks for your service, but HAVING SERVED IN UNIFORM you will UNDERSTAND why the caricature of Cobra Commando and the rest of the good and bad boys ARE AN INSULT... and I remember Cobra Commander thanks to a certain robotic chicken on Adult Swim

(For any brit readying this I can understand why that particular day in November might be very different from what is portrayed in the movie by the way... my apologies for those that don't necessarily know better)

[nadinbrzezinski]

175. I fear for clarity sake I will have to clarify

I served in uniform, not just in the Good ol' US of A

And even got shot at!

Hell even got to enforce them pesky conventions...

Ah the memories, medic...

[tom_paine]

164. From one veteran to another: thank you for your service.

Look, we are all imperfect human beings here. We all have human feelings and frailties and all of that.

Is there some element of what you contemptuously refer to as "V for vendetta"-ism. Probably. That's just human nature. Tell me you didn't have any gung-ho people in your battallion. Same thing, really. Same root feelings, just coming out in different ways in different sitautions.

But to try to discredit everything a person says becuase of that, something minor and pretty universally human, is not right.

We are all subject to the same feelings. My own post #107, as Bandage pointed out, does read pretty pompously. I admit it. I can't help it. The same feelings made me misty when I stood Retreat or when I read Tom Paine, Jefferson, or Franklin's last speech to the Constitution Convention. Hell I even got a little choked up (especially in light of the last seven years) when I saw that old Schoolhouse Rock "No More Kings" on YouTube for the first time in 30 years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofYmhlclqr4

Again, so what? Does that invalidate everything I said?

Try to understand. Maybe you think we are "getting off" on talking this way or puffing up our egos or feeling superior or feeling cool. I can only speak for myself that it ain't so. And while I can't speak for others, I strongly suspect that it ain't so for otehrs here, too.

Consider this: It's as if we are passengers on a train and maybe we are growing more increasingly frantic because we looked out the window and see the next trestle-bridge up ahead is wrecked. We run around trying to tell everyone but they are laughing and giggling (or calling us names, as you basically are), not listening.

Maybe the smashed bridge is an optical illusion, and really everything is fine. (I have to admit that I may be wrong about these things, and I would be overjoyed to be so) But not to us. And chances are, it IS REAL.

That's all I can say. You are clearly in disagreement and that's fine. But try to understand this isn't a matter of self-aggrandizement. It is people who love the Founding Fathers and wish to preserve what we were left so that future generations can enjoy it. I want to make it clear, lest you misinterpret: I AM NOT accusing you of loving our country less, just that you don;t see the same things we do and thus are not alarmed.

I'm willing to bet if one day you DID see a threat to the nation like we do now, you would react in just the same way. Then you could enjoy being in our shoes while people insulted YOu and questioneed your ulterior motives. Trust me, it's not fun.

Oh, and one more thing...

Lousy Army pukes! :evilgrin:

[NeedleCast]

170. Chair Force

Lousy Army pukes...well, it's the truth. If I could get a do-over on my game plan from age 23-27 I'd have joined the Air Force instead. I got recalled in 2003-2004 and spent most of it at McDill AFB in Tampa. You jokers had it easy! Ceiling fans in your lower enlisted quarters?!? It's like club-med.

Yes, there were some gung-ho people in all walks of my military experience and I pretty much universally loathed them because they failed to recognize that they are everything that's wrong with the military (in my opinion). I (and I think most military vets) didn't join because we wanted to shoot people and then get a parade. We joined because we felt a calling to a higher sense of purpose or that there was something out there bigger than our little world and that maybe we should take part in it for awhile. That's why it gets me a little worked up when I see hyperbolic crap (I've used the word hyperbolic way to many times today) about people "fighting" something that isn't there. I've been there myself and don't like that part of my personality and actively try to reign it in. It's shit like that...the chest thumping and posturing...that has started most of the problems we currently face.

The problem is, if you're spoiling for a fight, you'll probably find one. Fighting to defend freedom is an honorable thing but (as I'm sure you know) there's a lot of people on the internet who talk a good game about how they're going to take it to the man.

Is everything fine? No. Hell no. The last eight years have been a setback, but setbacks happen and the real gut check for the warriors out there is whether they can handle a setback, pick themselves up out of the dust and get back to marching or do they say "everything is so broken and it's too late to fix it" (which this OP has suggested in other threads of this nature). If you think that the USA version 2008 is less progressive than USA version 1970 you're off your nut. If you think that USA version 2008 is less progressive than USA version 1920 then you've got a whole stack of nuts missing. Change, especially in large societies like ours, happens at an unfortunately glacial pace. But it does happen. Generally people who "fight" to speed up the process come to realize at some point that you don't move the glacier, the glacier moves you.

[nadinbrzezinski]

171. You got BARRACKS?

And that is not what the OP suggests, but that is OK

Ah the memories!

[tom_paine]

180. LOL. That's Air Farce to YOU, Army Puke!

But to get back to the serious topic. I brought up the gung-ho types (I actually share your feelings towards that type...I steered clear of 'em, too) to describe these feelings. They can manifest themselves in different ways, and I was definitely not comparing myself to those gung-ho types, but to point out that there is no doubt, at least to me, that they are somehow related.

Again I can only speak for myself, but the last thing I want is a fight. I want to enjoy the life I have, it's peace and relative plenty and good times, for as long as possible and have a nice quiet death in my bed. Like most people.

In general, I can't deny your historical assessment of "progressive USA" as it relates to 1920, 1970, or 2008. Yeah, I would have to be nuts to assert that.

But that is not what I am asserting. It's interesting that you bring this up, because I was just discussing this with a pal of mine. There are currents and countercurrents moving in oppositie directions all the time, so that while the blanket statement 2008 USA is more progressive than 1970 USA is generally true (for God's sake, no African-Americans are being lynched for trying to vote) it is not the whole picture.

For while African-Americans are not being lynched trying to vote, they are now suffering under a whole host of laws (like the AZ proof-of-citizenship-to-vote law andthe rest of Voter ID laws) designed to reduce the power of their votes. No, they aren't being lynched, but it is now worked out that for every 10 African-Americans who try to vote, only 8 votes get counted (these aren't real numbers, but I am making a point with these speculative numbers. They are being Voter Caged and Minority Voter Registration Drives are being harassed and neutralized by - get this- the DOJ: Civil Rights Division (the Bushies love their turning of agencies against the people they were once meant to protect).

I didn't want to bog down in individual examples, but just one more. Congress. OK, so 2008 is generally more progressive than 1970, but is Congress' backbone more sturdy? My own opinion: no way!

That Congress investigated a President, and the next impaeched him over wrongdoing 1/50th of Bush's current felonious malfeasance. So, while 2008 is more progressive than 1970, it would be in error to say Congress is a stronger instiution than in 1970, IMHO.

Currents and counter-currents. The people progress foreward while our leaders regress and assert more propaganda and control to delude the nation into thinking that we are moving inthe same direction as our leaders.

Now I am bogging down in this deeply complex issue, and the post is getting long, so I am going to wrap up.

You say that people who fight to speed up processes find that the glacier moves THEM. Please tell me which of these movements that was true about:

Women's Suffrage
Civil Rights Movement
Voting Rights Movement

In these case, the glacier WAS moved, especially the civil and voting rights movements of the 60s and 70s. Those KKK bastards were some tough nuts, murderers and the spiritual antecedents of the modern Bushies. By the way, I think they demonstrated that, at least back then, they certainly weren't lazy about committing assault and murder, they would have made excellent fascists as their spiritual descendants the Freepers make good ones today - that is whether or not one considers this society to be fascist.

[nadinbrzezinski]

140. Ah another PREDICTABLE response

of course I want it, that is why I fight it.

The logic escapes me....

By the way.. keep ignoring the facts...

That is the way THEY LIKE IT!

By the way, what branch are you?

Tori

Burkian

Or just plain out DLC?

[NeedleCast]

157. I'm the Logical Democrat

The one who points out that when you dismiss all other arguments to your OP as predictable, that you're not really making an argument, which is your "style."

Basically, your argument (and I use that term loosely in regard to you) is "Here's my OP and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong." I've yet to actually see you make an argument supporting any of your assertions. All you do is label anyone who disagrees with you as predictable as if that's some sort of winning play. I actually think you're a pretty smart person (though obviously prone to hyperbole), I'd like to see you make an argument that wasn't just a dismissive hand-waving at everyone who disagrees with you.

By calling every attack on your position predictable, you negate any need to actually argue your point(s).

Here is your argument, in a nutshell

Nadin: The sun is green.

Respondent 1: No, the sun is yellow.

Nadin: It's completely predictable that someone would show up in my thread and claim the sun is yellow. Open your eyes, it's green! I'm an astro-physicist and I think I know what I'm talking about.

Respondent 2: But yeah really, the sun is yellow.

Nadin: I'm not going to waste my time arguing about what color the sun is when it's obviously green.

That's it. That's all you do. Then it really is as predictable as you've indicated. You tell everyone who dares disagree with you that they're predictable and dismiss them. A few of your cronies show up and pat you on the back. You tell each other how great you both are and act casually dismissive about those who disagree. Some sub-threads get deleted. Eventually I got bored and go look at porn.

[nadinbrzezinski]

160. Fine then why not do a simple thing if this irritates you so much

see this ignore button, or hide thread.

Otherwise, I am not being dismissive, just that the house is burning... and I did not call anybody GI Joe

Nor did I say that you lacked logic, which you just did

Now tell me, exactly how does the new FISA bill attack the fourth Amendment? By the way, not my words, but those of Jonathan Turley, who just happens to be a Constitutional Scholar

What is the logic of the current people in power, REGARDLESS of party, to

A) Give immunity to corporations, creating THAT precedent, which will allow corporations to get away with even more murder

And

B) Make this RETROACTIVE, which I belief goes against 800 years of legal tradition and common law?

Please enlighten me with your logic.... and chiefly, one of those pesky terms, CUI BONO, who BENEFITS?

(Clarity)

[TheWatcher]

161. And the "Logical Democrat's" Response?

[NeedleCast]

163. Sorry I wasn't quick enough for you slick

I went outside and sat on my deck awhile. Beautiful night here in D.C.

[TheWatcher]

190. Don't call me slick, Soldier.

However, I'm glad you did respond because I wanted to hear what you had to say.

And keep in mind, I say that with a capital "S", because I DO appreciate and Thank You for your service to this country. My Grandfather was a World War II Vet, and I've lost two friends thus far in this war, both really good, beautiful people. One was a father who left behind a wife of 25 years old who is suffering from MS, and a five-year old son, one was not, but both friends, who died in service of their country.

And because I am dead tired, I'm not going to address what you wrote point by point, because I'm running on two days with no sleep, and your points deserve to be addressed in a more comprehensive state of mind.

The short of it is, agree to disagree. The Hour is a lot later than you think, friend. But in the end, no matter how far apart in difference we are from point of view, nothing would be happier than for you to be right and me to be wrong. I'd much rather buy you a beer and eat all the crow you can order from the waitress, than the alternative.

On THAT, we can both agree.

[NeedleCast]

162. Here's the logic, and it's really very simple

If the country had slipped as far into fascism as you claim, you wouldn't be posting about what a fascist country it is in a public forum (well, you might, but you'd likely only do it once).

That's a lot of questions in your response. I'll cover a few.

1. I don't use ignore or hide thread because I don't like to live in an echo chamber where only people who agree with me exist.

2. You are being very dismissive and the proof of that is that you have yet to support your OP with any sort of actual argument. You posted an OP that basically said "OMG FACSICMS IS HERE!" then dismissed everyone who disagreed by calling them predictable.

3. I don't under stand what you're saying in your third line.

4. I basically agree with you that corporations have FAR to much power. That, in and of itself however, is not fascism. That pretty much covers everything else you asked me just now.

5. As far as who benefits, I think we'll both agree that the answer is primarily corporations. So once again I'll point out that yes, I agree, corporations have far to much power in this country. I hope Obama begins a reversal of this trend.

The underlying fact remains the same however, we are not a fascist country. I don't even think we're in danger of becoming one because frankly (and I'm including myself here) Americans are too lazy to get all worked into a froth and that's pretty much a prerequisite for fascism. There's a heightened amount of nationalism, but most of it is of the bumper sticker variety.

Hehe, and my high school councilor said being lazy never pays off. Shows what that dick knew. Just by being somewhat lazy and unable to get motivated to go kill the enemy du jour, I'm preventing fascism. Awesome.

[nadinbrzezinski]

166. Here is what we have been trying to explain to you

the idea you have of a fascist state is one where you are not free to post or say your opinion

I made a reference up-thread to the PRI of the 1970s... which I may remind you went after the student body at Tlatelolco in 1968 with armed force

The days after that the message was loud and clear, and sent to the LEADERS of the movement... about 1000 people disappeared... you may say our moment was the yet to be solved ANTHRAX attack... the message was received loud and clear by the Dems, and some may even add the media.

After that the illusion was kept on going. You could, more or less, as long as you were really small fry, keep talking and saying what you thought.. And just like today, calls were intercepted by TELMEX and monitored... by the way the TELCOS are doing that RIGHT NOW, RIGHT HERE.. We know that.

Now if you become a leader or a danger, you may be put on a no-flight list... and we do not know how far they will push that YET... since that has not been tested fully

Now Mussolini wrote this about Fascism

...The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone....

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html

And as you can see, removing your freedom to post on a message board is not imperative for fascism... and it goes beyond this,

Again from Benito HImself, "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini ...

You are aware that many corporations are now writing laws that protect them and that the people in charge of the agencies that regulate them are from the industries that are supposed to regulate, (That is by the classic Cronyism)

Just because we don't have camps, and you can still post on this message board, does not mean that you do not live in best case a proto fascist state, or worst case a fascist state. And I am using Mussolini's definitions, as well as real world experiences

As to preventing Fascism, nice joke but the countries that actually avoid it, are aware of it in the early phases, and again, those are not my words, but Naomi Klein's... Perhaps you should read Disaster Capitalism and that might help you to understand exactly who benefits in these conditions.

[NeedleCast]

177. Thanks, Now You're Making an Argument!

However, I think we're going to start getting circular here quick fast and in a hurry. I feel you're now asking me to prove that fascism doesn't exist in the US and it's going to be hard for me to disprove something that I don't think is there. I hope that made sense. It's 3:00 AM here and I ment to be in bed an hour ago.

I'm going to stand by my argument that Americans as a whole are simply to lazy and distracted to become a fascist country. I understand that the (possibly true) counter argument is that by being lazy and distracted, we're allowing fascism to creep into our society. I agree with you that there are some alarming trends going on but (I hope) in about six months, that we'll start the process of reversing those trends.

The bottom line is going to be that you and I disagree on what equates to fascism. I think most of Naomi Klein's work is self-indulgent bunk and I tend to be pro-capitalism (although I think it should be obvious that corporate selfism (is that a word?) needs to be heavily reigned in). Corporations though, are not evil. They are simply a noun, something that exists and is powered by people. To small a group of people who have a misguided agenda in many cases, but people none the less. There are some corporation out there that have a positive impact.

ust because we don't have camps, and you can still post on this message board, does not mean that you do not live in best case a proto fascist state, or worst case a fascist state. And I am using Mussolini's definitions, as well as real world experiences

and just because some elements that may be seen as a progenitor of fascism exist in a society is not indicative of that society sliding into fascism. Just like having some social programs does not make us a socialist society. Just like owning a gun doesn't mean I'm looking to go shoot someone with it.

(Okay, seriously, I gotta go to bed. If you respond to this, I'll try to get back to you tomorrow).

[nadinbrzezinski]

178. Good night and we will not agree

so lets just drop it

I hope you are right, and I am wrong.. I truly do

[FirstLight]

239. YES!

Thanks Nadin...
:applause:

I want to post a similar thread, about these exact questions:

At what point DO you really believe that our freedoms are null & void?
At what point do we se the red flag and feel it in our gut and
Do we have to see it on our street to give the idea credibility?

How bad does it get before we take action?
How bad does it get before we try and get out before the borders are truly closed...or will it matter?

Movies like Red Dawn come to mind, except the occupying force is Blackwater...

I agree Nadin, the other shoe drops as we speak...

[nadinbrzezinski]

243. It actually dropped this morning

[nadinbrzezinski]

244. It actually dropped this morning

[tom_paine]

168. Please read post #144.

[leftofthedial]

167. Time to move on?

Or time for pitchforks and shovels.

They can't stop us all, not even with nukes.

[nadinbrzezinski]

169. Pitchforks and shovels

as I said unthread, we need to change tactics

Ghandi and MLK come to mind

[leftofthedial]

172. so do Madame LeFarge and Robespierre

[nadinbrzezinski]

173. Yes, but personally if we can do this without going there

I'd prefer it, not that I am allergic to blood, but if we go there... the implications of what we will have to do are way too severe... civil wars are never civil to be frank... and the result is far less easy to control

Seen the effects of that...

And Ghandi was very effective in defeating an EMPIRE...

Remember that

But for that to happen... there has to be a will and right now I sense a frozen people, afraid and still stuck in the I paradigm. Though the elections have activated, perhaps woken. people up

[leftofthedial]

174. overarching, guiding principle

strength of character

separateness from the dominant paradigm



all seem to be missing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

176. I know, my best hope is that people will wake up from the SOMA induced

happy dreams in time

[hunter]

184. Congratulations Big Corporations!

You have just bought yourself a shiny new SUV with no wheels and no engine. But that's okay, you couldn't afford the gas anyways.

[nadinbrzezinski]

186. Now i like that sense of humor!!!!!!!!!

:-)

[alarimer]

196. I am disgusted.

This is the final straw. I no longer consider myself a Democrat. It is clear that they are (mostly) no better than Republicans. Worse, in some ways, because they often make claims to be the party of the working class and civil rights but clearly that is all a lie.

So it is going to take a lot for me to even vote in this election. I honestly do not really care anymore.

[nadinbrzezinski]

198. I know what I am going to do this election and I guarantee

it will not include voting for my useless rep

Not that vote will count, but that is another story

[conspirator]

217. We should spread that message. When no one cares anymore the system will colapse

The problem is the freeperbots that still live in a dream world.

[LanternWaste]

199. If it were over and one with...

If a corporate takeover were fully accomplished, I don't think we'd be allowed to post about it in a public forum.

[nadinbrzezinski]

202. Ok I will bother with this again

Most folks think that in a fascists country all freedoms are gone, Why? IMages of the SS in Hollywood movies mostly (which were based on reality), But not all Fascists or totalitarian states bother with that level, nor is it necessary for the goals of the state.

Also, according to Mussolini, who should have a clue, Corporatism is the mixing of corporate and state interests. That is the accepted definition

Given that corporate interests take priority of any of yours and mine, yes, it fits the definition

Will we get camps? Perhaps... but just because we don't have them does not mean it hasn't occurred. The snake of authoritarian, fascist governments takes many forms... and controlling the US population using electronic means and other means is not that hard.

And I can tell you that for example in the Franquist Spain of the 1970s you could have an opinion, just don't become an important fish. The wonders of this kind of a state is suspicion that they will do this, see FISA and other means of the state, not that they are doing it RIGHT NOW, though ATT is getting a copy of this post after I send it.

Oh and the image we all have of Germany did not come up fully formed, but it was a collection of minis steps that led to that horror. Do you want me to list the mini steps?

[LanternWaste]

206. I simply do not think that...

I simply do not think that a Fascist state (fascist within the classical definition of it-- and that may be the difference as I use the classical definition rather than the newer, trendier, one-size-fits-all definitions bandied about ) would allow criticism, denigration, satire, pointed humor, editorialism, etc of The Powers to the degree that we in the west posses. Speech being merely one example.




"Do you want me to list the mini steps?"
Unnecessary-- I'm somewhat conversant in both the rise and the fall of the post-Napoleonic era great powers; which is why I feel confident that we are simply not at that point, nor (all other things being equal) will be anytime in the near future.




Birth of Fascist Ideology: From Cultural Rebellion to Political (Zeef Sternhell)
Fascist Spectacle: The Aesthetics of Power in Mussolini's Italy (Simonetta)
The Fascist Revolution: Toward a General Theory of Fascism (Mosse)

Maybe these guys are wrong, but to be honest-- I'll trust their interpretations of what is or is not Fascism over yours (no slight intended-- I simply haven't read any of your peer-reviewed work).


So yeah-- I must be blinded to what's going on because I simply don't agree with your assessment.


Edited: Changed the word 'fully' to 'somewhat', as no one (myself included) is quite as clever as we think we are...

[nadinbrzezinski]

207. I am using the ACCEPTED definition given by the Founder of Fascism

and accepted by POLITICAL SCIENTISTS

Fascism is best understood as the mixing of corporate and state power

This is the CLASSIC definition

But we can also disagree as to what is the standard definition under political theory and practice as well, I guess

And they also USE his work and words

And no I am not peer reviewed, but again I AM USING a STANDARD POLI SCI definition, THANK YOU

Though I will admit, Mussolini wasn't peer reviewed either, so I guess his definition, as he saw it, and he wrote about the state, should be bunk too

Thanks

[LanternWaste]

209. I don't think his definition we should examine

"Though I will admit, Mussolini wasn't peer reviewed either, so I guess his definition, as he saw it, and he wrote about the state, should be bunk too"

I don't think his definition we should examine, but rather his actions and reactions to political and social movements to determine where he may be located within the political spectrum.

(unless of course that was simply a clever snark on your part)

[nadinbrzezinski]

212. No it wasn't but that is the STANDARD ACCEPTED DEFINITION

so tell me is writing legislation for the Congress to pas by your local industry fits that definition? YES... have they been doing this in practice? ABSOLUTELY! And are members of industry now in charge of agencies supposed to manage them? YEP

I am sorry, but I think we are at an impasse

To me the evidence of corporate power CONTROLLING the means of the state in the MODERN US of A is there.

So are the increased police powers that are part of the package

If in your view, this is not a problem, that is fine, we can do the ADULT THING, and agree to disagree

[Two Americas]

255. the word

The word "fascism" may be over-used and have no power anymore. It is a shame to see so many posts that are arguing about the definition of the word.

Tyranny existed before the word fascism came into use. Modern Americans have a very distorted, shallow and inaccurate view of the right wing governments in Europe during the 30's, so they are basically arguing here from a context of Hollywood scripts and newsreels. They think they really know the subject, and do not at all - a bad combination. Do many people here know the effect of the red scare and McCarthyism had on the narrative we were fed about WWII? I think not, and that ties in with the denial they have about what is happening here now. The propaganda continues, with the recent glamorizing Murrow as some journalistic hero, and presenting the false notion that the red scare was defeated or overturned. Murrow was a safe voice, and McCarthy the man needed to be discredited because he was making the witch hunt red scares look bad and discrediting them, and turned his back on many friends and colleagues who were blacklisted in exchange for a position and salary at CBS. Murrow was thoroughly complicit in helping the revisionists and witch hunters keep their racket going, by staging a fake "attack" on it. McCarthy went down, but the witch hunts went on. One of the stories that the red scare suppressed was the truth about the rise of fascism in Europe. We see the effects of that today right on this thread. See William Shirer's memoirs for details on this. Shirer was touring the country giving lectures about how fascism arose in Europe when he was blacklisted. Once his long time friend and colleague, Murrow, was promoted to an executive position at CBS, he never returned Shirer's calls again. Shirer and many other important voices were completely shut out and untouchable - for over a decade no publisher would hire Shirer, one of the leading journalists in the country before the red scare and our most important inside observer of the Nazi regime, and he lived in neglect and poverty until the 60's when a publisher finally agreed to publish his "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich."

[Two Americas]

253. absolutely no evidence to support that

Just because your fantasy about what totalitarianism might look like has not been matched that does not tell us anything useful. Who said police states were efficient? Who said they were that well coordinated? Who said that a certain amount of apparent freedom would not be allowed for tactical reasons by a tyrannical regime? Who says we are rocking any boats here or reprsent any sort of threat to the powers that be? How do you know that people here have NOT been harassed? I have talked to many who have.

Very little is ever said here that threatens the rulers, and when it is it is ruthlessly suppressed by our "friends." Besides, who knows what lists which people are on, for when the time comes? There were still newspapers criticizing the German government as late as 1941. Does that mean everything was fine there? In Germany, it was mostly a matter of the public self-censoring and policing each other, and we see an alarming rise in that sort of behavior and thinking right here on DU. There are never enough cops to watch everyone, and then who watches the cops? We are the authors of our own tyranny to a large extent, and willing participants. It has always been that way in the past.

One of the prime ways that the public living under a tyrannical regime polices itself is by people criticizing dissidents as being alarmists and therefore not to be taken seriously, as you just did on this thread.

"Allowed" - what nonsense. You have watched to many Hollywood movies or read too much sci-fi, I think. That is telling, though, because you are fine with the regime "allowing" things, it seems, and see politics that way - "so long as the authorities allow some privileges, it cannot be tyranny." The Soviet bloc nations "allowed" people to trade on the black market, because that served the purposes of the regimes. Would it have been logical to say that "if this were really tyranny we wouldn't be allowed to trade on the black market" about those regimes?

There may be nothing to worry about, and all may be just happy and free and fine as you claim, but we would never know otherwise no matter how bad things got if we relied on you to judge that and to inform us.

I do not think that the great freedom fighters from the past warned us not to be too quick to worry about government tyranny, nor too zealous in protecting ourselves from government tyranny, nor did they ward about some great threat that alarmists represented. They warned us about complacency. You are advocating complacency. That in and of itself is cause for worry, and is a feature of tyranny - when the people start dismissing those who are trying to sound the alarm. That is a person conditioned for accepting chains and servitude, which is a necessary ingredient for tyranny to arise - mules ready to accept the saddle and be ridden by the tyrants.

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

[LiberalPersona]

200. Corporate America has controlled the government for decades nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

Yeah but now they are taking steps they have not taken before

see retroactive law and immunity for Telecoms for the latest of these.

[nadinbrzezinski]

208. Yeah but now they are taking steps they have not taken before

see retroactive law and immunity for Telecoms for the latest of these.

[earth mom]

210. K & R and...

:argh:

[Junkdrawer]

222. We've chosen Empire...

History shows that Empire and Democracy can coexist for a while, but eventually there comes a point where one has to choose.

You see, Empire benefits a small, wealthy class. Eventually the majority becomes aware that The Empire doesn't warrant the cost in blood and treasure.

That's the decision point. Either The People rise up and dismantle the Empire, or The Empire dismantles the Democracy.

The Church Committee in 1978 put into place a number of limits on The Empire. FISA was one of those limits. Congressional oversight of the CIA was another. Today, the last of these limitations are gone.

Quite a few believe that on 9/11, this administration Crossed the Rubicon. Perhaps. But today, Caesar was crowned Emperor.

The Republic is dead. Long live Rome?

[nadinbrzezinski]

226. BINGO, and we have members of the Corporatist Imperial parties

in both parties

[Junkdrawer]

228. It's the biggest $$$ game in town...

Manufacturing and Unions are dead. Where else can an ambitious politician go for money?

[pinto]

227. This may be a good point to choose civility in our dicsussions.

:hi:

Thanks.

[Hydra]

230. Yup

With the addition of nationwide surveillance now being certified as "legal" by the Dems, the corporate takeover is complete.

They can now:

Monitor you
Arrest you
Torture you
Try you in court without evidence
Execute you

And everyone sat on the sidelines and let it happen. Congrats, all.

[nadinbrzezinski]

233. Don't worry some folks, even here, don't get it

They will, too late, but they will

[Hydra]

236. :D

Ya, I know. When the Stazi come to break their door down and they are "disappeared," they'll understand COMPLETELY how few "God given rights" they have.

Good thread, btw. Keep up the good work, and know that you aren't the only one listed to be picked up when they start sweeping up dissenters. We might even share cells.

[Two Americas]

256. right

But we cannot call that "fascism" - as though what we call it makes any difference - because that would be...well whatever they are saying that would be. "Overly fond of the Bill of Rights" is what we are probably guilty of, overly concerned about human beings, or overly alert to government tyranny, and who knows where that could lead. It must be stamped out, because it conflicts with the narrative of Greater America - "sure America has flaws, and anyone can criticize, but it is still better than other places." The irony here is that the narrative about "America - it is not tyranny so stop saying that" arguments serfve to defend the country and the government, wittingly or unwittingly, by using the exact opposite ideas to those upon which the country itself was founded. Our government was founded on the notion that all governments always tend to become tyrannical, and that we must be ever vigilant. Yet here we have people advocating that we are ever-complacent and scoffing at the danger of a government becoming tyrannical. Jefferson, John Adams, Paine, Samuel Adams and a few thousand other patriots must be rolling in their graves.

[Hydra]

271. Jefferson is my hero

As were all the others that stood against the federalists when they made their push during the constitutional convention. They understood that without transparency and the ability to question the gov't, they would NEVER be free.

Now, we are at the point where questioning and demanding accountability will get you arrested and/or smeared.

Btw, I loved your comment further up. I with I could rec it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3486999&mesg_id=3491754

I have no trouble seeing where all of this is going as a poor person. It seems like the only ones who don't are the ones with things left to lose.

[spanone]

234. i think it's still going on

[lonestarnot]

238. That is all? No fucking way! I intend to fight!

[nadinbrzezinski]

245. and it is time we talk tactics in the no longer free United States

see I have been also posting threads on that

[Two Americas]

268. hear hear

We are up against an aloof disconnection that is common among intellectuals, and we now have perhaps the most paralyzed and disconnected group of intellectuals here today that ever before in history, thoroughly trained to observe and never act, alienated from the rest of the working class, and determined to see everything through the lens of self-actualization rather than thinking in terms of mass action and the role we intellectuals should be playing in that, organizing, rabble rousing, leading and being willing to make sacrifices for others. Spoiled, anesthetized, morally and intellectually gutted and filleted, there is no courage or life or inspiration in the privileged ranks of educated and successful white collar folks.

The working class has been decapitated. We are the bodiless heads rolling around on the ground, of no use to anyone.

[sarcasmo]

241. It just didn't happen over night, this has been going on since Ronnie Raygun.

[nadinbrzezinski]

246. You could make the argument that Ronnie Reagan was the last

attempt, has been going on since the Guilded Age, this is what they have wanted for this LONG

[MrSlayer]

258. Wanna bet?

They are entrenched in both parties and are not going away anytime soon.

[nadinbrzezinski]

259. That is when we need to talk tactics

either that or fold

Not prepared to fold

[MrSlayer]

260. You might not be prepared to fold but the fact is that nothing can be done.

Literally nothing. We as a nation are not all of a sudden going to elect a bunch of people like Kucinich. The people of this country will never stand up for what is right because most of them don't even realize how badly they are being fucked and many people support the fascism under the heading of "Free Market Capitalism". They actively and happily fight against their own rights and the Constitution under the guise of defending it. The powers that be will never allow themselves to be removed. It's too entrenched, it's in both parties and it just is what it is. President Obama won't end any of this. Sure, he'll throw us a few bones and do the traditional Democratic tax hike on the rich but the outsourcing won't stop, the prices of commodities will continue rise while actual wages stagnate, the corporate agenda and war profiteering will move on nearly unchecked. We'll get the deficit knocked down enough by the end of his term so that when the Republicans take back over there will be something for them to loot. To even get to the point where you can become President you must be compromised. If it turns out Obama actually is genuine and does things that will threaten the grip on power, they'll kill him either by manufacturing scandals so crippling he'll be "voted" out in favor of one of the corporatists or by literally assassinating him. It has happened before. I vote Democrat because I prefer a little lube and a reach around to just being brutally raped. Either way you're getting fucked. It's too big and there is too much money involved for the changes that are truly needed to be enacted.

Talking tactics amongst ourselves is well and good because we actually care but very, very few of the politicians do. They aren't concerned with our concerns and they will not act on them. They have a different agenda, they don't give a fuck about us. Politics is the intellectual version of the WWF. It's almost all faked but it is entertaining.

I might sound like an ultra-cynic but I consider myself a realist. These are the facts as I see them and I would need serious convincing to be moved off of this position.

[nadinbrzezinski]

264. Let me tell you a story about a family

there was a father, two sons and a daughter...

The wife, the mother, had just died from a bomb. Then the Germans came

They took everybody to the central plaza, them and their neighbors

This father, the two sons a daughter fled... how the family has three stories, jumped from a train, bribed, their way out. does not matter.. the point is that they were not on that train when it arrived at Treblynka.

Then they went literally into the earth for 18 months, with the help of local neighbors, some because they were friends, some for money.

She almost starved to death.. the rest were extremely malnourished

They, unlike you, never folded. They survived one of the most horrific events in recent history.

Perhaps that is why I'm not ready to fold. Perhaps I am made from the same genetic code that realizes that even in the darkness of nights there is hope. And not whatever Obama is peddling. the real stuff. I am just as bad of a cynic as you are, and at times I want to just throw my hands. But I realize that every bit of resistance helps... every bit. And that is what I am talking... and not giving in....

And your first task is to build community... which in the United States is a revolutionary act. The fascist thrive on anomie.

Oh and you cannot tell me that things are as dark as they were for my dad. The potential is there... lord do I know it... but if you think things are bad... they can get immeasurably worst.

[Quantess]

276. self delete