It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

American Style Fascism

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJMSN
I am a little confused as this theory could describe both sides of the political spectrum. I don't believe it to be an accurate description of either side as this is a Republic based upon Democratic values. Neither side despite politic rhetoric would ever support an authoritarian government and the checks and balances we have in place would prevent one.


That's the idea anyways. Too bad the Two Party + MSM + IC System is all one in the same, and totally what the point of the OP was supposed to be about.





posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Asktheanimals



How much money did Hillary get from corporate interests in the last election versus how much did Trump get?


Google,JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs.

www.opensecrets.org...

www.opensecrets.org...


Something interesting on there. Remember, Hillary supposedly had the grassroots campaign and Republicans are the party of the rich.

Look at Clinton's campaign finance breakdown.

and look at Trump's


Who are all the "large individual contributions" to Clinton? They donated almost as much as Trump's entire campaign budget. I love how they keep managing the stick that "party of the rich" label on Republicans, thanks largely to a compliant media.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Those graphs not telling the whole picture. Clinton has something like $1.5BILLION total (public) warchest, most of which thru PAC's.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: face23785

Those graphs not telling the whole picture. Clinton has something like $1.5BILLION total (public) warchest, most of which thru PAC's.


The PAC contributions are on there?

Also, that doesn't change the fact those charts demonstrate a lot more rich people donated to Clinton than to Trump.
edit on 31 7 18 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Another nail in 'Clinton won the popular vote'.




posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 09:10 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015


1) submission to legitimate authorities;

This is an interesting point actually because in many ways I find the left cares more about the source than the actual information. Doesn't matter if Hillary or the DNC do something questionable and have it exposed, if the source was Russian then the truth must be ignored because we don't want them influencing the result of elections in any way. At least we are some what willing to consider alternative sources, why do you think there's so many right leaning people on ATS in the first place, we realize the fact the MSM only reports a very small fraction of the real news and so we look for less mainstream sources to get information, which is often one of the main criticisms leveled against our methods of informing ourselves.


2) aggression towards sanctioned targeted minority groups;

When has Trump ever encouraged violence against a specific minority group? Sanctioned aggression would be like when Obama helped fund and arm actual terrorists in places such as Libya and Syria in order to take down sovereign governments. Trump has done nothing but attempt to recover relationships with nations such as Syria and NK, and now even Iran. I really don't think I've seen so much corporation and dialog between these traditionally "bad actors" in my life time. The simple fact is Trump has done more for world peace in the least year than any president in the last several decades.


3) adherence to values and beliefs perceived as endorsed by followed leadership.

I will not at all change the things I believe in so they exactly align with what Trump may believe. I'm despise religion and believe strongly in a separation of church and state, I think the approach Sessions is taking to drugs like marijuana is completely absurd and he should have been fired a long time ago. Trump is much more liberal in his approach to marijuana but he doesn't seem to care much what Sessions does, or has no power to stop him. There are many things about Trump I don't like. Why I don't Like Trump But Support Him.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 09:29 PM
link   
A self-described “far left socialist” accusing others of facism. .

You really can’t make this stuff up.

Thanks for the lolz.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: NthOther
a reply to: dfnj2015

If you didn't embrace it, you wouldn't have posted it.


In political science this is called the "he who smelt it dealt it" theory.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

www.forbes.com...

"The line between fascism and Fabian socialism is very thin. Fabian socialism is the dream. Fascism is Fabian socialism plus the inevitable dictator." John T. Flynn

On many issues the Nazis align quite agreeably with liberals. The Nazis enforced strict gun control, which made their agenda possible and highlights the necessity of an armed populace.

The Nazis separated church and state to marginalize religion’s influence. Hitler despised biblical morality and bourgeois (middle class) values. Crosses were ripped from the public square in favor of swastikas. Prayer in school was abolished and worship confined to churches. Church youth groups were forcibly absorbed into the Hitler Youth.

Hitler extolled public education, even banning private schools and instituting "a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program" controlled by Berlin. Similar to liberals’ cradle to career ideal, the Nazis established state administered early childhood development programs; "The comprehension of the concept of the State must be striven for by the school as early as the beginning of understanding."

Hitler’s election platform included "an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare." Nazi propaganda proclaimed, "No one shall go hungry! No one shall be cold!" Germany had universal healthcare and demanded that "the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood." Obama would relish such a "jobs" program.

Nazi Germany was the fullest culmination of Margaret Sanger’s eugenic vision. She was the founder of Planned Parenthood, which changed its name from the American Birth Control Society after the holocaust surfaced. Although Nazi eugenics clearly differed from liberals’ abortion arguments today, that wasn’t necessarily true for their progressive forbears.

Germany was first to enact environmentalist economic policies promoting sustainable development and regulating pollution. The Nazis bought into Rousseau's romanticized primitive man fantasies. Living "authentically" in environs unspoiled by capitalist industry was almost as cherished as pure Aryan lineage.

National Socialist economics were socialist, obviously, imposing top-down economic planning and social engineering. It was predicated on volkisch populism combining a Malthusian struggle for existence with a fetish for the "organic." Like most socialists, wealth was thought static and "the common good supersede[d] the private good" in a Darwinist search for "applied biology" to boost greater Germany.

The Nazis distrusted markets and abused property rights, even advocating "confiscation of war profits" and "nationalization of associated industries." Their platform demanded, "Communalization of the great warehouses" (department stores) and presaging modern set aside quotas on account of race or politics, "utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State."

Nazi Germany progressively dominated her economy. Although many businesses were nominally private, the state determined what was produced in what quantities and at what prices. First, they unleashed massive inflation to finance their prolific spending on public works, welfare and military rearmament. They then enforced price and wage controls to mask currency debasement’s harmful impact. This spawned shortages as it must, so Berlin imposed rationing. When that failed, Albert Speer assumed complete power over production schedules, distribution channels and allowable profits.

Working for personal ends instead of the collective was as criminal in Nazi Germany as Soviet Russia. Norman Thomas, quadrennial Socialist Party presidential candidate, saw the correlation clearly, "both the communist and fascist revolutions definitely abolished laissez-faire capitalism in favor of one or another kind and degree of state capitalism. . . In no way was Hitler the tool of big business. He was its lenient master. So was Mussolini except that he was weaker."

Mussolini recognized, "Fascism entirely agrees with Mr. Maynard Keynes, despite the latter’s prominent position as a Liberal. In fact, Mr. Keynes’ excellent little book, The End of Laissez-Faire (l926) might, so far as it goes, serve as a useful introduction to fascist economics." Keynes saw the similarities too, admitting his theories, "can be much easier adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state than . . . a large degree of laissez-faire." Hitler built the autobahn, FDR the TVA. Propaganda notwithstanding, neither rejuvenated their economies.

FDR admired Mussolini because "the trains ran on time" and Stalin’s five year plans, but was jealous of Hitler whose economic tinkering appeared more successful than the New Deal. America wasn’t ready for FDR’s blatantly fascist Blue Eagle business model and the Supreme Court overturned several other socialist designs. The greatest dissimilarity between FDR and fascists was he enjoyed less success transforming society because the Constitution obstructed him.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 10:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ketsuko

Try being skeptical about man-made climate change.



*snort*



Oh, I have and am.

It's not enough to think that climate changes which is self-evident. If it didn't, I'd be sitting under a mile of ice right now, but I have to have enough hubris to think that I am responsible for every day that does not have picture perfect weather ... oh, I mean picture perfect *summer* weather. If the weather is brutally cold or snowy in the fall and winter and spring, that's just natural weather variation, nothing to see here.

Sometimes, it defies belief.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

This article practically describes the Obama regime to a T...



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 10:51 PM
link   
"I tend to be a far leftist socialist in my political views."

Weapons grade irony.

I predict the OP got VERY poor grades, or thought world history a complete waste of time.

Might want to brush up on world history of the 20th Century, sir.

Thanks



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 12:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I've read a number of articles on American style fascism. I think there is two sides to this study. Most of the articles on American style fascism concentrate their focus on the power-holders. I think just as important is there should be an equal focus on the American people. Hitler would never have risen to power if it were not for the mentality of the 1933 German people.

"Authoritarian personality is a state of mind or attitude characterized by belief in absolute obedience or submission to someone else's authority, as well as the administration of that belief through the oppression of one's subordinates."



This is a good point but the problem is even bigger than that. People will only refuse to submit to people they disagree with. So all it takes is an authoritarian government that the majority of people agrees with and it's all over. There will be no way to vote them out because you simply don't have the numbers. You might as well try to fly by flapping your arms.



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 02:14 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Nazi Germany relaxed gun control for the majority of the population.

Hitler wanted to create a state Christianity, so no separation of church and state.

Germany (technically prussia) was one of the first nations to introduce free public education. Long before the Nazis came to power.

Should I keep going?

It should also be fairly obvious that just because a bad government (far right or far left) supports a particular policy or law it does by default make that policy or law a bad one.



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 02:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I've read a number of articles on American style fascism. I think there is two sides to this study. Most of the articles on American style fascism concentrate their focus on the power-holders. I think just as important is there should be an equal focus on the American people. Hitler would never have risen to power if it were not for the mentality of the 1933 German people.

"Authoritarian personality is a state of mind or attitude characterized by belief in absolute obedience or submission to someone else's authority, as well as the administration of that belief through the oppression of one's subordinates."



This is a good point but the problem is even bigger than that. People will only refuse to submit to people they disagree with. So all it takes is an authoritarian government that the majority of people agrees with and it's all over. There will be no way to vote them out because you simply don't have the numbers. You might as well try to fly by flapping your arms.


I don't think that's true. I would at least like to to think that most people can separate the method of government from policies and wouldn't support (at least under normal circumstances) a 'benevolent dictatorship'.

Maybe wishful thinking on my part.



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 05:05 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Well. I would argue that it's the "Wild West Fascism" Horkheimer and Adorno warned us about in "The Dialectics of Enlightenment".


But there is another conclusion: to laugh at logic if it runs counter to the interests of men.”
...
“Today the order of life allows no room for the ego to draw spiritual or intellectual conclusions. The thought which leads to knowledge is neutralized and used as a mere qualification on specific labor markets and to heighten to commodity value of the personality.”
...
“The self, entirely encompassed by civilization, is dissolved in an element composed of the very inhumanity which civilization has sought from the first to escape.”
...
“On the way from mythology to logistics thought has lost the element of self-reflection and today machinery disables men even as it nurtures them.”
...
“Ruthlessly, in despite of itself, the Enlightenment has extinguished any trace of its own self-consciousness. The only kind of thinking that is sufficiently hard to shatter myths is ultimately self-destructive.”

A&H - DoE

Any and all criticism falls short if it fails to address the core-issue of a more common dominator in all aspects of the prevailing paradigm, down to Realpoliticks.

It's a great thread though, don't get me wrong here. Just adding a broader perspective, you should read that book asap.


edit on 1-8-2018 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-8-2018 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 07:46 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

its pretty clear since after operation paperclip , the seeds of fascism were sewn , deep into the soil of american society and politics !

but wasnt just from Germany , the eugenics programs the US were running pre ww2 were pretty fascist !



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Be afraid, very afraid! They may be coming for you at any moment! sarc/

But really, as a Leftist socialist, I'm surprised you haven't moved to Venezuela.



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I've read a number of articles on American style fascism. I think there is two sides to this study. Most of the articles on American style fascism concentrate their focus on the power-holders. I think just as important is there should be an equal focus on the American people. Hitler would never have risen to power if it were not for the mentality of the 1933 German people.

"Authoritarian personality is a state of mind or attitude characterized by belief in absolute obedience or submission to someone else's authority, as well as the administration of that belief through the oppression of one's subordinates."



This is a good point but the problem is even bigger than that. People will only refuse to submit to people they disagree with. So all it takes is an authoritarian government that the majority of people agrees with and it's all over. There will be no way to vote them out because you simply don't have the numbers. You might as well try to fly by flapping your arms.


I don't think that's true. I would at least like to to think that most people can separate the method of government from policies and wouldn't support (at least under normal circumstances) a 'benevolent dictatorship'.

Maybe wishful thinking on my part.


It's wishful thinking indeed because they already do.

The method of government is merely the path that authoritarianism has to take in order to make things presentable to the public. They would certainly rather take the most direct route that the public will accept but at the moment, it is necessary to take a meandering path that keeps people sufficiently disoriented and distracted.

The problem is not with WHO is running the government. This is a smokescreen. The problem is that totalitarianism is the only possible eventual goal of ANY successful government.

Why do I say that? Because a government is really basically just a machine. And like any machine, it does not care about your feelings or any of that nonsense. When a machine encounters any kind of resistance, the people who maintain it are simply going to look for the source and try to figure out how to eliminate it so that their shiny little machine can function optimally.

In the case of a government, every single time that particular machine does not run optimally, the source of the malfunction is invariably going to be people who are (intentionally or not) gumming up the works.

So, let's think. If a government is a big machine, what types of things would get in the way of it's operation? Human rights? Yep. Sooner or later, a government is going to encounter a task that is incompatible with human rights and basic morality/ethics. And it's going to have to be modified if it's going to keep working and do what it's being asked to do.

So, let's think. When do we see something like this happening? We see something like this happening in our history books when we turn to the page that tells us the story about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Or even when we look to the Holocaust. What you see there is not the result of a bunch of evil people. I mean, sure. Hitler and his closest associates may have been evil but the entire country wasn't evil. Their government was commandeered by people who (for whatever reason) believed they needed to change the world in order to make things work the way they thought they should. In that case, they believed Jews and other people were just in the way.

And there you have it. That is the real reason the Holocaust happened. To just explain it away by saying "The nazis were evil" is too easy and refuses to address the fundamental problem of human nature when it comes to the application of state power to solve problems. And that is that when a state has a major problem to contend with, there is usually at least one very attractive shortcut. The problems any government has to deal with are usually caused by a relatively small number of people. Which is why you always hear so much about "the greater good".

This is why it's OK to put an innocent person in prison for life and then when it is found (50 years later) that they were indeed innocent (or perhaps even that the law they were convicted of breaking was an unjust law), we just say "Oh. Sorry. We messed up."

This individual (however tragically) just had to be sacrificed on the alter of "the greater good". The battlefields of history are littered with the corpses of such people. People who were just in the way. The people who basically murdered them had no real evil intent. They only had to clear a path for the progress of their own country and way of doing things.

Fascism is a scary word but it's not the real problem. Authoritarianism of all kinds is really what you have to watch out for when it comes to any government. Because governments never shrink. Not willingly, anyway. They never aim for less power than they have. They never try to solve big problems with tools that were designed for small problems. They always need a bigger hammer. And when they reach for it, you can bet it's just a matter of time for it too becomes obsolete.
edit on 1-8-2018 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-8-2018 by BrianFlanders because: I'm a dork and don't proofread my posts.



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders

I think modern history in the developed world shows different. The trend has been for the role of the state to expand yet I would say the state has (again in most cases) become less authoritarian.

The state has less interest and affect on people personal life's than at any point in history. There are obvious exceptions, generally where the is a public safety or health concern involved, but in general I think the trend has been towards greater personal freedom and less authoritarian government.
edit on 1-8-2018 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join