Fascism 2.0

I haven't done an early morning (PST) drive-by in quite sometime. My work schedule is wonky this week and I have some time to fart around.

I found a couple of interesting pieces this morning. The one of interest is about contemporary fascism which makes some very valid points about the tools that the ideology uses very effectively.

“What’s different is that fascism was largely about the 3D world. It was about getting people to go out and conquer territory, to go out and march,” explained Synder.

“Whereas, I think Fascism 2.0 is not about that. It’s about getting us angry at the enemy, but not really doing anything about it.[color]”

From the above quote, I would paraphrase thus, "Organized Fascism intends for you to be angry at whoever they want you to be angry with while supporting and justifying their agendas whether it coincides with the objects of manufactured anger or not." Or, more simply, just be angry don't be active.

And this quote I found insightful, frightful and spot-on:

“Fascism is not so much about any particular idea as it is about the fundamental axioms that emotion and will are more important than reason and ideas,” Snyder told Observer.

Now get this, Professor Synder's take is that emotion and will, think about that, are more important than reason and ideas.

In that world, there is no common shared reality and everything is subjective based on 'whoever is the latest Strong Man''s emotion and will. Hmmmm... and they will be supported without any Reason and Ideas.

Don't you find that scary?

Quotes taken from interview with Yale Professor Timothy Synder ( www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527279787&sr=1-1&keywords=the+road+to+unfree dom) at observer.com...

"fascism" has a definition as a political and social ideology, many on the left and right toss it around as a pejorative or as a 'counter'

fascism will come to the so-called USA as a progressive-populist wrapped in an American flag carrying a bible and cross

Sorry, it's already here: America today is the Fourth Reich of the Rich.

a reply to: XAnarchistX

That's what fascism is simply defined as. It is a lot more than just a political system tho.

The OP explains how fascism is spread and used to gain momentum and power. The days of rallying together and calling for complete oppression and destruction is over.
And you quickly mentioning left and right shows that who ever is wanting this new age fascism is working.

a reply to: FyreByrd

An interesting side note. The company that owns and runs the website that ran the OP referenced story is owned by a Jared Kushner company.

The son-in law of President Donald Trump, Jared Kushner is the owner of The New York Observer and transferred his ownership into a family trust when he became an adviser to the President. At present, Kushner’s brother-in-law Joseph Meyer serves as publisher of Observer Media, which is the outlet’s parent company. Regarding New York Observer’s editorial voice, in 2014 the NY Times interviewed Jared Kushner where he stated “We stand for common sense, what’s great for New York. We’re pro-business and anti-entitlements.”

mediabiasfactcheck.com...

a reply to: Lazarus Short

No, not really

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
"fascism" has a definition as a political and social ideology, many on the left and right toss it around as a pejorative or as a 'counter'

fascism will come to the so-called USA as a progressive-populist wrapped in an American flag carrying a bible and cross

You quote Sinclair Lewis or Huey Long or....

quoteinvestigator.com...

a reply to: strongfp

Mentioning the fact that both the Left and Right toss around Fascism out of context, and inapplicable to the current political systems (within the so-called USA) has no relation to "whoever wants fascism is winning"

a reply to: FyreByrd

yeah, many people have used it in various forms and contexts, it wasn't in reference to anyone who said it before

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: Lazarus Short

No, not really

It's just such a truism that I want it to be attributable to someone.

I actually, while looking up the quote, found this direct quote from Eugene Debs:

Every robber or oppressor in history has wrapped himself in a cloak of patriotism or religion, or both. I am not a patriot as defined in the lexicon of the house of Morgan. I’d not murder my fellow men of my own accord, and why should I do it at the behest of the master class?

and then again:

No wonder Jackson said that “Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels.” He had the Wall Street gentry in mind or their prototypes, at least; for in every age it has been the tyrant, who has wrapped himself in the cloak of patriotism, or religion, or both.

Perhaps it should be a E. Debs quote!

quoteinvestigator.com...

About E. V. Debs

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
Sorry, it's already here: America today is the Fourth Reich of the Rich.

That comment is exactly what Snyder is talking about. A statement meant to do this (quoted from the article):

“That’s what fascists always dreamed of being able to do… they were trying to use language to get at people’s sense of friend and enemy to arouse anxiety and elation.”

Now I'm not rich by any means but I'm doing okay. I'm not going to get angry that there are wealthy people in this world. Fourth Reich? Hardly.

I see the usual suspects are here,but don't you find that this could serve as a cautionary tale to many on the left as much as it does to the right? Oh, I know, I know... ANTIFA is anti-fascist, says so right in the acronym, must be true.

But if all the modern definition needs is anger, there's plenty of that all around!

I'm a fascist; you're one too! Ops, everybody angry ... I think maybe this Op-ed person should stop trying so hard he might hurt himself.

originally posted by: ketsuko
don't you find that this could serve as a cautionary tale to many on the left as much as it does to the right?

Precisely, seems to me the left relies on emotion more and more while disregarding the importance of cold hard logic. As I've said several times before fascism is not something which can be clearly defined as a left or right thing.

a reply to: ketsuko

You are seriously obsessed with ANTIFA...

unless you are running counter operations, why would you identify under the "Anti-fascists" umbrella if you were, in fact, Pro fascist?

it says "Anti Fascists" because that is what it was created for, Oh, I know, I know... you subscribe to the reactionary "Antifa are the real fascists" hivemind

originally posted by: ketsuko
I see the usual suspects are here,but don't you find that this could serve as a cautionary tale to many on the left as much as it does to the right? Oh, I know, I know... ANTIFA is anti-fascist, says so right in the acronym, must be true.

But if all the modern definition needs is anger, there's plenty of that all around!

I'm a fascist; you're one too! Ops, everybody angry ... I think maybe this Op-ed person should stop trying so hard he might hurt himself.

You are correct - this is a warning to all EXTREMISTS, both personal and collective.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

because it doesn't exist on the political scale/spectrum, a "fascist" is neither left nor right, but by definition a "radical authoritarian nationalist" with dictatorship powers

"fascism" is anti-liberalism, anti-communism and anti-conservatism, which is why the ideology has been adopted by the far/extreme right (on a political scale) but not inherently "rightist" or "leftist"

another reason why horseshoe theory is complete nonsense

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

because it doesn't exist on the political scale/spectrum, a "fascist" is neither left nor right, but by definition a "radical authoritarian nationalist" with dictatorship powers

Try telling that to Google and everyone I was arguing against in this thread: Google Redefines The Word ‘Fascism’ To Smear Conservatives

This was the Google definition of fascism several months ago: "an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization"

I just checked again and it seems they've removed their own definition and show the Wikipedia definition instead. When I searched the Google dictionary directly for the word fascism it says "No definitions found" lmao they must have decided it doesn't deserve a definition.

Free speech is the enemy of Facism. Look for those trying to shut down the free exchange of ideas and the voices of the oppressed and it will lead you right to the Facists. Those who favor restricting feee speech and support censorship are the enemies of liberty.

This site is draining anymore.

This is one of the dumbest ops ever. Some nobody professor talking about some nothing topic to do with anything in real world terms talking about a subject related to a political ideology not seen since Mussolini and Hitler.

Honestly, there is no Fascism in USA, or anywhere in the world. It's all the same mix of A holes and non A holes. You can have your rights just as repressed by your ex wife as some dictator, fuhrer, or president.

Really, S.S.D.D is the only ideology you need to understand.

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

because it doesn't exist on the political scale/spectrum, a "fascist" is neither left nor right, but by definition a "radical authoritarian nationalist" with dictatorship powers

"fascism" is anti-liberalism, anti-communism and anti-conservatism, which is why the ideology has been adopted by the far/extreme right (on a political scale) but not inherently "rightist" or "leftist"

another reason why horseshoe theory is complete nonsense

Fascism arose in Europe as a response to Bolshevism. I agree it's anti-liberalism, anti-communism, I don't know about anti-conservatism. If you like communism, everyone else looks fascist.

"horseshoe theory is complete nonsense" Yes, nevertheless it is what most people at ATS seem to believe. There is no difference between the two. I think they just perceive both as authoritarian systems and are against that.