Are we a Fascist society?

**wickedsolo** · 07-17-2018, 05:19 PM

I think it's a fair question when you remove all of the Nazi aspects of it. Really, even Nazism is just National Socialism, but because of the Holocaust, there are some legitimate atrocities that will forever be attached to National Socialism.

So, just to level set with a basic definition...

Fascism, which is often traced back to Italy pre-WW2 and Benito Mussolini, is the idea that the government should be the central authority and corporations and the state should be operating as one. Facism does away with the ideas of democracy as there is only one central party. On the traditional "Left - Right" political spectrum, Fascism is often placed on the far right because it adopts ardent nationalism, strong military, and a strong dictatorial personality.

In thinking about that, do you guys think that there has been a movement towards a more totalitarian environment in the US since WW2?

The Federal Gubberment keeps growing and becoming one of the largest employers in the US. Social entitlement programs have been a mainstay for a significant percentage of America for decades and the programs are designed to keep people addicted and dependent. A lot of Congress sits on the boards of major corporations in American and are raking in serious amounts of $$$ every year. Major corporations have significant influence on federal, national policy and vice-versa.

I'm not suggesting Trump is a Fascist himself, but in general, has our society and government adopted Fascist principles over the years?

**WrongBaldy** · 07-17-2018, 05:50 PM

Corporations run America

**OhThePossibilities** · 07-17-2018, 07:26 PM

I wouldn't call it fascism. Fascism does not allow for dissenting view points and demands almost worship of the nation above all else.

Some might call Trump's attacks against kneeling NFL players fascist in the way they echo that, but in reality, a government rooted in fascism would physically round up any dissenting opinion and deal with them using violence.

Groups like Antifa and various white supremacy groups may use violent tactics, but they have no governing power.

In terms of the size of the government, I think a larger government is actually antithetical to fascism because fascism demands those within that government structure not just support the party in control, but wipe leadership's ass and lick the paper clean. With more and more people working within the government, it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain "quality control." While bureaucracy can work against the overall effectiveness of the government, it also keeps it from devolving into fascism.

I think in one way we're closer to an aristocratic society than a fascist one... just in the sense that our leadership is highly determined by who can raise enough capital to get elected, and in the process become more beholden to the richest special interests. I wouldn't say it's an actual aristocracy, but the super rich definitely have more say than the rest of us.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

**wickedsolo** · 07-17-2018, 07:31 PM

Originally Posted by OhThePossibilities

I wouldn't call it fascism. Fascism does not allow for dissenting view points and demands almost worship of the nation above all else.

Some might call Trump's attacks against kneeling NFL players fascist in the way they echo that, but in reality, a government rooted in fascism would physically round up any dissenting opinion and deal with them using violence.

Groups like Antifa and various white supremacy groups may use violent tactics, but they have no governing power.

In terms of the size of the government, I think a larger government is actually antithetical to fascism because fascism demands those within that government structure not just support the party in control, but wipe leadership's ass and lick the paper clean. With more and more people working within the government, it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain "quality control." While bureaucracy can work against the overall effectiveness of the government, it also keeps it from devolving into fascism.

I think in one way we're closer to an aristocratic society than a fascist one... just in the sense that our leadership is highly determined by who can raise enough capital to get elected, and in the process become more beholden to the richest special interests. I wouldn't say it's an actual aristocracy, but the super rich definitely have more say than the rest of us.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

Although you can debate how "violent" social justice is, is leveraging the idea of "social justice" to go after dissenting opinions sort of the same thing?

Does the idea of "Patriotism" not fall in line with ideals of Nationalism?

Interesting perspective about aristocracy being the driving force behind today's government. There is a lot of truth to that. Even running for local office can cost someone hundreds of thousands of dollars.

**OhThePossibilities** · 07-17-2018, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

Although you can debate how "violent" social justice is, is leveraging the idea of "social justice" to go after dissenting opinions sort of the same thing?

Does the idea of "Patriotism" not fall in line with ideals of Nationalism?

Interesting perspective about aristocracy being the driving force behind today's government. There is a lot of truth to that. Even running for local office can cost someone hundreds of thousands of dollars.

It is kind of the same thing, and I think that's what freaks a lot of the media out regarding Trump, but it's not explicitly the same. Fascism demands the party in control's ideals be enforced through government enacted violence, not just government encouraged "justice." The time bomb people hear when "street justice" is called for, is that flip of the switch when it would become government enacted.

Patriotism today and Nationalism aren't too far apart in my opinion. That's more of a feel assessment on my part, but Patriotism in our society today seems very into iconography. When the flag itself becomes more important than the ideals of the country, that, to me, is a problem.

I hope Civics make a comeback in schools.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

**Ortizer** · 07-17-2018, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by OhThePossibilities

It is kind of the same thing, and I think that's what freaks a lot of the media out regarding Trump, but it's not explicitly the same. Fascism demands the party in control's ideals be enforced through government enacted violence, not just government encouraged "justice." The time bomb people hear when "street justice" is called for, is that flip of the switch when it would become government enacted.

Patriotism today and Nationalism aren't too far apart in my opinion. That's more of a feel assessment on my part, but Patriotism in our society today seems very into iconography. When the flag itself becomes more important than the ideals of the country, that, to me, is a problem.

I hope Civics make a comeback in schools.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

Is there a standardized test for Civics? If not, I wouldn't count on a come back.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

**Laxdad24** · 07-17-2018, 11:21 PM

Originally Posted by Ortizer

Is there a standardized test for Civics? If not, I wouldn't count on a come back.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

I remember we had one. Here in B’More you had to pass the “Citizenship” ( civics) test to graduate. Along with a Standardized Writing and Math test.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**Culex** · 07-18-2018, 12:38 AM

We're not but that definitely seems to be what people think they want

**blah3** · 07-18-2018, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by OhThePossibilities

In terms of the size of the government, I think a larger government is actually antithetical to fascism because fascism demands those within that government structure not just support the party in control, but wipe leadership's ass and lick the paper clean. With more and more people working within the government, it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain "quality control." While bureaucracy can work against the overall effectiveness of the government, it also keeps it from devolving into fascism.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

I think it's the opposite. Big govt favors fascism. More govt, more reach, more control.

**DitkasSausage** · 07-18-2018, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

Although you can debate how "violent" social justice is, is leveraging the idea of "social justice" to go after dissenting opinions sort of the same thing?

Does the idea of "Patriotism" not fall in line with ideals of Nationalism?

Interesting perspective about aristocracy being the driving force behind today's government. There is a lot of truth to that. Even running for local office can cost someone hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I think that Nationalism does get a bad rep, here’s the definition:
patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts.
an extreme form of this, especially marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries.
advocacy of political independence for a particular country.

So being proud of your country, and feeling superior to other countries... that’s not evil in itself. We are independent of other nations and should be. If we weren’t our economy would suck like most of the EUs.

I disagree that the size of government acts as some form of protection against fascism. Everyone that works within government has their own career and interests, which is to keep their job. They do so by increasing budgets and budgets require revenues that they need to take from the private sector. It’s a form of fascism itself.

I like this discussion because yes... we are becoming a fascist country but that’s in spite of Trump. Bush took on more executive authority than any president should have. It was a trend he put into hyperdrive as all the presidents before him clear back to LBJ did the same. Some more, some less. More and more rights are being taken from the states making local elections nearly useless. Congress loves it when the president makes unilateral decisions because then they sit back and take credit or dispense blame while they collect payouts in the form of taxpayer benefits or corporate gifts. Congress is the most to blame in this because they openly advocate for taking rights away from States, and then shun the responsibilities of actually legislating and leave it on the Presidents doorstep. Trump has slashed regulations and tried pushing rights to the states. He’s chosen two good Justices and has been quietly putting constitutionalist on benches at every level. Even the SCOTUS keeps punting back to the circuit courts but they’ve been so monumentally incompetent from Clinton, Bush, and Obama that they can’t get anything close to correct.
The fascism that we are seeing is ultimately due to the complete lack of any real leadership within Congress. That’s due to corporate money even being allowed near our capitol. It’s a huge mess and the only people that can fix it are the ones benefitting the most.
Corporations do NOT control our country in the way people think. There’s only a handful that even sway policy. Democrats see regulations as a way to keep them in check. Congress knows better than their idiot followers. Regulations are a way to keep competition at bay so that they can continue to get these checks at the pain of the taxpayer. Not one subsidized company is successful once it becomes subsidized. Radio is the BEST example. Radio made crazy advances for 25 years. Now, they use essentially the exact same methods as the 50’s. AM is dead now. FM is close behind. The private sector tried to end-around this with satellite... that’s soon to be dead. Now net-neutrality is here and idiots championing this don’t realize that OF COURSE the biggest companies are in favor. You think Netflix WANTS competition?