Well, if the Miller/Hopfinger kerfluffle “perfectly” fits where it the thread last petered out, it is in the realm of noting that there have always been individuals who wanted to exclude their opponents for participating in society and, occasionally, they have the muscle to pull it off.
Where it fails to make a case for “Fascism” is in the fact that such individuals are still rather sparse in the political landscape and, more importantly, that such “eliminationism” is a hallmark of frightened politicos in many political philosophies rather than something significant in fascism and that there is no evidence, even in Miller’s campaign, (much less the country as a whole), of a number of other significant traits of fascism.
Not to mention that when the police came they ordered the reporter to be freed. I suspect a lawsuit is coming. This does not support a conclusion of fascism.
Looking over that list, I see a lot of points which can be readily applied to the Conservative party.
Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
Supremacy of the Military
Controlled Mass Media
Obsession with National Security
Religion and Government are Intertwined
Corporate Power is Protected
Labor Power is Suppressed
Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Since these seem to describe them to a T, I can’t imagine that Conservatives like this list very much.
Wait, there is no “Conservative Party” in the U.S. Except for a local one in New York, and this thing which just started last year. Neither of which has any apparent connection to the Tea Party.
It’s very hard to get enough people to support a fascist takeover, because people generally want to stick with democracy. The best way to convince them is by showing a credible threat from the other side: “It’s either us or the Bolsheviks”. (This is the same reason extreme leftists often argue “It’s either us or the Fascists.”)
There is no far left movement that has people scared today. Yes, Fox and friends can harp on how the Democrats are socialists and Obama is going to turn our country into the USSR, but the only people who buy it are the teabagger choir. They’re not convincing the mainstream that there’s a real danger of Stalinism taking hold here. In fact, although I don’t have the numbers to back this up, I think people are less afraid of a radical leftist takeover today than at any point in the 20th century. And without that threat, fascism has no mainstream draw.
As a side note, I’m not sure why it’s so important to label people fascist. If the country is taken over through undemocratic violence by extremist lunatics, is it somehow worse if they’re fascist than if they’re not? No, it’s the same problem either way.
For gosh sake the Tea Party and the GOP are not fascists! They may be naive and have bad views on policy they are as fascist as Democrats are socialists.
Like what? And even if they did, socialism isn’t the opposite number of fascism; Communism is. By American standards most of the planet is socialist.
They are wannabee fascists who don’t have the support to impose the kind of tyranny they’d like. But both groups have plenty of people who’d be very comfortable with a Nazi-America. They could round up and slaughter all those Jews/homosexuals/immigrants/atheists/liberals/Muslims. They could shoot all those “evil-lutionary” scientists who defy God’s Will. They could forbid women abortions, and lock them up to keep from getting one. They could increase their profit margin by using slaves. They could take their Second Amendment guaranteed guns and use them to kill all those liberals and homosexuals and brown people like they are itching to. They could nuke countries that don’t submit to America properly.
The Right, especially the teabagger scum, is composed of the kind of ignorant bigoted thugs who’d just love to turn American into a copy of Hitler’s Germany.
Ah wonderful generalizing and stereotyping. I suppose there are nuts who actually think that but it is ridiculous to say most of them are “wannabee fascists”.
Ah, the classic argument of the Right that you can’t criticize them because they aren’t all absolutely identical. If you are going to speak of a large group then like it or not you are going to have to commit the terrible crime of “generalizing”.
All your argument is, is a demand that nothing be said that is critical of the Right.
If you said for instance specifically “Glenn Beck’s political programme is insane and unrealistic” it would be understandable. But you aren’t just saying the conservatives are wrong but that they’re would be fascists who would murder people. You don’t think it would be surprising that most conservatives would be offended by such laughable generalization?
Considering that they are the ones who go about threatening their opponents with violence and murder, that their side of the political spectrum is presently the one engaging in most of the political violence in this country, and considering their general objectives I consider that a perfectly reasonable expectation.
Why should I care? They find the fact that I’m a liberal and an atheist horribly offensive anyway. They’d find it offensive if I didn’t thank them for it while they beat me to death.
In all fairness to the turd-smoochers, most conservatives, as far as I’m aware, want less government control of the media. The rest of the list seems pretty dead-on, though.
I would generally agree that they prefer that the government butt out and allow (Right wing) monopolies to control the media, but they do enjoy government intervention to prevent the “wrong things,” (typically sexual), from airing on TV and radio.
(It is the standard Right/Left dichotomy where the Left wants the government to be in your wallet and the Right wants the government to be in your bedroom. )
Not at all, they are always screaming for everything they find offensive to be banned, from sex to The Wizard of Oz. They love government control of the media and everything else as long as they are the ones making the decisions.
)