anarcho whatis??
ruff ruff
Geez…just how long is 60 seconds anyway?
Yeah, right. Trotskyist or Trotskyite? Got $5 says you know.
Well, Reeder hates Bush, therefore Reeder’s a Democrat.
Isn’t that how the two-party system works? You Americans are so confusing.
Well Kerry let it go . . . and wasn’t he the one running. :smack:
So what’s next? Loyalty oaths? Bureaucratic purges?
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=anarcho-syndicalist
I am an anarcho-syndicalist. In common use in a forum like this it means someone whose economic poltics are heavily toward socialism, but on social issues are very much libertarian. In fact a synonym for anarcho-sydicalism is “libertarian socialism”. Many European countries have active anarcho-syndicalist political parties. The Scandanavian nations with their cradle to grave social welfare programs alongside of capitalism, with little interest in legislating morality, probably come closest to this.
Not quite. Republicans love Bush, everybody else fears/loathes. Xtians love Bush, except for Jesus, who rolls His eyes ands says “Feh!”
Si Amigo wrote:
You’re changing the subject. You objected to criticism of Bush propaganda on the grounds that he won the election. My response was apropos of that. You then talk about the issue of ceding the election, which is an entirely different matter.
Kerry didn’t let it go.
He rolled.
I don’t hate Bush.
I would have loved for him to have taken his cut from our tax dollars and retired gracefully.
Yeah, but it’s not “Bush propaganda” per se (at least not in the totalitarian sense of propaganda) if a private party did it with its own money, in order to suck up to Bush and obtain favorable political results. That’s more like “lobbying.” Moveon.org showed, I think, that both sides of the pro/anti Bush message can readily be aired by private parties willing to take the time and money. Not so in totalitarian-land.
I don’t disagree with your much more modest version of the notion that we should use trends that showed up in bad governments as cautionary tales, but (a) we’ve agreed that we’re not near the extremes that these sort of regimes reached, and (b) the “indicators” are not infallible, both because they’re susceptible of being attributed to any government and because they may be characteristic of a totalitarian government without really being connected to its totalitarian nature. The Nazis were big into building great road systems (for both military and civil purposes). I don’t think the presence or absence of a strong pro-highway policy tells us much about whether a government’s headed toward being Nazi like.
Sorry, but I got caught up in the moment. :smack: I see now that you were expounding on the BIG picture. And now back to our regulary schudeled program . . .
A few short months ago, folks were scolded, excoriated, flamed, and boxed about the ears for saying anything in Great Debates that couldn’t be cited. When did I miss the sticky that announced that GD is now a subsidiary of The BBQ Pit? Please advise. 
Respectfully,
AskNott
Huerta88 wrote:
I don’t know if the degree of relevance from any of the 14 criteria listed is quite that far out, but I’m as tempted as anybody to make sure I’m not one of the people who missed the signs that will be so obvious to future generations. “Well, duh,” the kids will say. “Weakening civil liberties in support of a war on some abstract notion of ‘terror,’ using disproven evidence to justify an invasion, a burgeoning cult of personality. Why didn’t you stop this guy?” I want to be able to say, “Oh, yeah, well, I mean I totally saw the shit coming, and spoke up and everything.”
We did the whole “characteristics of fascism” from the 2nd cite in the OP quite awhile ago in GD. I’m not going to search for that thread, but needless to say it was a trainwreck. If anyone is interested, he can do a search and dig it up. Many of the posters in this thread were around then and should remember it.
Could this possibly be an anti-Bush statement that uses irony in order to draw a parallel between Bush and Hitler or (more possibly) Bush and Saddam Hussein? The first thing I thought when I saw this was “they can’t really be serious, this has to be an anti-Bush political statement.”
But I don’t think most people are that smart.
When there’s a line item in the federal budget to erect “Our Leader” billboards in every majore city of the US, I’ll be concerned. Until then, I think I’ll just pour myself another glass of wine and enjoy the evening.
My biggest concern is that while ClearChannel is not a government entity, there are only 2 real voices in radio left, and they’re both suck-ups and fearful of the FCC.
Your late… these already happen… :eek: