In political rhetoric, there are often charges that society is “creeping” towards either communism or fascism. (with both sides often using the same evidence!) But what changes need to occur to bring us to either state are rarely outlined; perhaps because vaguely ominous proclamations are harder to dissect…
Imagine that it’s 2031, and since 2012 we’ve elected a series of presidents who have steadily moved us towards a communist or a fascist state. In the next election we’ll elect the man who will bring us all the way to communism or fascism. How is the country different than it was in 2009?
What will have changed since 2009 if we’ve become a communist country? What laws & governmental policies have changed? What happens to public dissenters?
What will have changed since 2009 if we’ve become a fascist country? What laws & governmental policies have changed? What happens to public dissenters?
Communism: state ownership of a growing number of large firms, with regulation of their internal workings. Redistribution from capital holders to unions. Continuation and expansion of Bush-era practices against detainees, expanded towards political dissenters.
Fascism: state ownership of a growing number of large firms, with regulation of their internal workings. Quasi-mandatory state service programs.
:p. Honestly “Fascism” is so ill-defined, and has so many overlaps with state communism, that it’s probably impossible to answer the latter.
Fascism and communism don’t really overlap much at all. The popular conceptions do, but those ideas have little in common with the political theories, and not much more with governments that actually used those forms.
For one thing, if the people who say the country is fascist now continue to do so if the country really was fascist, they would ‘disappear’ rather quickly.
Not neccessarily. Not all Fascist movements were psychotic a la the Nazis.
Strictly speaking, Fascism is a hyper-natioalist movement which seeks to subjugate all other power centers to centralized state power which is itself seen as the embodiment of a racial/ethnic nation.
They usually aren’t nice, but they are also not usually monstrous, either. The Spanish are a good historical example of this, despite current and historical hystronic Leftist rage at Franco.
I think we need to stop all this nonsense and recognize that it is highly unlikely for the US to adopt a totalitarian system and that we will–within certain parameters–remain quite moderate.
After all, the historical examples of totalitarian regimes and their evils are there for us to learn from and abhor. Virtually nobody wants to go there, so why do we go around assuming that they do?
I think we’re in more of a pendulum mode than in any ongoing long-term trend; at the moment we are swinging toward socialism (e.g., the “nationalization” of GM), but the American public seems to have a modicum of common sense, and tends to reverse course after an election or two when we go too far in any one direction…TRM
Apologies for us leftists getting all hystrionic about a man who launched a civil war against a democratically elected government that led to 500,000 deaths, that presided over a regime that killed around 100,000 more, predominately leftists, that banned unions and political opposition (and fixed football games).
First, he did not launch it. Second, he was no more (and arguably less) brutal in his prosecution of the war than the Republicans. Third, the Republicans were tools and toadies of Stalin, and their victory would likely have meant far worse. In fact, they certainly did not wait to begin using assassination and disappearances.
I’d probably lead a bloody civil war against Stalinists, too. Which is what he did, no more, no less, nothing else. And as a dictator, frankly, he was much more mild than most others have been. You may not like it, but that is the record, even assuming I take your numbers as valid.
I can’t answer an apologist for fascism outside of the pit, and I have no interest in doing it there. So, you are right. Franco was a fluffy bunny who saved Spain for Catholicism from the nasty commies.
Agreed. “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance” etc. etc., but the chance of either communism or fascism becoming the dominant political ideology and seizing power in the U.S. is extremely remote. Communism is almost completely discredited around the world (just about everywhere except Cuba and North Korea, arguably), and while fascism is perhaps easier to foresee arising here, it too is little more than fringe ideology professed by just a tiny, tiny minority of the population, fortunately.
Either communism or fascism, to take root under the nurturing hand of several increasingly-terrible Presidents, would require widespread and willful breaches of the Constitution, the establishment of secret police with untrammeled powers, the “disappearance” or imprisonment of political opponents, seizure or censorship of the media, etc. It could happen, I suppose, if several dozen things went wrong with American democracy in a very short time, but I’m not losing any sleep over it.