47: USA's fall into Fascism

[Gene2memE]

I think terms like "fascism" get tossed around too willy nilly.

Can you cite another fascist regime in history that wanted:
- The citizens themselves to have more guns
- To dismantle more levers of government power than it creates
- To deregulate enterprise to the point where private corporate interests have as much power as the government itself

Nazi Germany.

On all three counts

1. While guns were restricted for certain categories of people (particularly Jews), the laws passed around gun control in Germany during the late 1930s liberalised gun regulations rather than tightening them. See the Waffengesetz of 1938 for more informaton.

2. The Nazis dismantled the democratic structures of the Weimar Republic, concentrating power in the chancellorship and a handful of internally facing ministries. They initially failed to make inroads in dismantling the bureaucracy, focusing instead on controlling government at the local level. However, they ended up consolidating many bureaucratic structures through the 1930s. In doing so, the created more centralised institutions which were more powerful on paper - but also less effective overall than the smaller institutions they replaced. See, for instance, the consolidation of the Ministry of Economics and its subsequent hand off of management of various labour and social services to non-government organisations.

3. Nazi Germany privatised state-owned businesses, creating the largest privately owned companies in Germany, permitting monopolies and allowing the formation of consortia/cartels. In comparison to the Weimar Republic, it withdrew from much of the state's role in economic management. By the late 1930s, companies like IG Farben, Deutsche Bank and Krupp were powerful enough to have a direct hand in guiding national policy and straight out refuse government contracts. It wasn't until national mobilisation in 1939-1941 that these companies were again subordinated to the state.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Can you really say that the commonalities are small with a straight face? Ultimately, whatever precise form of non-democratic governmental system you want to call what the US is turning into isn't really that important. It begins to sound like that meme about Champagne - "It's only Fascism if it comes from the Faccismo region of Italy. Otherwise it's just sparkling authoritarianism." The point is that our president is encouraging corruption (pardons for crooks who make donations to him, firing prosecutors who investigate his actions or the actions of his friends, punishing law firms who bring cases against his administration and letting them off when they agree to do free work for him, firing inspectors general), consolidating power in his office while bypassing the checks and balances built into the constitution, targeting marginalized groups for retribution and disproportionate punishment, squashing free speech rights, attacking intellectuals, etc. These are all hallmarks of authoritarian regimes, not healthy, democratic societies. And the thing is, his supporters won't even deny he's doing these things - they just say that it's necessary or "they started it."

Yes, the commonalities are small.

Each one of those things you listed, I can pick a democratic example for.

If...
Pardons for crooks (See Bill Clinton's controversial pardon list -- ranging from pardoning his own half-brother, to pardoning the kids of his political donors)

Firing prosecutors who were investigating them or their buddies (Bill Clinton again, when elected he fired Jay Stephens who was investigating his friend, Carter did the same by firing Dave Marsten who was investigating his buddy)

Punishing law firms...that one's actually a quite long list (including Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Clinton...again, and Obama)

Squashing free speech rights... remind me again, which party were the senators from that called CEOs up to capitol hill to try to get them to filter out certain search results, and implement censorship during covid?

Attempting to bypass the balances put in the constitution... how much time do you have?

Is it really crying wolf if they were laying the groundwork for what Trump is doing now? But, regardless, you don't have to take my word for it - the wolf is right there.

If you see Mitt Romney as being a steppingstone and laying the groundwork for fascism, then it sounds like you want a single party state.

Mitt Romney's about as controversial as plain white toast and oatmeal.


A one-party nation is an unacceptable outcome, so I'll ask, who do you consider to be an acceptable Republican to run as the loyal opposition to the Democrats?

 

[chevyontheriver]

One thing we should all agree on is that the GOP isn't "Left Wing".

The presence of RINOs might indicate otherwise.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The presence of RINOs might indicate otherwise.

Who are these left wing "RINOs" (in public life, not here, of course)?

 

[Lukaris]

The Democratic Party is open to a leader that is gay, or trans, or non Christian, or female, or black or whatever, they don't seem to care.
But much of the country do care. There was nothing wrong with Hillary, and she actually got millions more votes than Trump, but just look at the amount of derision she gets from people on the USA right. Her crime, being a woman.

No, she is a demo and all demos are rejects probably to all conservatives. You are ignorant of US politics to make such a statement. Personally, I have voted for conservative women younger than myself who will hopefully further advance politically and are of a moderate disposition. In some elections they faced lib male opponents.

Among these are Stephanie Salavantis, Tara Toohill, Brenda Pugh etc.

Salavantis, Toohil emerge as winners of Luzerne County judge race

Votes in the closely contested race were still being counted on Wednesday.

www.wnep.com

Brenda Pugh declared winner of 120th District

EYEWITNESS NEWS (WBRE/WYOU) — The seat for Pennsylvania’s House of Representatives 120th District was a battle between Republican nominee Brenda Pugh and Democratic nominee Fern Leard. Early …

www.pahomepage.com

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Yes, the commonalities are small.

Each one of those things you listed, I can pick a democratic example for.

If...
Pardons for crooks (See Bill Clinton's controversial pardon list -- ranging from pardoning his own half-brother, to pardoning the kids of his political donors)

Firing prosecutors who were investigating them or their buddies (Bill Clinton again, when elected he fired Jay Stephens who was investigating his friend, Carter did the same by firing Dave Marsten who was investigating his buddy)

Punishing law firms...that one's actually a quite long list (including Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Clinton...again, and Obama)

Squashing free speech rights... remind me again, which party were the senators from that called CEOs up to capitol hill to try to get them to filter out certain search results, and implement censorship during covid?

Attempting to bypass the balances put in the constitution... how much time do you have?

I'm not interested in a game of "who is worse" - it has nothing to do with the point of my post.

If you see Mitt Romney as being a steppingstone and laying the groundwork for fascism, then it sounds like you want a single party state.

Mitt Romney's about as controversial as plain white toast and oatmeal.

I said nothing about Mitt Romney - you're the one who brought him into this. I have no issues with Mitt Romney.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The Democratic Party is open to a leader that is gay, or trans, or non Christian, or female, or black or whatever, they don't seem to care.

You're basing this off what? The grand total of 3 candidates they've selected that haven't checked all of those boxes (just most of them)?

The fact that both times they've tried to run woman, their voters didn't come out in full force for them would indicate that it's quite possible that maybe Democrats (as a whole) aren't quite as open to those things as you're claiming.

The fact that Hillary and Harris both lost isn't an indictment of republicans.

 

[stevil]

The fact that Hillary and Harris both lost isn't an indictment of republicans.

It's an indictment of USA in general.

Probably more so of those that call themselves "independent"

 

[JSRG]

The Democratic Party is open to a leader that is gay, or trans, or non Christian, or female, or black or whatever, they don't seem to care.
But much of the country do care. There was nothing wrong with Hillary, and she actually got millions more votes than Trump, but just look at the amount of derision she gets from people on the USA right. Her crime, being a woman.

Is Joe Biden's crime being a woman too? He got no shortage of derision from people on the USA right.

 

[Lukaris]

It's an indictment of USA in general.

Probably more so of those that call themselves "independent"

It's an indictment of USA in general.

Probably more so of those that call themselves "independent"

This is why America needs to pursue less interaction with the world and strive for being self sufficient. I know the howls of saying how impossible this is have already bellowed as I type this. This is a philosophy to pursue and fulfill as much as possible. This is anathema to the internationalist mindset.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It's an indictment of USA in general.

Probably more so of those that call themselves "independent"

Or it's the fault of the party who picked people who didn't invigorate their base.

Quite a big drop-off in votes for the democrats from 2020 to 2024.

Biden (who wasn't all that exciting of a personality) wrangled in 6 million more votes than Harris.

It seems like they prioritized checking off a "First Ever" box over picking someone who everyone liked and who excited the base.


Similar to the mistake they made in 2016. Bernie had the momentum that year and a message that resonated with people, but they kneecapped him with the goal of "we gotta get the first woman president" in mind.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Keep telling yourself that. Maybe it will comfort you. But watch out for the Fascism you might enable without intending yourself to do so. The harassment of Jews in America by Hamas supporters is real and it is Fascist. I could go on.

I am not comforted as I see it rising in the US from the right.

 

[chevyontheriver]

The Democratic Party is open to a leader that is gay, or trans, or non Christian, or female, or black or whatever, they don't seem to care.
But much of the country do care. There was nothing wrong with Hillary, and she actually got millions more votes than Trump, but just look at the amount of derision she gets from people on the USA right. Her crime, being a woman.

Nope. Her crime was her incompetence at campaigning. And a special part of that incompetence was persuading her sometimes friend, The Donald, to enter the race as a Democrat, er, I mean Republican. She and her operatives and the media (but I repeat myself) worked hard to get The Donald the nomination. Then they switched on a dime to go into attack mode against him once he clinched the nomination.

I am not comforted as I see it rising in the US from the right.

I am not comforted as I see it already rampant in the USA from the Left. Progressives, Hamas supporters, sexual deviants, Tesla torchers, ecoterrorists, and the list goes on. There are a few scary people on the Right too. But to see only them and intentionally not see those on the Left is a purposeful self-deception.

 

[stevil]

Is Joe Biden's crime being a woman too? He got no shortage of derision from people on the USA right.

He won the election right? Enough people were willing to vote for him.

 

[ozso]

You seem to be making bad assumptions about me. At the same time, I think it says a lot that you try to make this about me rather than addressing my comments.

I did address your comments about not liking democrats/leftists being given a taste of their own medicine.

 

[SimplyMe]

I did address your comments about not liking democrats/leftists being given a taste of their own medicine.

Odd, I don't recall making those comments, nor do I see them in what I wrote.

 

[Pommer]

The fact that Hillary and Harris both lost isn't an indictment of republicans.

Neither is it a credit to the Democrats that the only time Donald J Trump lost a Presidential Election, he ran against a fail old man.

I’ve heard it for forty years, “oh I’d vote for a woman for President, but not that woman!”
Somehow, whenever a woman runs for the Presidency, she’s not quite “right”.

There’s a fair amount of “I ain’t having a woman president telling men what to do!”, enough but probably not as much as we might think. Hopefully.

 

[ozso]

Odd, I don't recall making those comments, nor do I see them in what I wrote.

That's how it came off to me. Perhaps you could tell me what you meant in a nutshell.

 

[Pommer]

You don't seem to like the shoe being put on the other foot. But turnabout is fair play.

Do the Democrats have the Proud Pep-boys as their “militia”?
Do they let the air outta the tires?

 

[ozso]

Do the Democrats have the Proud Pep-boys as their “militia”?

They have antifa and radicals in general.

Do they let the air outta the tires?

?