Fascism

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Don't mind Steven. He is one of our more liberal members. He thinks that conservatism is the next thing to fascism. But he is a nice guy though.

I don't think so. He's more of one of a "Progressive" which as far as I can tell if very far from liberal.

What is a progressive and what is a liberal...

and while you're at it, what's a conservative and how does it differ from a statist?

I think that's really an open question - without getting into too much detail - Liberalism and Conservatism (and really Progressivism as well) are extremely broad umbrella terms with different relative meanings in different countries, and their proponents tend to be defined by specific local issues pertaining to those countries.

Statism is really the one that is actually a specific term - basically its economic socialism.

I see, I had no idea statism had a specific meaning. I had always thought it meant preserving the power of the state... kind of the opposite of libertarianism.

Well it does mean that too - I believe it has a more specifically economic bent to it, but again these meanings tend to be rather fluid - and depend somewhat on your context.

[dalegg 143]

Don't mind Steven. He is one of our more liberal members. He thinks that conservatism is the next thing to fascism. But he is a nice guy though.

I don't think so. He's more of one of a "Progressive" which as far as I can tell if very far from liberal.

What is a progressive and what is a liberal...

and while you're at it, what's a conservative and how does it differ from a statist?

I'll put it like this. Take the subject of smoking for example.

The progressive wants to ban smoking tobacco because a society free from smoking is, after all, a better society. Restaurants smell nicer, people are just genuinely healthier, and soldiers don't have to pick up cigarette butts every morning.

The liberal on the other hand believes that banning smoking is a violation of an individual's free rights, and if he wants to kill himself, let him go right ahead and while your at it, lets make all other drugs legal.

You can also look to the progressives leaders on how they feel about certain subjects. Freedom of speech is very big with liberals. The liberal would defend Two Live Crews right to say anything they want on their album, while someone who is not liberal would be against it. Who was it that was leading the charge against explicit language in music? Al Gore. Therefore, Al Gore is not a liberal.

Al Gore is a Progressive, because he wants change in society that he believes would be better for all. Individual freedoms are secondary to this cause. This does sound a lot like socialism and it should. If you ever listen to some of the hardcore progressives on NPR, these guys are not shy at all about wanting a socialist society. They actually come right out and say it. They'll spend an hour on the radio telling you how what a great place Cuba is to live for example-- of course these are the extremes and I don't mean to say Steven wants to live in Cuba.

[mendeleev 69]

Hmm . . . I've noticed in this and at least one other thread that you seem to have an interest in fascism. By inference, I've concluded that you:

1). Are an amateur or professional political philosopher, or;

2). Are intimating that the US government is either becoming or is currently based upon fascist principles, or;

3). Have another yet undisclosed agenda.

Please, do explain yourself. No need to be coy.

Don't mind Steven. He is one of our more liberal members. He thinks that conservatism is the next thing to fascism. But he is a nice guy though.

isn't being liberal a requirement to live in cali?

You might be right, but for the Republican Governor

Oh, please. When was the last time we had a liberal president coming from California? A conversative one?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Don't mind Steven. He is one of our more liberal members. He thinks that conservatism is the next thing to fascism. But he is a nice guy though.

I don't think so. He's more of one of a "Progressive" which as far as I can tell if very far from liberal.

What is a progressive and what is a liberal...

and while you're at it, what's a conservative and how does it differ from a statist?

I'll put it like this. Take the subject of smoking for example.

The progressive wants to ban smoking tobacco because a society free from smoking is, after all, a better society. Restaurants smell nicer, people are just genuinely healthier, and soldiers don't have to pick up cigarette butts every morning.

The liberal on the other hand believes that banning smoking is a violation of an individual's free rights, and if he wants to kill himself, let him go right ahead and while your at it, lets make all other drugs legal.

You can also look to the progressives leaders on how they feel about certain subjects. Freedom of speech is very big with liberals. The liberal would defend Two Live Crews right to say anything they want on their album, while someone who is not liberal would be against it. Who was it that was leading the charge against explicit language in music? Al Gore. Therefore, Al Gore is not a liberal.

Al Gore is a Progressive, because he wants change in society that he believes would be better for all. Individual freedoms are secondary to this cause. This does sound a lot like socialism and it should. If you ever listen to some of the hardcore progressives on NPR, these guys are not shy at all about wanting a socialist society. They actually come right out and say it. They'll spend an hour on the radio telling you how what a great place Cuba is to live for example-- of course these are the extremes and I don't mean to say Steven wants to live in Cuba.

That's probably a good definition ...perhaps Progressives other the side of the coin with regard to neo-cons? Like erekose states, I don't really think a single label accurately describes anyone, but I'm pretty sure I'm mostly liberal. The Constitution is one thing that I hold as the highest authority with regard to our rights and liberties.

[BabyBlueSusie 1]

I'm going to stray a bit from the current convo in order to illustrate a personal example of mine, which opened my eyes a bit to the dimishing civil liberties in this country...

I was studying in europe for all of last summer (also when i met my fiance, fyi) and during that time, there was a thwarted 'terrorist plot' in London's Heathrow airport. I'm sure you all read and heard about it. Some people were caught trying to bring liquid explosives onto a plane. This is the event that resulted in liquids being banned from carry-on luggage. I happened to be returning to the US two or three days after the 'incident'. I was in Italy, and had to change flights in Heathrow, the airport where the 'incident' happened. So I get on my flight from Florence to London and everything is totally normal with security and luggage and all. As usual, I carry on a bookbag with books and cds and such. I then arrive at Heathrow airport and am told that if I want to fly to the US, that I must proceed outside the terminal, check my bookbag AND PURSE (which is roughly the size of VHS tape), because no carry-ons are allowed on the plane whatsoever. I proceeded outside the terminal and had to check in once again. I had to take everything out of my tiny purse and place it in a clear plastic bag, this included my book, keys, wallet, passport, tampons, and other assorted goodies, now available for all the world to see. I was outraged, and could not believe that this was actually happening. I overheard someone arguing with the security guards, and the guard replied, 'Yea well, if you want to fly to the states, that's what is going to have to happen'. I have photos from that day of an entire cabin full of people in their seats, and not one single bag is in the overhead bin. It's freakin' surreal. If I was more computer savvy, I'd post them for you. In essence, my point is this: the place where the 'attack' was thwarted, was virtually unchanged. I was able to fly into that airport in the same fashion that I always had. It was america that changed. This event (which clearly did not occur in America) was used as an excuse to, once again, impede upon the civil liberties of the american people.

I live in NYC and every morning when I take the subway to work, I have to now listen to an announcement stating the following: 'Attention passengers, the MTA would like to remind you that bookbags and other large items are subject to random search by the police. We thank you for your cooperation, and hope you have a pleasant day.'

'Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.'

-Benjamin Franklin

[mRx 16]

I live in NYC and every morning when I take the subway to work, I have to now listen to an announcement stating the following: 'Attention passengers, the MTA would like to remind you that bookbags and other large items are subject to random search by the police. We thank you for your cooperation, and hope you have a pleasant day.'

That is just awful that you must endure such inconvenient security measures! I mean, God, who would really bring a bomb on a subway?

Edited September 17, 2007 by Matt85

[Scott & Lai 12]

I live in NYC and every morning when I take the subway to work, I have to now listen to an announcement stating the following: 'Attention passengers, the MTA would like to remind you that bookbags and other large items are subject to random search by the police. We thank you for your cooperation, and hope you have a pleasant day.'

That is just awful that you must endure such inconvenient security measures! I mean, God, who would really bring a bomb on a subway?

Well, I'm sure we won't hear any complaints that the government didn't do enough if someone does explode a bomb on an NYC subway

[Dan J 277]

I live in NYC and every morning when I take the subway to work, I have to now listen to an announcement stating the following: 'Attention passengers, the MTA would like to remind you that bookbags and other large items are subject to random search by the police. We thank you for your cooperation, and hope you have a pleasant day.'

That is just awful that you must endure such inconvenient security measures! I mean, God, who would really bring a bomb on a subway?

Yes, its CYA security, it doesn't have to make sense. Just as long as the person in charge doesn't get fired.

[BabyBlueSusie 1]

I live in NYC and every morning when I take the subway to work, I have to now listen to an announcement stating the following: 'Attention passengers, the MTA would like to remind you that bookbags and other large items are subject to random search by the police. We thank you for your cooperation, and hope you have a pleasant day.'

That is just awful that you must endure such inconvenient security measures! I mean, God, who would really bring a bomb on a subway?

they're not stopping anyone

[Heracles 417]

Sad to see so many intelligent people buy the "you're either with us or against us" BS. Fear does make people act irrationally.

What about the people who think the government is out to get them????

[Heracles 417]

they're not stopping anyone

It is about being alert and not alarmed.

[Jenn! 918]

Sad to see so many intelligent people buy the "you're either with us or against us" BS. Fear does make people act irrationally.

What about the people who think the government is out to get them????

What about them?

[Heracles 417]

Sad to see so many intelligent people buy the "you're either with us or against us" BS. Fear does make people act irrationally.

What about the people who think the government is out to get them????

What about them?

You insinuated people saying your either with us or against as are idiots. Therefore what do you think about the people who constantly say the US government is out to get them..

Are they intelligent unlike the above????

[Jenn! 918]

Sad to see so many intelligent people buy the "you're either with us or against us" BS. Fear does make people act irrationally.

What about the people who think the government is out to get them????

What about them?

You insinuated people saying your either with us or against as are idiots. Therefore what do you think about the people who constantly say the US government is out to get them..

Are they intelligent unlike the above????

Actually that's not what I insinuated at all. I said the people are intelligent, but fear makes them act irrationally.

Sensitive much?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I said the people are intelligent, but fear makes them act irrationally.

That's one of key components of fascism and I think FDR was enlightened enough to recognize that when he said we have nothing to fear but fear itself.