Fascism: Can It Happen Here?

2

Comments

  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,178
    BS44325 said:

    For facism to become ascendent religion will have to be removed completely from the public square.

    it should be, and it should not be in our political discourse.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    BS44325 said:

    Fascism today will also need to control the internet. This will be done under the concept of "net neutrality".

    Hahaha what a crock
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    BS44325 said:

    You will see fascism when people who want to debate science are called "deniers" and when the justice department meets to discuss how these deniers can be charged under existing laws.

    Hahaha what an even bigger crock!
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    You will see fascism when people who want to debate science are called "deniers" and when the justice department meets to discuss how these deniers can be charged under existing laws.

    Hahaha what an even bigger crock!
    We're not talking about global warming here, right? Naaaaahh. Didn't think so. :lol:
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,178
    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    You will see fascism when people who want to debate science are called "deniers" and when the justice department meets to discuss how these deniers can be charged under existing laws.

    Hahaha what an even bigger crock!
    science, by definition, is truth. it can't be debated. if someone wants to refute 99.8% of scientists on climate change, they are disingenuous at best, in denial. or lying at worst.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Free
    Free Posts: 3,562
    edited March 2016
    From The Great Dictator:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WibmcsEGLKo
    Post edited by Free on
  • Free
    Free Posts: 3,562
    gimmesometruth27 said:

    i think anything can happen to a country when the public goes to sleep and becomes unable to think critically.

    the republicans are about to nominate donald fucking trump. this should be proof enough that anything can happen.

    I think this has everything to do with it. almost everyone I know is asleep at the wheel and don't care what happens. That's what we have to worry about.
  • blueandwhite
    blueandwhite Posts: 662
    Fascism? How democratic is the US anyways? You have a two-party system that is dominated by lobbyists, a senate that literally refuses to act because they oppose the sitting president and an upcoming election which offers little in the way of meaningful choices. I find it more surprising that so many Americans actually believe that they live in a democratic state. The US like most western democracies is democratic in name only.
  • ldent42
    ldent42 NYC Posts: 7,859
    Lol of course it could happen.
    NYC 06/24/08-Auckland 11/27/09-Chch 11/29/09-Newark 05/18/10-Atlanta 09/22/12-Chicago 07/19/13-Brooklyn 10/18/13 & 10/19/13-Hartford 10/25/13-Baltimore 10/27/13-Auckland 1/17/14-GC 1/19/14-Melbourne 1/24/14-Sydney 1/26/14-Amsterdam 6/16/14 & 6/17/14-Milan 6/20/14-Berlin 6/26/14-Leeds 7/8/14-Milton Keynes 7/11/14-St. Louis 10/3/14-NYC 9/26/15
    LIVEFOOTSTEPS.ORG/USER/?USR=435
  • riotgrl
    riotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    Have any of you read this article on the rise of American authoritarianism? http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424/trump-authoritarianism

    I think this is an interesting analysis about the rise of Trump, and others like him, that transcend education levels, socioeconomic status, and even political leanings. The gist of the article is that people who espouse an authoritarian style resist change and struggle with chaos. They value political and economic leaders who will institute order. Its long but a really interesting read.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • Free
    Free Posts: 3,562
    riotgrl said:

    Have any of you read this article on the rise of American authoritarianism? http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424/trump-authoritarianism

    I think this is an interesting analysis about the rise of Trump, and others like him, that transcend education levels, socioeconomic status, and even political leanings. The gist of the article is that people who espouse an authoritarian style resist change and struggle with chaos. They value political and economic leaders who will institute order. Its long but a really interesting read.

    It was interesting and makes a lot of sense.
    For years now, before anyone thought a person like Donald Trump could possibly lead a presidential primary, a small but respected niche of academic research has been laboring over a question, part political science and part psychology, that had captivated political scientists since the rise of the Nazis.

    How do people come to adopt, in such large numbers and so rapidly, extreme political views that seem to coincide with fear of minorities and with the desire for a strongman leader.
    My fist answer to this is Fox News. The article answered it better, but along the Same lines.
    The political phenomenon we identify as right-wing populism seems to line up, with almost astonishing precision, with the research on how authoritarianism is both caused and expressed
  • Free
    Free Posts: 3,562
    After reading most of the article, I couldn't help but think about how we drove citizens into an authoritarian mind frame rather than evolve as we are supposed to. And then I remember how not only events (the few big terror attacks) induced it, but Fox and mainstream media in general has a lot to do with it. Really does.
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    gimmesometruth27 said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    You will see fascism when people who want to debate science are called "deniers" and when the justice department meets to discuss how these deniers can be charged under existing laws.

    Hahaha what an even bigger crock!
    science, by definition, is truth. it can't be debated. if someone wants to refute 99.8% of scientists on climate change, they are disingenuous at best, in denial. or lying at worst.
    Science by definition isn't "truth"...it is the "search for the truth". There is a huge difference. What science proves one day can be re-tested and be refuted the next. It happens all the time. At least that is what my MSc. degree taught me.
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664


    Either way, science is closer to truth than denial of global warming is. But, do we really need for this to become a discussion about global warming. We're all beyond that, right?

    Right. I thought so.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    brianlux said:



    Either way, science is closer to truth than denial of global warming is. But, do we really need for this to become a discussion about global warming. We're all beyond that, right?

    Right. I thought so.

    The earth warms, the earth cools, climate changes, man's actions contribute. To what degree know one knows. The earth's ability to cope with these changes? Again no one knows. To suggest that the science is settled on any of these issues is fascism. To suggest that anyone who questions the current science is a heretic is fascism. Science is far more about skepticism then truth. Every study starts by trying to disprove a null hyothesis. Fascism prevents this kind of research as it undermines authority.
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    "To suggest that anyone who questions the current science is a heretic is fascism." Question all you want. You have that right. I've never said or even suggested you are not allowed to question anything. Yeah, sure, if I said, "BS, you are not allowed to question global warming", that would be a relatively fascist statement.

    Now as to why anyone with half a brain any any kind of common sense would argue with the 97% of scientists who agree that global warming is anthropogenic... rolling eyes, baby, rolling eyes.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    brianlux said:

    "To suggest that anyone who questions the current science is a heretic is fascism." Question all you want. You have that right. I've never said or even suggested you are not allowed to question anything. Yeah, sure, if I said, "BS, you are not allowed to question global warming", that would be a relatively fascist statement.

    Now as to why anyone with half a brain any any kind of common sense would argue with the 97% of scientists who agree that global warming is anthropogenic... rolling eyes, baby, rolling eyes.

    Many scientists can and do argue with the "97%" and the number disputing current science is growing everyday as new data rolls in. For you to label these scientists as people without "any common sense" or as people with less then "half a brain" is the same as preaching heresy from your current enviro-religious dogma. You may think your rolling eyes are innocent but they are actual rolling eyes of fascism where academics are pressured to go along with conventional wisdom for fear of being ostracized.
  • Free
    Free Posts: 3,562
    BS44325 said:

    brianlux said:

    "To suggest that anyone who questions the current science is a heretic is fascism." Question all you want. You have that right. I've never said or even suggested you are not allowed to question anything. Yeah, sure, if I said, "BS, you are not allowed to question global warming", that would be a relatively fascist statement.

    Now as to why anyone with half a brain any any kind of common sense would argue with the 97% of scientists who agree that global warming is anthropogenic... rolling eyes, baby, rolling eyes.

    Many scientists can and do argue with the "97%" and the number disputing current science is growing everyday as new data rolls in. For you to label these scientists as people without "any common sense" or as people with less then "half a brain" is the same as preaching heresy from your current enviro-religious dogma. You may think your rolling eyes are innocent but they are actual rolling eyes of fascism where academics are pressured to go along with conventional wisdom for fear of being ostracized.
    BS44325 said:

    brianlux said:

    "To suggest that anyone who questions the current science is a heretic is fascism." Question all you want. You have that right. I've never said or even suggested you are not allowed to question anything. Yeah, sure, if I said, "BS, you are not allowed to question global warming", that would be a relatively fascist statement.

    Now as to why anyone with half a brain any any kind of common sense would argue with the 97% of scientists who agree that global warming is anthropogenic... rolling eyes, baby, rolling eyes.

    Many scientists can and do argue with the "97%" and the number disputing current science is growing everyday as new data rolls in. For you to label these scientists as people without "any common sense" or as people with less then "half a brain" is the same as preaching heresy from your current enviro-religious dogma. You may think your rolling eyes are innocent but they are actual rolling eyes of fascism where academics are pressured to go along with conventional wisdom for fear of being ostracized.
    The only scientists that are in the denial class are being directly paid to preach that. Paid to deny climate science usually for political reasons.
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    BS44325 said:

    brianlux said:

    "To suggest that anyone who questions the current science is a heretic is fascism." Question all you want. You have that right. I've never said or even suggested you are not allowed to question anything. Yeah, sure, if I said, "BS, you are not allowed to question global warming", that would be a relatively fascist statement.

    Now as to why anyone with half a brain any any kind of common sense would argue with the 97% of scientists who agree that global warming is anthropogenic... rolling eyes, baby, rolling eyes.

    Many scientists can and do argue with the "97%" and the number disputing current science is growing everyday as new data rolls in. For you to label these scientists as people without "any common sense" or as people with less then "half a brain" is the same as preaching heresy from your current enviro-religious dogma. You may think your rolling eyes are innocent but they are actual rolling eyes of fascism where academics are pressured to go along with conventional wisdom for fear of being ostracized.
    Oh, actually I think the 97% of scientist that confer on anthropogenic global warming are quite smart to brilliant. The other 3% work for oil corporations. But, really, are we having this conversation again?

    :fascistrollingeyesemotocon:
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    Free said:

    BS44325 said:

    brianlux said:

    "To suggest that anyone who questions the current science is a heretic is fascism." Question all you want. You have that right. I've never said or even suggested you are not allowed to question anything. Yeah, sure, if I said, "BS, you are not allowed to question global warming", that would be a relatively fascist statement.

    Now as to why anyone with half a brain any any kind of common sense would argue with the 97% of scientists who agree that global warming is anthropogenic... rolling eyes, baby, rolling eyes.

    Many scientists can and do argue with the "97%" and the number disputing current science is growing everyday as new data rolls in. For you to label these scientists as people without "any common sense" or as people with less then "half a brain" is the same as preaching heresy from your current enviro-religious dogma. You may think your rolling eyes are innocent but they are actual rolling eyes of fascism where academics are pressured to go along with conventional wisdom for fear of being ostracized.
    BS44325 said:

    brianlux said:

    "To suggest that anyone who questions the current science is a heretic is fascism." Question all you want. You have that right. I've never said or even suggested you are not allowed to question anything. Yeah, sure, if I said, "BS, you are not allowed to question global warming", that would be a relatively fascist statement.

    Now as to why anyone with half a brain any any kind of common sense would argue with the 97% of scientists who agree that global warming is anthropogenic... rolling eyes, baby, rolling eyes.

    Many scientists can and do argue with the "97%" and the number disputing current science is growing everyday as new data rolls in. For you to label these scientists as people without "any common sense" or as people with less then "half a brain" is the same as preaching heresy from your current enviro-religious dogma. You may think your rolling eyes are innocent but they are actual rolling eyes of fascism where academics are pressured to go along with conventional wisdom for fear of being ostracized.
    The only scientists that are in the denial class are being directly paid to preach that. Paid to deny climate science usually for political reasons.
    You are proving my point.

Categories