On Neo-cons and Fascism...

[EdisonBoy]

Mick, there wasn't a button to reply to your post about Neo-con evil-doers, so I made this topic here.

You are more right than you know (or do you).  It has been the neo-cons since before Reagan that have been at the forefront to re-define fascism as a nationalistic dictatorship, but that is not what the original definition of fascism.  The neo-cons have been attempting to pull fascism's teeth so that they could not be accused of fascism.

The original definition of fascism was given by the original fascist, Benito Mussolini, as being the merger of state and corporate power.  He effectively dissolved the Italian parliament and replaced their members with a body of representatives appointed by the largest corporations in each province.  Sound familiar?

Let's go back in time; before Reagan as President.  Not many people know that Reagan was being groomed for public office (ultimately the Presidency) by 5 major corporations in the 1950s.  You can look this up, get the information from Mike Papantonio's websites.  Anyway, remember how the cornerstones of his Reaganomics (of course, he couldn't call it by it's original name!) was deregulation and privatization of public functions?  This was when the corporations started to really get their claws into our government, so that now our elected representatives are more beholden to them than they are to the people who elected them.

There's only one little thing wrong with that; this is supposed to be a populist democracy and our reps can't serve two masters!

And, of course, neo-cons since Reagan have also been trying to tear down FDRs New Deal policies.  Why?  Because those policies created the largest, strongest middle class the world has ever seen!  And when you have a strong middle class (I prefer Jefferson's term for the middle class, the yeomanry) then they are going to demand more rights and more say-so in the halls of power.  That's democracy!  The corporatocracy can't have that!  So the New Deal had to go because it gave the people too much power and gave the corporations none.  Profit was no longer their main concern under those circumstances, it was the public good, and that doesn't sit well with the board of directors!  They want to be able to sell us their snake oil no questions asked.

Another thing that hurts our democracy is the ludicrous idea of corporate personhood, but that's a rant for another time for me!   

Laterz!

[misfitguy]

You said it will, friend.  Where did you see a post by me that you couldn't respond to.  I had posted this topic in the politic section, but does have a reply button.  That post is mostly a copy/paste.  I post almost daily on USA Today under the name misfitguy1.  I never fail to connect fascism and neo-cons.   It almost never gets denied and it has been picked up by other posters.

Mick

[Husker Du]

Politics is like wrestling on TV.  On the TV they hate each other and each side is at odds with one another but behind the screen, at dinner they are loving each other having a good time.  To say Neo-cons are fascists, or to favor the Democrats, or Republicans, Liberals, or whatever label they are using to distract you with today is not getting us anywhere anymore.  Bush, Obama, slightly different.  Different show, but the same company owns the channel.  Interests are interests, and when your politicians aren't the ones running the country anymore it's not worth it having hope in either side.  Hope is something you do right before defeat anyways.  I think once we start putting the labels aside and start looking at all of our politicians right now under the same light then we might get somewhere.  No more hope though please.  That hasn't gotten us anywhere.  

[misfitguy]

Without hope, we have hopelessness.  Is that what you are suggesting we should try to develop?  How odd.  This thread is about the neo-cons and that fact they are fascists, by definition.  If fascists running your Democratic-Republic are what you would like, then, sure, ignore it and simply pass it off as "labeling".  The fact is, Ronald Reagan was a John Bircher and the first of the active fascists to control the power in this country.  George Bush Sr. and the son were also from the same Bircher/fascist stock.  It is simply the way it is.  We will either change or simply lose the Bill of Rights.  The Patriot Act was a direct attack on the Constitution and without the Bill of Rights, America isn't great anymore.  The Bill of Rights limits the power of the Government and empowers us with certain expectations and freedoms.  So, yeah, I think it is very important to evaluate those in leadership roles, define them and talk about them.  I also believe that we have to have hope.  

MIck

[Husker Du]

Without hope, we have hopelessness.  Is that what you are suggesting we should try to develop?  How odd.  This thread is about the neo-cons and that fact they are fascists, by definition.  If fascists running your Democratic-Republic are what you would like, then, sure, ignore it and simply pass it off as "labeling".  The fact is, Ronald Reagan was a John Bircher and the first of the active fascists to control the power in this country.  George Bush Sr. and the son were also from the same Bircher/fascist stock.  It is simply the way it is.  We will either change or simply lose the Bill of Rights.  The Patriot Act was a direct attack on the Constitution and without the Bill of Rights, America isn't great anymore.  The Bill of Rights limits the power of the Government and empowers us with certain expectations and freedoms.  So, yeah, I think it is very important to evaluate those in leadership roles, define them and talk about them.  I also believe that we have to have hope.  

MIck

I'm suggesting that all this knee slapping hope end, and suggest we should try to develop some action.  I don't see that as odd at all.  Labels are disabling and are a tool being greatly employed by many.  It's a great distraction.  I think you've totally read me wrong here.  I'm for the opposite of ignoring the situation.  I find it funny that people still hold onto blaming just the Republicans, Bush, and Reagan as if the Clinton administration never happened and as if the Obama administration isn't happening.  I think it's very important to not get suckered by labels so they don't continue to pull the one two punch they have done so well with us. How could you not vote for Obama after Bush?
Let me put it this way I guess, hope is just being lazy.  Hope is what you do when you don't know what to do.  Right before you get defeated you "hope" to win or be saved.  If you knew what to do you wouldn't have to hope.  I hear a lot of talk and no action.  Plus Neo-Cons is one name/label, soon they will be called something else and what then?  More complaining about the new fascists.  It's beyond party lines.  Plus to use the term fascists when the majority of Americans have NO concept of what it is to live under a fascist regime is just hmm just takes away from what really happened under fascist regimes.

[misfitguy]

I guess I did read you wrong, since I still can't figure out what you are saying other than maybe, "shut-up about it".  It is very important for everybody to understand that Reagan/Bush/bush are fascists and not Republican.  It is very important for Republicans to understand that their party was hi-jacked by the John Birchers and that they are supporting a fascist regime.  What do you mean we don't know what it is like to live under a fascist rule.  Exactly what would you call the twenty years of Reagan/Bush/bush?  These last 8 years were just the culmination of the first 12 years.  Listen to those still in Congress yelling and demanding. These are the same fascists that were there when they gave huge tax cuts to the rich, financed their wars with deficits we'll look at for years, attacked the Bill of Rights, turned the word Patriotism into a derogatory.

We either learn from history or we risk the possibility of repeating it.  We have to look back to assure ourselves that we are heading in the right direction as we go forward.  Neo-con means the "new conservative" and if it has become a derogatory, they can only thank themselves for their own actions.  Fascism is a form of government.  Of course we can't have a "fascist" style government simply because somebody was voted into office, but we can approach it with little changes that add up to bid changes.  We've been taught that capitalism and the "free market" are the foundation of democracy.  That too is just so much fascist propaganda.  We have also been taught that socialism is evil.  Since when is concern for each other evil?  It is very important that all of these different ideas get debated so that each of us have a better understanding of the forces around us.

I'll be gone for 10 days.  I will respond to your posts when I return.

Mick

[EdisonBoy]

We either learn from history or we risk the possibility of repeating it.  We have to look back to assure ourselves that we are heading in the right direction as we go forward.  Neo-con means the "new conservative" and if it has become a derogatory, they can only thank themselves for their own actions.  Fascism is a form of government.  Of course we can't have a "fascist" style government simply because somebody was voted into office, but we can approach it with little changes that add up to bid changes.  We've been taught that capitalism and the "free market" are the foundation of democracy.  That too is just so much fascist propaganda. 

I know I probably get too much of my talking points from Thom Hartmann, but I have to give credit where credit is due.  --- Most people have come to the assumption (thanks to the above mentioned propaganda) that democracy and capitalism go hand in hand.  Actually, capitalism, when unchecked by government, is dangerous to democracy, and the Founders knew this well.*  The US was born in a fight against a monopolist corporation (the British East India Company) just as much as it was in a fight with the English monarchy.  The BEIC was the Wal-Mart of its day, and King George and many in British Parliament were stock holders.

*Proof - "I hope that we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

— Thomas Jefferson

Democracy is about choice.  If you think that capitalism goes hand in hand with capitalism, ask yourself this; do you think a big corporation wants you to have a choice?  No way!  They want you to buy their products, not those of somebody else.  That's why when corporations get big enough they start to stick their fingers into government so that they can stifle democracy and choice.

That's why I want big government (considering that government is an extension of the will of the people); I want government to be at least as big as is necessary to protect me from the biggest corporation, because if it isn't then they will beat up the government protecting us and then they will squash you and me as soon as we open our mouths in protest.

[misfitguy]

Al

Thank you for your thoughts.  I just read this week that Michael Moore is releasing a new movie called "Capitalism: A Love Story" where he treats the subject, from what I have read, similar to what you and I espoused.  I look forward to seeing it.  I always relate capitalism in its purest sense lto a Monopoly game.  The winner winds up with everything and everybody else is bankrupt. 

Mick

[EdisonBoy]

I just read this week that Michael Moore is releasing a new movie called "Capitalism: A Love Story" where he treats the subject, from what I have read, similar to what you and I espoused.  I look forward to seeing it.

Yeah!  He was promoting it on Olberman last night.  I wanna see it.

I always relate capitalism in its purest sense lto a Monopoly game.  The winner winds up with everything and everybody else is bankrupt. 

I always kick a** on Monopoly, 'cuz when I play it I turn into such a cut-throat SOB!   Would ya' believe it?  But I know it's just a game.  In the real world, people get hurt and that's why you need regulation to make sure that the public good is actually being served.  Without that, it's like a football game with no rules - you can kill members of the other team or the spectators whatever you need to to just win.  That's not good! 

On the other hand, I don't want anybody to get the idea that I'm a Marxist or anything.  Capitalism is very good at doing certain things, for example manufacturing things, selling goods and services, etc.  but if you don't have certain regulations in place then capitalism becomes a very destructive force and goes against the public good.