Skip to main content

View Diary: Hamsher and House Detained/RELEASED, Denied Manning Visit! (1543 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  the hard thing for the fascists (4+ / 9-)

    to get here is that Bradley Manning, an American citizen, is being tortured by our government...but that seems to be ok with you.

    •  Here's a donut to feed your fascists with. (4+ / 0-)

      "Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage." - Confucius

      by IndieGuy on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 02:50:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  there are no fascists on dailykos. (13+ / 0-)

      you ARE talking about fellow kossacks. Please try to show a little civility.

      Keep your objectivity: masturbate early and often!

      by rexymeteorite on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 02:51:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  the hard thing for the (ahem!) (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fcvaguy, mattman, emal, 3goldens, Pluto

      fellow Kossacks(some of them, not a majority by any stretch), to get here is that Bradley Manning, an American citizen, is being tortured by our government...but that seems to be ok with (fill in your name here if you want)

      is this OK with the hide rate brigade? (original comment hide rated because it implied or intimated there were (gasp!) some fascists lurking on Daily Kos.

      For you doubters, notice in nearly every poll there is a hard core of 4 or 5% that show up to tab the really outrageous or authoritarian choice...just mentioning that factoid FYI.

      This sanitized   (OK, redacted) version of IvanR's comment brought to you as a junior Wikileaks  outing for those unable to see his original comment for lack of status as a Trusted User.

      cast away illusions, prepare for struggle

      by Pete Rock on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 03:39:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  #1 (6+ / 0-)

        For you doubters, notice in nearly every poll there is a hard core of 4 or 5% that show up to tab the really outrageous or authoritarian choice...just mentioning that factoid FYI.

        link or retract.

        #2

        You may be okay with calling those you disagree with fascists, but I am not.

        Keep your objectivity: masturbate early and often!

        by rexymeteorite on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 04:58:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  and I am saying dailykos "fascist" (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          vcmvo2, Geekesque, IndieGuy

          problem is slim to none.

          There may be a few lurkers here and there who are what you would classically consider "fascist" but they are few, and probably don't comment. Remember, you don't even have to be a registered user to vote in dailykos diary polls.

          The preponderance of these supposed "fascists" never comment, and if they do they are either picked up by MB and banned, or hiderated into oblivion and autobanned within a day or two.

          Keep your objectivity: masturbate early and often!

          by rexymeteorite on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 05:05:53 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Your problem (0+ / 0-)

            is that you're working with this cartoony circa 1940s image of what a fascist is.

            Fascism has evolved. It doesn't look like the picture you have in your head. It's important to remember that fascism is a post-modern ideology (not Post-Modern, but rather after the Modern period in political theory). It does not conform to a left/right dichotomy (it didn't even back in the 30s). As such, someone can hold views we would identify as "left" or even "progressive" and in fact be a fascist. Sort of like how fascism is a deeply anti-Conservative belief, but we have no shortage of fascists on the right who call themselves "Conservatives".

            I would go in to much greater detail, but there's already too much hostility to an open and honest discussion of this topic at this time.

            However, I hope this is enough to give you insight into what some people here mean when they say "fascist" so that next time you see the F-Bomb it won't be so jarring.

            The Angries are back

            by Goldfish on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 11:42:52 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  its fairly jarring, yes. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Goldfish

              my understanding of fascism may be different than others.

              let me wiki it, just so I am on the same page

              Fascism -- As defined by wikipedia.org

              Fascism (pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists seek to organize a country according to a particular nationalist strand of corporatist values and perspectives, with an emphasis on enforcing a collectivist form of political and economic organisation based on a tightly prescribed national identity.[5][6] Fascism was originally founded by Italian national syndicalists in World War I who combined extreme Sorelian syndicalist political views along with nationalism.[7][8][9] Though normally described as being on the far right, there is a scholarly consensus that fascism was also influenced by the left, but with a focus on solutions from the right.[10][11][12][7][13]

              hmm...doesn't sound like anyone has expressed anything "fascistic" in this diary...

              I would buy calling some in this diary "authoritarian", but "fascist" is reserved, I think, for a special kind of political belief outlined in the intro to the wikipedia article I linked.

              Keep your objectivity: masturbate early and often!

              by rexymeteorite on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 12:23:35 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  That is actually (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Pete Rock

                a very good definition to use, although I would argue certain aspects of it are a bit dated (though it describes historical fascism well).

                Taken in isolation, the views of some here could be dismissed as simply authoritarian. But given that many of these same people are also the ones most ardently defending the President's continued drift towards favoring corporate interests, it takes on a darker note.

                What we're dealing with in this country today is not fascism as it was known in the first half of the 20th century (and as your citation elegantly describes). This is part of why it's difficult to talk about fascism, even for people who don't make the mistake of "All Fascism = Nazism" (I once meet an educated person who was convinced that fascism independent of Nazism never existed at any time in history) the fact the current fascist ideology does not perfectly align with the classical fascism makes it difficult to identify.  

                Instead of the hyper-nationalist fascism of the 20th century we have corporate fascism (or corpofascism for short), with corporate interests replacing the role that political parties played in past fascist states (it is a historical irony that when fascism first entered the popular vocabulary it was used to denote a government ruled by business, but later came to mean the program we remember today).

                Instead of corporations as the side-kicks of a fascist party that exercises dictatorial control over the state apparatus, today corporations ARE the fascist party. Their collectivist project is the evolving subjugation of the middle and working class through economic coercion (we get all of the downsides of collectivism without any of the social programs, you can thank the neoliberals for that one).

                Another area of contention is economics. Many people, most of them influenced by Marxist-Leninism to one degree or another see the classical fascism economic agenda as intrinsic to the ideology. I would posit this is not so, and just as Marxist-Leninist states have experimented with different economic models, so to have the contemporary fascists adapted. Neoliberalism is the economic program of fascism and has arguably replaced nationalism as the driving force behind the fascism movement.

                Now, before some reactionary attacks me by claiming I'm calling Obama a fascist, I'll just state for the record I don't think he is. I do think he is unknowingly but actively enabling fascism with his pro-business agenda and his expansion of the security state.

                But as to the issue of whether there are fascists on this diary or on Dkos in general would be this:

                There are some people who excuse torture or other authoritarian measures taken by this administration.

                There are some people who excuse the absurdly pro-corporation, neoliberal economic policies of this administration.

                The people who do both are probably corpofascists, even though they probably don't realize that is what the sum total of their beliefs amount to.

                There are qualifications to this Venn Diagram. Some of these people seem perfectly capable of recognizing these policies as ethically reprehensible when it's George Bush carrying them out. That is, however, where the Good German analogy becomes very relevant; when subjects like torture become a hypothetical rather than categorical imperatives because of an unwarranted supplication to authority.

                You don't have to agree with any of this, but I hope it explains why the term is in fact relevant to the conversation.

                The Angries are back

                by Goldfish on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 12:54:59 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  perhaps what you are talking about (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Goldfish, Geekesque

                  is corporatism...in fact these paragraphs right here

                  Instead of the hyper-nationalist fascism of the 20th century we have corporate fascism (or corpofascism for short), with corporate interests replacing the role that political parties played in past fascist states (it is a historical irony that when fascism first entered the popular vocabulary it was used to denote a government ruled by business, but later came to mean the program we remember today).

                  Instead of corporations as the side-kicks of a fascist party that exercises dictatorial control over the state apparatus, today corporations ARE the fascist party. Their collectivist project is the evolving subjugation of the middle and working class through economic coercion (we get all of the downsides of collectivism without any of the social programs, you can thank the neoliberals for that one).

                  sound like they could be right out of an explanation of corporatism...as long as we're arguing political semantics :)

                  Keep your objectivity: masturbate early and often!

                  by rexymeteorite on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 01:05:02 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  the way I interpret the definition (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Goldfish

                    of fascism is that the emphasis revolves around national identity. Corporations become a mechanism of the national government. What you are explaining is corporatism. Instead of emphasis being on national identity and pride, in corporatism the emphasis is on stuff like "staying competitive", corporate image, corporate pride, corporate identity, and a social, economic, and governmental structure that relies on national and transnational corporations to operate.

                    Combine that with a culture that revolves around greed, money, materialism, and instant gratification, I think you've got a pretty good grip on true "fascism" in america.

                    Keep your objectivity: masturbate early and often!

                    by rexymeteorite on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 01:12:30 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Actually, I used to classify (0+ / 0-)

                      the rise of corporate power and its agenda as "Corporatism", but I've come to believe it is more accurately a hybrid of corporatism and fascism. The nationalist element that you point out is, in fact, why I used to discount a fascist component (even though there was clearly an old school fascist tint to Dick Cheney and his followers).

                      But after a few years of working with this theory, it at some point hit me that nationalism isn't actually a required component of fascism, we just think of it as being so because it was so intrinsic to past fascist movements. If you examine how fascist ideology propagates itself and how fascist political systems operate, it becomes clear that nationalism isn't the thing that can fill that role in the ideology.

                      Corporatism left on its own actually isn't excessively authoritarian, and in many ways doesn't match up with what we're seeing today. The kind of mindset you're describing goes beyond Corporatism and becomes something else. It allows Corporatism to becomes to Fascism today what nationalism used to be.

                      Nationalism has been the historic fuel of fascist ideology, but it's not the only fuel it can run on. Like a diesel engine, it actually can accept a wide variety of fuels (basically, any thing that has an emotional narrative and popular appeal can be twisted to fascist ends).

                      In the case of Corporatist-Fascism you just described exactly what it operates on.

                      And of course, the nationalist card has also been played to get support for the Corpofacist agenda.  Personal Responsibility, Rugged Individualism, The American Dream, these are parts of a certain kind of American nationalism that have been fully embraced by the Corporatist-Fascist movement. There's still a bit of that nationalist fuel left in the fascist gas tank (I speculate that like a diesel fuel, nationalism is a more efficient fuel in the fascist engine than its substitutes).

                      As I mentioned, it took me several years to reach this conclusion but it compellingly explains several trends in American politics that are contradictory under a different model. I can understand why you would be more comfortable sticking to Corporatism as the go-to term for this political phenomena, but as a political scientist my instinct is to use the most accurate term available, and calling this mere corporatism leaves many things unaccounted for.

                      The Angries are back

                      by Goldfish on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 04:32:22 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

        •  Don't you pay attention to large participation (0+ / 0-)

          polls that get 500, 1,000 responses include "pie" and an obviously off the wall choice and still get a number of votes for the off the wall choice?

          Are you paying attention to those polls at all or skipping over them?

          I am not going to debate you about a specific category because I have never seen that word in a poll or used it on people I disagree with : I see them as defending specific ideas or special values/interests and none of them would be an extreme right wing party.

          however, the point being made here is the argument to defend all sorts of convenient exceptions to the human rights and civil rights we in theory are entitled to and alluded to in the comments. Why are folks insisting  :   no no,  Manning is not being tortured!  it is only solitary which thousands of others get for months and years, and 5 minute call outs to ensure sleep deprivation, that's all!.

          you ever been in that situation? you have specific access to those cells to the actual activities being talked about here. until you do, you haven't investigated you haven't got a creditable opinion based on facts. Except you don't know and don't want to know but you do want to tear down people trying very hard to find out.

          You have no idea what prisoners can be subjected to if the goal is to keep them alive only just long enough to suit some purpose or another.  

          Manning's case  is very disturbing because his case breaks down an lot of mythology about rule of law and defense of democratic values even when someone is unpopular and that other myths we got in grammar school.  Some simply don't want to know,

          cast away illusions, prepare for struggle

          by Pete Rock on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 06:18:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  the hardest thing for you to understand (5+ / 0-)

        it seems....

        Is that you don't get to call other Kossacks "fascists".

        Its really that simple.

        •  Why exactly are you above being (3+ / 3-)

          called fascist?

          Are you seriously claiming your behavior can not in fact be shown to be fascist ever? That there is something so unique to the posters at this site that you are above such behavior?

          I mean the over reaction to the very idea of being called this is enough to illustrate Ivan's point.

          •  what a bizarre response (7+ / 0-)

            I don't know if you are trying to call me a fascist, but simply can't muster the intestinal fortitude to do so, or you're saying that there are indeed fascists on this site.

            I turn it around on you. What makes you believe you are so self-righteous, so utterly sure of your own politics, that you are entitled to call anyone a fascist that disagrees with you.

            Reported to Meteor Blades.

            •  Strange is thinking you are above (5+ / 0-)

              being called a fascist for no other reason than you post on Daily Kos.

              There is no special protection that this site provides you as far as whether your arguments are or are not fascist.

              The fact you and other back slappers don't get that is not surprising.

            •  If you don't like being called a fascist (0+ / 0-)

              stop acting like one. Very simple.

              The Angries are back

              by Goldfish on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 10:45:01 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Reported to Meteor Blades (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Socratic Method
              •  The arrogance of your comment is just stunning (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Socratic Method, DollyMadison

                I'd really like to understand how you feel entitled to say something so offensive with zero basis in fact or without even providing a shred of supporting evidence? Do you really think that there are Kossacks who have been here for 7 years who have written many diaries, thousands upon thousands of comments, who are sleeper "fascists" - people who are so right wing, so radical that they embrace the killing of millions of people because of their ethnicity?

                Really?

                IMO, and I know it will never happen, people who fling around the ugliest of crap like you just did should be banned. What you're doing is flat ugly and indecent.

                •  Nice strawman (0+ / 0-)

                  It has absolutely nothing to do with what I believe. Nothing. It is pure fantasy.

                  You want to talk about ugly crap? How about the people here defending torture, how about people here defending defenders of torture, why don't you save some anger for them? No, I guess that just doesn't offend you in the same way.

                  The Angries are back

                  by Goldfish on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:31:43 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Fantasy? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    DollyMadison

                    You said what you said. You call other Kossacks fascists.

                    The fantasy is how you think you get to decide who is a fascist and then demand that those you accuse stop acting like fascists.

                    •  Nice distortion (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Pete Rock

                      of events. Rearranging the pieces to fit your narrative might better if the pieces weren't all here.

                      When someone expresses fascistic beliefs and complains about being called a fascist (which I didn't do, that was someone else, by the way), then it seems to me the appropriate response is to tell them not to say fascistic things. Because hey, they're probably not a fascist. They probably just didn't realize the horrible, god-awful, immoral implications of whatever horrible thing they just said were. It happens a lot in a society increasingly willing to accept authority without question or hesitation.

                      I would love to explain to you more about the importance of anti-fascism and how those principles have become more important in an increasingly deranged and inhuman society, but you seem to want to make this about name-calling rather than actual political beliefs.

                      Have fun fighting with your strawman, you don't even need me at all to have your favorite argument. Bye now!

                      The Angries are back

                      by Goldfish on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:11:27 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  thanks (0+ / 0-)

                        Nice rhetoric, taking their blinders off. some get frightened at the word without making any connection at all that it is a process, a mindset not simply a bunch of people now in graves left over from Spain and Germany.  There were full blown Fascists in America in 1940 and many more lived here who agreed with them and supported them.

                        More to the point, it is the basis of fascist thought and philosophy of action and  belief that needs to be addressed here and in society at large.
                        Democracy isn't easy or convenient, or a gift that is free and painless.  It isn't about fighting the boogieman "out there" or overseas, it is the enemies of human rights and disclosing the truth right here and now at home.  Don't let ignorance and the authoritarian method  rob you of integrity and decency in your dealings with people.

                        cast away illusions, prepare for struggle

                        by Pete Rock on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 12:02:29 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

          •  HRed. (4+ / 0-)

            I don't know if you know what the meaning of "facist" is, but implying that fellow kossacks are is bullshit, and you and all those running around with your "you're, like a faccccciiiisstt, maaaaan" attitudes need to stuff it with those insults. The implication of facism is evil, and evil cannot be talked to, or reasoned with. So, again, stuff it with the facist talk.

            Maybe if we use our words more the rest of the world will play nice and the only boom-boom will be in our pants--ralph wiggam

            by Socratic Method on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 08:00:52 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You are making the case better than (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              TheMomCat, Goldfish

              i could in your own behavior right now. Thanks.

              •  Riiiight... (5+ / 0-)

                because facist down rate comments on the internet in order to "silence dissent!" Oh noes! Teh brown shirts! They is comin!

                Maybe if we use our words more the rest of the world will play nice and the only boom-boom will be in our pants--ralph wiggam

                by Socratic Method on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 08:05:42 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  As I said, you keep illustrating the point (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  TheMomCat, Goldfish

                  Yes,  down rating me for pointing out that this site does not provide you any protection from being called a fascist if your arguments are in fact fascist is you acting authoritarian.

                  I don't expect you to see that. Most of the Bush authoritarians rarely saw their behavior in that light either.

                  Feel free to now down rate me for, gasp, comparing you to a Bush supporter in terms of your behavior.

                  Its a thought crime to point out that your behavior is authoritarian or similar to the right because your posting  on Daily Kos magically makes you immune from the definitions of those words.

            •  He knows what it means (0+ / 0-)

              Do you? If you do, perhaps you should take some time to read through some of the comments on this diary, and then consider Bruh's comment in light of them.

              The Angries are back

              by Goldfish on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 10:46:48 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Reading your comment again (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              TheMomCat

              I see where the disconnect is. You hear "fascist" and think of a supervillian. Myself, and I believe also Bruh use the term to denote a specific and discrete ideological program. It isn't just a generic word for evil. It is a name for a particular system of belief.

              The Angries are back

              by Goldfish on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 11:48:37 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  Nope (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bulldawg, Geekesque, DollyMadison

      Despite your sense of self-righteousness and entitlement to be abusive to others, you are NOT going to call anyone here "fascists".

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site