astros123 held his bag of $hit in everyone’s face and now ran away

Also you are giving ways your hand of a naive boomer who believes the individual voted in for the office of the presidency isn't anything more than the mascot, spokesman for that branch.


When we vote for the presidency we vote for the party because the party fills in the actual people who will run the branch. The individual you vote for is the mascot. How are you involved in political discussion your entire life and not understand this yet?

You think Ronald Reagan was sitting late at night writing nuanced policy positions or something?

 

It has been clear for a very long time that chowderhead doesn't know what fascist means. He thinks libertarians are fascist because Rockwell said the word freedom 80 years ago.

 

Brah even right wing sources acknowledge the libertarian to fascist pipeline.


If you reach back the roots of American libertarianism it has very similar end game goals as fascism. Both ideas protect traditional order. One group who is usually born into privilege will believe their freedom to exploit their privilege is just grounds to wax lyrical about the concept of liberty. It's a vapid concept of liberty.

Think of Thomas Jefferson and him waxing lyrical about the strong independent farmer harking back to ancient proto-libertatian Roman independent farmers who in both instances ignore how their "independent farming" is off the backs of forced labor. Think of how Thomas Jefferson had to wax lyrical about freedoms to his French buddies looking at him with funny yes thinking "but you own slaves?!". That is the vapid center core of libertarianism in a nut shell.

That's American libertarianism in a but shell. The freedom to exploit. And a lot of those desires end up with fascist desires.

The core essence of American libertarianism is privileged old white men trying to win mental gymnastics on how they are self made. That is the core of American libertarianism. A bunch more f privileged old men who's narcissism refuses then to acknowledge the systems and people around them that got them their lifestyle.

 

@Os Trigonum
@AroundTheWorld
@J.R.
@Jontro

for woke123

 

Is pushing power to the states and deregulation a characteristic of fascism?

 

If it comes with the desire to utilize those new powers to enforce traditional hierarchies like "women belong at home raising children and cooking" ya.

Otherwise you are just describing generic authoritarianism.

Are you trying to distinguish one party from the other in terms of avoidance in expanding presidential powers?

Is that something you are trying now? You will fail just to be warned.

 

No, you seem to be interested it educating us on Fascism which is to my memory centrally controlled by autocrats and leans far closer to dirigisme than laissez faire.

 

If Hitler delegated the right of local German state governments like Braveria to strip property from Jewish businesses owners without due process would that be a liberal or fascist move?

 

You seem to believe fascism is just another generic term for authoritarianism.

The type of person who uses those two terms interchangeably as if they are the exact same word.

 

You seem to be a person that avoids discussing things and just tells people what you think of them instead. Your education attempts are crap breh.

 

Hitler was pretty laissez-faire when it came to the "Jewish question". He relied on the work ethic and upstart nature of generals, local government officials etc to design their own methods on how to solve "the Jewish problem".

 

I'm discussing how the way you incorporate the term "fascism" is just another term for generic "authoritarinism".

Apparently you believe a discussion can't have someone say you are wrong and explaining why.

 

I have only used the word in asking you questions you are avoiding. I haven't ascribed any characteristics at all.

 

How am I not addressing the question?

You can answer questions by asking questions yourself to show logic holes.

So I responded by asking you a question:

If Hitler delegated the right of local German state governments like Braveria to strip property from Jewish businesses owners without due process would that be a liberal or fascist move?


That is a response to your question. I'm asking you is the core concept of removing the ability of a local state government in a federal system from harming a group of people fascist?

Is it the mere concept of removing or adding rights of local states relative to the federal government inherently a fascist principle?

Would allowing state governments to decide on the question of slavery be a liberal anti - fascist decision?

"I'm against fascism and I'll show it by allowing state governments to decide on the legality of slavery".

Does that make sense? It's a sincere question. Does the criteria you created to determine if something as fascist jibe well when we go over these things?

To me the concept of delineating government powers between states and the federal government has no bearing on the concept of fascism. It's what specific rights and powers that are given and WHY they were given.

 

Fascism is a political ideology with several core tenants that (I think) directly oppose the GOP's efforts. I mentioned a few and asked how you still apply the term and you come up with insane hypotheticals.

 

There is no core tenant of fascism that cares about the rights of the federal government vs local government outside the means in which the fascists can force their ideology.

For example, if the national sentiment is that migrant Muslims aren't evil and should be able to do things like own businesses without harassment, the the fascist sentiment would be to fight for the right to make it harder for Muslims to live in this country by exerting their force at the state level as they don't have the clout to influence their desires at the national level yet.


So I don't see how fascism has anything I do with state vs federal rights. Any political ideology can take advantage of the current relationship between those two levels of government to enforce their ideology.