Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 73
  1.    #1  
    I often use the TuneIn/RadioTime app to listen to Antioch Radio Network, which plays vintage radio shows 24/7. It's really entertaining, and highly I recommend it.

    Often, they play shows from the World War II era. An episode of "The Great Gildersleeve" they played this morning aired only weeks after the Pearl Harbor attack, and there was a talk in the breaks--including the commercial breaks--about the war just begun and about the collective effort on the part of all citizens that would be required to win it, which only became more true when we entered the European theater.

    When I hear or read about those times, I'm struck by the ease with which the federal government was able to marshal the will of the entire nation in the war effort, determining the direction of manufacturing, rationing food, gasoline, etc., all moves that would apparently be vigorously resisted today.

    One of the unfortunate consequences of the current widespread allergy to anything that "smacks of socialism" is that we have no collective purpose and make no collective sacrifice, even though the infrastructure that makes up our common space is crumbling, and even though we have two wars going--three if you count the "War or Terror," or whatever we're calling it these days.

    If we needed to implement a bit of so-called "socialism" today to defeat fascism, would we do it?
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #2  
    I hope not. And what does socialism have to do with anything?

    The flaw in your argument is that it was the federal government that marshalled the will of the entire nation, as if it would have been non-existant without their expert coaxing.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. #3  
    people didn't need to pass a law to plant victory gardens and put patriotism ahead of safety.

    I think you just took a false premise and insulted what has been called the greatest generation.
  4. #4  
    No, I believe he's actually insulting our generation.
  5. #5  
    actually both. He is saying my parents would be speaking german if it weren't for the federal govt. And he is saying we could become the next nazzi germany if the federal govt doesn't implement socialist policies because we are too stupid or lazy...

    wow
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by grappler View Post
    If we needed to implement a bit of so-called "socialism" today to defeat fascism, would we do it?
    Depends what part of the world you're from though. Classic schoolbook fascism a la ******/Mussolini/Franco is easily identifiable. Guess we all agree. There are other figures/parties/nations most people will not agree on this easily.

    Wow I can't use that name? Tweak the profanity filter down a notch?
    I can say tits.
  7. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #7  
    Using socialism to defeat fascism? Is that like fighting fire with fire?
  8. #8  
    I think it's 'cutting your nose off to spite your face'
  9. angiest's Avatar
    Posts
    933 Posts
    Global Posts
    952 Global Posts
    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    Using socialism to defeat fascism? Is that like fighting fire with fire?
    Yeah... the only real difference between fascism (right wing socialism) and communism (left wing socialism) is which group is hated and persecuted, there is always a scape-goat in a totalitarian state. One could actually make the case that the Soviet Union under Stalin was more fascist (nationalist socialism) than it was communist.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by GuyFromNam View Post
    Wow I can't use that name? Tweak the profanity filter down a notch?
    I can say tits.
    if they can say it on Seinfeld, it should be ok here... NO SOUP FOR YOU!! (grin)
  11. #11  
    lol he said 'yadda yadda yadda'...
  12. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by angiest View Post
    Yeah... the only real difference between fascism (right wing socialism) and communism (left wing socialism) is which group is hated and persecuted, there is always a scape-goat in a totalitarian state. One could actually make the case that the Soviet Union under Stalin was more fascist (nationalist socialism) than it was communist.
    Could we say that fascist tactics are used in all totalitarian states, whether they're socialist or communist?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  13. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by GuyFromNam View Post
    Lots of isms, ates, and izes.
    I like the smell of isms, ates, and izes in the morning.... smells like.... victory.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Could we say that fascist tactics are used in all totalitarian states, whether they're socialist or communist?
    We could say "fascist tactics are used in all states". Period.
    We're all sheep and we need to be herded.
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by angiest View Post
    Yeah... the only real difference between fascism (right wing socialism) and communism (left wing socialism) is which group is hated and persecuted, there is always a scape-goat in a totalitarian state. One could actually make the case that the Soviet Union under Stalin was more fascist (nationalist socialism) than it was communist.
    Indeed. Seems like the mainstream battle cry of the right is, "if you don't agree with us you're the enemy." It's said really because governance and legislation in a republic should require the ability to consider all sides, at least in a functioning republic. Sure you'll expect some demonizing from every side against opposition but to see one side so staunchly opposed and united against anyone that thinks differently from them. That's saddening and really paints a bleak future if they succeed on that platform of "us or them" because the other side will simply try the same thing and cycle through as we spiral more and more toward collapse.
  16. #16  
    Man, I thought for a moment that this thread might be about an actual discussion of economic structures, and it turns out that it's more a salute to jingoism. Ah well...I'll get my coat.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  17. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Indeed. Seems like the mainstream battle cry of the right is, "if you don't agree with us you're the enemy." It's said really because governance and legislation in a republic should require the ability to consider all sides, at least in a functioning republic. Sure you'll expect some demonizing from every side against opposition but to see one side so staunchly opposed and united against anyone that thinks differently from them. That's saddening and really paints a bleak future if they succeed on that platform of "us or them" because the other side will simply try the same thing and cycle through as we spiral more and more toward collapse.
    Wow. That's almost exactly how I was thinking about the left! Amazing!
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Wow. That's almost exactly how I was thinking about the left! Amazing!
    You can see it that way but the problem with it is that the Right = Republicans while the Left =/= Democrats. The extreme Right that fits that description is in control of the Republican party but the extreme Left that fits that description is not in control of the Democratic party. In the end the Democratic party ends up having a lot more division of opinion then the Republican party which is why the Dems can never mount the "united front" that the Repubs are able to consistently mount with the "us vs them" actions.
    Last edited by Orion Antares; 10/25/2010 at 01:18 PM.
  19. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #19  
    I don't agree that the extreme Right is in control of the Republican party. If anything, it's been controled by the moderates... pseudo-democrats like John McCain. Part of the reason the Tea Party has gained traction is that the Republican party had swung too far left, e.g., liberal-socialist, big spending, bigger government, etc.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  20. #20  
    Funny thing about that is if John McCain had actually run his Presidential campaign on the principles of, as you put it, "pseudo-democrats" then the political landscape would likely be a lot different today as he would have likely won the election. Instead he tried to court the extreme Right, throwing out gimmicks and going against the principles he'd held prior to his campaign. His actions and even your statement of moderates in the party being "pseudo-democrats" show just how much control the extreme Right currently have over the party.
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions