Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Very good harry. And calling the US "fascist" does a serious disservice to those who have sacrificed to keep fascism at bay!
Fascism. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.
Now do we have elements that might be a bit heavy handed at times? Sure! For instance, removing protestors from political parade routes. I may not agree with such maneuvers, but can see the need to keep the peace. Yet, we must remain constantly vigilant against the threat of oppression whether it is couched in the premise of keeping the order, or morality or economic growth.
We are far from perfect, but the fact we can gather and post our beliefs on forums like this, speaks volumes about our freedoms and ability to self determine our future.
To the original point, I see nothing wrong with a society that seeks to eliminate poverty and hunger and make health care affordable. That doesn't make us socialist, it makes no sense to have a society comprised of haves and have nots. It just needs to be done in a way that doesn't overburden the productive members of society. We should seek to drive out fraud, inefficiency and corruption rather than fighting amongst ourselves because it suits political candidates to keep us polarized.
WHO did you ever hear that was a founding father of the country say that it was going to be capitalist????
The U.S. has a MANAGED economy. When the U.S. wanted to promote better communication, it gave mail contracts to stage companies, and then to railroad companies, and then to airline companies. When Hollywood got too much power, it invoked anti-trust laws to break it up. I could go on for pages.
The U.S. has only ever been capitalist in the wet dreams of the far right.
Growth of socialism via government spending... gimmie a break.
Is there any chance that government spending might have been high while we fought Hitler??? Would that have made us socialist???
Simplistic rhetoric on the level of Rush or Moore.
I guess you are not too well versed on World War II, especially the homefront. Also yes I would definitely argue that the USA was socialist/communist/fascist during WWII. Here are some of the things that occurred during that time:
1. We instituted price controls
2. Taxes rose dramatically. Every employed person paid taxes, compared to 1940 where only 10% of those employed paid taxes. Roosevelt even tried to push for 100% taxes on incomes over 25k (320k in current USD).
3. Many items were rationed - tires, gasoline, shoes, meat etc. You had to get government coupons to purchase said items.
4. We drafted men into war
5. We setup an agency called the War production Board. This board was established to make sure the economy produced goods and services for the war. War industries were encouraged and non war industries were discouraged.
Now going back to the current question. Did high government spending during WWII make us socialist? ABSOLUTELY.
Quote:
Growth of socialism via government spending... gimmie a break.
If you look at socialist/communist countries they are generally defined by a large state. A large state is often define as large amounts of government spending. They essentially use the spending to control the economy and everything else. Here are some interesting countries based on amount of government spending as % of gpd.
... calling the US "fascist" does a serious disservice to those who have sacrificed to keep fascism at bay!
Fascism. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.
Oh please, save the romantic rhetoric for grade school and peach-fuzz recruits. This is the real world now.
The above is merely a portion of a description of fascism, and fascism heavy at that, some of it is not necessarily applicable, and in any case it completely misses the main point.
The main feature of fascism is corporatism, i.e. ownership of the means of production remains in private hands who organise strategic sectors of the economy into corporations, and the owners consort to significantly influence the shape of government and its policy to safeguard their hold on such sectors (e.g. in the US, the industrial-military complex, the banks, most recently the health insurance industry).
The system can be enforced through a heavy hand, rule-by-force, tried in the Twentieth Century to varying degrees of success, or through a light hand, rule-by-telecommand, at least domestically, which the US ruling class seems to be pretty skilled at.
Elements of capitalism, free markets, socialism, and fascism can co-exist at the same time to various degrees in the same body social, there is no absolute contrast among them, on the contrary they often blend well together, there is no need for stifling "either/or" type questions, they are the mark of a two-dimensional mind.
The USA ranks the lowest of all the world's industrialized countries, in percentage of GDP collected as taxes. In fact, of 143 countries, the USA ranks 131st.
The US looks closest to "Lite" Fascist to me -- fascism has a third component mixed in (in addition to the .gov and corporate you observed) -- the military. We have a HUGE military component that is blended in.
Whatever it is, probably everyone agrees it is no longer a Republic -- and is now pretty much an Empire type operation.
I would also say fascism which is on the same road as socialism. We don't have a dictator (which isn't necessary for fascism to exist), but we have centralized planning which is what socialism and fascism both have.
If you read FA Hayek's book "The Road to Serfdom" he explains about centralized planning and the similarities of socialism and fascism.
If Socialism is the economic system that favors the poor, and Free Markets the economic system that doesn't favor anyone, what's the word for the economic system that favors the rich? That's how I might describe the US.. where the "rich" (top 0.1%) would fare better than under completely free and unregulated markets.
The fact that we all have the freedom to post here, criticize our elected leaders, run for office, protest in public, choose our profession or job, start a business, and travel freely within and outside our borders is a pretty good indication we are not a fascist society. I get a feeling that a lot of those calling the US fascist don't actually understand the full definition and historical context of the term.
As for the arguments about socialism vs. capitalism, the US has never in its history had full-fledged capitalism. Capitalism in the purest sense involves ownership of the means of production. This is anarcho-capitalism, where everything from the military to infrastructure to education is funded 100% by the private sector.
The US is a mixed economy and has been from its earliest days.
The fact that we all have the freedom to post here, criticize our elected leaders, run for office, protest in public, choose our profession or job, start a business, and travel freely within and outside our borders is a pretty good indication we are not a fascist society. I get a feeling that a lot of those calling the US fascist don't actually understand the full definition and historical context of the term.
As for the arguments about socialism vs. capitalism, the US has never in its history had full-fledged capitalism. Capitalism in the purest sense involves ownership of the means of production. This is anarcho-capitalism, where everything from the military to infrastructure to education is funded 100% by the private sector.
The US is a mixed economy and has been from its earliest days.
Claims of Fascism and Socialism just shows how little understanding there is of both. We've always had a mixed economy. Pure capitalism would be a disaster.
Much of the growth of government has been due to defense spending:
Claims of Fascism and Socialism just shows how little understanding there is of both. We've always had a mixed economy. Pure capitalism would be a disaster.
Much of the growth of government has been due to defense spending:
The problem is that ideologues tell people what to think instead of people actually thinking for themselves. If they hear someone crying "socialism!" or "fascism!" enough they will start to believe it despite all the resources available to discredit those egregious absolute statements. It's easier to repeat rhetoric than to open a book.
Very good harry. And calling the US "fascist" does a serious disservice to those who have sacrificed to keep fascism at bay!
!All! !Exclamation! !Points! !Aside! I hope you will not mind if I call that a total crock of *****? So who is it that you think has made said sacrifices to "keep fascism at bay?"
Please don't tell me the US military. btdt, got the t-shirt, enlisted and officer. I know the game. Present role of the US military is pretty much Corporate Hessians to maintain the Empire. The flag follows the dollar and the troops follow the flag.
Quote:
Fascism. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.
While that is a Very Good description of the direction and intent of the "Patriot Act" and "War on Terror," along with the string of crimes and war crimes associated with them, I am still calling US the "lite" version.
Going towards one of the authors of the Fascist Model -- Mussolini -- is generally credited with the concept that Fascism is the merger of the Corporate, Military and Government. The US is pretty far down that road.
Quote:
Now do we have elements that might be a bit heavy handed at times? Sure! For instance, removing protestors from political parade routes. I may not agree with such maneuvers, but can see the need to keep the peace.
Protesters and Parades? Brutha, Please.
Corporate Fascism is about the money and the power. Not goofy gay political parades and drama queen look-at-me protesters. Those serve a purpose as they are useful to keep the energetic idiots busy. Just so long as they do not mess with the money and the power.
Quote:
Yet, we must remain constantly vigilant against the threat of oppression whether it is couched in the premise of keeping the order, or morality or economic growth.
Do you write for Superman or Batman Comics, or what?
Quote:
We are far from perfect, but the fact we can gather and post our beliefs on forums like this, speaks volumes about our freedoms and ability to self determine our future.
Not really. It speaks to the acknowledgement that it matters not what the proles (that would be the "we" of your sentence above) have to say about anything at this point.
In times when such a condition was considered a threat to the powers, it was slapped down with the Sedition Act, Habeous Corpus, the Committee on Un-American Activities and plenty of other methods. And it would be slapped down again in a NY minute if it were perceived the proles were any threat to the Corporate Fascists.
Quote:
To the original point, I see nothing wrong with a society that seeks to eliminate poverty and hunger . . . .
Sure, the Swiss have done a wonderful job of that. Oh wait a second. You were not actually talking any actual intent to eliminate poverty or hunger?
The US seeks to make poverty and hunger Profitable to the select Corporations. That is why JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s public-sector benefit payments business, is making more profits -- more folks on Food Stamps.
If we actually were seeking to eliminate poverty and hunger we could instead do something useful -- like create decent paying US jobs actually making the products and services we use here? But Nope. Can't do that, might harm the Corporate Profits of the importers, with their overseas slave factories, and their retail operations.
Quote:
and make health care affordable.
You must be joking. Or even worse, you are not? There is no intent to make US Health Care affordable. THAT would harm profits. Else the Congress would not have banned imported prescription drugs and paid to limit medical school enrollment. The goals are to run UP the prices.
Or maybe you are talking about the IRS enforced "Obamacare" Corporate Insurance Laws? Even the most simplistic of business folks can figure out that to add a layer of "insurance" with a 10 to 20% Insurance Corporate profit on every dime and dollar of health care is not going to make it "affordable." The goal is to mandate that no prole shall escape sending money to the health insurance industry. In practice, THAT is all the law does.
Quote:
That doesn't make us socialist, it makes no sense to have a society comprised of haves and have nots.
That sentence is total nonsense. The US totally exists and operates on the premise of Have and Have Not. Do you live in the US? Have you ever visited here?
Quote:
It just needs to be done in a way that doesn't overburden the productive members of society.
Productive? Producing What? Weapons? Innovative Debt Instruments to burden the workers and the world? Perhaps vaunted "Intellectual Property" such as Hollywood crap moves and Internet Porn? Automobiles that burn imported Oil and pollute the air?
So What is it that you think these "productive members" are producing?
Quote:
We should seek to drive out fraud, inefficiency and corruption rather than fighting amongst ourselves because it suits political candidates to keep us polarized.
Corporate polarization is the base of the marketing model. Present two bad choices and state that one MUST be chosen.
Coke v. Pepsi.
Ford v. Chevy.
Democrats v. Republicans
Both sides in all choices are essentially the same crap with a different label.
From the top down view the method is to exploit division, and create division where it does not exist -- and then exploit that.
The story and concept is as old as the Tower of Babel.
Our own native packs of retards that call themselves Conservative or Liberal are perfect examples.
If you want to drive out fraud, inefficiency and corruption, we would have to drive out the Corporate Fascist "Lite" operators. That is the source.
nope, can't do that. WE are not a Corporate Fascist country, right?
There. All solved.
Last edited by Philip T; 05-14-2011 at 10:34 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
