Freedom to Fascism

From here:

fas·cism
n.
1. often Fascism
a. 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.
Click to expand...

So, where's the part about out-of-control corporations that I always hear kooks talking about?
 
scooby said:
What does Fascism mean?

You can't spell it, but you talk like you know all about it - so go on - enlighten us.
Click to expand...

1. (sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
3. (initial capital letter) a fascist movement, esp. the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.

There you go. Glad to be of service.
 
scooby said:
What does Fascism mean?

You can't spell it, but you talk like you know all about it - so go on - enlighten us.
Click to expand...

Instead, I'll coin a new word:

Scoobyism
Scoo.by.ism [skoo-bee-iz-uh-m]
- n
1. a style of debate, conversation, or discourse that intentionally avoids the idea(s) or fact(s) being discussed in order to shift focus onto some irrelevant or tangential detail;
2. pathology compulsive inability to engage in honest debate, with a tendency toward preferring dogma over reason
 
I got about ten minutes into that pile of [rule8].

Here is the bottom line for the idiot tax protestors: The law says whatever we, through our justice system, agree it says. Since out courts are absolutely united in agreeing that the law does require the payment of income tax (and have been for ninety years), there is no argument otherwise.

That's the whole debunk right there.
 
scooby said:
Now we all hate the taxman don't we?
Don't we?

Because I think people browsing this place might find it odd, a bunch of 'skeptics' eagerly attacking anyone who would want to remove such a tax.
Click to expand...



Classic goalpost move. If these guys were making an honest argument to remove or reduce the current tax burden, we wouldn't be heaping scorn on them - we might disagree, but we wouldn't think they were whacko.

But they aren't doing that. What they are doing is spinning bizzaro fantasy stories about how there are no current tax burdens, because of some obscure misunderstanding on their part. This is clearly wrong, and has been shown to be wrong in several court cases, and yet they still persist in their delusions.

That's what we're dismissing. Hate taxes all you want, but don't expect us to buy some bogus argument about how wages aren't income, or any of the other nonsense these guys spew.

Seriously - if there actually was no law that required you to pay taxes on "wages", why wouldn't they simply write one? Almost everyone does that already, so it wouldn't even be an added burden!
 
scooby said:
Bear in mind oh 'debunkers' that at the heart of "From Freedom to Fascism" is the issue of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank and the fact that there seems to be no law in the US that demands you pay tax on wages. "Show me the law", is the demand that these people are making - and no law can be shown.

Now we all hate the taxman don't we?
Don't we?

Because I think people browsing this place might find it odd, a bunch of 'skeptics' eagerly attacking anyone who would want to remove such a tax.

So tone it down a bit, or you'll give the game away.
Click to expand...

The problem is- as with most conspiracists and conspiracies- the central issue is being obfuscated by your political bias. If you're actually interested in doing away with a tax system- what makes you think "hating the taxman" and going off on a nutbar ridiculous diatribe complete with tinhat wearing rain dancers is going to make your case?

It's self-defeating.

Your strawman speaks volumes for this attitude- the skeptics here who have a point are not attacking "anyone who would want to remove such a tax"- they are attacking the method of putting on a jester costume and cawing like a raving lunatic in order to try and make a point. That's what skeptics and debunkers do, we point out the wackjobs.
 
gumboot said:
...

"Facist" is also a word, Scooby.

-Gumboot
Click to expand...

World War Two and the following Cold War cast a very dark shadow over humanity. Words like "facist", "police state", and "Nazi" have profound connotations. Yet the further we move from those historic events, the more young people throw these terms around as they please - utterly oblivious and ignorant of what they really mean.
 
Horatius said:
Classic goalpost move. If these guys were making an honest argument to remove or reduce the current tax burden, we wouldn't be heaping scorn on them - we might disagree, but we wouldn't think they were whacko.
Click to expand...

Now this would be a lofty post almost worth reading if it wasn't for one sorry and certain fact - you haven't watched the film have you?
 
Last edited:
Translation: "Waah! The path is too long and too old! It's not paved and cool! I don't want to walk it! I don't wanna!"
 
Not a very educational or informed bunch on here are you?
It really makes me skeptical.

Let me help you all out. There are some wonderful definitions of fascism available for the competent skeptic - you could just look up the dictionary definition of course, but with a complex issue such as this I find something meatier is justified.

Your one stop shop these days of course is Wikipedia, which no doubt is why it hasn't been mentioned, it covers the subject very well ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

But for the ultimate soundbite and handy reference, I really don't think you can beat the "14 Characteristics of Fascism" as defined by political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt and recited here by good old Mike Malloy ...

http://www.fileden.com/files/2006/9/11/214131/14_Characteristics_of_Fascism.mp3

I'm frankly shocked that people who call themselves a 'skeptic' can't explain the topic in any depth, but then again, when you look at the list - what more could you expect?

I'd add one more characteristic from my observations this past few years, a handy euphemism within any laymans grasp ...

15: The **** floats to the top.
 
Hokulele said:
At the end of it was the answer to your question, and a response to your complaint.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that you know the answer to my question and are able to respond to my complaint? Well, maybe you should have - because no ones listening now bud.
 
scooby said:
Are you saying that you know the answer to my question and are able to respond to my complaint? Well, maybe you should have - because no ones listening now bud.
Click to expand...


No, I was saying that the thread held the answer to your question and a response to your complaint. Particularly the posts by AS. If you are not interested in the answer, that's fine. There are lurkers or other posters here who may be interested, and are "listening" and learning things by clicking on the link.

PS - Wrong gender in the "bud" comment.
 
scooby said:
World War Two and the following Cold War cast a very dark shadow over humanity. Words like "facist", "police state", and "Nazi" have profound connotations. Yet the further we move from those historic events, the more young people throw these terms around as they please - utterly oblivious and ignorant of what they really mean.
Click to expand...


Are you aware that quoting other people without citing it as their words is a violation of your membership agreement?

I know what I wrote.

"Facist" is a word. That's what I intended to write. Thus your claim that I spelt "facism" wrong is incorrect.

Next time you post my words as yours I will report it.

-Gumboot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom