The 14 Points of Facism

[Mephisto]

In "Fascism Anyone?," Laurence Britt identifies 14 characteristics common to fascist regimes. His comparisons of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Suharto, and Pinochet yielded this list of 14 "identifying characteristics of fascism."

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
____________

Pass out the hobnail boots and Praise the Lord!

 

[Art Vandelay]

Fourteen indentifying characteristics of someone who hasn't figured out yet that comparing Bush to Hitler shows that you have absolutely no credibility:

1. Your name is Mephisto.

 

[Mephisto]

Fourteen indentifying characteristics of someone who hasn't figured out yet that comparing Bush to Hitler shows that you have absolutely no credibility:

1. Your name is Mephisto.

Laurence Britt made the comparison, I merely passed on the site, but then distinctions like that often seem to escape the conservative crowd who are still hoping that WMD will be found in Iraq!

 

[RandFan]

Fourteen indentifying characteristics of someone who hasn't figured out yet that comparing Bush to Hitler shows that you have absolutely no credibility:

1. Your name is Mephisto.

 

[RandFan]

Fourteen indentifying characteristics of someone who hasn't figured out yet that comparing Bush to Hitler shows that you have absolutely no credibility:

1. Your name is Mephisto.

Don't you just love a thread that starts out validating Godwyn's law in the first post?

 

[demon]

Godwyn`s Law is the last refuge of the soundrel

 

[normdoering]

Fourteen indentifying characteristics of someone who hasn't figured out yet that comparing Bush to Hitler shows that you have absolutely no credibility:

What do you expect from someone who hasn't figured out what facism is yet?

Hitler wasn't the only facist. In fact, I think that Italian guy Adolf used to call Moose defined the term... go figure what his definition means.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Actually, this is a beautiful demonstration of Godwin's Law.

Godwin's Law states that once Nazis have been brought up, useful discussion has ended and you might as well go home. The Nazis were mentioned in the first post, and indeed there has been absolutely no worthwhile discussion since.

 

[SezMe]

Fourteen indentifying characteristics of someone who hasn't figured out yet that comparing Bush to Hitler shows that you have absolutely no credibility:

1. Your name is Mephisto.

Nice ad hom, Art.

How 'bout speaking to the 14 points in an objective, useful manner for those of us who like the conflict of ideas, not pissing contests? Thanks.

 

[normdoering]

Nice ad hom, Art.

How 'bout speaking to the 14 points in an objective, useful manner ....

How about we list the points first?

1.) Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
...constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

That seems to be true of all governments and it is a matter of degree. Is a little symbolism okay? When does it start to get pathological? I don't think American use of symbols is as bad as a facist state would be... yet.

2.) Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need."

Hmmm... Gitmo, "patriot" act... maybe we really have crossed that line?

3.) Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause

Terrorists aren't just a scapegoat.

They then list some books by Ann Coulter. But isn't the extreme left also scapegoating Republicans in a similar manner?

4.) Supremacy of the Military

Well, whatever the neocons may have wanted, they ain't going to get that. The Army is now having a hard time recruiting.

5.) Rampant Sexism

Why can't there be a non-sexist facism?

6.) Controlled Mass Media

What's a journalist to do? The left claims the media is controlled by the right-wing and the right thinks it's controlled by the left-wing. If you present both sides, you present not just alternate opinions, you present alternate realities where the facts are different on each side and truth itself seems an illusion.

7.) Obsession with National Security

Well, the idea of sleeper cells training in your own country to fly your own planes into your own buildings and dying when they do it has got to make anyone paranoid.

8.) Religion and Government are Intertwined

Facism would then be the oldest form of government on this planet.

9.) Corporate Power is Protected

Again, a matter of degree. Some corporate power must be protected or else you have no corporations.

10.) Labor Power is Suppressed

Modern neo-conservatives, like their old conservative counter-parts, are "cheap labor conservatives" and ultimately not friends of the middle class.

11.) Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts

Again, isn't this a matter of degree?

12.) Obsession with Crime and Punishment

Another matter of degree?

13.) Rampant Cronyism and Corruption

That's always been the case in American politics... hasn't it?

14. Fraudulent Elections

Are our elections frauds?

 

[toddjh]

Don't you just love a thread that starts out validating Godwyn's law in the first post?

I once saw a Usenet post by a guy whose name actually was Hitler. The thread was over before it began.

Jeremy

 

[Random]

Out of idle curiosity, just when can we start comparing people to Hitler? I mean, if someone is using media manipulation techniques that were used by the Nazis in the mid-thirties, can we mention it? Or do they have to change their name to Adolph, grow a tiny moustache, and start shipping out Jews in boxcars to concentration camps?

I just notice that someone on the left or right will do something, someone else will point out that it is similar to something that Hitler did, and everyone says that it is over the line to make the comparison regardless of whether or not it is factually accurate.

My concern is that by taking all discussion of the rise of the Nazi regime (or the lesser mentioned Stalin regime) off the table, we leave ourselves open for a new disaster. Not because we didn't recognize the warning signs, but because we refused to discuss them.

 

[Mephisto]

Out of idle curiosity, just when can we start comparing people to Hitler? I mean, if someone is using media manipulation techniques that were used by the Nazis in the mid-thirties, can we mention it? Or do they have to change their name to Adolph, grow a tiny moustache, and start shipping out Jews in boxcars to concentration camps?

I just notice that someone on the left or right will do something, someone else will point out that it is similar to something that Hitler did, and everyone says that it is over the line to make the comparison regardless of whether or not it is factually accurate.

My concern is that by taking all discussion of the rise of the Nazi regime (or the lesser mentioned Stalin regime) off the table, we leave ourselves open for a new disaster. Not because we didn't recognize the warning signs, but because we refused to discuss them.

Thank you! I'm sure most of the objection to using Hitler's regime as an example wouldn't have raised so many hackles had I been talking about Saddam.

You're right, at what point CAN we compare someone to Hitler (or Stalin)? Godwyn's Law aside, it seems the biggest objection to compatible elements in facist regimes comes only when the comparison includes the U.S.

For the record, I wasn't necessarily comparing Bush to Hitler, I just happen to agree with some of the comparisons. Of course, many here may be blind to all the magnetic "Support Our Troops" stickers on the back of vehicles, all the "God Bless America" bumperstickers, the flags everywhere with the saying, "United We Stand" (I'm considering printing one that says, "Divided We Sit") and John Ashcroft singing the beautiful "The Eagle Flies" song. Perhaps those who objected most to my OP hold these slogans close to their heart.

 

[RandFan]

Godwyn`s Law is the last refuge of the soundrel

No, baseless comparisons to Hitler are.

 

[CFLarsen]

Of course, many here may be blind to all the magnetic "Support Our Troops" stickers on the back of vehicles, all the "God Bless America" bumperstickers, the flags everywhere with the saying, "United We Stand" (I'm considering printing one that says, "Divided We Sit") and John Ashcroft singing the beautiful "The Eagle Flies" song. Perhaps those who objected most to my OP hold these slogans close to their heart.

The problem with that is that it would also imply that the United States were in a similar situation during WWII. We saw the exact same things happening then.

Well, except perhaps Ashcroft singing. That is a warning sign, I agree. I'm just not sure of what...

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Out of idle curiosity, just when can we start comparing people to Hitler?

Godwin's Law is not a moral rule, it is just an observation.

According to Godwin's Law you can compare people to Hitler at any time you want to, it is just that afterwards there will be zero intelligent discussion in that thread or subthread. I mean, look at this mess.

 

[demon]

Mephisto:
"Thank you! I'm sure most of the objection to using Hitler's regime as an example wouldn't have raised so many hackles had I been talking about Saddam."

True.
Von Rumsfeld and Bush do it regularly. Who calls Godwyn`s law on them?

 

[RandFan]

Out of idle curiosity, just when can we start comparing people to Hitler? I mean, if someone is using media manipulation techniques that were used by the Nazis in the mid-thirties, can we mention it? Or do they have to change their name to Adolph, grow a tiny moustache, and start shipping out Jews in boxcars to concentration camps?

I just notice that someone on the left or right will do something, someone else will point out that it is similar to something that Hitler did, and everyone says that it is over the line to make the comparison regardless of whether or not it is factually accurate.

I think one should ask what is the prupose of the comparison and what is the agenda of the person making the comparisons? Are the comparisons justified? It would be relatively easy to compare FDR to Hitler. FDR trampled on Civil rights and locked up an entire group of people because of their race (Japanese internment camps). FDR's regime stoked the nations patriotism and used propaganda to further his cause. I would not make such a comparison because such a comparison is not warranted.

Most people want to score political points by tying their opponents to a regime that most of us agree was extremly bad. But as we see with FDR such comparisons are simply choosing which part of the elephant you want to look at to define the elephant. Such comparisons are often idiotic because their agenda is transparent. The lack of objectivity is transparent.

My concern is that by taking all discussion of the rise of the Nazi regime (or the lesser mentioned Stalin regime) off the table, we leave ourselves open for a new disaster. Not because we didn't recognize the warning signs, but because we refused to discuss them.

Uh oh, sky is falling again. I've discussed Hitler and the Nazi party plenty on this forum. I've even made comparisons. I so find this type of slipery slope argument sad and disapointing. Not to mention stupid. Google Hitler and you get 7,440,000 posts. Google Nazi and you get 9,010,000. A search of Hitler on this forum yields 4338 posts (show results as posts).

So stop it.

 

[RandFan]

True.
Von Rumsfeld and Bush do it regularly. Who calls Godwyn`s law on them?

Tu Quoque. If and when Bush and company does so to play on people's fears and score political points then he is an a$$hole.

 

[Skeptic]

Laurence Britt made the comparison, I merely passed on the site

Oh. So you didn't SAY Chimp Bushitler, the world's dumbest fascist, is evil. You just QUOTED someone who says Chimp Bushitler, the world's dumbest fascist, is evil.

Enormous difference there, I admit.

Well, except perhaps Ashcroft singing. That is a warning sign, I agree. I'm just not sure of what...

The apocalypse?