TRUMP - Some people think......... How do you feel?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Um - no. That's the trouble with words like fascist and Nazi. Even scholars have trouble defining them. And, in common parlance they become whatever the speaker wants them to mean. Yuckie-poo would be just as meaningful. And dictionaries simply flounder about, taking any usage that's floating around, and making it a definition.
Under some definitions - and these closer to Mussolini's use of the word, - fascism means providing a corporation role in government. And, under that, Canada is a fascist country.
 
Maybe it is time to stop using labels like "Nazi" "fascist" and "antifa" and start naming the behaviours........ We throw labels around and assume everyone has the same definition. That can shut down discussion and that won't help anything.
 
Um - no. That's the trouble with words like fascist and Nazi. Even scholars have trouble defining them. And, in common parlance they become whatever the speaker wants them to mean. Yuckie-poo would be just as meaningful. And dictionaries simply flounder about, taking any usage that's floating around, and making it a definition.
Under some definitions - and these closer to Mussolini's use of the word, - fascism means providing a corporation role in government. And, under that, Canada is a fascist country.

All ideologies, really, are about economics of some sort, and fascism is basically about the state giving corporations a free hand so that both can support the other's agenda.

However, in popular usage (which is really what matters) BettetheRed is right - fascism includes that but is also about authoritarian control, both on the national and personal level, usually mixed with a degree of nationalism and (and sometimes racial supremacy) and usually under the leadership of a particular dictator, who may be the actual leader or a figurehead of the regime.

Bette points out small things (innocuous enough on the surface) that tend in this direction. Generally speaking, most people accept some government regulation of business and the economy and even our personal lives, but when that attempt to regulate moves into unimportant spheres it's a step in the direction of what's popularly known as fascism.

Most see communism as the opposite of fascism, but really anarchism would be its opposite.
 
well, yes. But, oh, words are a problem. I don't know what an opposite to fascism would be. But it can't be anarchism because anarchism is no government at all - which means it would be, I suppose, an opposite of communism, socialism, democracy. But surely democracy is an opposite of anarchy - as are communism, socialism. In fact, I'm not sure communism or socialism can be called forms of government.
We need fewer words in the language.
 
m-mm-m-m--m
worse. One could argue that Canada and the U.S. are fascists states by the definition you (correctly) give to fascism.
And Karl Marx's communism owes considerably to Judaism and Christianity. (Though Joseph Stalin's and Mao's didn't.)
 
Forgive me. But I just wrote this for my blog. And it has given me a severe attack of vanity.

Telling the Truth is dangerous.
So here goes.
It was May 8, 1945. I was late for grade 6 - again. So the teacher sent me home - with a note. I was one frightened kid.
But my mother ignored the note. And she didn't even listen to me. Without a word, she took me to downtown Montreal on a tram car that was packed with jubilant people. The streets were packed, with a mob following a man strutting in front with a wire litter bin over his head. Then I saw the signs.
VE Day! Germany had surrendered! The war in Europe was over! My father would be coming home.
And, oh, there were there were stilll the wartime signs up. "Loose lips sink ships", "Buy a bond for freedom today"...."We've won the war. Now we've got to win the peace."
Oh! That last was a new one. But it made no sense We'd won the war. It was over. My father was coming home. So we'd won the peace...hadn't we?
It certainly looked that way. We formed the UN to establish a sort of world government that would keep the peace. We formed NATO as a defence against Russian expansion.
And we threw it all away. The first use of NATO was to invade North Korea, an operation that killed a third of all North Koreans while making no gain whatever. Even the idea of preserving the freedom of South Korea was pure propaganda. South Korea was a vicious dictatorship.
No. The real purpose of that war was to occupy North Korea as a base to attack China. U.S. big business desperately wanted control of China as a capitalist's wonderland of cheap labour and markets. That's why President Truman seriously considered the nuclear bombing of North Korea when Chnese troops intervened.
Generally, the major powers, prominently the U.S., have pretty much ignored the U.N. And when Afghanistan offered to turn over Osama Bin Laden to international courts for trial on 9/11 charges, the U.S. refused - preferring to punish a whole country, killing far, far more than were killed on 911 - and most of them just as innocent as those who died on 911.
In fact, the biggest aggressor since 1945 (and perhaps the biggest in history) has been the U.S. with over 70 invasions, with uncounted CIA murders, with the CIA creation, traininig and equipping of al Quaeda. with drone bombers that have killed thousands, with the creation of dictatorships as it did all over Latin America, in Iran and in Africa, with the creation of chaos, refugees and horrible suffering in Africa.
All of this has been to make billionaires richer. And, like Britain in its fading days, the U.S. wants its empire to join its wars. That's why Canada and Britain fought in Korea and Afghanistan and Libya. That's why Britain fought in Iraq. That's why Canadian soldiers are on a very dangerous duty in Lavia and, possibly, in Iraq and Syria.
And our news media reports it as though the world is made up of evil countries that are always picking on us. Yes. Guatemala was picking on the U.S. So was Castro. So was Vietnam. So was Iran. This is why Canadians are on dangerous duty in Latvia (and without our news meda paying much attention to it.) Same for Iraq and Syria.
The world of today is many things. But there is one thing it is not. It is not what our soldiers, sailors and airmen fought and died for in World War Two. It is not a world of peace and sharing and freedom. And our soldiers did not die so that billionaires could plunder oil in the Middle East.
We now have a world in which the most dangerous aggressor (by far) is the United States. And that's not because of the American people. It's because of those very, very wealthy Americans who own the American government - and almost all the news media.
No. It's not just Trump. It's every American President since 1945. .
(The American people can be propagandized by the news portrait of foreigners as evil; but there's an almost subconcious reaction, as well. They're fed up with wars. That's why the American army can't get enough volunteers. So now, slightly over half of the U.S. army is make up of mercenaries from all over the world. And they are extremely expensive, most earning more in a year than an American general does and, commonly, with the promise of American citizenship at retirement.)
On, November 11, let us, most certainly, remember those who served. Let us think of the debt we owe them. But let us also, for the first time, remember how we betrayed them, how we broke all the promises we made about the world they were fighting for. And let's promise to change, to honour the promises we made as they honoured our need for to risk their lives.
And let's stop making a propaganda show out of Nov. 11. For a start, let's take loaded words like patriotism off the table. That's a vague and misleading word. Patriotism is one of those words that can be good - or terribly evil. The Naziis who killed Canadians and who operated death camps for Jews were patriots. So were the Italians who killed for Mussolini, and the Japanese who starved Canadians in their work camps.
The Japanese were not only patriots serving their country. They were serving their emperor - as Canadians served their king and as Italians served Mussolini (who actually thought he was a caesar) and as Germans served Hitler.
There is nothing necessarily good about patriotism or serving your country. These are just propaganda words.
So let's get reasonable. From the age of six, I can remember the 'boys' coming to our place to say goodbye. I can remember their happiness. This was adventure. I remember the fellow who helped my father with the scouts, proud of his navy uniform, and thrilling me by letting me hold his jacknife. He, like many others of 1939, was joining because there were no jobs. This was the Great Depression, an almost universal plague of poverty and hopelessness. (He was blown off the bridge of HMCS Sackville on D Day.)
None of this detracts from the service he gave us, and the respect and honour we owe him.
My father joined because he had a family to feed. And that just wasn't possible in the Great Depression. The same was true for thousands, especially of the first contingent to go overseas.
My uncle joined to get away from his wife and children. It was no secret. He was at Dieppe and D Day. And he talked about the war for the rest of his life. But all the war ever meant to him was the great parties in England.
And Bertie. Poor Bertie. He was only 16 when he stole his brother's draft papers to join up. But he was big and strong and looked older. Intellectually, he was four or five. That's why he played with me. And he just loved marching because of the sound of the steel clips on his boots hitting the sidewalk. His family said they would tell the army his real age. But they didn't. They were a family of poverty and ignorance and alcohol and indifference.
In his first action, Bertie was lying down under machine gun fire. I met a man who was with him.
"He was cryin'. Yeah. I could see he was crying. Then he jumped up and was cut in half by the machine gun. Craziest thing, when he jumped up he was screamin' for his mother."
It wasn't all patriotism and God blessing the King.
Let's not lose ourselves in wonderland.
They were a generation raised in the dreadful 1930s, a period of suffering and hunger and fear and dreadful exploitation by the wealthy. And, for those ten, dreadful years, they got no help, none, zip from the government of this country. And less than no help from the wealthy of this country. Indeed, the wealthy used the hard times to cut salaries, cancel holidays, and even to put the unemployed into remote 'work camps' that were really concentration camps.
We most certainly should remember those who served, and remember with respect and gratitude for what they suffered. What we should not do is to romanticize November 11 as though it were a sort of revival of King Arthur's knights doing good deeds.
We should remember all - including the promises we made to them - the promises that we have since dishonoured - of the better world they were sacrificing for.
And the worst offender in that respect is The Canadian Legion. It has a record of romanticizing war, and forgetting about the promises. The greatest honour it could do to those who sacrificed would be to remind us of what it was all supposed to be for. Instead, it invariably plods into a dream world of big words and small actions.
With fond memories of Jack and Bertie and Howard, of my father who was away so many years of my life, of my mother who had to live through all the fears and loneliness of a wartime world - and with a son who couldn't even get to school on time.
Telling the Truth is dangerous.
So here goes.
It was May 8, 1945. I was late for grade 6 - again. So the teacher sent me home - with a note. I was -one frightened kid.
But my mother ignored the note. And she didn't even listen to me. Without a word, she took me to downtown Montreal on a tram car that was packed with jubilant people. The streets were packed, with a mob following a man strutting in front with a wire litter bin over his head. Then I saw the signs.
VE Day! Germany had surrendered! The war in Europe was over! My father would be coming home.
And, oh, there were there were stilll the wartime signs up. "Loose lips sink ships", "Buy a bond for freedom today"...."We've won the war. Now we've got to win the peace."
Oh! That last was a new one. But it made no sense We'd won the war. It was over. My father was coming home. We'd won the peace...hadn't we?
It certainly looked that way. We formed the UN to establish a sort of world government that would keep the peace. We formed NATO as a defence against Russian expansion.
And we threw it all away. The first use of NATO was to invade North Korea, an operation that killed a third of all North Koreans while making no gain whatever. Even the idea of preserving tthe freedom of South Korea was pure propaganda. South Korea was a vicious dictatorship.
No. The real purpose of that war was to occupy North Korea as a base to attack China. U.S. big business desperately wanted control of China as a capitalist's wonderland of cheap labour and markets. That's why President Truman seriously considered the nuclear bombing of North Korea when Chnese troops intervened.
Generally, the major powers, prominently the U.S., have pretty much ignored the U.N. And when Afghanistan offered to turn over Osama Bin Laden to international courts for trial on 9/11 charges, the U.S. refused - preferring to punish a whole country, killing far, far more than were killed on 911 - and most of them just as innocent as those who died on 911.
In fact, the biggest aggressor since 1945 (and perhaps the biggest in history) has been the U.S. with over 70 invasions, with uncounted CIA murders, with the CIA creation, traininig and equipping of al Quaeda. with drone bombers that have killed thousands, with the creation of dictatorships as it did all over Latin America, in Iran and in Africa, with the creation of chaos, refugees and horrible suffering in Africa.
All of this has been to make billionaires richer. And, like Britain in its fading days, the U.S. wants its empire to join its wars. That's why Canada and Britain fought in Korea and Afghanistan and Libya. That's why Britain fought in Iraq. That's why Canadian soldiers are on a very dangerous duty in Lavia and, possibly, in Iraq and Syria.
And our news media reports it as though the world is made up of evil countries that are always picking on us. Yes. Guatemala was picking on the U.S. So was Castro. So was Vietnam. So was Iran. This is why Canadians are on dangerous duty in Latvia (and without our news meda paying much attention to it.) Same for Iraq and Syria.
The world of today is many things. But there is one thing it is not. It is not what our soldiers, sailors and airmen fought and died for in World War Two. It is not a world of peace and sharing and freedom. And our soldiers did not die so that billionaires could plunder oil in the Middle East.
We now have a world in which the most dangerous aggressor (by far) is the United States. And that's not because of the American people. It's because of those very, very wealthy Americans who own the American government - and almost all the news media.
No. It's not just Trump. It's every American President since 1945. .
(The American people can be propagandized by the news portrait of foreigners as evil; but there's an almost subconcious reaction, as well. They're fed up with wars. That's why the American army can't get enough volunteers. So now, slightly over half of the U.S. army is make up of mercenaries from all over the world. And they are extremely expensive, most earning more in a year than an American general does and, commonly, with the promise of American citizenship at retirement.)
On, November 11, let us, most certainly, remember those who served. Let us think of the debt we owe them. But let us also, for the first time, remember how we betrayed them, how we broke all the promises we made about the world they were fighting for. And let's promise to change, to honour the promises we made as they honoured our need for to risk their lives.
And let's stop making a propaganda show out of Nov. 11. For a start, let's take loaded words like patriotism off the table. That's a vague and misleading word. Patriotism is one of those words that can be good - or terribly evil. The Naziis who killed Canadians and who operated death camps for Jews were patriots. So were the Italians who killed for Mussolini, and the Japanese who starved Canadians in their work camps.
The Japanese were not only patriots serving their country. They were serving their emperor - as Canadians served their king and as Italians served Mussolini (who actually thought he was a caesar) and as Germans served Hitler.
There is nothing necessarily good about patriotism or serving your country. These are just propaganda words.
So let's get reasonable. From the age of six, I can remember the 'boys' coming to our place to say goodbye. I can remember their happiness. This was adventure. I remember the fellow who helped my father with the scouts, proud of his navy uniform, and thrilling me by letting me hold his jacknife. He, like many others of 1939, was joining because there were no jobs. This was the Great Depression, an almost universal plague of poverty and hopelessness. (He was blown off the bridge of HMCS Sackville on D Day.)
None of this detracts from the service he gave us, and the respect and honour we owe him.
My father joined because he had a family to feed. And that just wasn't possible in the Great Depression. The same was true for thousands, especially of the first contingent to go overseas.
My uncle joined to get away from his wife and children. It was no secret. He was at Dieppe and D Day. And he talked about the war for the rest of his life. But all the war ever meant to him was the great parties in England.
And Bertie. Poor Bertie. He was only 16 when he stole his brother's draft papers to join up. But he was big and strong and looked older. Intellectually, he was four or five. That's why he played with me. And he just loved marching because of the sound of the steel clips on his boots hitting the sidewalk. His family said they would tell the army his real age. But they didn't. They were a family of poverty and ignorance and alcohol and indifference.
In his first action, Bertie was lying down under machine gun fire. I met a man who was with him.
"He was cryin'. Yeah. I could see he was crying. Then he jumped up and was cut in half by the machine gun. Craziest thing, when he jumped up he was screamin' for his mother."
It wasn't all patriotism and God blessing the King.
Let's not lose ourselves in wonderland.
They were a generation raised in the dreadful 1930s, a period of suffering and hunger and fear and dreadful exploitation by the wealthy. And, for those ten, dreadful years, they got no help, none, zip from the government of this country. And less than no help from the wealthy of this country. Indeed, the wealthy used the hard times to cut salaries, cancel holidays, and even to put the unemployed into remote 'work camps' that were really concentration camps.
We most certainly should remember those who served, and remember with respect and gratitude for what they suffered. What we should not do is to romanticize November 11 as though it were a sort of revival of King Arthur's knights doing good deeds.
We should remember all - including the promises we made to them - the promises that we have since dishonoured - of the better world they were sacrificing for.
And the worst offender in that respect is The Canadian Legion. It has a record of romanticizing war, and forgetting about the promises. The greatest honour it could do to those who sacrificed would be to remind us of what it was all supposed to be for. Instead, it invariably plods into a dream world of big words and small actions.
With fond memories of Jack and Bertie and Howard, of my father who was away so many years of my life, of my mother who had to live through all the fears and loneliness of a wartime world - and with a son who couldn't even get to school on time.
 
well, yes. But, oh, words are a problem. I don't know what an opposite to fascism would be. But it can't be anarchism because anarchism is no government at all - which means it would be, I suppose, an opposite of communism, socialism, democracy. But surely democracy is an opposite of anarchy - as are communism, socialism. In fact, I'm not sure communism or socialism can be called forms of government.
We need fewer words in the language.
True that.

My thinking is that to most people fascism means essentially highly controlled and regimented and anarchism means neither control nor regimentation. But, yes, any system of government inevitably involves a certain amount of authority and control. It's the nature of the beast.

Graeme Decarie said:
m-mm-m-m--m
worse. One could argue that Canada and the U.S. are fascists states by the definition you (correctly) give to fascism.
And Karl Marx's communism owes considerably to Judaism and Christianity. (Though Joseph Stalin's and Mao's didn't.)
I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you on any of that.
 
Dangers of fighting fascism with fascism
What he means by sorting yourself out (he also uses the phrase "clean your bedroom" :3)
 
Maybe it is time to stop using labels like "Nazi" "fascist" and "antifa" and start naming the behaviours........ We throw labels around and assume everyone has the same definition. That can shut down discussion and that won't help anything.
I think when they are carrying flags and wearing their "uniforms" - including black clothes and bandanas and sunglasses covering their faces, as well as nazi flags - and identifying with ideologies it's ok to name them something. I think we have to name them differently. I think we have to because we have to name what is motivating the behaviours on each side. "Antifa" may be short for anti fascist when they are not behaving that way, really. I actually think "alt-left" is a better descriptor. But on the far right, neo-nazis is what they are.
 
And I don't think neo-nazi ideas such as white supremacy should be protected under free speech. It doesn't serve the purpose of allowing people to "discuss and debate ideas". It has now served to give some of these ugly ideologies a validity that they have not enjoyed for a long time, and it's fomenting violence. Those ideas should be kept under the rock that they crawled out from. I don't think anybody's going to change the minds of the most virulent racists in our lifetime but they shouldn't be allowed to spread it. Limiting their free speech keeps their ideas from being validated, and their behaviour in check. In other words, they are free to think what they want but not act on it, in a civil society. And acting on it includes spreading the ideas.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, as Graeme says
And then who gets to decide and what is the metric?
My pattern detectors are going all crazy now, what with google now having an automated blasphemy detector, Facebook with their censorship shenanigans, Angela Merklz administration passing laws that punish companies that promote fake news, Twitter sneakily shadowbanning some users, certain police departments in UK warning people they might be fined and sent to jail if they write offensive things on social media and so forth...
Charlottesville being a false flag is still on the table for me...Jesus, such a tiny teeny event...

Its sheer madness
Control for control's sake
Like the war on (some) terror
Like the various blasphemy laws historically
We've managed to create a civilization that has attempted and been successful at breaking free of the 6000 or so years of rule by the elite...I don't want that spark that hope to die out whether due to frikkin fear of the mob or by these eldritch oligarchs getting more and more control...
 
I don't agree. White supremacist ideology, "fittest race", ideology is evil. And we need to keep a lid on it or tribalist instincts will do us in.
Btw whew that was a tough couple of weeks there on this thread
For you to go through your tantrums as you adjusted your Beliefs...
You really were lashing out at pretty much everyone...a fresh example of someone dealing with cognitive dissonance in more or less real time...
Glad to see you on the other side, sistah
 
Indeed, as Graeme says
And then who gets to decide and what is the metric?
My pattern detectors are going all crazy now, what with google now having an automated blasphemy detector, Facebook with their censorship shenanigans, Angela Merklz administration passing laws that punish companies that promote fake news, Twitter sneakily shadowbanning some users, certain police departments in UK warning people they might be fined and sent to jail if they write offensive things on social media and so forth...
Charlottesville being a false flag is still on the table for me...Jesus, such a tiny teeny event...

Its sheer madness
Control for control's sake
Like the war on (some) terror
Like the various blasphemy laws historically
We've managed to create a civilization that has attempted and been successful at breaking free of the 6000 or so years of rule by the elite...I don't want that spark that hope to die out whether due to frikkin fear of the mob or by these eldritch oligarchs getting more and more control...
And allowing white supremacist ideology to be spread has helped, how, exactly?

It's the root problem in this alt-right vs. antifa conflict we're seeing.
 
Btw whew that was a tough couple of weeks there on this thread
For you to go through your tantrums as you adjusted your Beliefs...
You really were lashing out at pretty much everyone...a fresh example of someone dealing with cognitive dissonance in more or less real time...
Glad to see you on the other side, sistah
I reported this post for the ad hominem (whether friend or no friend - I will be doing it from now on)
 
And allowing white supremacist ideology to be spread has helped, how, exactly?

It's the root problem in this alt-right vs. antifa conflict we're seeing.
you said the white supremacist ideology should be kept under rocks etc.
Ok. How is that done?
Who decides?
What is the metric?
Then how is it kept under the rocks so to speak?
See what I mean?
Its the whole problem with hate. What is hateful? What is offensive?
 
Back
Top