Is The US Government A Fascist One?

[TheBloods]

Fascism and Totalitarianism (some ignorant people refer to as Communism)

It may not be the true theoretical version of communism, but virtually every historian and social and political commentator refers to the 'communist' states of Eastern Europe and China as 'communist', even renowned and avowed left-wing historians such as Hobsbawm, and he wouldn't be considered 'ignorant'.

 

[CharlieG]

Small but important correction: "Communist" is used to refer to the former Soviet bloc and other Communist states. Without the capital 'C', however, "communism" refers to the theoretical system.

 

[TheBloods]

Small but important correction: "Communist" is used to refer to the former Soviet bloc and other Communist states. Without the capital 'C', however, "communism" refers to the theoretical system.

Yes. The same as Fascist (Italy) and fascist (theory, such that it is).

 

[Former]

This is far more the case in Nazi Germany than Fascist Italy for example. It was a very powerful of aspect of Nazism. It's not really nearly so prevalent in the US, and police do not have limitless powers.

As of 2001 (the latest figures I can find with a quick Google), "While the US accounts for just 5 percent of the global population, 25 percent of the world's prisoners are in American prisons and jails." I'd appreciate input from anyone who can find fresher stats.

The US police don't have limitless powers but the leaders of the "free world" have locked up more than anyone else. Bit of doublethink going on there wouldn't you say?

 

[CharlieG]

I don't think that you can have a clearly defined 'fascism' unless you limit it to Mussolini's regime. Every single regime is different, and you can really only apply these labels loosely. I'm arguing that the current PRC is enough like other regimes that have been labelled 'fascist' to warrant that label as well. But you can go the other way, and easily say that even Nazi Germany fails to meet the criteria (depending on how you set them).

 

[Murray]

Cant China be considered Socialist?

I think China is a long way from being Socialist.

I would put them in the Totalitarian category but not necessarily to the same extent as Uncle Joe

 

[- PC -]

I think China is a long way from being Socialist.

I would put them in the Totalitarian category but not necessarily to the same extent as Uncle Joe

But one could argue they are heading that way.

Socialism as fas as I see it is the State controlling the resources (51% ownership) ie ''These movements generally envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to social control. [1] As an economic system, socialism is usually associated with state or collective ownership of the means of production. This control, according to socialists, may be either direct, exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils, or it may be indirect, exercised on behalf of the people by the state.''

''In China, the Chinese Communist Party has led a transition from the command economy of the Mao period under the banner of "market socialism." Under Deng Xiaoping, the leadership of China embarked upon a program of market-based reform that was more sweeping than had been Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika program of the late 1980s''

From wikipedia . A better explanation may be that China has Economic Socialism and Communism as its Political Theory

 

[Richo83]

Fascism and Totalitarianism (some ignorant people refer to as Communism) are very nearly the same thing.

The US is heading towards facism, but is contstrained to a degree by Congress, so a 'pure' fascist state is unlikely.
But in different areas of government, such as those controlled by the Military/White House, it will become totally fascist

I still think that the Chinese government doens't have all of the facets of facism described above. Nearly the same, but slightly different. However, they are very close to being a facist government. The Chinese leaders of today don't have this demi-god status of Hitler or Kim Jong Il though.

 

[Murray]

But one could argue they are heading that way.

Socialism as fas as I see it is the State controlling the resources (51% ownership) ie ''These movements generally envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to social control. [1] As an economic system, socialism is usually associated with state or collective ownership of the means of production. This control, according to socialists, may be either direct, exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils, or it may be indirect, exercised on behalf of the people by the state.''

''In China, the Chinese Communist Party has led a transition from the command economy of the Mao period under the banner of "market socialism." Under Deng Xiaoping, the leadership of China embarked upon a program of market-based reform that was more sweeping than had been Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika program of the late 1980s''

From wikipedia . A better explanation may be that China has Economic Socialism and Communism as its Political Theory

I think they will give the perception that they are moving towards being Socialist mainly on the basis that the Capitalists with whom they need to trade, continually raise Human Rights Issues with them.
Summary executions will still continue, the build of of military forces will continue, the desire to 'threaten' neighbours will continue and most of the freedoms of the masses will be controlled.

A few token 'freedoms' will be allowed.

 

[Murray]

I still think that the Chinese government doens't have all of the facets of facism described above. Nearly the same, but slightly different. However, they are very close to being a facist government. The Chinese leaders ot today don't have this demi-god status of Hitler or im Jone Il though.

Yep, agree with that ^ Richo

 

[Richo83]

Yep, agree with that ^ Richo

And even if the Chinese government is facist (which it's not, close though), it's grip is slipping. The opening of the Chinese markets has meant that the Chinese government has been forced to accpet some of the freedoms. For example, foreign travel is much more frequent than before. The Chinese government's control over the internet over the years has diminished, even though it is still heavily regulated (google).

 

[TheBloods]

The Chinese have a number of elements of a fascist regime, but that's hardly surprising as the traits of totalitarian regimes overlap.

But yes, I agree that they will gradually move away from that and become more open. It will simply be forced on them, internally and externally, as they open up their economy more and more.

 

[Richo83]

The Chinese have a number of elements of a fascist regime, but that's hardly surprising as the traits of totalitarian regimes overlap.

But yes, I agree that they will gradually move away from that and become more open. It will simply be forced on them, internally and externally, as they open up their economy more and more.

Yep.

IMO the American corporate venture into China has been a great thing because with the American influence, the Chinese government has had to loosen the grip it has over society to allow Chinese people to be buy in the foreign influence.

Examples of this is as I said before, but China is much more open to foreign ideas than before (American influences, democratic ideals, western influence etc.) Now the Chinese government realises that for China to prosper in the future, it must operate on the global stage, and allow for some opening of the country.

 

[- PC -]

Now the Chinese government realises that for China to prosper in the future, it must operate on the global stage, and allow for some opening of the country.

Wait till after the Olympics and see where China is in 2010

 

[Former]

The Chinese leaders of today don't have this demi-god status of Hitler or Kim Jong Il though.

Go out into the poor country villages and you'll probably still find a deified image of the leaders.

 

[Bombers 2003]

Came across this and written in 2003 , I do think it was directed at the US Government without naming them. The original author highlighted what he saw as the defining principles of Hitlers Germany, Francos Spain ,Mussolinis Italy and Suhartos Indonesia .What do you think? I think it comes very scarily to the mark , but hopefully some can

1. Point out the error of the original piece

2. Highlight what they see as Fascism and its principles.

I know RJ did a thread last July but he named 3 principles of Fascism. Do these 14 count?

14 Signs of Fascism

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make 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.

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." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread
domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

The majority of these points also refer to the Howard Govt.

 

[TheBloods]

Really stretching the point a bit there...

 

[Bombers 2003]

Really stretching the point a bit there...

The only 2 points i exclueded are nos 4 and 14.The rest you'll find under a howard govt.

 

[CharlieG]

Really stretching the point a bit there...

There's strong tendencies for points one, three, seven, eight, nine and ten. Points two, four, five, eleven and thirteen are present to a lesser extent as well (ie, some of the identifying details apply whilst others do not). Some would argue that points six and twelve are either already happening or heading in that direction. It's only point fourteen that clearly doesn't apply (and that's when you overlook such factors as the lack of proportional representation and inequitable electoral boundaries).

However, I don't think that Howard is a fascist leader, despite meeting eleven to thirteen of the "criteria". I think the real problem is trying to use this list as some sort of definition of fascism, which as I've noted before I don't think is possible.

 

[Contra Mundum]

To label or not to label is a distraction from the main game

 

[- PC -]

I think the real problem is trying to use this list as some sort of definition of fascism, which as I've noted before I don't think is possible.

Thanks Charlie, I felt this as well. My feeling was the original piece was done by someone who stretched the definitions a little more than he should have to reach a conclusion about the US

 

[TheBloods]

There's strong tendencies for points one, three, seven, eight, nine and ten. Points two, four, five, eleven and thirteen are present to a lesser extent as well (ie, some of the identifying details apply whilst others do not). Some would argue that points six and twelve are either already happening or heading in that direction. It's only point fourteen that clearly doesn't apply (and that's when you overlook such factors as the lack of proportional representation and inequitable electoral boundaries).

However, I don't think that Howard is a fascist leader, despite meeting eleven to thirteen of the "criteria". I think the real problem is trying to use this list as some sort of definition of fascism, which as I've noted before I don't think is possible.

I agree. Plus even for the points that do apply there is a matter of degree, and in virtually all cases Howard's Australia is not anywhere near as extreme as Mussolini's Italy or Hitler's Germany.

This is particularly the case for points 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8 (which is wrong anyway), 12, 14 and the other ones of violence, Leader Principle, creation of myths, Collectivism, and of course Single Party State

 

[CharlieG]

I agree. Plus even for the points that do apply there is a matter of degree, and in virtually all cases Howard's Australia is not anywhere near as extreme as Mussolini's Italy or Hitler's Germany.

No, certainly not.

This is particularly the case for points 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8 (which is wrong anyway), 12, 14 and the other ones of violence, Leader Principle, creation of myths, Collectivism, and of course Single Party State

Eight is wrong? What rock have you been living under? Banning gay marriage, RU486, 'Values neutral' public education, Nelson's "teach both sides" rubbish... you don't think that the government routinely falls upon Christian-based wedge politics and religious rhetoric to justify its policies?

 

[Richo83]

Go out into the poor country villages and you'll probably still find a deified image of the leaders.

I have and it doesn't exist.

 

[TheBloods]

Eight is wrong? What rock have you been living under? Banning gay marriage, RU486, 'Values neutral' public education, Nelson's "teach both sides" rubbish... you don't think that the government routinely falls upon Christian-based wedge politics and religious rhetoric to justify its policies?

Eight is wrong as mixing religion and government is not a fascist trait.