Bill was a self-professed liberal just as GWB was a self-professed conservative and they all end up governing in the middle somewhere. That's why I'm not worried about Barak's "liberal" tag. He'll either govern in the middle or try to do some lefty stuff and conservatives will galvanized against him and elect majorities as you mentioned. That's what Dems did to GW and neither side can get anything substantive done, in my opinion. My hope is that we as a nation will do more to help people rather than merely protect our interests. I don't see HIl or McCain even trying to do that. At least Barak talks about it and this hope is what I think fuels the grass-roots response from the younger voters. They want things to be better, not more of the same. Whether he can deliver on that is questionable at best, but at least he has a chance at actually doing it, thus will prob get my vote. It'll be the first time I voted for a Dem since I started voting. If I don't vote it'll be the first election where I didn't vote. Hey, these are just my opinions. Mine stink just as much as everybody else's.
__________________
"Most human beings are not able to stand the message of the shaking of foundations. They reject and attack the prophetic minds, not because they really disagree with them, but because they sense the truth of their words and cannot receive it." Paul Tillich
It is fascinating to see the interest shown by FDR and several of his cronies to the 'Italian experiment'.......
Rhetoric is one thing Dave ... but when we speak of socialism/communism keep in mind the economically these are leftist policies ... fascism is anti-thetical economically and for the most part politically from these leftist ideals.
In the end game ... as extremes they both stifle free thought and civil liberties.
Is it possible that both a left winger and a right winger can be Fascists? It doesnt seem to me that Fascism is exclusively the domain of either right or left.
Historically, there was a period where several countries and leaders openly accepted the label of "fascist" to describe their political systems, particularly in the 1930s and 1940s. However, owing to the historical record and verdict on these past fascist countries, the term has now fallen largely into disuse as an objective description. Overall, this is due to the associations between fascist regimes and racial supremacist policies, especially in Nazi Germany, although not all fascist regimes espoused racist policies.[citation needed] The term is now used more as an epithet than as a term for any existing systems. This is true even in countries where it might legitimately apply.
Facism has its roots in a form or conservitism that is quite foreign to American Politics.
Early 20th century European Conservitives believed in totalitarianism that was an extention of the Monarchical systems of Europe
this relates in no meaningful way to American Conservitives at all.
American Conserivitives draw their traditions from the founding fathers who were enlightenmenet liberals
Liberalism by definition is much more closely alligned with American Conservitives than American Liberals.
American Liberals arent even liberals (Hillary agrees by the way).
they are Progressives who are much more alligned with certain aspects of Facism and socialism than they are with the ideas of the enlightenment liberal views that are the core of True Liberalism.
So, while you are accurate in saying that Facism is more a conservitive view, you are incorrect in connecting that word "conservitive" to Modern American Politics"
American Liberals are the true conservitives.....we American Conservitives really are the true Liberals!
Ferd ... once again I am a fiscal and social conservative ... but to say that there are not Communists in the Democratic party and Fascists in the Republican party is missing it.
Rhetoric is one thing Dave ... but when we speak of socialism/communism keep in mind the economically these are leftist policies ... fascism is anti-thetical economically and for the most part politcally from these leftist ideals.
In the end game ... as extremes they both stifle free thought.
I find it intesting that you would use the word "rhetoric" to discribe Dave's comment, then end with the statement in bold.
What do you base that on?
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Rhetoric is one thing Dave ... but when we speak of socialism/communism keep in mind the economically these are leftist policies ... fascism is anti-thetical economically and for the most part politcally from these leftist ideals.
In the end game ... as extremes they both stifle free thought and civil liberties.
What were the philosophical economic differences between Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia?
__________________ "I have had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this wasn't it."
Captalism still existed in Germany ... Communist Russia worked to obliterate it in theory.
In Communism the people own the means of production.
You seem to relegate fascism/communism to strictly economic differences. While I don't believe that the economic differences were all that distinct, and many times blurred, both are complete worldviews that are much more similar than they are different. Essentially it is differences of degree and not much in true substance.
__________________ "I have had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this wasn't it."
Linear Mode
