Political memes, Posters, Funny Pics, Etc.

[kalm]

But you guys are still against fascism, right? Just checking.

Says the guy who keeps trying to avoid causes he likes to be revealed as fascism. But yes, to answer your question, I'm all against fascism, no matter which side of the aisle tries to employ it.

Which aisle?

[UNI88]

Says the guy who keeps trying to avoid causes he likes to be revealed as fascism. But yes, to answer your question, I'm all against fascism, no matter which side of the aisle tries to employ it.

Which aisle?

[Baldy]

If RootsAction says so, I guess it must be true.

[kalm]

If RootsAction says so, I guess it must be true.

Hillary fan then?

[Baldy]

If RootsAction says so, I guess it must be true.

Hillary fan then?

No thanks, she's been a solid member of your team.

[kalm]

Hillary fan then?

No thanks, she's been a solid member of your team.

Then you may not have understood the tweet.

[Baldy]

No thanks, she's been a solid member of your team.

Then you may not have understood the tweet.

That account and ones like it are set up to throw red meat to the lowest common denominator of folks. It isn't difficult to understand at all. The hard part to understand is that people actually believe the bullshit it spews.

[kalm]

Then you may not have understood the tweet.

That account and ones like it are set up to throw red meat to the lowest common denominator of folks. It isn't difficult to understand at all. The hard part to understand is that people actually believe the bullshit it spews.

You do realize it wasn’t flattering of Hillary, right? As though she (someone supposedly on the left) is congratulating a semi-fascist? Just clarifying. Thanks.

[kalm]

When MTG AND Hillary both like you…

[GannonFan]

That account and ones like it are set up to throw red meat to the lowest common denominator of folks. It isn't difficult to understand at all. The hard part to understand is that people actually believe the bullshit it spews.

You do realize it wasn’t flattering of Hillary, right? As though she (someone supposedly on the left) is congratulating a semi-fascist? Just clarifying. Thanks.

Fascism knows no political ideology or leaning. Doesn't matter if it's left or right, fascism is about power and control.

[kalm]

You do realize it wasn’t flattering of Hillary, right? As though she (someone supposedly on the left) is congratulating a semi-fascist? Just clarifying. Thanks.

Fascism knows no political ideology or leaning. Doesn't matter if it's left or right, fascism is about power and control.

That’s authoritarianism. Fascism is also nationalistic, racist, corporatist and often misogynistic. It’s historically a right wing movement. But keep convincing yourself otherwise. Easier than admitting you’re wrong. Quietly awaiting your next polemic.

[UNI88]

Fascism knows no political ideology or leaning. Doesn't matter if it's left or right, fascism is about power and control.

That’s authoritarianism. Fascism is also nationalistic, racist, corporatist and often misogynistic. It’s historically a right wing movement. But keep convincing yourself otherwise. Easier than admitting you’re wrong. Quietly awaiting your next polemic.

Ganny has already shot that argument down but for shits and giggles, what is historically left wing version of fascism? One that is nationalistic, racist, and often misogynistic? Marxism? Whatever it is, it is just as bad as fascism despite your attempts to make fascism the epitome of ideological evil.

[GannonFan]

Fascism knows no political ideology or leaning. Doesn't matter if it's left or right, fascism is about power and control.

That’s authoritarianism. Fascism is also nationalistic, racist, corporatist and often misogynistic. It’s historically a right wing movement. But keep convincing yourself otherwise. Easier than admitting you’re wrong. Quietly awaiting your next polemic.

Keep hanging on to your Wiki definition. Heck, keep editing it in case anyone edits it otherwise. Historical are just a handful of examples, and big ones at that. In reality, it's far more complicated. I would write a polemic but I don't want to kick you while you're down. Not very sporting.

[CAA Flagship]

Fascism knows no political ideology or leaning. Doesn't matter if it's left or right, fascism is about power and control.

That’s authoritarianism. Fascism is also nationalistic, racist, corporatist and often misogynistic. It’s historically a right wing movement. But keep convincing yourself otherwise. Easier than admitting you’re wrong. Quietly awaiting your next polemic.

JFC. You set a new record with the number of isms and ists in one post. And the record you broke was your own.

[Winterborn]

That’s authoritarianism. Fascism is also nationalistic, racist, corporatist and often misogynistic. It’s historically a right wing movement. But keep convincing yourself otherwise. Easier than admitting you’re wrong. Quietly awaiting your next polemic.

Ganny has already shot that argument down but for shits and giggles, what is historically left wing version of fascism? One that is nationalistic, racist, and often misogynistic? Marxism? Whatever it is, it is just as bad as fascism despite your attempts to make fascism the epitome of ideological evil.

Klam is just on a one man (I am assuming a gender here, my apologies Kalm) mission to convince us of his righteous definition.

[Winterborn]

That’s authoritarianism. Fascism is also nationalistic, racist, corporatist and often misogynistic. It’s historically a right wing movement. But keep convincing yourself otherwise. Easier than admitting you’re wrong. Quietly awaiting your next polemic.

JFC. You set a new record with the number of isms and ists in one post. And the record you broke was your own.

Bet you he breaks his own record again.

[Baldy]

That’s authoritarianism. Fascism is also nationalistic, racist, corporatist and often misogynistic. It’s historically a right wing movement. But keep convincing yourself otherwise. Easier than admitting you’re wrong. Quietly awaiting your next polemic.

Keep hanging on to your Wiki definition. Heck, keep editing it in case anyone edits it otherwise. Historical are just a handful of examples, and big ones at that. In reality, it's far more complicated. I would write a polemic but I don't want to kick you while you're down. Not very sporting.

klam seems to believe that anyone who doesn't prescribe to the progressive doctrine is a fascist.

[Baldy]

When MTG AND Hillary both like you…

Both Joe and Hillary LOVED Robert Byrd. Using your logic, that makes them supporters of the KKK.

[GannonFan]

Keep hanging on to your Wiki definition. Heck, keep editing it in case anyone edits it otherwise. Historical are just a handful of examples, and big ones at that. In reality, it's far more complicated. I would write a polemic but I don't want to kick you while you're down. Not very sporting.

klam seems to believe that anyone who doesn't prescribe to the progressive doctrine is a fascist.

Or at least a semi-fascist.

[UNI88]

Keep hanging on to your Wiki definition. Heck, keep editing it in case anyone edits it otherwise. Historical are just a handful of examples, and big ones at that. In reality, it's far more complicated. I would write a polemic but I don't want to kick you while you're down. Not very sporting.

klam seems to believe that anyone who doesn't prescribe to the progressive doctrine is a fascist.

Isn't that consistent with modern progressive doctrine? If you oppose us you're a (deplorable) fascist (threat to democracy).

[Winterborn]

Was reading about the Paris Commune of 1871 over lunch and there are some interesting similarities to what has been discussed in this thread recently (and elsewhere on the board) and those advocating for certain "beliefs".

[kalm]

That’s authoritarianism. Fascism is also nationalistic, racist, corporatist and often misogynistic. It’s historically a right wing movement. But keep convincing yourself otherwise. Easier than admitting you’re wrong. Quietly awaiting your next polemic.

Keep hanging on to your Wiki definition. Heck, keep editing it in case anyone edits it otherwise. Historical are just a handful of examples, and big ones at that. In reality, it's far more complicated . I would write a polemic but I don't want to kick you while you're down. Not very sporting.

Good lord man, you’re a glutton for punishment. We discussed sources other than wiki. You gave up then.

I’m not sure why the notion hursts you so much other than maybe your own right wing gravitation? Maybe Jordan Peterson is right that there’s a little Hitler in all of us?

Both sides can be authoritarian and violent. I’m mostly on the left but it causes me no harm to admit marxism has led to violent authoritarianism. But by all means continue and go around espousing both sides are fascist.

In every case, leaders exploited local hatreds and inflamed ordinary people against their neighbors with the constant repetition of an alarming “Big Lie” and the promises of a strongman for salvation. Every similar movement that has arisen since the end of WWII, says Yale University Professor of Philosophy Jason Stanley in the video above, has shared these characteristics: using propaganda to create an alternate reality and paying obeisance to a “cult of the leader,” no matter how repugnant his tactics, behavior, or personality. “Right wing by nature,” fascism’s patriarchal structure appeals to conservatives. While it mobilizes violence against minorities and leftists, it seduces those on the right by promising a share of the spoils and validating conservative desires for a single, unifying national narrative:

Fascism is a cult of the leader. It involves the leader setting the rules about what’s true and false. So any kind of expertise, reality, all of that is a challenge to the authority of the leader. If science would help him, then he can say, “Okay, I’ll use it.” Institutions that teach multiple perspectives on history in all its complexity are always a threat to the fascist leader.

https://www.openculture.com/2021/10/yal ... scism.html

[GannonFan]

Keep hanging on to your Wiki definition. Heck, keep editing it in case anyone edits it otherwise. Historical are just a handful of examples, and big ones at that. In reality, it's far more complicated . I would write a polemic but I don't want to kick you while you're down. Not very sporting.

Good lord man, you’re a glutton for punishment. We discussed sources other than wiki. You gave up then.

I’m not sure why the notion hursts you so much other than maybe your own right wing gravitation? Maybe Jordan Peterson is right that there’s a little Hitler in all of us?

Both sides can be authoritarian and violent. I’m mostly on the left but it causes me no harm to admit marxism has led to violent authoritarianism. But by all means continue and go around espousing both sides are fascist.

In every case, leaders exploited local hatreds and inflamed ordinary people against their neighbors with the constant repetition of an alarming “Big Lie” and the promises of a strongman for salvation. Every similar movement that has arisen since the end of WWII, says Yale University Professor of Philosophy Jason Stanley in the video above, has shared these characteristics: using propaganda to create an alternate reality and paying obeisance to a “cult of the leader,” no matter how repugnant his tactics, behavior, or personality. “Right wing by nature,” fascism’s patriarchal structure appeals to conservatives. While it mobilizes violence against minorities and leftists, it seduces those on the right by promising a share of the spoils and validating conservative desires for a single, unifying national narrative:

Fascism is a cult of the leader. It involves the leader setting the rules about what’s true and false. So any kind of expertise, reality, all of that is a challenge to the authority of the leader. If science would help him, then he can say, “Okay, I’ll use it.” Institutions that teach multiple perspectives on history in all its complexity are always a threat to the fascist leader.

https://www.openculture.com/2021/10/yal ... scism.html

Selective memory on your part (not uncommon for you either). You keep regurgitating that two historical examples of fascism were initiated on the right and you blissfully ignore the actual details of what makes fascism fascist. Just because you label violent authoritarianism from the left with a different label (actually, you don't even provide a label for that as I'm sure you think Marxism is perfectly benign) doesn't mean that they can't be fascists. And at the end of the day, it's the tactics and mechanisms that lead to the violent authoritarianism that really matter. If it starts on the left or on the right ultimately does not matter at all. If I'm in a lifeboat and I poke a hole through the hull and flood the boat, does it matter if I was sitting on the left side of the boat or the right side of the boat when I did it? In the end, the boat still sinks. You'd have us believe that labeling the two sides differently would make a difference (and making the guy on the right side more sinister). As we all drown I don't see how that's remotely helpful.

But, in this case, you actually provided a decent link for once (miracles do happen). Browsing through some of it they had Umberto Eco's (brilliant guy - rather esoteric, but he clearly had plenty of neurons firing in that brain of his) 14 typical features of Eternal Fascism, which he calls Ur-Fascism. I list them here:

But Eco is perplexed “why the word fascism became a synecdoche, that is, a word that could be used for different totalitarian movements.” For one thing, he writes, fascism was a fuzzy totalitarianism, a collage of different philosophical and political ideas, a beehive of contradictions.”

While Eco is firm in claiming “There was only one Nazism,” he says, “the fascist game can be played in many forms, and the name of the game does not change.” Eco reduces the qualities of what he calls “Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism” down to 14 “typical” features. “These features,” writes the novelist and semiotician, “cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it.”

The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”
The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”
Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”
Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”
The obsession with a plot. “Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged.”
The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”
Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”
Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”
Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”
Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”
Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

While you can certainly claim that some are the province of political thinking on the right (certainly the Contempt for the weak, and the Machismo and weaponry are almost exclusive to the right), there's literally nothing stopping political thinking on the left from exhibiting and using any of these typical features of fascism (you see it today in the Fear of Difference, the Disagreement is treason, The obsession with a plot, and most especially with the Selective populism and the Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak). So again, when fascism is divorced from the isolated and historical examples (and a fairly small sample size at that) of what fascism was, and instead broken down into the components of the characteristics that could define it, and taking Eco's cue that it doesn't have to be, and often isn't, all of these, but some combination of these, then it's pretty easy to see how anyone anywhere on the political spectrum can and does utilize fascism to advance their causes.

Lesson over. Class dismissed. Unless you need to stay after and have me explain it to you again.

[HI54UNI]

[kalm]

Good lord man, you’re a glutton for punishment. We discussed sources other than wiki. You gave up then.

I’m not sure why the notion hursts you so much other than maybe your own right wing gravitation? Maybe Jordan Peterson is right that there’s a little Hitler in all of us?

Both sides can be authoritarian and violent. I’m mostly on the left but it causes me no harm to admit marxism has led to violent authoritarianism. But by all means continue and go around espousing both sides are fascist.



https://www.openculture.com/2021/10/yal ... scism.html

Selective memory on your part (not uncommon for you either). You keep regurgitating that two historical examples of fascism were initiated on the right and you blissfully ignore the actual details of what makes fascism fascist. Just because you label violent authoritarianism from the left with a different label (actually, you don't even provide a label for that as I'm sure you think Marxism is perfectly benign) doesn't mean that they can't be fascists. And at the end of the day, it's the tactics and mechanisms that lead to the violent authoritarianism that really matter. If it starts on the left or on the right ultimately does not matter at all. If I'm in a lifeboat and I poke a hole through the hull and flood the boat, does it matter if I was sitting on the left side of the boat or the right side of the boat when I did it? In the end, the boat still sinks. You'd have us believe that labeling the two sides differently would make a difference (and making the guy on the right side more sinister). As we all drown I don't see how that's remotely helpful.

But, in this case, you actually provided a decent link for once (miracles do happen). Browsing through some of it they had Umberto Eco's (brilliant guy - rather esoteric, but he clearly had plenty of neurons firing in that brain of his) 14 typical features of Eternal Fascism, which he calls Ur-Fascism. I list them here:

But Eco is perplexed “why the word fascism became a synecdoche, that is, a word that could be used for different totalitarian movements.” For one thing, he writes, fascism was a fuzzy totalitarianism, a collage of different philosophical and political ideas, a beehive of contradictions.”

While Eco is firm in claiming “There was only one Nazism,” he says, “the fascist game can be played in many forms, and the name of the game does not change.” Eco reduces the qualities of what he calls “Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism” down to 14 “typical” features. “These features,” writes the novelist and semiotician, “cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it.”

The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”
The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”
Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”
Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”
The obsession with a plot. “Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged.”
The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”
Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”
Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”
Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”
Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”
Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

While you can certainly claim that some are the province of political thinking on the right (certainly the Contempt for the weak, and the Machismo and weaponry are almost exclusive to the right), there's literally nothing stopping political thinking on the left from exhibiting and using any of these typical features of fascism (you see it today in the Fear of Difference, the Disagreement is treason, The obsession with a plot, and most especially with the Selective populism and the Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak). So again, when fascism is divorced from the isolated and historical examples (and a fairly small sample size at that) of what fascism was, and instead broken down into the components of the characteristics that could define it, and taking Eco's cue that it doesn't have to be, and often isn't, all of these, but some combination of these, then it's pretty easy to see how anyone anywhere on the political spectrum can and does utilize fascism to advance their causes.

Lesson over. Class dismissed. Unless you need to stay after and have me explain it to you again.

My image and voice of you as I’m reading, Professor Vezzini….