The philosophical foundations of Fascist ideology are sophistry - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The non-democratic state: Platonism, Fascism, Theocracy, Monarchy etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14849574
Nimaiejshg wrote:What specific events do you think would result in the US becoming a fascist state?


It would require a broader and clearer realization that democracy is a failure, and an authoritarian alternative is needed. For many years the US national debt has kept rising, because in our democracy you just can't cut benefits or raise taxes sufficiently to stop it. The essential solution--sacrifice--is just too unpopular. But while informed people realize democracy is the crux of the problem, as long as we're still outwardly doing OK there's no pressing need or demand for change. A major economic meltdown, due to the failings of present government, should do it. There are a number of other possibilities. Btw while the US may ultimately turn into something resembling a fascist state, I doubt that term will be used.
#14849985
MB. wrote:Since the self-described fascists on this forum refuse to debate me every time I point out that their ideology is a bunch of rubbish, I'll take this direct to the people.

The philosophical underpinning of the fascist ideology is based on pure sophistry, usually combined with appalling historical ignorance, reactionaryism, social Darwinism, and other bankrupt ideological rubbish. It has no place in the modern world. Period.


I must echo the sentiments of others on here and say that this sort of rhetoric poisons-the-well for any serious debate, and I was tempted to just read the comments and not respond myself, but since no one is here to defend the position being criticized, and the alleged proponent of fascism is being spoken of without being here to defend the position, I feel the need to stand the gap. Even though fascism is not my position, I would rather honest debate continue for the sake of truth and entertainment as no one really enjoys or gains anything from watching an intellectual circle-jerk.

My position of Imperialism is similar to Fascism, only I deny a protectionist and non-interventionist approach to nationalism and see colonization and empire building as necessary for the perpetuation of civilization, I am also clearer on the need for a national church (state religion) and less "statist" in the organization of the corporate structure of social and institutional spheres, though there is definite overlap. I also reject a purely darwinian and symmetrical theory of race (contra National Socialism) and favor a patriarchal-spiritual theory of race and nationhood. Thus, regarding such nuances, I will defend fascism in contrast to my position only as a devil's advocate unless you are content to merely debate my position (as its probably close enough to equally receive your ire).

In any event, here I am, I will debate you in defense of either position. 8) (actually, against you, I'd probably be willing to defend any position)

Also, since you seem to have a shallow or simplistic understanding of such positions, I suggest you ask questions first and run your mouth later. This may redeem whatever esteem you have lost in the eyes of your peers for your posting quality thus far. ;)

@Negotiator , Many populations don't support goi[…]

Cricket

:roll: It's either "I don't care", or &[…]

One would imagine that any sentient being would re[…]

The Central Plaza mall parking lot at opening time[…]