CCP announces plan to take control of China's private sector - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

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

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15122293
Godstud wrote:
1. Hyper-nationalism. This attribute is not confined to fascism, but it is central to all fascism. Trump regularly promises to put America first and extolls the virtues of ordinary Americans (by which he often seems to mean white Americans). His trade policy qualifies as economic nationalism. By the standards of American politics, he is a hyper-nationalist, but by the standards of historical fascism, he is not in the upper echelon. Two Benitos.

2. Militarism. Fascists routinely lionized military institutions and military virtues, and at least rhetorically sought military solutions to political issues. Trump lavishes praise on the troops, as almost all American politicians do these days, and he has proposed (in vague and vulgar terms) a militaristic solution to the problem posed by the Islamic State. He has recommend taking the oil of the Middle East, which presumably would require armed force. But by and large, Trump does not blithely recommend military action and often lambastes his rivals for allegedly incompetent military adventurism. He does not dress his followers in ersatz military garb. Two Benitos.

3. Glorification of violence and readiness to use it in politics. Fascists such as Mussolini thought violence could cleanse and redeem a tarnished nation. They encouraged loyal thugs to rough up, and occasionally kill, people whose politics differed from theirs. Trump scores low here. His rallies, according to many reports, have a frisson of menace to them; he has said things that could be interpreted asinvitations to assassination; his followers often speak longingly of violent acts they wish to see committed against others; he has recommended using torture and killing the families of terrorists. But this still leaves him well short of the standard of Mussolini’s blackshirts or Hitler’s brownshirts, who not only called for political violence but resorted to it extensively. One Benito. - Trump offered to pay legal expenses for people who beat up protesters, so we have to upgrade that to Two Benitos -

4. Fetishization of youth. Fascist movements, even when led by middle-aged men, always extolled the vigor and promise of youth and made special efforts to appeal to young people. Trump, as a septuagenarian, is ill-positioned here. He has no special youth organization to speak of. His most devoted followers are long in the tooth. Zero Benitos.

5. Fetishization of masculinity. Fascists trumpeted what they saw as masculine virtues and supported male authority within family and society, urging women to confine their sphere to home and children (the more of which the better). Trump shares much of this outlook, lauding his own stamina and accusing his femalerival, Hillary Clinton, of lacking it. He mocks men whom he deems deficient in virility. But whereas Mussolini liked to hold up his own mother, devoted to home and hearth, as the feminine ideal, Trump’s vision of the proper woman seems to be a supermodel, more in line with Hugh Hefner’s ideology than Mussolini’s. Nonetheless, on swaggering machismo he gets full marks. Four Benitos.

6. Leader cult. Fascists always looked to a leader who was bold, decisive, manly, uncompromising and cruel when necessary — because the parlous state of the nation required such qualities. Mussolini and Hitler, both veterans of World War I, drew their models of leadership from army officers and worked hard to polish their images as dauntless rulers beholden to no one. They encouraged their followers to idolize them as Il Duce and der Führer. They claimed special insight into the will of the people. Trump, although not a war veteran, fully embraces the cult of the leader. He offers his business experience as evidence of his decisive leadership and is very testy when his business acumen is doubted. He also claims to channel the common man, enjoying a connection all other politicians lack. Four Benitos.

7. Lost-golden-age syndrome. Italian and German fascism shared a strong commitment to the notion of national rebirth. Mussolini and Hitler encouraged their supporters to believe in lost (or stolen) greatness, in a glorious past. That could be long ago, as with the Roman Empire, which Mussolini liked to invoke, or only a couple of decades prior, as with the German Reich that was, according to Hitler, “stabbed in the back” in 1918. Trump makes this appeal to a golden age the centerpiece of his campaign, assuring audiences that only he can “make America great again.” Four Benitos.

8. Self-definition by opposition. Fascists defined themselves as the bulwark against various evils and menaces to the nation. Those included communism, routine democratic politics, the traditional conservatism of industrial and agrarian elites (although both Mussolini and Hitler eventually made peace with these elites), and, especially in the German case, foreigners and minorities. Communism is no longer an issue for American politics. But Trump constantly rails against politics as usual, against political correctness, against elites of all kinds (including, curiously, business elites), and he has made a habit of vilifying minorities. He does not advocate their annihilation, as Hitler did. Three Benitos.

As a political movement, fascism displayed three further important traits:

9. Mass mobilization and mass party. Both Mussolini and Hitler rode to power on tidal waves of support that were organized into new political parties. A new party might fit Trump better, but he has not created one. Instead he has made a venerable one, the Grand Old Party, into his vehicle. He likes to refer to his following as a movement, and since the GOP convention in July has rarely tried to brand himself as a Republican. Many in his party loathe him. Two Benitos.

10. Hierarchical party structure and tendency to purge the disloyal. Fascist movements, like revolutions, ate their children. Anyone who displayed only tepid loyalty to the leader or who showed the potential to outshine the leader risked being purged or killed. So did followers who outlived their usefulness. Trump’s campaign shares this tendency toward purges, but the Republican Party under his leadership does not. And violence plays no role. One Benito.

11. Theatricality. In style and rhetoric, fascism was highly theatrical. Film and audio of Mussolini and Hitler make them seem like clownish buffoons, with their exaggerated gestures, their salutes, their overheated speeches full of absolutes and superlatives. Their rallies evolved into elaborate collective rituals for loyalists. Trump does not strut across stages like a Mussolini, and Nazi-style torchlit parades are out, but his rhetoric fits the fascist style well. He constantly calls things and people the worst or the best ever. His rallies feature repetitive chants. Even his studied frown of disapproval recalls a classic Mussolini pose. Three Benitos. - Another we have to upgrade to Four Benitos since Trump is all theatrical and no substance -


Add all this up, and you get 26 out of a possible 44 Benitos. In the fascist derby, Trump is a loser. Even Spain’s Francisco Franco and Portugal’s António de Oliveira Salazar might score higher. While there is a strong family resemblance, and with some features an uncanny likeness, Trump doesn’t fit the profile so well on those points where the use of violence is required. Projecting an air of menace at rallies, uttering ambiguous calls for assassinations, tacitly endorsing the roughing-up of protesters, urging the killing of terrorists’ families and whatever else Trump does — while shocking by the standards of American politics — fall far short of the genuinely murderous violence endorsed and unleashed by authentic fascists.

In a more nuanced approach, we might weight the various traits of fascism differently, but it’s not obvious how best to do so. Hyper-nationalism, for example, is more consequential than the youth fetish and perhaps ought to be taken more seriously. But it is also less distinctively fascist, being common to many types of political regimes. A longer list, too, might add refinement and complexity. But Trump does not do nuance. A crude, quick and flippant assessment is what he deserves. He is semi-fascist: more fascist than any successful American politician yet, and the most dangerous threat to pluralist democracy in this country in more than a century, but — thank our stars — an amateurish imitation of the real thing.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... -for-that/



Since Member Unthinking Majority claims China a Fascist state I think mentioning anyone else is irrelevant.


Let's fit the above criteria to China.

China certainly fits 1, 3, 6, 7, 8 (against the US), 9, 10; and on occasions 2 and 11.

They were opposite of 4 before 8964, now somewhat neutral.

5 is more like the trait of the people rather than the government, but compared to Arabia, India or even Japan, it's absurd to suggest Chinese are misogynists.


Another two cents earlier this year:
viewtopic.php?p=15070918#p15070918
#15122393
Rancid wrote:What? Naaaah. You have nothing to worry about. I'm sure China will be benevolent towards the rest of the world. Hong Kong? India border disputes? Taiwan? South China Sea disputes and threats with nearly everyone? Censorship and control over the citizenry? Debt trap diplomacy in Africa and Latin American? Meddling in Sri Lankan and Maldives politics? Installing a president/dictator for life?....Nothing to worry about... nothing.


Posts like this are known as a gish gallop.

They will be 100x better than the US, even as they engage in the same behaviors as the US.


China isn't imperialist as we keep hearing from the brainwashed, nor denies its citizens housing, education, healthcare etc. In what ways does it engage in the same behaviours as the U.S.? If you plan to do another gish gallop post, please add some sources this time.

Even as they openly express how they want to be the world's dominant military power. Nothing to be concerned about here. Nothing.


When did China openly express it wants to be the world's dominant military power? Citation needed.
#15122434
China is a Communist tyranny with a Capitalist system. It's not a fascist state. They allow free market capitalism on a small scale, but when it starts making big bucks, the Party takes notice and wants its due.
#15122473
Rancid wrote:YOOOO!

Maoist Rebel News!

He's still around!

I remember I was told about this youtube channel about 10-12 years ago by one of @Verv's friend when I hung out with him in Korea. I remember watching a few of his videos back then.


Oh yeah, man, I remember we were talking about that because Jason Unruhe looks abnormally like my friend Morgan.

Morgan had created a troll account and spent a year or two just occasionally leaving comments like "Why do you look like me?"

"Who are you? Why are you doing this?"
#15122493
wat0n wrote:China is quite possibly the best contemporary example of State Capitalism, rhetoric aside.


Aka literally SOCIALISM.

CPC proclaims China a socialist country with Chinese characteristics following a mixture of Confucian and Marxist ideals. Marx was all about scientific socialism, and that's exactly what the CPC has been implementing, aka state capitalist experiments in special economic zones with big national economic champions spearheading larger scale efforts to invigorate the means of production in domestic and global markets. Large private enterprise is merely tolerated, but it is not paramount. See CPC's social curbs on mobile gaming which hurt Tencent badly and now it is getting ready to block the sale of TikTok.
#15122500
Igor Antunov wrote:Aka literally SOCIALISM.

CPC proclaims China a socialist country with Chinese characteristics following a mixture of Confucian and Marxist ideals. Marx was all about scientific socialism, and that's exactly what the CPC has been implementing, aka state capitalist experiments in special economic zones with big national economic champions spearheading larger scale efforts to invigorate the means of production in domestic and global markets. Large private enterprise is merely tolerated, but it is not paramount. See CPC's social curbs on mobile gaming which hurt Tencent badly and now it is getting ready to block the sale of TikTok.


I highly doubt socialists would agree with that characterization of socialism :lol:
#15122510
Rancid wrote:YOOOO!

Maoist Rebel News!

He's still around!

I remember I was told about this youtube channel about 10-12 years ago by one of @Verv's friend when I hung out with him in Korea. I remember watching a few of his videos back then.


Yep. Obviously I do have some disagreements with him politically, but I try to make a habit of posting things from others when they happen to be correct to me also. China isn't exactly Socialist anymore to him, I don't know, maybe it's just a case of theory meeting reality and being tested by it, tweeking it, making adjustments. And if that means more Confucius and less Marx to the Chinese, what can I say?
#15122540
annatar1914 wrote: China isn't exactly Socialist


They haven't been for an extremely long time. Calling themselves socialist/communist is more of a marketing thing.

Anyway, I always say they are the world's best capitalist. They are playing that game better than anyone else. It's more like a state managed capitalism. They allow capitalism, so long as it aligns or doesn't interfere with state (CCP) goals and ambitions. The goals and ambitions are not communistic nor socialist. That's just wrapping paper. The goal is to restore the glory of China, which is a euphemism for establishing an empire with global reach/dominance. This is not conspiracy or a secret, Xi Jingping and the CCP say's shit like this all the time. It's not hard to find this and their actions around the globe, they don't hide much, I don't have to spoon feed evidence of all of this to intellectually lazy people like skinster who would just ignore it all anyway. This too is just a lazy "argument" technique lazy ass people like her use.

If someone claims to be anti-imperialist, then they should be against the actions of BOTH the US and China, not just the US. It's clear, these people are a bunch of fakers. As I always say, I never need or care for people to agree with me, but what I do need is for people to be consistent. Most if not all of the pofo people that claim to be anti-imperialist aren't consistent in this respect. It becomes clear when they bash the actions of the US or EU (which is totally fine to do so by the way), but then turn a blind eye, or even apologize for the actions of say Russia or China.
#15122548
wat0n wrote:I highly doubt socialists would agree with that characterization of socialism :lol:


There isn't really a consensus on what to describe China. Maoists denounce China as"revisonist" and "imperialist," many Trotskyists claim it's "just capitalist," and everything in between including critical support.

Rancid wrote:If someone claims to be anti-imperialist, then they should be against the actions of BOTH the US and China, not just the US.


Nonsense. The idea that China is some major imperialist power even close to approaching that of the West just doesn't align with reality.

Rancid wrote:It becomes clear when they bash the actions of the US or EU (which is totally fine to do so by the way), but then turn a blind eye, or even apologize for the actions of say Russia or China.


It's almost as if they're not all the same!
#15122552
KurtFF8 wrote:Nonsense. The idea that China is some major imperialist power even close to approaching that of the West just doesn't align with reality.


I agree, they are not...yet. That doesn't mean it's ok to excuse their obvious imperialistic behaviors and openly stated ambitions either. By ignoring/excusing China's actions, you will just end up with another empire once the US is pushed out. If you are really anti-imperialist, you would be against current empires and potential raising empires (i.e. China). If the idea/hope is that once China supersedes the west, that they will establish some sort of international workers utopia, then that is a mistaken idea.

KurtFF8 wrote:It's almost as if they're not all the same!

I don't understand this comment.

That said, fundamentally, they are the same. These are all regional/global powers vying for supremacy. None are interested in establishing a global order where workers have more power.Willfully ignoring China's actions is going to bring you right back to where we are now. Workers being exploited constantly, just under a different regime.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Many Republicans think that disenfranchising black[…]

The Wuhan virus—how are we doing?

@Finfinder If you cannot support your argument[…]

Election 2020

President Trump has been a worker in America. He […]

"Macron is one of the few leaders who worshi[…]