Fascism and the United States of America. - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

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

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15163750
Pants-of-dog wrote:Russia is definitely a western dictatorship that is supported by some US politicians, notably the Trump faction.

Saudi Arabia is another.


Trump is widely seen as a traitor by the Western establishment (although I see him as a manifestion), and my examples obviously trump yours.

Therefore your statement of "most" is wrong. I am surprised that you would continue the argument as if I have not thought Saudi Arabia or other pro-West dictatorships.
#15163773
wat0n wrote:Sure. This example will of course be centered in the US, but you can see equivalent stuff in other countries.

The idea that a right-wing administration will impose a dictatorship, or take your rights away, ban abortion or end welfare is the counterpart to the idea that a left-wing administration will impose a different kind of dictatorship, take your guns and other property away, hike taxes to confiscatory levels, force you to abort fetuses or nationalize all healthcare.

I think we can agree that in reality both actually share quite a few ideas and policies when it comes to governing, and that neither will do any of that.


This seems like a false equivalence.

Since this does not contradict anything I have said and seems to only discuss a whataboutism as being as real and true as the thread topic, I am ignoring this.

——————

Patrickov wrote:Trump is widely seen as a traitor by the Western establishment (although I see him as a manifestion), and my examples obviously trump yours.

Therefore your statement of "most" is wrong. I am surprised that you would continue the argument as if I have not thought Saudi Arabia or other pro-West dictatorships.


Since this does not contradict my point about the USA supporting right wing dictators, and my point about ow this support can translate into support for a local right wing dictator, I am just going to leave it at that.
#15163776
Pants-of-dog wrote:This seems like a false equivalence.

Since this does not contradict anything I have said and seems to only discuss a whataboutism as being as real and true as the thread topic, I am ignoring this.


Is it? It's a true and tried form of political discourse, and heavily undermines the attempt to make it sound like 1) it's done by one side of the spectrum only, 2) it's the harbinger of fascism.

You need a lot more than that for fascism to arrive, even more so in a fiercely individualistic society like the US.
#15163782
wat0n wrote:Is it? It's a true and tried form of political discourse, and heavily undermines the attempt to make it sound like 1) it's done by one side of the spectrum only, 2) it's the harbinger of fascism.

You need a lot more than that for fascism to arrive, even more so in a fiercely individualistic society like the US.


Ignored.

——————————

Getting back to my actual point:

Trump is definitely fascism lite. He espouses a simple and readily understood nationalism that appeal to his white supporters. His economics are heavily protectionist and hierarchical. He supports police violence. He has even gotten away with ignoring important democratic checks and balances.

And one of the ways he was able to get away with all of this was by making it seem like the media, the academics, the people of colour, and the LGBTQ+ crowd were the evil bad guys who were trying to take over everything.

If this same sort of delusion continues and the next Trump like candidate takes it even further, you could easily end up with actual fascism.
#15163785
Pants-of-dog wrote:I don't have any sort of response so I'll just post I'm ignoring you to look smart


FTFY, okay. If you come up with a reason to suspect that scare tactics are not relatively common across the political spectrum, please do let me know.

By the way, what you mentioned after are things you can see from populist left-wing regimes in South America. Trump is just a right-wing counterpart to that, but it's good to see you opposing populism.
#15163787
wat0n wrote:FTFY, okay. If you come up with a reason to suspect that scare tactics are not relatively common across the political spectrum, please do let me know.

By the way, what you mentioned after are things you can see from populist left-wing regimes in South America. Trump is just a right-wing counterpart to that, but it's good to see you opposing populism.


Sure, whatever.

If you want to choose to ignore the rise of fascism in the USA because you feel that South Americans do blablabla, ho ahead.

This corroborates my point that conservatives in the USA have a tendency to justify the attacks on US democracy and that this paves a way for fascism in the USA. Thanks for providing an example.
#15163790
Pants-of-dog wrote:Sure, whatever.

If you want to choose to ignore the rise of fascism in the USA because you feel that South Americans do blablabla, ho ahead.

This corroborates my point that conservatives in the USA have a tendency to justify the attacks on US democracy and that this paves a way for fascism in the USA. Thanks for providing an example.


Do you think there has been a corresponding rise in fascism in South American countries where those populists were elected? Take, for instance, Venezuela or Nicaragua.
#15163796
wat0n wrote:Do you think there has been a corresponding rise in fascism in South American countries where those populists were elected? Take, for instance, Venezuela or Nicaragua.


I am not helping you take this thread off topic.

This red herring (where conservatives in the Us try to change the subject away from Trump and Republicans) is one way that Trump and Republicans make it easier to introduce fascism.
#15163811
I would actually say that double standards make it easier for fascism to become spread. After all, once different standards are in place according to political allegiance then why would anyone follow the key precepts of any democratic regime?
#15163812
Pants-of-dog wrote:I am not helping you take this thread off topic.

This red herring (where conservatives in the Us try to change the subject away from Trump and Republicans) is one way that Trump and Republicans make it easier to introduce fascism.

POD, there is little difference between communism and fascism. That is why you have fascists in Nicaragua and Venezuela. In Venezuela nationalism is everything.

Image

Imagine Biden or Trump dressed in an American flag.
#15163815
wat0n wrote:I would actually say that double standards make it easier for fascism to become spread. After all, once different standards are in place according to political allegiance then why would anyone follow the key precepts of any democratic regime?


I doubt it.

Has this supposedly hypocritical stance enabled an authoritarian leftist to get any power in the USA?

Because I have an actual example in Trump.
#15163828
Pants-of-dog wrote:Please explain exactly how Long subverted democracy, and used the same scare tactics as Trump did.

Thanks.


You can read a few bits in Wikipedia:

Wiki wrote:...

Once his control over the state's political apparatus was strengthened, Long pushed several bills through the 1929 session of the Louisiana State Legislature to fulfill campaign promises. His bills met opposition from legislators, wealthy citizens, and the media, but Long used aggressive tactics to ensure passage. He would appear unannounced on the floor of both the House and Senate or in House committees, corralling reluctant representatives and state senators and bullying opponents.[57][58] When an opposing legislator once suggested Long was unfamiliar with the Louisiana Constitution, he declared, "I'm the Constitution around here now."[59][60]

...

Irritated by "immoral" gambling dens and brothels in New Orleans, Long sent the National Guard to raid these establishments with orders to "shoot without hesitation". Gambling equipment was burned, sex workers were arrested, and over $25,000 was confiscated for government funds. Local newspapers ran photos of National Guardsmen forcibly searching nude women. City authorities had not requested military force, and martial law had not been declared. The Louisiana attorney general denounced Long's actions as illegal but Long rebuked him saying: "Nobody asked him for his opinion."[62]

...

In 1929, Long called a special legislative session to enact a five-cent per barrel tax on refined oil production to fund his social programs.[65] The state's oil interests opposed the bill. Long declared in a radio address that any legislator who refused to support the tax had been "bought" by oil companies. Instead of persuading the legislature, the accusation infuriated many of its members.[66] The "dynamite squad", a caucus of opponents led by freshman lawmakers Cecil Morgan and Ralph Norman Bauer, introduced an impeachment resolution against Long.[67][68] Nineteen charges were listed, ranging from blasphemy to subornation of murder.[69][note 3] Even Long's lieutenant governor, Paul Cyr, supported impeachment; he accused Long of nepotism and alleged he had made corrupt deals with a Texan oil company.[70][note 4]

Concerned, Long tried to close the session. Pro-Long Speaker John B. Fournet called for a vote to adjourn. Despite most representatives opposing adjournment, the electronic voting board tallied 68 ayes and 13 nays. This sparked confusion; anti-Long representatives began chanting that the voting machine had been rigged.[note 5] Some ran for the speaker's chair to call for a new vote but met resistance from their pro-Long colleagues,[74] sparking a brawl later known as "Bloody Monday".[69] In the scuffle, legislators threw inkwells, allegedly attacked others with brass knuckles, and Long's brother Earl bit a legislator on the neck.[5][75] Following the fight, the legislature voted to remain in session and proceed with impeachment.[76] A trial in the house took place with dozens of witnesses, including a hula dancer who claimed that Long had been "frisky" with her.[33] Impeached on eight of the 19 charges,[note 6] Long was the first Louisiana governor charged in the state's history under four different nations.[67][75]

Long was frightened by the prospect of conviction, for it would force him from the governorship and permanently disqualify him from holding public office in Louisiana.[78] He took his case to the people with a mass meeting in Baton Rouge, where he alleged that impeachement was a ploy by Standard Oil to thwart his programs.[75] The House referred the charges to the Louisiana Senate, in which conviction required a two-thirds majority. Long produced a round robin statement signed by fifteen senators pledging to vote "not guilty" regardless of the evidence. The impeachment process, now futile, was suspended. It has been alleged that both sides used bribes to buy votes and that Long later rewarded the round robin signers with positions or other favors.[79][80]

Following the failed trial, Long treated his opponents ruthlessly. He fired their relatives from state jobs and supported their challengers in elections. Long concluded that extra-legal means would be needed to accomplish his goals: "I used to try to get things done by saying 'please.' Now... I dynamite 'em out of my path."[81] Receiving death threats, he surrounded himself with bodyguards.[82] Now a resolute critic of the "lying" press,[55] Long tried to place a surtax on newspapers and forbid the publication of "slanderous material", but these efforts were defeated.[82] In March 1930, Long established his own newspaper: the Louisiana Progress. The paper was extremely popular, widely distributed by policemen, highway workers, and government truckers.[55][83][84]

...

Long was an ardent supporter of the state's flagship public university, Louisiana State University (LSU). Having been unable to attend, Long now regarded it as "his" university.[113] He increased LSU's funding, expanded its enrollment, and authorized financial support for poorer students. He intervened in the university's affairs, choosing its president and expelling seven students who criticized him in the school newspaper.[114][115] He constructed new buildings, including a fieldhouse that reportedly contained the longest pool in the United States.[113][116][117] Long founded an LSU Medical School in New Orleans.[118][note 9] To raise the stature of the football program, he converted the school's military marching band into the flashy "Show Band of the South" and hired Costa Rican composer Castro Carazo as the band director.[113] As well as nearly doubling the size of the stadium,[113] he arranged for lowered train fares, so students could travel to away games. Long's contributions resulted in LSU gaining a class A accreditation from the Association of American Universities.[113]

...

Long continued to maintain effective control of Louisiana while he was a senator, blurring the boundary between federal and state politics.[169] Long chose his childhood friend, Oscar K. Allen, to succeed King in the January 1932 election. With the support of Long's voter base, Allen won easily, permitting Long to resign as governor and take his seat in the U.S. Senate in January 1932.[170][171] Allen, widely viewed as a puppet, dutifully enacted Long's policies. When Long visited Louisiana, Allen would relinquish his office for the Senator, working instead at his receptionist's desk.[166][172] Though he had no constitutional authority, Long continued to draft and press bills through the Louisiana State Legislature.[173] One of the laws passed was what Long called "a tax on lying"—a 2 percent tax on newspaper advertising revenue.[174]

In 1934, Long and James A. Noe, an independent oilman and member of the Louisiana State Senate from Ouachita Parish, formed the controversial Win or Lose Oil Company. The firm was established to obtain leases on state-owned lands so that its directors might collect bonuses and sublease the mineral rights to the major oil companies. Although ruled legal, these activities were done in secret, and the stockholders were unknown to the public. Long made a profit on the bonuses and the resale of those state leases and used the funds primarily for political purposes.[175]

...
#15163831
wat0n wrote:You can read a few bits in Wikipedia:


Most of that is dross.

The only thing that seems even vaguely anti-democratic is using the National Guard as a police force.

The last paragraph is a nice example of him abusing his authority to profit as a capitalist would. This contradicts the idea that leftists are doing this in order to enact Marxism.
#15163833
Pants-of-dog wrote:Most of that is dross.

The only thing that seems even vaguely anti-democratic is using the National Guard as a police force.

The last paragraph is a nice example of him abusing his authority to profit as a capitalist would. This contradicts the idea that leftists are doing this in order to enact Marxism.


Funny, because Trump acted similarly, perhaps even less blatantly than Long did. So Trump's actions would be dross too, then.
#15163834
wat0n wrote:Funny, because Trump acted similarly, perhaps even less blatantly than Long did. So Trump's actions would be dross too, then.


No.

Trump deliberately circumvented checks and balances by ignoring congressional oversight, as well as attempted to subvert an election by providing misinformation.
#15163837
Pants-of-dog wrote:No.

Trump deliberately circumvented checks and balances by ignoring congressional oversight, as well as attempted to subvert an election by providing misinformation.


Huey Long did the same by intimidating Louisiana's Congressmen and blurring the lines between Federal and State officials by effectively acting as Governor while being an US Senator (this is also one of the checks and balances of the US). We ignore if he'd have tried to subvert a losing election since, unlike Trump, he was actually popular.
#15163841
wat0n wrote:Huey Long did the same by intimidating Louisiana's Congressmen and blurring the lines between Federal and State officials by effectively acting as Governor while being an US Senator (this is also one of the checks and balances of the US).


No, these are not comparable. The first is not even illegal. Being rude and imposing is not anti-democratic.

And the fact that his lapdog did his bidding does not change the fact the lapdog still acted within the law and did not introduce socialist policies in an authoritarian manner.

We ignore if he'd have tried to subvert a losing election since, unlike Trump, he was actually popular.


Yes, that is why you have no evidence.
#15163844
Pants-of-dog wrote:No, these are not comparable. The first is not even illegal. Being rude and imposing is not anti-democratic.


He seems to have been more than simply rude and imposing although that was also cited as evidence of Trump's disregard for the rule of law.

Pants-of-dog wrote:And the fact that his lapdog did his bidding does not change the fact the lapdog still acted within the law and did not introduce socialist policies in an authoritarian manner.


That depends, actually, his lapdog did not but it would seem he did by de facto assuming official State capacity. He even drafted bills and seemingly presented them to the Louisiana Congress.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Yes, that is why you have no evidence.


I didn't claim Long tried to subvert an election, though. I only claimed he was an authoritarian leftist who subverted democracy in the USA, at least in LA. This is clearly true (and yes, he was leftist, he would be now and was at the time to the extent that he was to the left of FDR).
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
Israel-Palestinian War 2023

Sharon only got away the relative modest settleme[…]

Who needs a wall? We have all those land mines ju[…]

Puffer Fish, as a senior (and olde) member of this[…]

As someone that pays very close attention to Amer[…]