Are Liberals That Capable of Defeating the Fascists?

[JSJ]

I ask because liberals, or Democrats, are the only entity annointed by media to be the fascists' only 'approved' opposition- much as Republicans (fascists) have been annointed by mass media to be the dominant political force in the nation. So far, liberals seem to be too encumbered by the same quest for profits, comfort, and dominance that make fascism so enticing to so many- not to mention their concurrent support for such slogans as 'support the troops' and 'acorns for Israel' (an old fundraising slogan better converted to 'a-bombs for Israel'- ie.; support for zionism). It is within these two areas of support- as well as many others- that make any difference between the two majors seem very, very thin.

And if you think liberals are not up to the task of defending 'American' values from the onslaught of Bush's fascist program, then who among the various political movements would be better in the role of true opponent of all things Republican or fascist?

[Swamp Rat]

1. Americans will defeat the fascists

I'm sorta confused with all the designations mentioned. Let's dispense with these labels, or at least shift them to a new location in the dialectic.

For clarity's sake let's just say, Americans will defeat the fascists.

Americans are up to the task.

[JSJ]

2. okay...

..., but my point is liberalism has long been failing to budge America off it's fascist path. Is there a better orthodoxy to deal with fascism's increasing hold on America and the world? And isn't the struggle one that, not only 'Americans', but the world must be involved in?

[Swamp Rat]

4. Yes

The people of the world are already engaged in this struggle.

So in this discourse we're to examine what "ism" can defeat the other.

How about if I put it this way: Americanism can defeat fascism.

Note: The current administration is attempting to redefine Americanism and morph it into fascism.

[thebobartist]

3. The more important question is,

is calling Republicans "fascists" accurate, or is it amazingly immature?

[Swamp Rat]

5. No, you have a point

But I might put it this way: many fascists call themselves Republicans. It's camouflage.

[thebobartist]

7. Hm.

That is a very good point. But when we use "fascist", are we really talking about the actual fascists, or just using it as a general term of "endearment"?

[Swamp Rat]

8. Oh...

I was referring to "actual fascists." You know, the people that use it as a term of endearment.

[thebobartist]

10. Oh dear.

I see.

[porphyrian]

24. What is your problem with using an apt word?

Look at the definition:

Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: 'fa-"shi-z&m also 'fa-"si-
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality -- J. W. Aldridge>


I'd like to see your arguments that current Republican policy differs from this.

[JSJ]

6. that is a good republican question n/t

[Algomas]

9. There is a Lee Perry song...

that goes "too much ism and schism, it's a sufferers time" or something like that.
He is right and I am left thinking it might be a good time to build bridges. The Bu$hco agenda is sinking all our boats. If we can somehow get the message to rank & file republican voters that a vote for Bu$h is a vote against their own best interest it will be a landslide for Kerry.
I know there is considerable unrest in the veteran population, the underfunded retirees, the outsourced, etc.etc.

[JSJ]

11. it's apparent my question went over the heads...

...of those 'liberals'- or Democrats if you prefer- who replied to my post. Or, perhaps... it's a question they wish not to ponder. Thus, I'm rephrasing and re-loading it into a declarative; Liberals ARE incapable of taking down fascists because they won't condemn or even acknowledge the principles they commonly share- those, among many, being 'support the troops', militarism in general, 'torture as commendable practice in certain instances', and corporate capitalism. Of course, a few of the responders may not be liberals at all- they may in fact be closer to fascists. Same camo- different message board. In fact, I was close to asking the E-bay spammer if he is a freeper. But, I don't want to do that.

[Blue Wally]

12. Well..........

By that logic, true "liberals" should form their own third party or vote for Nader and say "a pox on both your houses". Where would that get us?.

[JSJ]

13. where would that get us?

That would take us one step closer away from the powersharing between professional 'liberals' and fascists. It won't be easy and can't be contained in a slogan- but it will make for us a better world.

[Blue Wally]

15. In other words

Go with Mao on a "long march" into the wilderness. Let the Republicans run the country for twenty years or more and the Democratic Party dies out like the Brit Liberal Party while we rebuild our strength then come back to power with an ideologically pure liberal party?

[Swamp Rat]

14. Your definition of Liberal?

You may be correct, but what is your definition of "liberal?" You made a declaration - that is fine - but please clarify what "liberal" or a "liberal person" is to you.

As for freepers, or people with low post counts making drive-by spams, I couldn't say... especially since I have such a low post count.

[JSJ]

16. today's 'liberal' can be defined as...

...someone who says he likes, in equal measure; Negroes, recycling, supporting the troops, but not the war, and sharing power with fascists. It doesn't go much beyond these oft stated views, though. For example, Pitt's a liberal.

[Swamp Rat]

17. Then I don't agree

with your definition of "today's liberal."

"Bill O'Reilly, is that you?" (Dave Chapelle quote)

[JSJ]

18. what's yours, then? n/t

[Swamp Rat]

21. I agree with ronatchig

and would add that "liberalism" means supporting autonomy of the individual, protection of civil rights and liberties - some folks call this progressivism perhaps due to the stigma attached to the word "liberal" fostered by folks like Newt Gingritch and the Bob Boudelangs of America.

[ronatchig]

19. Well lets see

the progressive wing of the Democratic party (much out of favor in some circles) advocates labor rights, enforcement of antitrust laws,single payer healthcare,putting teeth in corporate fraud law, Fair trade, prison reform. All of these are good antidotes to fascism imho.
After saying that, the thing is I wonder how many people realize how far down the road to a full blown fascist state we have come before Bushco ever hit the national stage. I will site as examples: Corporations abilities to knowingly commit an array of crimes against citizens, the enviroment, and the people of the world without a worry of doing more than paying a fine or just a legal fee, the absolute power that prosecuters(both local and federal) hold, the ability of companies to demand urine samples as conditions of employment.

It is my opinion that the corporate state has been a fact for many years now, it's just that thru Bushco's hubris and stupidity that the corporate state has been outed for all to see. To many have said , well I don't commit crimes so what happens to those who do are not my concern, to many have said well I don't use drugs , why should I care if all should prove with body fluids they don't. Well, I'm making a good living off the corporate state, why should I care there are children starving.

The outlook is indeed dower, however I take comfort in the fact that not even the richest get out alive.

[NuttyFluffers]

20. I have hope...

because no matter what fascism, especially if it was american fascism, would last a very short period. the world could not tolerate that condition for very long - something would have to give.

either fascism will be beaten by
a. non-violently by elections,
b. after elections by popular denunciation through scandals,
c. after elections from violence from within,
d. after elections from violence from outside against us,
e. from overconsumption, overstretched, overbloated system run by incompetent boobs.

the neo-cons cannot ever have their lasting victory - it is preordained. they can only create a more hellacious aftermath to live through. it is our job to spare us, our children, and the rest of the world the more horrible of fates.

i prefer option a. but we shall see how long america (the beautiful) will dance with the devil. and you never dance with the devil and leave unchanged...

[Swamp Rat]

22. Yes, the NeoCons will consume each other in the end

and the longer they are in power, the more likely we'll experience a "hellacious aftermath."

Non-violent elections is the best option. Let's hope it works because the other choices are progressively worse.

[Killarney]

23. Liberals will never be able to defeat the fascists until

we learn what the fascists have learned so well.

Unity.

Every day, here at DU, I see firsthand why Democrats lose. We're too busy fighting amongst ourselves (naive ideologues vs pragmatic) to have unity and win.

[Swamp Rat]

25. Funny

I see the disagreements between the "naive ideologues vs pragmatic(s)," as well the rest of the crowd under the "big tent," as one of our strengths. This doesn't mean we're not unified. Did you not see the millions of Americans protesting against the war last year?

We could follow a narrow, myopic path - think Bill O'Reilly and his ilk - and end up falling off a cliff like a herd of lemmings.

edit: formatting problem

[Killarney]

26. I don't know

It's probably a html command. Did you do any formatting?
Is there anything in brackets?

[Swamp Rat]

27. Brackets... Doh!

Thanks but I figured it out. I was using brackets to add an 's' to the word "pragmatic." I was just trying to follow "academic" rules... I hope the DU Elves forgive a newbie.

[Q]

28. There are few 'liberals' left in the Democratic party...

...thanks to the DLC. They have no power within the party and have been driven out like the true conservatives in the GOP.

- This leaves the loyal Democratic opposition. Oops.