backdoor gun control

[huskertim]

It's been a while since my last Poli Sci class in college but I don't think your definition of Facism is exactly teextbook. Admittedly, the term has evelvoved graeatly since it's inception during Mussolini"s reign but the gist of it is " Everthing in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state" -Mussolini 1928.

The idea that the state has the right to dictate, interfer with and regulate all aspects of life is patently contrary to everything embodied in the constitution.

The idea that Facism and Socialism are mutually exclusive is rediculous at best. (see Stalin, Po Pok, even to a lesser extent Sadam).

Whether left or right is a mute point. Authoritarianism is the enemy and both parties engage in way too much of it.

When you find yourself on the wrong end of the gun, do you really care what label is being worn by the guy who pulls the trigger?

[huskertim]

For the record, I am a registered republican, not proud of my party. My leaning are Libritarian. WHy then do I favor a corrupt right wing party over a corrupt left wing party. It comes down to money. Money equals power and the more taxes we pay, the greater the power they have. To think that my liberties are anymore at risk with one party over the other outside of their ability to enforce thier will (via my money) would be very naive.

[carlfense]

It's been a while since my last Poli Sci class in college but I don't think your definition of Facism is exactly teextbook. Admittedly, the term has evelvoved graeatly since it's inception during Mussolini"s reign but the gist of it is " Everthing in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state" -Mussolini 1928.

The idea that the state has the right to dictate, interfer with and regulate all aspects of life is patently contrary to everything embodied in the constitution.

The idea that Facism and Socialism are mutually exclusive is rediculous at best. (see Stalin, Po Pok, even to a lesser extent Sadam).

Whether left or right is a mute point. Authoritarianism is the enemy and both parties engage in way too much of it.

When you find yourself on the wrong end of the gun, do you really care what label is being worn by the guy who pulls the trigger?

 

1. I never said that fascism and socialism were mutually exclusive. I said that socialists and fascists generally hate each other. The bigger problem here is that people erroneously equate disfavored policies with fascism and socialism. (Example: Obama is going to raise taxes, he is a socialist fascist. Alternatively, George W. Bush invaded Iraq, he is a fascist.)

 

2. No, the idea that "Fascism and Socialism are mutually exclusive" is NOT ridiculous at best. If you actually want to use the capitalized versions of fascism and socialism then you are referring to the respective political parties and not to the political philosophies. It'd be the equivalent of me accusing you of being a Republican Democrat. (Sen. Specter??)

 

3. Just because something is contrary to the constitution (which is a great little phrase that people like to throw around, without apparently even realizing what is ACTUALLY IN THE CONSTITUTION!) does NOT mean that it is fascist or socialist. It MIGHT be fascist or socialist, but just because something is not in the constitution does not automatically confer that.

 

Fascism=RIGHT WING! If anything the Republicans are more likely to be fascist.

Fascism is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascism is also a corporatist economic ideology. Fascists advocate the creation of a single-party state. Fascists believe that nations and races are in perpetual conflict whereby only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and by asserting themselves in combat against the weak. Fascist governments forbid and suppress criticism and opposition to the government and the fascist movement. Fascism opposes class conflict and blames capitalist liberal democracies for creating class conflict and in turn blames communists for exploiting class conflict.

 

Socialism=LEFT WING! If anything the Democrats are more likely to be socialist.

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital, creates an unequal society, and does not provide equal opportunities for everyone in society. Therefore socialists advocate the creation of a society in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly based on the amount of work expended in production, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.

 

Are you suggesting Obama is both a right and left wing radical? Or is it just that you disagree with him and want to pigeon hole him with an unfavorable label?

[carlfense]

It's been a while since my last Poli Sci class in college but I don't think your definition of Facism is exactly teextbook. Admittedly, the term has evelvoved graeatly since it's inception during Mussolini"s reign but the gist of it is " Everthing in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state" -Mussolini 1928.

The idea that the state has the right to dictate, interfer with and regulate all aspects of life is patently contrary to everything embodied in the constitution.

The idea that Facism and Socialism are mutually exclusive is rediculous at best. (see Stalin, Po Pok, even to a lesser extent Sadam).

Whether left or right is a mute point. Authoritarianism is the enemy and both parties engage in way too much of it.

When you find yourself on the wrong end of the gun, do you really care what label is being worn by the guy who pulls the trigger?

 

1. I never said that fascism and socialism were mutually exclusive. I said that socialists and fascists generally hate each other. The bigger problem here is that people erroneously equate disfavored policies with fascism and socialism. (Example: Obama is going to raise taxes, he is a socialist fascist. Alternatively, George W. Bush invaded Iraq, he is a fascist.)

 

2. No, the idea that "Fascism and Socialism are mutually exclusive" is NOT ridiculous at best. If you actually want to use the capitalized versions of fascism and socialism then you are referring to the respective political parties and not to the political philosophies. It'd be the equivalent of me accusing you of being a Republican Democrat. (Sen. Specter??)

 

3. Just because something is contrary to the constitution (which is a great little phrase that people like to throw around, without apparently even realizing what is ACTUALLY IN THE CONSTITUTION!) does NOT mean that it is fascist or socialist. It MIGHT be fascist or socialist, but just because something is not in the constitution does not automatically confer that.

 

Fascism=RIGHT WING! If anything the Republicans are more likely to be fascist.

Fascism is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascism is also a corporatist economic ideology. Fascists advocate the creation of a single-party state. Fascists believe that nations and races are in perpetual conflict whereby only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and by asserting themselves in combat against the weak. Fascist governments forbid and suppress criticism and opposition to the government and the fascist movement. Fascism opposes class conflict and blames capitalist liberal democracies for creating class conflict and in turn blames communists for exploiting class conflict.

 

Socialism=LEFT WING! If anything the Democrats are more likely to be socialist.

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital, creates an unequal society, and does not provide equal opportunities for everyone in society. Therefore socialists advocate the creation of a society in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly based on the amount of work expended in production, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.

 

Are you suggesting Obama is both a right and left wing radical? Or is it just that you disagree with him and want to pigeon hole him with an unfavorable label?

[huskertim]

Isn't it possible that I see the problem not in the spectrum of Socialist V Facist but rather in Authoritarian V Anarcist terms and thusly don't particuarly favor either party.

Doesn't your second point disprove your first. Could I not be a registered Republican with stong a democratic philosipies (let's watch the CAPS) and, by the way I have perrused the Constitution a time or two my friend.

[carlfense]

Isn't it possible that I see the problem not in the spectrum of Socialist V Facist but rather in Authoritarian V Anarcist terms and thusly don't particuarly favor either party.

Doesn't your second point disprove your first. Could I not be a registered Republican with stong a democratic philosipies (let's watch the CAPS) and, by the way I have perrused the Constitution a time or two my friend.

 

Doesn't your second point disprove your first? <- Not really. I first stated that I hadn't said that "socialism and fascism are mutually exclusive." Then I further explored the issue by saying that it would not be ridiculous if someone DID say that.

 

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to accuse you of not knowing what was in the constitution. More often than not when I hear that something is "unconstitutional" that person is simply repeating some story he/she heard on CNN or Fox News. (whereas if you really want to know if something is unconstitutional you should probably check with the Supreme Court.)

 

Authoritarian v. anarchist would be a much more relevant conversation, plus it would leave out some of the emotions evoked by fascism, socialism, etc.

[huskertim]

Carlfense, I enjoy a good political debate, so thanks for that.

As to the Supreme Court determining constitutionallity, that to can be temporary. IE Dallas' law against sodomy, upheld in the 80's, struck down in the 90's. As court and times change, so do interpetations.

Sorry I couldn't site the actual case, I'm feeling kind of lazy.

Bottom line is, if it should be a law, make it a law, we actually have people for that. If your constituacy disagrees, you lose, deal with it.

[carlfense]

Carlfense, I enjoy a good political debate, so thanks for that.

As to the Supreme Court determining constitutionallity, that to can be temporary. IE Dallas' law against sodomy, upheld in the 80's, struck down in the 90's. As court and times change, so do interpetations.

Sorry I couldn't site the actual case, I'm feeling kind of lazy.

Bottom line is, if it should be a law, make it a law, we actually have people for that. If your constituacy disagrees, you lose, deal with it.

 

Absolutely! That's why it's such a slippery argument. Something could be constitutional today and unconstitutional tomorrow. (unless you subscribe to Scalia's view I suppose)

 

The problem is that the constitution can't stand alone...it has to be interpreted by someone to determine what it is actually saying. That interpretation can almost be more influential than the actual words on the document.

[huskertim]

Will return to discussion later, going to lunch with wife, need to discuss inportant health article I just read.

[SOCALHUSKER]

 

Fascism=RIGHT WING! If anything the Republicans are more likely to be fascist.

Fascism is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascism is also a corporatist economic ideology. Fascists advocate the creation of a single-party state. Fascists believe that nations and races are in perpetual conflict whereby only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and by asserting themselves in combat against the weak. Fascist governments forbid and suppress criticism and opposition to the government and the fascist movement. Fascism opposes class conflict and blames capitalist liberal democracies for creating class conflict and in turn blames communists for exploiting class conflict.

 

Socialism=LEFT WING! If anything the Democrats are more likely to be socialist.

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital, creates an unequal society, and does not provide equal opportunities for everyone in society. Therefore socialists advocate the creation of a society in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly based on the amount of work expended in production, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.

 

 

I agree with what you are saying here, but I also think you can have a mix of the two which is fairly close to what you see in America today. While the two sides squabble over which direction/philosophy is worse, they forget that either way we go, we lose our freedom. Both are based on a very authoritarian government, and as we have seen lately with use of executive order after executive order, they aren't afraid to use and expand their authority. The reason I say we have a mixture of it here, is due to the change of the power after the election. We went from a so-called "fascist" to a so-called "socialist". Yes, they are elected (but even that is under debate and another topic altogether) so it's hard to classify it as authoritarian but with as much power as the executive branch is wielding I wouldn't exactly call it democratic either.