• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Rejecting words and actions which perpetrate, support or encourage white supremacists

RJKarl said:
That has nothing to do with your points. Weak attempt to move the goalposts.
Click to expand...

220px-Dusty_con_su_indumentaria.jpg
 
I don't know who the mod on the Tunnels is, but if I post a thread with the definition of fascism, can we pin it to the top of the board so people stop using it incorrectly?
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
I don't know who the mod on the Tunnels is, but if I post a thread with the definition of fascism, can we pin it to the top of the board so people stop using it incorrectly?
Click to expand...

Only if it includes this gem from powerlineblog:

The fascists (or Communists, the difference isn’t worth arguing about, like the difference between the Crips and the Bloods)
Click to expand...
 
There are many ideas on an exact definition of fascism, but these are the main tenets that are generally agreed upon by all:

  • Positive views of violence while promoting masculinity, youth, and charismatic leadership
  • Attacks against communism, liberalism, generated primarily from the far right on the political spectrum
  • Populist ultra-nationalism

Robert Paxton, a Rhodes Scholar who attended Washington and Lee University in Lexington, VA, as well as Oxford and Harvard, states that fascism is "a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion." I highly recommend reading Paxton's Five Stages of Fascism article for more detail.

Multiple scholars also consider racism as a central tenet of fascism, as well as vehement opposition of egalitarianism (which brings in anti-feminist, anti-homosexual and anti-Semitic/Islamic beliefs to the picture).

I hope this is informative to all. I used both my own notes from college history courses as well as sources found on Wikipedia to compile this brief definition post on fascism. Sources below.

Paxton, Robert. The Anatomy of Fascism. Vintage Books.

http://theleder.com/docs/Misc/Paxton_Five Stages of Fascism.pdf

http://www.thefader.com/2016/11/29/trump-hitler-fascism

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
There are many ideas on an exact definition of fascism, but these are the main tenets that are generally agreed upon by all:

  • Positive views of violence while promoting masculinity, youth, and charismatic leadership
  • Attacks against communism, liberalism, generated primarily from the far right on the political spectrum
  • Populist ultra-nationalism
Click to expand...

"Similar movements in Holland and Norway were non-nationalist to the point of treason -- Quisling may have been a name for a good fascist, but was certainly not one for a good patriot"
 
This quote from the linked article by Paxton may also be helpful for those that want to understand fascism better:

Fascists despise thought and reason, abandon intellectual positions casually, and cast aside many intellectual fellow-travelers. They subordinate thought and reason not to faith, as did the traditional Right, but to the promptings of the blood and the historic destiny of the group. Their only moral yardstick is the prowess of the race, of the nation, of the community. They claim legitimacy by no universal standard except a Darwinian triumph of the strongest community.
Click to expand...
 
cville deac said:
No, federal judges answer ultimately to the Constitution, not us. That's why the system was set up that way - so we don't have a tyranny of the majority. And the white supremacists aren't hiding behind the robes of the SCOTUS. They're feeling emboldened these days and are coming out to argue their effed up beliefs.
Click to expand...

I'm saying you are the one hiding. Far easier to throw up your hands and yield to the current interpretation of a 230 year old document, sparingly amended, than to say whether you think that current interpretation is how things ought to be.

And while the Constitution absolutely serves as a useful barrier between us and the Supreme Court, they still, like every branch of government, ultimately answer to us.

Our ability to hold the judiciary accountable, both through constitutional mechanisms and outside of them, is limited but it is there. So it absolutely matters what we think.
 
So I'll ask this again for Junebug and cville:

RChildress107 said:
Do you think the rally on Saturday should have been allowed to happen, given that authorities were aware of the message and the firepower accompanying that message?
Click to expand...

Or put a different way, do you think it should (regardless of whether it is) be constitutional to ban or more heavily regulate white supremacist rallies like the one that occurred over the weekend?
 
Can we get Brad to lecture us on the South's virtue in the civil war again? I couldn't get enough of it the first time.
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
This quote from the linked article by Paxton may also be helpful for those that want to understand fascism better:
Click to expand...

Interesting, This quote implies that there would be no basis for debating fascist thought and ideals. How can you talk some one out of adhering to a bad idea when possession of the bad idea is rooted in simply wanting to have the bad idea?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top