I fear I am repeating myself:

The word fascist has been flung frequently as an insult and, like all insults, it has accomplished nothing positive. Its meaning may have even been weakened by such use. So, curious about what fascism really means, I went to some old college textbooks and looked up what they had to say about the term. I found out that fascism involves several elements. The most important are:

1. A connivance between political power and big money. Fascism differs from free capitalism in that it is a political way of maintaining an economy controlled by a wealthy few.

2. The political power and its supporters make great displays of nationalist feeling — "my country right or wrong" sort of things — and fling about such emblems as banners, flags or lapel pins.

3. Such "patriotic" display is used to justify the consolidation of a police state with unabashed repression of dissent and with pushes to legalize searches, spying and the tapping of phones over select segments of the population.

4. A large portion of the national wealth is given to sustain a fearsome military machine. The interests of the military, in the name of patriotism, are put above those of the citizens in general while dissent among the military is strongly suppressed.

5. In order to justify lavish military expenses, nations or groups of people are demonized as "enemies" that cannot be dealt with through negotiation or diplomacy. Such "enemies of the state," foreign or domestic, may be political units or simply groups of people made coherent by race, religion or belief: blacks, gypsies, Jews, Muslims, communists …

6. The fascist state emphasizes the popularity of one leader who is seen to represent the nation more firmly than the nation's traditional institutions of governance. The elected officials of those institutions of government tend to go along with the popular leader's policies, in part for fear of alienating their own support base.

The history of Europe before World War II affords clear examples of fascism in power. Fortunately, those powers became resounding failures, with the exception of General Franco in Spain. Because of those failures, fascism is thought to be unpopular. The fact is that fascist regimes were tremendously popular in their countries of origin.

Let us now look at the United States today keeping the points above in mind.

1. President George W. Bush presides over a Cabinet with more CEOs than any other president before him. Bush himself had run an oil company; Vice President Cheney is a former CEO. Other former executives in the Cabinet are the Treasury Secretary, the Secretary of Commerce, the head of the Office of Management and Budget and the Army, Navy and Air Force secretaries. They were all executives in companies that depend for success on the government's regulations, bills and setting of tariffs. These were executives who had little regard for the nature of markets.

2. We are today immersed in a paroxysm of blind nationalism. Count how many U.S. flags you see on the streets in a day. Think of how little thought is given to the possibility that our international policies and actions may be misguided, let alone wrong.

3. It seems that several repressive measures are enacted each month by the present administration, measures allowing or even requiring such actions as mail delivery personnel to spy on citizens, librarians to report on readers of "suspicious" books, phones to be tapped. President Bush is sure that the new Congress will back him on the strengthening of such measures. But even now the U.S. is the nation with the largest proportion of its population in jail. A disproportionate majority of those in jail belong to a racial minority. There are, for example, more African-American men in jail today than in college.

4. For 2003 the U.S. Congress approved a budget for the military of $400 billion. This budget is greater than the military budgets of the next 15 more powerful countries in the world put together. Increases have been requested and voted in for 2004.

5. The terrorist attacks on the U.S. have been carried out by multinational groups. Yet all the political rhetoric focuses upon a sovereign nation, Iraq, and its leader as the main culprits. It is easier to define an enemy than to solve a problem. There is in this country widespread and indiscriminate sentiment against Arabs and Muslims.

6. President Bush's popularity is growing every time he makes a public address in which he takes a "tough-guy" stance. His leadership relies on inflammatory and divisive talk rather than on practical measures. President Bush's popularity, on the other hand, decreases every time that public discussion focuses on the economy or the environment.

The U.S. can become a fascist regime unless we put a stop to this process. We must insist on the questioning of our political leaders, particularly the administration's campaign against Iraq, a campaign which seems assured to bring about a greater international conflict in the world and a greater reduction of freedom at home. We must demand that the world's most powerful country have leaders who look to solve the important problems: famine, increased gap between haves and have-nots, global warming, overpopulation. However far away, these are also our problems.

This not the time for inflammatory rhetoric. The crushing of dissent and the hard-headed talk of war I hear from those in power are fascistic rather than patriotic. There can be a reasoned and sensible response.

Would I compare Bush to Hitler? I don't think he has the mental capacity to take over power without much decision makig still under the influence of those arround him. His charisma is of a different sort and his background is considerably differnt. I'd rather present the facts and let you draw your own conclsions. I obviously have my own thoughts, but I'm sure most of you have the minds to decide for yourself.
Much of what we are seeing now, we have seen before. History works in cycles, and all too often we see the same mistake repeated as well. Those in power might not even be consious of the similarities, but are simply responding in the same mistaken way that so many before have tried.
I caution only that throughout history the grab for so much power has precipitated an equally dramatic crash. If you are a patriot, you might have an interest in seeing this country step back from the brink, or save itself from the oblivion.
If you're not, you might relish in the natural course that history takes. Or you might still want to shrink the expanding power to allow you to break free from its grasp.
We might very well be at an inportant point in history. This could also just be one more step and our lifetimes might not see the end. But the potential for a change is there.

I think all of you have very good points, and I agree with a lot of them, but I tend to side with Dante on some of his argument. Now I don't believe that the U.S. is a Fascist country at all...yet. I love democracy, and I love how well our country has maintained our democratic processes for longer than any other country in the world. But seriously, how much of a democracy can you have with a Republican majority in two of the major branches of our government? There needs to be a balance of power in the checks and balances of our system, especially in this day and age. However, our country has made it through previous times when one political party had a majority in the branches (think: end of Federalist age, and beginning of Republican), and we'll make it through again. Sorry for this lukewarm stance, but I just wanted to say that everyone has good points.

"But our popular president's family has ties to the Nazi Jew-Killing Machine." There were people I went to scholl with who's grandparents were Nazis, does that make them Nazis?

"Well, Bush didn't do it himself, but he obviously knew about Sept. 11 in which thousands upon thousands of Americans were slaughtered by CIA-trained and funded fanatics." Once you actually look at the report given to the President about a possible terrorists attack, take note of the time frame they said it could take place. Are you suggesting the president should have put us on lock down for that amount of time? As for the CIA, we funded them and trainned them almost a decade ago.

"Create a "crisis" find an enemy and turn this country into a fascist police state." You morons are right, the time has come to retake washington and give us our rights back. I will buy into the propoganda you college sociology teacher fed you and march with you stop this facists-police state, despite the fact we have a congress. Once we re-take our country we will all haave a picknik on a grassy field together and play the guitar and reflect on our expierence. To arms fellow conspirators.

A good resource for links and info on the Oneida Community is the syracuse collection at http://libwww.syr.edu/digital/guides/o/OneidaCommunityCollection/
Hope it helps.

Well, "Communist State" is almost an oxymoron. The end aim of communism would be the absence of hierarchical structure.
In practice, Leninist movements have used the state apparatus as a means to stay in power believing their ideas are the correct ones. We see in instances like China that they can barely even be called communist anymore as they move further and further into the world market.
Marx's orginal theory called for capitalism to replace feudalism, socialism to replace capitalism, and finally communism to replace socialism in the final evolution. The constant class war will first abolish kings and lords, then the burgoise, then the state and the bosses. This was to be the natural evolution of economic arrangements. Of course, that's just all theory. In history we saw that communism or socialism was rarely introduced into countries that had industrialized. Mostly revolutions occured in the so-called "3rd world". In the capitalist states the state and businesses appeased the workers with things like minimum-wage, standard work week, the right to unionize, pensions, working conditions, abolishing sweatshops, etc. to keep teh workers pacified and unwilling to wage significant protest against teh status quo (which is in essence why we saw revolution in the third world where protections were not in plac and pesants, the people really being oppressed, took up arms instad of the capitalist workers).
To answer your question, in history the many popular examples of attempted socialism have simply evolved into states controlled by a select few without the pure democracy or much hope for the ideas Marx envisioned. They have been mostly fascist states. Cuba is a country where many are allowed to speak freely and the youth have become disenchanted with nationalism when they see no economic progress (largely due to the embargo). They are often critical of the status quo, yet for some reason still endorse the general ideas of the revolution and the good it did for the country.
Stalin killed far more people than Hitler and went to great lengths to rewrte history. the USSR lost hope as a country when Lenin died and Stalin took over.
Some of the best examples of socialism as a viable system however, can be found in the US. the 19th century saw the rise of teh Oneida Community, which was a devoutly Chrstian and socialist community that survived extremely well for 50 years until State pressure forced them to disband. The founder of the community believed both Christianity and socialism needed each other to truly survive, and by all accounts he was at least partially correct: it might not be necessary, but the two together certainly answer the questions of 'why obey?' 'what do i gain?' 'why give up freedoms?' 'who has power?' etc. that ensured that everyone was not serving an earthly master that could abuse power and corrupt.
So the differnce in practice, historically, has not been too much as far as governments go. It can be argued, however, that a communist state has never and will never exist. It is a utopian idea that so far has worked best in voluntary and committed communities.
Fascist governments, on the other hand, are more likely to fail, and more rapidly.

Now Dante, you've been labeled a Communist before, so here's a question for you.

By the way, thanks for posting the definition of Fascist; I wondered what all that meant.

Anyway, what's the difference between a Communist (i.e., China, Cuba) state and a fascist state?

Marine, you are completely ignorant of what really goes on.

You spout off things like "conspiracy theorist" and that people here are involved with "conspiracy propaganda" like it's a bad thing.

Yet you haven't got a clue as to what goes on - what *really* goes on.

It's just not what you've said to Dante, but also to me.


You state some things about Hitler and the Holocaust in response to Dante.

We can all agree that they were horrible, horrible acts.

But our popular president's family has ties to the Nazi Jew-Killing Machine.

This isn't some conspiracy theory made-up crap either.

Prescott Bush, grandfather of our current popular president, helped fuel Hitler's hate machine before, during and even AFTER World War II.

...with the help of General Electric, Ford, and IBM (just to be fair).

Ever hear of the Trading With the Enemy Act?

Well guess who was mainly responsible for us even passing those set of laws?

Prescott Bush.


Dante asks what has Bush done as in comparison to Hitler's Reichstag.

Well, Bush didn't do it himself, but he obviously knew about Sept. 11 in which thousands upon thousands of Americans were slaughtered by CIA-trained and funded fanatics.

Create a "crisis" find an enemy and turn this country into a fascist police state.

That is what America has become - a fascist police state.

Kinda what Hitler did.

Stop dissenting, Dante, you communist! Don't you know you can "mysteriously disappear" for that? So shaddup and git back to yer cubicle where ya belong, ya hear, ingrate?

Allright Bubbycrystals, you are going to regret not getting your gun, which is what Dante wants you to do, to stop our horrible facists government. I am sure if you e-mail Dante he will provide you with various exeremists conspiracy propoganda and you will jump on his band wagon

Marine16- why must you dramatize almost everything? From what I understand, Dante didn't imply any of the b.s. you put in your post. You can distort everything he writes, but I'm pretty sure he knows what his intentions were so it's not really necessary for you to tell us what they were.

Often, I'm really glad no one listens to you.
Anyone who is sane and literate can read what I wrote and know I said nothing of the sort.

Everyone listen to Dante, there is a huge conspiracy in our government to lock us up in conserntration camps and steal all of our gold and put it in swish banks. Everyone listen to Dante, the only solution is for us to get our guns and conquer washington and hand the government over to a group of working class liberitarians who will whip our government back in shape.

1 - Offer proof that Bush didn't sign on to the ICC because of 'his calculus of decision making'

2 - 'Are you saying our treatment of prisoners is right?' You make it sound like Bush is breaking international law and violating human right law and holding these prisoners. I am not saying the treatement is right, but it is far from wrong. If it is so wrong, than why did almost every country in the world sign the geneva convention allowing this kind of treatment?

3 - You can post your statstics if you feel it nessecary. However, you must be living in a cave because the platform of several representatives and senators was A-War on Terrorism and B-Stance on Economy. true they gave more emphasis on the war but you make it twist facts to make it seem like every politician is a rapid dog who needs to taste blood.

4 - The qoute you provide that Bush says is simply invalid. You are conviently leaving out parts of that qoute. If you are not going to qoute something in full please provide a link to the entire qoute. Also, it discredits your arguement greatly when you take bits and peaces of Bush's qoute and make a mockery of the qoutes made by members of the beuracracy and credit pretend qoutes to them.

5 - "It doesn't trivialize the atrocities of Hitler, it is used to put into context the atrocities of the US and the moral comparison between the two." So the US is a wrong as Nazis and we are committing just as great of atrocities as Hitler? Also I believe you said 'Adolph Hitler was evil but the comparison is not based upon the evil of the "concentration camp thing."' i believe the attrocities Hitler and Germany comitted were the Holocausts. Perhaps you should try to get your arguement straight.

Also, I see you put concentration camp thing in qoutes. Why is that, are you implying that the Holocausts never happened?

That was a more than competant response and you wrote it yourself. I was very happy to read that. A few brief things besides general points of contention (i.e. Bush vs. Hitler).
1. I don't think Bush really cares what Clinton urged future presidents to do, and I don't think it worked into his calculus of decision making. Also, just because Clinton said it doesn't add validity to it.
2. Are you saying our treatment of prisoners is right? Just because it's allowed doesn't mean it's right.
3. Polls show most people were concerned about the economy, moreso than security or the "war". I beleive I already posted them, however I could probably find them iff need be.
4. If there's a part of the quote missing you feel adds context, feel free to post it. Otherwise, he said what he said. (btw the dots are called 'elipses')
5. It doesn't trivialize the atrocities of Hitler, it is used to put into context the atrocities of the US and the moral comparison between the two. During WWII many people didn't consider the atrocities to rise to the level of previous genocides and could have claimed to compare the two 'trivialized' the first, but in historical context the name Hitler registers a certain way in our minds that is an effective tool to make people aware of what is currently going on.

Bush and Hitler.

Hitler set fire to Riechstag himself. What has Bush done to match this?

What political treaty has Bush been trowing in our faces to show we have been humilated as a country?

Dante, you complain that Bush only got 22,000 votes of the majority. But hey, that is hwo a democracy works. Whoever gets the most votes, wins because the most people want him to president. If you have a problem with it, perhaps you should try to change our electorate system and I am sure our government will listen to a noisemaker who compares the head of government to Hitler.

"We are arresting thousands all over the world without leveling charges against them other than they might be tied to terrorist organizations" that is because there is a state of war. If you have a proplem with how we treat P.O.W.s perhaps you should try to ratify the Geneva Convention.

Actually Bush bowed out of the ICC because Clinton urged future presidents to do so and the senate did not ratify it. In addition he bowed out so that American leaders would not fall victim to political witch hunts that ICC allowed for between diplomats.

You say there is no formal decleration of war and to an extent you are right. But not very right. Congress gave the President the power to uses the whatever resources and personael he deemed nessecary to fight the war on terrorism. So this war is not something bush is doing by himself, he has the consent of an elected representative body.

You are right, a government committee has stated we are vunerable to another terrorists attack. this is the same comittee that said almost two years ago the US was vulnerable to a terrorists attack, so I would listen to them.

""Oh, it was just business as usual. No big deal other than what we always confront." If you are not going to take exact qoutes for a source, than do not use qoutes.

"any discussion of what was really on the voters' minds." War with Iraq was the only thing on voters minds. Perhaps some cared about the economy, but all the majorities wanted to know about was war.

Bush nothing like Hitler. Yoyu say people like me are blinded, well my 'friend' you are also blinded. You are blinded by your athetic paranoi propoganda that you college profs. have been feeding you. It is a sad day when a young mind can be so easily manipulated into believeing everyone is out get him and he is the only one who has the 'power' to see trough everyone elses vail of ignorance.

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier ... just as long as I'm the dictator ..." Why don't you put the whole qoute down Dante, instead conviently using '...' to push out phrases that do not suit your arguement.

Comparing Bush to Hitler trvialisez all the atrocities Hitler comitteed and that is plain anti-humanity.

"The president emerged wearing a New York Fire Department windbreaker. He raised his arm and gave a thumbs-up to the crowd on the third base side of the field. Probably 15,000 fans threw their arms in the air imitating the motion. He then threw a strike from the rubber, and the stadium erupted. Watching from owner George Steinbrenner's box, Karl Rove thought, "It's like being at a Nazi rally."
-Bob Woodward, Bush at War, Simon & Schuster, p. 277

Not long ago, I did a radio interview with conservative radio talkshow host, Barry Farber. He was as polite as he was conservative. We had a great debate - better than anything that's taken place in Congress lately - then he commented on something I'd said in an earlier article. He took great offense to my remark in an article that the former Minister of Justice in Germany was not the first to compare Bush II to Hitler. I had stated that many people all over the world had made the same comparison long before - and that the comparison was appropriate. This did not go over well. But, of course, the remark was never meant to go over well with conservatives. The truth hurts and, of course, they're missing the point of the statement. That would be because of the fact that Bush supporters are also Bush's victims.
I am honestly amazed at the level of denial that Bush II supporters have allowed themselves to become prisoner to. Here they are, bragging about some kind of "mandate" after the last election without even considering that they won't be enjoying any of the spoils of "war" against those dastardly liberals and other "terrorists." The most participation in Bush's America that they will have is providing corpses - those that used to be their kids - in the war against Iraq. That's about it - unless they make a stink-load of money (like Bush's daddy did during Vietnam).
See, the only "mandate" Bush won was that of the "scaredy-cats." All 22,000 of them - the total of Republican votes over Democratic votes in election 2002. That's about the size of a small town. I don't know, doesn't sound like much of a mandate to me.
Decades ago Hitler made the prudent decision to rule, not only by scapegoating, but also by fear. He used the Reichstag fire and the humiliation that was the Treaty of Versailles as a centerpiece and the Jews as a focus for the peoples' anger. The German populace was eager to guard their newfound economic prosperity and their pride against any perceived threat, and many turned a blind eye to what actually was happening within their borders. Summarily, the Jewish persecution allowed not only a "final solution" but an effective diversion aimed at the German people, thus allowing Hitler to pursue his quest for world domination. Adolph Hitler declared war against an entire people while waging a world war on multiple fronts.

"The great masses of the people ... will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one." -Adolph Hitler.

I sincerely believe that my esteemed host that night felt "violated" by the Bush-Hitler comparison because of the - oh, how would Dubya say it? - the concentration camp "thing." But that is not what so many people around the world have been using as a basis for their rational observations when it comes to Bush II tactics of political survival.
Bush - like Hitler - rules by fear, lies and a manipulative control of the media. Yesterday's German-Jewish scapegoat is today's American-Arab scapegoat. No, we're not gassing prisoners but we are deporting them to countries which allow the use of torture. We are arresting thousands all over the world without leveling charges against them other than they might be tied to terrorist organizations. Just last month, we assassinated an American citizen by a remote control missile along with five others because Rumsfeld decided they were terrorists undeserving of due process. We arrest American citizens right here, call them "enemy combatants" and deny them their rights.
The Gang of Four continue to thumb their noses at the Geneva Convention and civil liberties while the headlines make it more and more obvious why Bush bowed out of the International Criminal Court. Think about it.
With no formal declaration of war, the Bush administration has advocated assassination.
From the events in Yemen to Ari's flip remark about a single bullet costing less than an all-out invasion, those in the Bush administration are showing themselves - to anyone willing to pay attention - to be the criminals they are. But nobody is paying attention to these little incidentals. They're too busy worrying about the latest terrorist alert.
The government, during the week of November 14th, issued a statement saying that there was threat of an attack by terrorists with "significant damage." Then on the following Monday Tom Ridge pops up and says, "Oh, it was just business as usual. No big deal other than what we always confront."(Yes, I'm paraphrasing - who has time to rewrite all the drivel that comes out of Homeland Security?) But it is tactics of suggested fear like this that the Bush administration has used to its political advantage since long before the WTC smoke cleared.

"The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it." -Dr. Joseph Mengele

So, in the weeks leading up to election 2002, neither the Bushes nor the media would allow any discussion of what was really on the voters' minds. Instead, the public was given a steady dose of impending war, terrorism, and staged Bush events with carefully selected crowds waving their flags and booing the opposition for being "unpatriotic."
The GOP campaign was a carefully orchestrated exercise in mass manipulation fueled by corporate funding along with the compliance of the major media outlets. There would be no discussion of corporate scandal or the dying economy. There would be zero coverage of the millions of people who have found themselves jobless and broke since Bush stole office. There would be only talk of imaginary threats of weapons of mass destruction and how the opposition (what there was) in effect was giving aid to the terrorists by not giving the petulant "president" everything he wanted. And 21 percent of the voters bought the big lie.

"Misadvised by a frustrated and panic-stricken attorney general, a president of the United States has just assumed what amounts to dictatorial power to jail or execute aliens."
-William Safire from The New York Times column "Seizing Dictatorial Power" (11/15/01)

Bush, from the beginning, has surrounded himself with advisers who have questionable, if not criminal, backgrounds. From a saber-rattling veep with five deferments to his credit to National Security Councilman Elliot Abrams who pleaded guilty in 1991 to two counts of withholding evidence from Congress (lying) over his role in the Iran-Contra affair, the Bush administration is rife with convicted criminals (pardoned by Bush's daddy) and former CEOs without an ounce of compassion for the average working American. They are quietly destroying the environment, eroding rights to privacy - except theirs, of course - and rewarding the very corporate thugs who should be hauled off in handcuffs.
And now, Americans are faced with the prospect of Admiral John Poindexter heading the Information Awareness Office. Poindexter, convicted in 1990 of 5 felony counts of lying to Congress, will be given the power to monitor everything you do. Your phone calls, emails, credit card purchases and so on.
And yet the electorate seems to miss the blatant danger of such an appointment. Why? Because the Bushies have everybody's undies twisted in a knot of fear. That's how they have continued to get away with murder. Literally. Whether it is the environment, the economy or innocent Afghans and - coming soon - Iraqis, the Bush administration will continue to issue their "alerts and warnings" every time the electorate seems like it's going to start asking the tough questions.

"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." -Hermann Goering

I can understand why Bush's supporters would become angry about any comparisons between him and Hitler. Adolph Hitler was evil but the comparison is not based upon the evil of the "concentration camp thing." People the world over have been making the comparison for a very long time - beginning with Bush's dubious, at best, rise to power. Immediately after "taking" office, he proceeded to tell the world to "buzz off." Whether it was the Kyoto agreement or CO2 emissions, his version of America was not going to answer to anybody.
After 9/11, things got even worse and the world took note. From his "you're either with us or you're against us" routine to his desire to thumb his nose at the international community so he can go kick some Iraqi butt - or any others he deems necessary - has left the world viewing the United States as a rogue nation led by a reckless and power-thirsty monarch. Sound familiar?
But Bush's supporters can't see that. They don't want to see that. They are afraid to see that. They handed Bush some sort of imaginary mandate because they are scared. Part of the fault lies with Bush, Rove and the GOP machine. Most of it, however, is the fault of their own ignorance. They also need to stop getting angry over the Bush/Hitler comparisons as well.

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier ... just as long as I'm the dictator ..."
-George W. Bush during his first trip to Washington as president-elect, December 18, 2000,

See? Bush started it.

Dante, you moron, you are conviently forgetting to mention that in Facism there is a dictator. In case you live in a cave, we have a congress, and have ad one for over 200 years.

But besides that, you are right. All the citizens of America should, ney, must rush to their guns and take over washington so we will not be a facists state in Dante's mind (By the way you moron, I am being sarcastic.)