Warnings from History - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

04/27/2007 12:27:32 PM · #1

I read this in the mainstream UK media and found it interesting: Fascist America, in 10 easy steps

The subject matter has been raised in a couple of recent threads and I thought that people might be interested in discussing it. The article may give some US people a view "from the outside looking in", which may be interesting.

Please bear in mind that this article does not state that America is already a fascist state, but rather points out the risks of the paths being trodden. I appreciate that it is a little light on giving cross references (and I don't pretend to be expert enough to justify every sentence). However, it has the inbuilt advantage of pre-empting Godwin's law...

Louis

Nikon D800

04/27/2007 05:02:22 PM · #2

Very interesting. In a related development, Europe is emerging as the fabled land of opportunity and bastion of democracy, and may eclipse America as the world's only superpower. I recommend reading The United States of Europe.

citymars

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

04/27/2007 05:18:37 PM · #3

Thanks for posting this. I've only skimmed it, but the points seem right on the money to me.

In tangentially related media news, did anyone watch "Buying the War," the Bill Moyers report on how the U.S. media lost its way leading up to the war in Iraq? I thought it was fascinating and should be "required viewing" for anyone concerned with the future of the United States. Definitely check it out if you get the chance.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

04/27/2007 06:04:23 PM · #4

It's an interesting read, but when a Police State starts calling names I pretty much just doze off...

JeffDay

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

04/27/2007 06:54:34 PM · #5

Thanks for posting more trash......

frisca

Nikon D70

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

04/27/2007 06:57:06 PM · #6

Originally posted by JeffDay:

Thanks for posting more trash......

No, thank you.

JeffDay

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

04/27/2007 07:04:39 PM · #7

Comparing the US to Hitler and Nazi Germany is silly in any form....

Message edited by author 2007-04-27 19:05:54.

Louis

Nikon D800

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

04/27/2007 07:39:12 PM · #8

Originally posted by JeffDay:

Comparing the US to Hitler and Nazi Germany is silly in any form....

Perhaps. However, don't make the mistake that what is being discussed are mere facile comparisons between the US and Nazi Germany, but rather a comparison of tactics used by the Nazi regime to obtain their dictatorship, and corollary acts of the current US administration. It's highly unlikely that the US government is seeking a dictatorship modeled on the "Leadership Principle" of National Socialism. It's undeniable, however, that the executive branch of the administration has sought to distill more power in itself.

04/27/2007 10:25:59 PM · #9

Politicians Seek More Power For Themselves - Story at 11.

And tomorrow watch our special investigative report - Sun Continues To Rise In The East.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

04/27/2007 11:18:13 PM · #10

The article makes some errors in interpreting historical events, errors which naturally bolster the author's argument. One that springs to mind immediately is the portrayal of Weimar Germany as some sunshine and butterflies country in which no one would ever have expected such a dark future. In reality the domestic situation was both violent and politically chaotic, and those are rather vital ingredients in the rise of a dictatorship which the author seems to ignore.

Setting that aside and assuming good faith on the author's part, the article misses the point. For that matter, most people I read and talk to these days also miss the point. I think to a large degree they are purposely missing the point.

The 'warning from history' that should be ringing alarms in the head of any thinking person these days is this - you can only fuck people over for so long before they decide to kill you for doing it.

Here we go...

The US was attacked. It really did happen.

There is an enemy out there responsible for it. GW didn't make it up. Hard as it is for you to accept, there are some people in the world who really, really don't like you.

They don't like you because, as an example, you spend thousands of dollars on cameras to take pictures of your overfed and over medicated little kids, while they have a hard time feeding their kids and live day to day in shit. And they've gotten the impression you really don't care. Wether or not they are misguided in their beliefs, these are their beliefs and now a number of them have decided it is time to change the situation.

The battlefield is global - it is a connected world and the system they see as a great evil exists now in all corners of the globe.

The battle is open ended - I really, really doubt that any Western nation is going to start advising their citizenry to go out and help the less fortunate rather than buy, buy, buy. To that end, the enemy's attitude is not likely to change as his situation is not likely to get any better. So, the war will go on.

Forget about Nazi Germany. Start thinking about the fall of Tsarist Russia, the French Revolution, any number of other examples of people getting their due for living large at the expense of others.

Rather than buying into exciting little theories about the return of Facism, accept the events that have occurred at face value and ask yourself what the most likely reason is for them having happened at all. It seems pretty clear to me. The only question left is would you rather maintain your way of living by killing off any of the enemy trying to change it, or do you find their cause just and something that you would like to do something about?

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

04/28/2007 12:17:50 AM · #11

Better stock up on guns then!!! Thank god for the 2nd ammendment!

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

04/28/2007 12:18:33 AM · #12

Originally posted by routerguy666:

The US was attacked. It really did happen.

There is an enemy out there responsible for it. GW didn't make it up. Hard as it is for you to accept, there are some people in the world who really, really don't like you.

Yes, but they were not active in Iraq until we invaded it on false pretenses. I can see some justification for attacking bin Laden in Afghanistan. I can see no justification for largely abandoning that quest in favor of toppling a sovereign dictator sitting atop a bunch of oil who had no plans nor capability of making us "fight them here" as the President likes to warn us against.

Sorry, but I think every one of those 3000-plus US service-people and many thousands of Iraqi civilians have died in vain, or worse.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

04/28/2007 02:26:44 AM · #13

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by routerguy666:
The US was attacked. It really did happen.

There is an enemy out there responsible for it. GW didn't make it up. Hard as it is for you to accept, there are some people in the world who really, really don't like you.

Yes, but they were not active in Iraq until we invaded it on false pretenses. I can see some justification for attacking bin Laden in Afghanistan. I can see no justification for largely abandoning that quest in favor of toppling a sovereign dictator sitting atop a bunch of oil who had no plans nor capability of making us "fight them here" as the President likes to warn us against.

Sorry, but I think every one of those 3000-plus US service-people and many thousands of Iraqi civilians have died in vain, or worse.

Regardless of the justification for the war in Iraq, it exists.

Would you have the US just pull out and leave Iraq to become the next Afghanistan, where Al Qaeda calls the shots and sets up training camps for the next 9/11?

I don't disagree that Iraq is a mess and that mistakes were made, but like it or not, the US broke it so the US has to fix it.

04/28/2007 07:15:27 AM · #14

Originally posted by routerguy666:

Forget about Nazi Germany. Start thinking about the fall of Tsarist Russia, the French Revolution, any number of other examples of people getting their due for living large at the expense of others.

I think that this a good point to the extent that it relates to the current ideological conflict.

I don't think that it deals with the dismantling of the apparatus of state that protects American democratic and hard won freedoms.

I think that the two issues are:

1. whether the improvement of homeland security is misdirected through physical force and invasion of neutral countries;

2. whether the changes at constitutional level to the US are (or could be) a precursor to a more troubling political leadership.

The common factor is that the "war on terror" is the justification for both. I see that as a smokescreen, since the "war on terror" is an ideological conflict for the reason that you have given.

04/28/2007 07:27:14 AM · #15

Originally posted by routerguy666:

They don't like you because, as an example, you spend thousands of dollars on cameras to take pictures of your overfed and over medicated little kids, while they have a hard time feeding their kids and live day to day in shit. And they've gotten the impression you really don't care. Wether or not they are misguided in their beliefs, these are their beliefs and now a number of them have decided it is time to change the situation.

I don't think that this is very accurate. IMO, the dislike is of the state, not the people. The state is disliked for a number of reasons. Key among these is the approach taken to Israel and the occupied territories and more recently the failure to respond to the invasion of Lebanon and the invasion of Iraq. Where Americans are hated, it is largely because they represent the state, rather than because they are comparatively rich.

In my experience, if you were to travel in large parts of the region, as individuals you would generally be welcomed.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

04/28/2007 07:34:57 AM · #16

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

I don't disagree that Iraq is a mess and that mistakes were made, but like it or not, the US broke it so the US has to fix it.

I don't know that the US can fix it - certainly not alone. There are already millions displaced as refugees and hundreds of thousands killed in the aftermath of the coalition invasion: that cannot easily be fixed.

IMO, the most significant changes will happen when some responsibility is accepted and the western leaders responsible for the invasion on false pretences are held to account. When our hands are a little more clean on account of Iraq, we might be able to persuade a few more states to help clean up the mess.

Key among these will be the states surrounding Iraq: Iran and Syria. I don't know how serious diplomatic relations can be sustained with those states under the current leadership, and perhaps until the current leadership is held to account.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

04/28/2007 09:19:18 AM · #17

Originally posted by Matthew:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I don't disagree that Iraq is a mess and that mistakes were made, but like it or not, the US broke it so the US has to fix it.

I don't know that the US can fix it - certainly not alone. There are already millions displaced as refugees and hundreds of thousands killed in the aftermath of the coalition invasion: that cannot easily be fixed.

IMO, the most significant changes will happen when some responsibility is accepted and the western leaders responsible for the invasion on false pretences are held to account. When our hands are a little more clean on account of Iraq, we might be able to persuade a few more states to help clean up the mess.

Key among these will be the states surrounding Iraq: Iran and Syria. I don't know how serious diplomatic relations can be sustained with those states under the current leadership, and perhaps until the current leadership is held to account.

Iran and Syria huh? I doubt that they will be of much actual "help".

Iran's already "helping" by kidnapping British troops, supplying weapons to the terrorists in Iraq and even conducting cross-border incursions into Iraq. All of which do little more that kill their Muslim "brothers and sisters" and increase their suffering.

And as for Syria, I don't think they're any better, serving as a conduit for terrorists that are "helping" their Muslim "brothers and sisters" by killing them.

That's exactly the kind of "help" the Iraqis don't need.

04/28/2007 09:31:38 AM · #18

Originally posted by Matthew:

Originally posted by routerguy666:

They don't like you because, as an example, you spend thousands of dollars on cameras to take pictures of your overfed and over medicated little kids, while they have a hard time feeding their kids and live day to day in shit. And they've gotten the impression you really don't care. Wether or not they are misguided in their beliefs, these are their beliefs and now a number of them have decided it is time to change the situation.

I don't think that this is very accurate. IMO, the dislike is of the state, not the people. The state is disliked for a number of reasons. Key among these is the approach taken to Israel and the occupied territories and more recently the failure to respond to the invasion of Lebanon and the invasion of Iraq. Where Americans are hated, it is largely because they represent the state, rather than because they are comparatively rich.

In my experience, if you were to travel in large parts of the region, as individuals you would generally be welcomed.

At some point, a State is its people. Each of us actively or passively supports the social and political systems that define 'The West' and are thus, to the enemy, culpable for its 'crimes'.

In my exerpience, people who have a problem with the US have shown they like to attack its citizens.

04/28/2007 09:37:50 AM · #19

Originally posted by Matthew:

Originally posted by routerguy666:
Forget about Nazi Germany. Start thinking about the fall of Tsarist Russia, the French Revolution, any number of other examples of people getting their due for living large at the expense of others.

I think that this a good point to the extent that it relates to the current ideological conflict.

I don't think that it deals with the dismantling of the apparatus of state that protects American democratic and hard won freedoms.

I think that the two issues are:

1. whether the improvement of homeland security is misdirected through physical force and invasion of neutral countries;

2. whether the changes at constitutional level to the US are (or could be) a precursor to a more troubling political leadership.

The common factor is that the "war on terror" is the justification for both. I see that as a smokescreen, since the "war on terror" is an ideological conflict for the reason that you have given.

I see no evidence that a system of checks and balances that has been working for a couple of hundred years has now failed. Some of the administration's policies have been rebuffed by Congress, some by the judicial system, some have not been challenged. No part of the system has been dismantled. Many people have been too lazy to aggressively perform their part of the job (Congress).

Rights and freedoms have been temporarily curtailed before, this is even noted in the article you posted. While I have to say that I've not felt one bit of my freedoms stepped on (unless there is a right to speedy passage through airport security), I am confident that whatever nefarious stripping of liberties has been put in place will be rolled back by subsequent administrations as the pendulum starts to swing the other way.

photodude

04/28/2007 10:02:48 AM · #20

The internal "facism" is a result of world pressure to play defense in the wake of 9/11.

If we were to play offense, most of it would not be necessary.

We need to apply basic doctrine to the Islamic world. It's really simple. How about for every American killed in an Islamic Terrorist incident, we will randomly kill 1,000 Islamics residing in Islamic countries around the world. Sort of an extension of MAD that kept the USSR and USA from nuking each other for 40 years. The 1,000:1 ratio is a powerful message. It says don't screw with us.

I will bet that would quickly change the tune of all these mullah schools recruiting terrorists for their share of virgins. It would be different if their families would be directly at risk as a result of their actions.

If we would just do that, we could go back to life as it should be here - Free!!

RayEthier