English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Does anyone ever look up a word in the dictionary before they use it as a name calling device? How does the American government attempt to exalt nation and often race above the individual and stand for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition? Don't these people realize that there is such a thing as National Security and Freedom that in this day and age still only have a few negotiating tools to defend and sometimes require covert actions? What would the opponents of military action around terrorist based countries propose as an alternative to those actions. Utopian society would have us all be able to communicate in each other's languages and resolve our difficulties at the lowest level. How many people are even ready to study Arabic and learn it fluently? If people consider that military action is abusive, what are they willing do to or fund as an alternative?

2006-08-29 02:04:56 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

15 answers

How does the present regime NOT try to exalt the nation above the individual and stand for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader with severe economic and social regimentation and suppression of opposition? Holding people without trial or without bail, in secret prisons, beating them up--this is not American, it is Stalinist! Those who give up freedom to be safe are neither free nor safe, I think Benjamin Franklin said that, its as true today as it was then. And please do not forget that if this country had been content to mind its own business and not get involved in the internal affairs of the Middle East, they would have had zero interest in us; there was never anything wrong with the idea of buying our oil from Mexico and Venezuela and just ignoring the Mideast, it even would have helped our own immigration problems.

Fascist actually means a binding of business and government, and that is what you see here today with the drug industry writing the senior drug benefit law for their representatives in Congress to pass--Medicare can't use its bargaining power, it is a half trillion dollar gift to the Republican campaign contributors from you, the taxpayer. How generous of you!

2006-08-29 02:12:57 · answer #1 · answered by jxt299 7 · 0 3

In order:
1.sometimes, mostly no.
2.Increasing use of propaganda, Attempting to install a common morality as law. Subsidization of profitable companies and use of trade negations to secure certain American farmer's sectors, all done to increase the ruling parties political base and capital. Increasing use of calling opposition as non-patriotic.
3. Soon more Americans will have died in Iraq than in 9/11. More money will be spent than was lost. They release people every couple of months from Guantanamo base because they were never a danger. The American justice system can stop terror attacks while following the law as the British justice system has shown. \
4. Use of diplomacy, and not acting unilateral. Frankly if you can’t convince other countries that use of force is needed perhaps its not such a good idea.
5. Eh?
6. I’d rather learn Farsi.
7. Not just abusive, counter productive. Fund renewable energy so we can forget about the Middle East and be unconcerned in their affairs. (aka why they hate us)
And yes you are right, calling the American government fascist is incorrect. But fascist states don’t appear overnight.

2006-08-29 02:35:52 · answer #2 · answered by cobratang 2 · 1 1

Too many question at once . But to begin the people who cal, the US government Fascist are just being stupid they are just leftist type liberals who resort to name calling when they don't have an alternative solution to a perceived problem. The are doing this stuff because they don't like Bush because they don't like any Republican or Conservative who cuts taxes and don't give them everything they want. As for an alternative to military action against terrorism they don't have one. They think that if we could only talk to them and appease them they would go back to their old way of life, It's kind of like the 1930's all over again when France and England tried appeasement with Hitler. It didn't work it only gave them more time to arm and plan and that is what Islamic Fascist terrorists will do if we try to appease them. Also the liberals in the US just want to see Bush lose no matter the consequences.

2006-08-29 02:18:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

These are the questions that the opposition refuses to answer, because they have no answer. It's funny how you hear "we have a plan", and yet none has ever been put forward. In fact, Nancy Polosi of California has rebuked anyone in her party who has suggested policy of their own. Her only strategy is to oppose and Republican action, even if it will help the country, just for political gain.

2006-08-29 02:13:25 · answer #4 · answered by sethle99 5 · 3 0

The name comes from the Latin fasces – a bundle of rods with a projecting axe, which was the symbol of authority in ancient Rome. The term was applied by Mussolini to his movement after his rise to power in 1922. The Fascists were viciously anti-Communist and anti- liberal and, once in power, relied on an authoritarian state apparatus. They also used emotive slogans and old prejudices (for example, against the Jews) to bolster the leader's strongman appeal. ...


I chose the above definition: Bush - anti-liberal and anti-communist, is now, anti-Islamic, anti-extremist, anti-evil regimes. Reagan was the anti-communist. Bush chose another direction.

Dictatorial leadership - he got it after 9-11, he had carte blanche to do whatever he liked. Anybody against, they were against America. The CIA had license to kill. Guantanamo Bay - they can hold prisoners without trial or accusation, no POW status. Free to tap all phones, Billions and billions to fight a war which is illegal, it has never been proven there were weapons of mass destruction, still continue the war as such. etc etc the list is long.

Of course it is a tragedy what happened to the Twin Towers, without any doubt in my mind, but Bush used it very much for his own policy and successfully. Finally, part three of the definition: the use of emotive slogans,

Bush said:

the axis of evil
we are gonna smoke em out, the terrorists, we're gonna find em and hunt them down (wherever they are)
the fight against terror, for peace and democracy etc etc, the list is so long. When the US was under attack, 9-11, he gathered all people around him for the press conference - a black, an asian, a woman, an old man and he posed them around him so that it clearly seemed he was representing the whole free world. His statement was that the whole democratic world was under attack, not only the US - talk about emotive slogans and the power of the media for State purposes..

So yes, I can imagine that some people refer to the term fascism when they refer to the Bush administration. Hell, Bush is the first to use the terminology: he speaks of Islamic Fascism..now look that up in the dictionary and see if it fits the description.

2006-08-29 02:20:25 · answer #5 · answered by Avatar13 4 · 0 4

As I read these responses, I see nothing but a bunch of teenagers complaining about how unfair their parents are cause they are grounded for doing something stupid and adolescent.

America is in trouble as you ungrateful boobs become leaders. The terrorists can't wait and your to stupid to realize that America (or George Bush for that matter) is not the enemy.

And neither are your parents btw so grow up.

2006-08-29 02:18:28 · answer #6 · answered by fuddlynn 2 · 1 1

Hey , they have no answers , they deny the question even exists.
If they were willing to do something that mattered they'd be in Uniform .
But no they are more worried about their own selves and getting
some sort of handout .

2006-08-29 02:16:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Good question. I think it has to do with the sound of the word. Certainly not the meaning as it's one of the most overused and abused words around today.

BTW, in case you hadn't noticed, there are hoards of idiots on this website.

'Nuff said?

2006-08-29 02:13:59 · answer #8 · answered by Mr. Peachy® 7 · 2 0

You've asked about 20 questions there. I can't answer them all, but I will say that 1) you can't stop terrorism 100%, and 2) Bush is not fighting the proper war on terrorism. Make me president and I'll show you how it's done.

2006-08-29 02:08:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 6 2

You should watch Michael Moore's movie FARENHEIT 9/11 it will answer many of your questions here.

2006-08-29 02:17:28 · answer #10 · answered by trykindness 5 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers