If we are a Democracy, why is the Bush Administration acting is if it were a neo-Fascist oligarchy?

Question

Okay, okay... If we are a Democractic republic, why is the Bush Administration acting is if it were a neo-Fascist oligarchy?

You guys are acting, again, like a team of Republican neo-Conservative responders set out to defend and uphold the fantasy-Bush-land where idealism is fantasy and fantasy is real. Gimme a real answer, now, common.

Fascism. Gimmee a true definition that DOESEN'T fit within the neo-Conservative, Bush agenda... Commonn..... Bring it onnnnn......

"Despite all of the silly parody characters, the Bush Admin does not resemble an oligarchy."------ An ignoran response like that deserves a deliberate challenge. My question is being monitored by some type of Bush-supporting entity. Email me ****-faze, [e-mail] and let's see what happens. Try me, arzshole.

Very, very, interesting.....

This Yahoo Board is being monitored by some sort of organization that is associated with the neo-conservative cause... I will pass this event on to my occasional friends whom I meet..... This is most interesting... attacked immediately by various sides... You-all have been most misguided as to the true meaning of Christian faith. Shall we speak again?....you have my email above....

Coach: I am neither Communist nor an idiot. Apparently your mis-recognize my literate approach as imbecilic, while I take Olberman as a rather erudite and expansive type of personality who would have the cojones to stand in front of his own president to express his absolute disgust at the performance of the office of the President of the United States towards the entire of the world. Duh, idiot? Nuff sayid? Or, do I need digress into some other type of reptilic behaviour to get my thought across….

Now, Zahid has a rather interesting idea, perhaps even a point, about the direction that the American policy has taken over the LAST 40-50 years…. If there any of you chicken-ship neo-con-truth-and-denying-conservative-****-heads still reading this post, you might take note of this gem of truth as it appears in front of your face. Beware….

Twenty minutes later, no responses from my replies.... Three to five minutes after posting my question, I receive about seven accusatory responses - now, after defending myself, no response at all. Hmmm.... Were they here soley to take advantage of the "boredom effect" of the first several messages? Let's wait and see till tomorrow morning! [e-mail] Please feel free to communicate because this here is definitely a war of words, but could easily escalate into something much worse - - because "A Christian with an unforgiving gun is a disgusting and unforgiveable thing to endure" . . . . . . . . . .

DefiantKulak: Write something better for me to yawn about, please. Let’s start with that Fascism is a “natural” (that’s nice) extension of capitalism (that is, industrial monopolies in the extended sense) and (conservative/reactionary) government, rather than the Stalin-esque style “socialisam”. Duhhhh. Even Eisenhower was aware of that.
Regarding the Bush Oligarchy, it is, so I disagree about that…. Write me, chicken-shict, and let’s muse on the abstraction for a few emails, o-kay???
Regarding the disperse issue I have brought up with the question, it seems that an oligarchy has little to do with whatever a democracy has to do with responding to the needs of the PEOPLE under whom it that Democracy is governed. Moreover, if Democracy is mob-rule (which it isn’t in my book, to which we may agree or disagree) why aren’t we still following the edicts that were first propagated from the evangelists on the Mayflower?

Do I need add another Duhhhh???, here? Wake up, pal.

Opus... I'm truly IMPRESSED AT YOUR RESPONSE!!! Now my question is getting somewhere...... Any other posters will, I hope, follow Opus's lead with her list. Take it from there, folks, start with the dictionary before it itself becomes a target of the Bush "revisionist doctrine".

Answer 1

do you even know what an oligarchy is???

just for the record, the United States is not a democracy, we are a democratic REPUBLIC....
Look it up

Answer 2

Fascism definition (Thank you Webster's): a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

There are 14 points to Fascism. They are:

1) Powerful and continuous nationalism.
2) Disdain for the recognition of human rights.
3) Identification of enemies and/or scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4) Supremacy of the military.
5) Rampant sexism.
6) Controlled mass media.
7) Obsession with national security.
8) Religion and government intertwined.
9) Corporate power is protected.
10) Labor power is suppressed.
11) Disdain for intellectuals and the arts.
12) Obsession with crime and punishment.
13) Rampant cronyism and corruption.
14) Fraudulent elections.

How many does the current government score? My view is that about 12-13 of the points have been met by the Government starting with FDR. The Bush administration has succeeded in installing at least points 1,2,3,4,6,7, and 14.

Question begs here is this: Is Bush a dictator? He wants to be, he is working on it through illegal executive orders. Maybe he will achieve this one.

Oligarchy? Probably so. Oligarchy is the rule of a few, and that is the way that it seems to have been going. Those that have money and power will rule those who don't. Can you afford to run for political office? No silver spoon in your mouth today, you have little to no chance.

This country was founded as a Representative Democratic Republic, however, through the corruption of power and the apathy of the population we have lost that Republic to a few power hungry individuals who don't give a squat about anything but the retention of their power.

It's a just a simple matter of time before the final nails (points) are made and we all wake up one day wondering where our country went to.

Ask yourself this - are you free? Really free?

Answer 3

If I answer by accepting your terminology, I'd say it's because we let it. If we - the basis of power in a representative republic - want to end it, we (technically) can.

However, the resemblance between our current system and the ideal of democracy, or the form of a representative republic, is dwindling. It's not all Bush's fault - I just don't think he's that much of a go-getter.

However, the corporate domination of the media, the flooding of campaigns with the money of the ultra-rich, and Americans' apparently increased ability to behave like a frog in a pot of water on a stove leaves us NOT in charge.

Now, those terms...
"neo-Fascist oligarchy" - Did you really think you were going to win an argument with this one? You're the Barry Bonds of political discussions. Nobody will like you. Even those of us who are predisposed to agree with your position will wince at the use of this overblown terminology. And for the wingnuts, it's pheromones.

I know, you need a shorthand to get the question into the small space allowed. Still, I feel about the same as most Republicans gun-owners do when Ted Nugent gets in the news.

[note to wmcritter - this isn't moveon.org language, it's the Spartacist Youth League's]

That said, you're basically right. Corporations and their representatives (the lobbyists) are in charge, sucking the life out of our economy, and dominating political discussion, news, and policy. Period.

And every time some earnest Republican votes to protect his or her faith, family and freedom by voting for the corporate candidates on the right, they get screwed.

I'm not entirely convinced that I - way out left, voting for liberty, lifestyle and ... crap, I can't think of another L... lasagne? - and voting for the corporate Democratic Party candidate, am not getting similarly buggered.

Answer 4

Technically, we're a 'federal constitutional republic' - a republic being a state that practices some form of representative democracy, at least in theory. Since the elected representatives in a republic are comparatively few in number, though, they could be characterized as a sort of 'elected oligarchy.'

Nothing fascist about a two-party system, of course, but, one could argue that if the two parties became so antagonistic and so sure that thier way was the only way, then each would, itself, be like a fascist state...

Answer 5

"neo-Fascist oligarchy?"

You have as much basis for this characterization as if you were to call the Bush Admin a bunch of Purple Emus.

Fascism is a natural extension of socialism. The Bush Admin is not fascist.

Despite all of the silly parody characters, the Bush Admin does not resemble an oligarchy.

Look into an issue, think about why you disagree, and make a point. Ad-hominem does nothing to advance whatever your cause might be.

Answer 6

Because a cowardly Congress--including the Congress as now dominated by Democrats--is refusing to live up to its responsibility to balance the President. The Democrats have a majority, they can refuse funding for any project the President wants, but they are too cowardly to do it.

Answer 7

He's not.
But the Democrats have taken-over Congress. And they act like Fascists.
Well..... I guess they are Fascists & Communists.
Both Hate the USA.

Democrats are mad because they say they lost some Freedom.
But they only Freedom Democrats have lost, is not being able to call known Terrorists over the phone, without being Wiretapped.
Why can't Democrats just write Terrorists letters? Why must they always phone them?

Answer 8

Because we let them by giving them a second term. They believe in oligarchy as the best form of government (for themselves) but they know it isn't good for the rest of us, so they do not state it openly.

Answer 9

We're a representative republic actually, not a democracy or an oligarchy.

Answer 10

You are wrong on both counts. The US is not a democracy. It is a representative republic. Mr. Bush is doing a good job, despite the constant back stabbing by the left wing liberal loonies in Congress and in the main stream media.