Here is a good website that shows just how relevant this is.
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14_pts_2.htm
2007-12-23 05:04:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I try to recognize the current events as some best examples of truth. Many national perspectives are overshadowed by some disposition of local politics; but, many people are more connected with "the local bar scene." If that country improves lives nepotically, then maybe; [because nepotism is a mutual inclusion, and not everyperson can be included]. Usually, an individual perspective(s) will shape the definition of [govern] as we know it.
. . .
Likewise, any person will be correct to believe the argument which opposes your suggestion (questions are suggestive). [a little dangerous(?)] We can be sure when the government storms the room, and hangs us. The book entitled Jonathon Livingston Seagul (c. 1975) can be considered as a lesson in themes (particularly, fascism). Obviously, the story remarks the efforts of hope. The political ideologies are influenced by neighborhood perspectives; sometimes the right hand sees the difference in the left.
The key politcal-for (and against) were discussed, by Ayn Rand (c. 1955, The virtue of selfishness : a new concept of egoism). The story points to a disordered group; and the disordered group points to a disordered youth; and, the disordered youth flees from the disordered group to follow a wise, old bird. The book is actually well-illustrated; bird flying out-of-control! Rand's point--this rudeness of a group is virtuous when it works for the group, but only when the opinion-majorous is an acceptable vice individually; so, John Seagul wanders-off, learns to think quickly, and snips a cricket.
2007-12-23 12:44:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
We have too many politicians wanting to appeal to both sides of the poilitical fence & they seem to pick the worse aspects of both sides.
But we are far from being fascist.
Almost all politicians want more control. Reps AND Dems!
Military does NOT reign supreme here! We do not have soldiers
They want to limit corparations & punish people for succeding by taxing then more & more!
Our national security IS at great risk! Or are you one of the folks that think Cheney orchestrated 911?
It is human nature to look for a scapegoat, but I am very proud that America has not done to the Arabic Americans after 911 what we did to the Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor!
Mass media is not controlled by the state, unless you think fining a station for showing Janet Jackson's breast is an example of fascism.
We do not have fixed elections. The corruption in the government is much less than it was in many other times in our history. And out police force doesn't have anything close to unlimited power.
2007-12-23 12:42:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Sheldon Cooper 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
I think as a country we have lost freedoms that the founding fathers would be pi$$ed about but it isnt something that happened this year or even this decade. In modern times I see the actions of the democrat party as closer to fascism because it is they who seek to divide the nation in order to gain power, push people into dependency thus guaranteeing their power, silence all opposition by actions that make no one dare to speak out, definitely corrupt and stand by each other while attacking the slightest infractions of the opposition and God knows they control the media
2007-12-23 12:43:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
We have some of those elements but not to the extreme degree in a true Fascist state.
Of course, it takes a long long time to grease the rails to Auschwitz.
I did notice that Ann Coulter said recently in a TV interview that Jews needed to be "perfected" into Christians.
Criticized for such a shocking remark, she replied:
"Its only dangerous fun"
For true Fascism, we'd have to move further:
Some danger signs would be:
1. Strong movement to a One Party system
(Bush tried this but has failed so far)
2. Violence in polling places
(haven't seen that yet)
3. Arbitrary arrest and detention of opposition leaders
4. Attacks on intellectuals, artists and science
(DEFINITE signs of this)
5. Scapegoats for the nation's problems
(to some extent, the gays are the new "Jews", but the Jews are always handy)
6. Alliance of the military and the government
(pretty much a done deal in the USA)
2007-12-23 12:41:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
Look at the definition of facism. Look at your question. Look at the United States.
The executive branch has been slowly but surely increasing its political and world wide power. In this upcoming election if Clinton or Obama wins then definitely the U.S. will have defined facism. Right now the facist front is somewhat hidden by all the bluster of the Bush administration.
2007-12-23 12:45:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by ARAX 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
There was a coup in 2000. Fascism's been slowly showing itself to be the true policy here ever since.
2007-12-23 12:44:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
After reading the elements of fascism we may already be there.
2007-12-23 12:48:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by junk man 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
None of our rights have been suspended that we didn't always have except to pray in a public school or have private international phone conversations with known terrorists. Based on that I'd say we're headed more towards communism than fascism.
2007-12-23 12:38:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
It's already been a Faschist government for the last years. And it's getting worse. I can't wait for January '09 to get here.
2007-12-23 12:45:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Big Bear 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
From Freedom to Fascism? No. Someone has to protect the weak. Great Britain nor France are strong enough any more to protect those who can not defend themselves fron tyrants.
2007-12-23 12:41:39
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋