Capitalist Neocons=Fascists

[Lenin II]

Despite the name, Neocons are neither new nor conservative. They are capitalist aggressor fascist pigs that favor globalization, anti-intellectualism, theocracy, upper-class tax cuts to bankrupt the working class, sabotaging scientific research, teaching that masturbation can cause pregnancy, banning gay marriage and abortion, ruling the world, and election systems which don't have a paper trail.

Bush has gone to an unjust war and the damn Democrats are doing nothing to stop him, even now that they have control of Congress. He is costing the people their lives and nullifying our efforts to create a free and equal society. And now, thanks to his appalling Patriot Act, which the Dems and Greens have also failed to stop, he may spy and arrest anyone he pleases. This, combined with religious fundamentalism, is the very definition of FASCISM.

We cannot stand for this, comrades. I want to discuss what we can do to stop this, what we can say to anyone who will listen. I hope this will stop and make us think, and inspire us on the far-left to raise our voices.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/may2005/300505perspective.jpg

[ComradeR]

GASP you say neocons are Fascists? haven't you heard what they say?

[Guerrilla22]

The neo-con ideology actually pertains to foreign policy, not really domestic issues.

[ComradeR]

Seriously though the capitalist conditioning has done a tremendous job of creating an apathetic working class, so there's not much we can do about the neocons at the moment.

[Guerrilla22]

Their influence seems to have decreased dramatically with the failure of Iraq. Rumsfeld, a very prominent neo-con got the boot and was replaced with a more pragmatic Sec. of Defense. Bill Kristol has been reduced to doing spots on Fox News, while Francis Fukuyama, perhaps the most prominent neo-con of all has gone back and recanted on his support for pre-emptive war. still we are still hearing calls form the neo-cons for strikes against Iran, North Korea and most recently the tribal region of Pakistan.

[RebelDog]

Whats happening in the US is not fascism. If it was it would be far clearer to see. Fascism develops, and more importantly gains power, basically as a counter to a strong, organised working class movement that constitutes a threat to the establishment. Such a working class movement does not exist in the US. The ruling class don't need fascism at this moment, their perfectly safe. If however it came to a point, just like Germany 1933, where the ruling class needed to crush the working class, then they turn to the Hitler's etc, to do the job. Its a mistake to call whats happening in the US fascism, because when it does come along you might not recognise it.

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 12:47 pm
The neo-con ideology actually pertains to foreign policy, not really domestic issues.
Perhaps that is right, but the damnable Republican ideology has greatly influenced their social views, leading them to favor social authoritarianism and plutocracy. You say their ideology doesn’t apply to domestic issues? Tell that to the rejected stem cell bills and Kyoto protocol bills.
Their values are a threat to us and must be conquered.

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 03, 2007 04:32 pm
Whats happening in the US is not fascism. If it was it would be far clearer to see. Fascism develops, and more importantly gains power, basically as a counter to a strong, organised working class movement that constitutes a threat to the establishment. Such a working class movement does not exist in the US. The ruling class don't need fascism at this moment, their perfectly safe. If however it came to a point, just like Germany 1933, where the ruling class needed to crush the working class, then they turn to the Hitler's etc, to do the job. Its a mistake to call whats happening in the US fascism, because when it does come along you might not recognise it.
Fascism: a system of government that exercises dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
Signs: concentrated private control of wealth, control of information, massive investment/manufacture of arms and military equipment, suppression of labor movements…sound familiar??

The only reason people don’t call it full-fledged fascism right now is because we haven’t begun rounding people up and putting them into death camps…oh wait, yes we have. See—Abu Gharib and Guantonomo Bay.

[Goatse]

Why do so many leftists claim the US or whoever else they hate are fascists? Fascism isn't the only oppressive ideology out there.

[PRC-UTE]

For many many reasons, they're not fascists, just capitalists / imperialists.

[Fawkes]

Fascism only occurs when the ruling class is in extreme danger of losing their positions, something that is not happening in the U.S. Fascism is not a blanket synonym for ultra-authoritarian governments (somewhat of an oxymoron, I know).

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 08:00 pm
Fascism is not a blanket synonym for ultra-authoritarian governments (somewhat of an oxymoron, I know).


Eh, you may be right. Even me, a hardcore leftist, would never compare Bush to Hitler.

...

I mean, Hitler was democratically elected.

[ComradeR]

The US right now isn't Fascist, but it wouldn't take much at this point (nothing more then a crisis that potentially threatens the ruling class to occur) for it become Fascist.

[The Grey Blur]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 03, 2007 04:32 pm
Whats happening in the US is not fascism. If it was it would be far clearer to see. Fascism develops, and more importantly gains power, basically as a counter to a strong, organised working class movement that constitutes a threat to the establishment. Such a working class movement does not exist in the US. The ruling class don't need fascism at this moment, their perfectly safe. If however it came to a point, just like Germany 1933, where the ruling class needed to crush the working class, then they turn to the Hitler's etc, to do the job. Its a mistake to call whats happening in the US fascism, because when it does come along you might not recognise it.
Dissenter said it perfectly. Calling America at the moment fascist or that it's heading in that direction is a cheapening of the real political description.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Permanent Revolution+March 04, 2007 04:01 pm--> (Permanent Revolution @ March 04, 2007 04:01 pm)
The [email protected] 03, 2007 04:32 pm
Whats happening in the US is not fascism. If it was it would be far clearer to see. Fascism develops, and more importantly gains power, basically as a counter to a strong, organised working class movement that constitutes a threat to the establishment. Such a working class movement does not exist in the US. The ruling class don't need fascism at this moment, their perfectly safe. If however it came to a point, just like Germany 1933, where the ruling class needed to crush the working class, then they turn to the Hitler's etc, to do the job. Its a mistake to call whats happening in the US fascism, because when it does come along you might not recognise it.
Dissenter said it perfectly. Calling America at the moment fascist or that it's heading in that direction is a cheapening of the real political description. [/b]
Even more problematic for revolutionaries in the USA, calling Bush fascist only pushes people into the ranks of the democrats.

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 12:51 pm
The US right now isn't Fascist, but it wouldn't take much at this point (nothing more then a crisis that potentially threatens the ruling class to occur) for it become Fascist.
Than god SOMEONE is listening to me. So far you guys seem unable to see a true threat to your cause when you see one. If anything, Bush is a greater threat to the cause than the fascist factions--he is in control of the most powerful country on earth, and now the three largest oil reserves on earth--Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq. His conquest plans will result in the capitalists controlling all the oil in the Middle East. All the while eating away at our liberties and destroying peoples' faith in the left.

[Question everything]

Bush? The Democrats are almost as Bad. I made this pic to summerize my opinion

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by AndrewG+March 04, 2007 07:32 pm--> (AndrewG @ March 04, 2007 07:32 pm)
[email protected] 04, 2007 12:51 pm
The US right now isn't Fascist, but it wouldn't take much at this point (nothing more then a crisis that potentially threatens the ruling class to occur) for it become Fascist.
Than god SOMEONE is listening to me. So far you guys seem unable to see a true threat to your cause when you see one. If anything, Bush is a greater threat to the cause than the fascist factions--he is in control of the most powerful country on earth, and now the three largest oil reserves on earth--Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq. His conquest plans will result in the capitalists controlling all the oil in the Middle East. All the while eating away at our liberties and destroying peoples' faith in the left. [/b]
He could be more dangerous. But that doesn't make him a fascist necessarily.

Fascism is something that occurs in a period of crisis (which is likely on the way) and doesn't happen exactly in responce to the workers' movement gaining strength but more often when they've missed their opportunity to take power. It's when the bourgeoisie can't rule for themselves so call upon the most reactionary elements (law n order types) to do so for them through a dictatorship.

Bush's background is completely different, he's a very very privelaged bourgeois. A fascist dictator in the states would be more like someone in the 'minuteman' movement.

[Lenin II]

http://www.larryflynt.com/ad_parodies_gallery/image/bush-nazi.jpg

[bolshevik butcher]

PRC-UTE appears to me to be the voice of reason in this discussion. The republicanism is a classic ruling class conservative party, Bush is not a fascist he is just a reactionary capitalist imperialist leader. If Bush is a fascist then we would have to call Regan a fascist as well. Regan fought imperialist wars, and attacked the American working class as well. Fascism is something far more specific than this.

[Stone]

Despite the name, Neocons are neither new nor conservative. They are capitalist aggressor fascist pigs that favor globalization, anti-intellectualism, theocracy, upper-class tax cuts to bankrupt the working class, sabotaging scientific research, teaching that masturbation can cause pregnancy, banning gay marriage and abortion, ruling the world, and election systems which don't have a paper trail.


You clearly are oblivious to what a Neo Con is. A Neo Con is entirely distinct from a fascist. Neo Cons are essentially liberal free marketeers with some libertarian social values that have an aggressive, expansionist, hegemonist foreign policy. A large number of Neo Cons like David Horowitz used to be Trotskyists. Essentially they have taken Trotsky's misinterpretion of Marx's "Permanent Revolution" theory and have adapted it to USA imperialism.

In regard to religious fundamentalism, you are entirely off the mark. Neo Cons like Alan Dershowicz actually tend to be socially liberal degenerates.

Neo Cons also have some fanatical obsession with Israel. If you browse through the prominent Neo Con rag Frontpagemagazine.com, you'd notice that every other article is aimed at promoting pro-Likud propaganda and slandering Muslims. Of course, the motive for slandering Muslims is to strengthen international Zionism. Neo Cons slander relatively respectful Paleo Con commentators like Justin Raimondo and Pat Buchanan.



Bush has gone to an unjust war and the damn Democrats are doing nothing to stop him, even now that they have control of Congress. He is costing the people their lives and nullifying our efforts to create a free and equal society. And now, thanks to his appalling Patriot Act, which the Dems and Greens have also failed to stop, he may spy and arrest anyone he pleases. This, combined with religious fundamentalism, is the very definition of FASCISM.

This is a manifestation of the "partisan" charade in American politics. Your ilk do not find fault with the system but only with the policies of the present regime. It is not Bush that is the problem. Rather, it is the capitalist system that's the problem.

[Pilar]

We must NOT support the impeachment of George W. Bush. This is a perfect time for Revolutionaries to DO NOTHING in the United States. Impeachment would be one of the biggest reverses of recent gains. The United States has lost so much during the past 6 years. Every month, a new revolation shows Americans that their government and rights are both a myth, and that their leaders will only protect the capitalist class. People's views about their faith in their institutions is at an all time low at the same time that the Left is flooding the internet with statements about our growing strength.

Impeachment would actually benefit American's views that their Constitution has value. Something the Revolutionary Left has been arguing against for some time.

The Left argues the Constition's rights and U.S. Government must be turned from the right to the left to achieve positive ends. Our argument must be that, by design, in cannot work.

The World Can't Wait organization ORIGINALLY had it right: At first, it argued that the current administration had to be driven from office. After the 2004 election, and especially after 2006, they have adopted the view that impeachment is the best thing for America and the world. Every day Bush stays in office is a "vote" for Internationalism, Socialism, Marxism, and Disarmament.

[KC]

This thread is about as mature as the "Republican Terrorists" one. The starter of this thread and those that agree with him really have no idea what they're talking about and base their "analyses" on their emotion. It's really immature.


They are capitalist aggressor fascist pigs that favor globalization, anti-intellectualism, theocracy, upper-class tax cuts to bankrupt the working class, sabotaging scientific research, teaching that masturbation can cause pregnancy, banning gay marriage and abortion, ruling the world, and election systems which don't have a paper trail

Sounds like a completely pointless rant to me. Why don't you post this shit in Chit-Chat or something where it belongs (or better yet, don't post it at all)?


He is costing the people their lives and nullifying our efforts to create a free and equal society. And now, thanks to his appalling Patriot Act, which the Dems and Greens have also failed to stop, he may spy and arrest anyone he pleases

Sounds like you blame everything on the Bush regime. Sorry, but Bush really isn't the problem; all of this is a development of capitalism and not the fault of a single person. To blame it on one person or a small group of people within the government would be simply wrong.

Also, the Democrats didn't "fail to stop" the patriot act, because they never tried to! They support the Patriot Act. It's as much theirs as it is Bush's. The Patriot Act doesn't mean that Bush can spy on anyone he pleases; it means that the government as a whole can. That includes democrats!


This, combined with religious fundamentalism, is the very definition of FASCISM.


No it's not. Go read about fascism before throwing the word around senselessly.


Seriously though the capitalist conditioning has done a tremendous job of creating an apathetic working class, so there's not much we can do about the neocons at the moment.

Communists don't care about "the neocons"; they care about the bourgeoisie as a whole. The fact that you espouse such anti-Marxist rhetoric shows how vulgarized your conception of Marxism is.


while Francis Fukuyama, perhaps the most prominent neo-con of all has gone back and recanted on his support for pre-emptive war.

It was actually a preventive war, not a pre-emptive one.


Perhaps that is right, but the damnable Republican ideology has greatly influenced their social views, leading them to favor social authoritarianism and plutocracy.

This isn't a "republican ideology" at all. There's all kinds of republicans and to lump them all into one category like that is to completely ignore or even reject reality.


You say their ideology doesn’t apply to domestic issues? Tell that to the rejected stem cell bills and Kyoto protocol bills.
Their values are a threat to us and must be conquered.

Because every single republican agreed on those issues. :rolleyes:


Why do so many leftists claim the US or whoever else they hate are fascists? Fascism isn't the only oppressive ideology out there.

Because many leftists have no way to express their emotions than through childish accusations and mudslinging; they don't understand how to rationally analyze a situation and come to a conclusion based on that analysis. Their politics are based on how they feel. Which is stupid.



Eh, you may be right. Even me, a hardcore leftist, would never compare Bush to Hitler.


Uh, you compared the American Government to Nazi's in your original post...


If anything, Bush is a greater threat to the cause than the fascist factions--he is in control of the most powerful country on earth, and now the three largest oil reserves on earth--Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq. His conquest plans will result in the capitalists controlling all the oil in the Middle East. All the while eating away at our liberties and destroying peoples' faith in the left.

First, Bush doesn't control the country; the government does. This includes the democrats! Get that through your thick skull. Bush isn't the sole enemy here, and ranting against him is really fucking annoying and immature. Use your brain. Second, the capitalists already control the oil in the Middle East!


Bush? The Democrats are almost as Bad. I made this pic to summerize my opinion


I don't think comparing either party (or both) to the Nazi's is historically, theoretically, or ideologically valid at all. That whole argument's based on an emotional reaction to capitalism, or more specifically, imperialism (the latest development of capitalism).


http://www.larryflynt.com/ad_parodies_gallery/image/bush-nazi.jpg

What happened to "I wouldn't compare Bush to Hitler."? You're an idiot.


We must NOT support the impeachment of George W. Bush. This is a perfect time for Revolutionaries to DO NOTHING in the United States. Impeachment would be one of the biggest reverses of recent gains. The United States has lost so much during the past 6 years. Every month, a new revolation shows Americans that their government and rights are both a myth, and that their leaders will only protect the capitalist class. People's views about their faith in their institutions is at an all time low at the same time that the Left is flooding the internet with statements about our growing strength.

Impeachment would actually benefit American's views that their Constitution has value. Something the Revolutionary Left has been arguing against for some time.

So the krux of your argument is basically that we should support the destruction of workers rights because it leads to revolutionary consciousness... sounds like some vulgar crap to me.

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by Zampanò@March 10, 2007 06:26 am


I don't think comparing either party (or both) to the Nazi's is historically, theoretically, or ideologically valid at all. That whole argument's based on an emotional reaction to capitalism, or more specifically, imperialism (the latest development of capitalism).


http://www.larryflynt.com/ad_parodies_gallery/image/bush-nazi.jpg

What happened to "I wouldn't compare Bush to Hitler."? You're an idiot. [/quote]
Excuse me? Did you even read the entire post? It was meant to be sarcastic. I said I would never compare Bush to Hitler...because Hitler was democratically elected. Also, for someone who accuses others of immaturity and pointless mudslinging, your childish rants and name-calling aren't much of an inspiration for other posters. Why don’t you practice what you preach before you call me an "idiot?"

[Guerrilla22]

It was actually a preventive war, not a pre-emptive one.

Actually it was an anticapatory war and "pre-emptive" is their term not mine. although I should have clarified that.

[KC]

Also, for someone who accuses others of immaturity and pointless mudslinging, your childish rants and name-calling aren't much of an inspiration for other posters. Why don’t you practice what you preach before you call me an "idiot?"

Calling someone an idiot isn't "childish" when they're being an idiot. Now, respond to the rest of my post.


Actually it was an anticapatory war and "pre-emptive" is their term not mine. although I should have clarified that.

Preventive war is the term usually used in world politics for wars like this.

[Guerrilla22]

Preventive war is the term usually used in world politics for wars like this.

I realize this. However, I used the term coined by Chomsky because I figured it fits better. Preventive war is a war in self defense when an attack is not necessarily imment, but a threat still exist a pre-emptive war is when an attack is certain, however the US never had any credible evidence to believe that Saddam ever posed a threat to its security when the decision to go to war was made, therefore a better term for the war is "anticpiatory." However this is merely semantics for the most part.