What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
99 Comments
- rcook18, on 11/10/2007, -6/+66Bush is on a roll here. He reminds me of a kid testing boundaries, wondering when his parents are going to stop him, and the parents standing back thinking to themselves "I'm just sure he's going to stop any minute now".
- inactive, on 11/09/2007, -11/+45Dr. Lawrence Britt, a political scientist, published research on fascism in which he examined the fascist regimes of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Suharto and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each fascist State:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2. Disdain for the recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarceration of prisoners, etc.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists; terrorists, etc.
4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military are glamorized.
5. Rampant sexism - The government of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
7. Obsession with National security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
8. Religion and Government are intertwined - Government in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.
9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation are often the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
10. Labor Power is suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated, or are severely restricted.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassinations of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Benito Mussolini - who knew something about fascism - had a more straightforward definition: “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.”
Abraham Lincoln stated, “I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me, and causes me to tremble for the safety of our country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people, until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the republic is destroyed.” - inactive, on 11/09/2007, -10/+29Thanks, President *****, for all your fine work for the white people of the neocon wing.
- lucidguru, on 11/09/2007, -10/+28Affirmative Action doesn't work. It's point is to stop racial inequality, but it is racist and actually increases inequality. It is WRONG to segregate people by the color of their skin, and then give an advantage to one race.
White applicants feel like they are discriminated against when people of other races get acceptance at universities and employment with lower qualifications. White applicants are put up against a much higher standard, whereas it is permissible for other races to have average and below average qualifications. Society then treats other races like they are less qualified in professions such as medicine and law, even when they are better than the white doctors and lawyers in these professions. Affirmative action screws the smart and rewards mediocrity.
We need to be blind to skin color and race in all situations. A blind policy will help rid society of stereotypes, it will level the playing field for everyone, and it will get rid of racism still inherent in the system. If we want everyone to be equal then we must treat everyone that way. - sivsta, on 11/09/2007, -12/+28Affirmative Action is such baloney. It really gets under my skin, although its not the biggest issue at the moment.
- jackspace, on 11/09/2007, -1/+13Yes, and the neighbors and people in the community who have had their homes vandalized, set on fire, their pets disappeared, as well as some serious voyeurism perpetrated by said child; thinking "maybe they can't take of their own kid, let's call the authorities." So they ring up the authorities and it is answered by the juvenile delinquent who has been causing all the problems in the first place.
- Xondar, on 11/08/2007, -2/+12The very definition of fascism is when corporations are in bed with the government. This is exactly what's going on the the United States at the moment.
Simply because everyone calls the American government fascist and thus throws the term around a lot doesn't make it any less true. No matter how many times I call an apple an "apple" it still remains an apple. - pintomp3, on 11/09/2007, -1/+8while the intentions of affirmative actions may be noble, it is like curing cancer with a bandage. the real problem is institutional racism, which is much more systemic and subtle.
- DirtySnachez, on 11/08/2007, -2/+8or George ***** Bush
- Dundasbro, on 11/08/2007, -1/+7Interesting. I know I shouldn't Godwin but my teacher used the exact same comparison when she explained Hitler's pre-war actions in Nazi Germany. Just took a little more, a little more, broke a few more rules... Poland was the last straw I believe from memory.
- DirtySnachez, on 11/08/2007, -5/+11Ah, I was worried for a bit there - I hadn't seen any Ron Paul spam for at least 20 secs.
- chris8535, on 11/08/2007, -3/+9we're gonna get dugg down for this, but I support you in making that statement. Digg itself has become a real place of propaganda and control. The same figures keep saying the same things over and over again, yet somehow it has come from "the masses." Feels like a rather odd form of social engineering to me. I'm starting to wonder if Digg works as it claims to work.
- saranagati, on 11/08/2007, -2/+8I had to go to the museum of tolerance a few weeks ago and took the holocaust tour. Before that I thought there were maybe one or two parallels between the current US and pre WW2 germany but now, it looks like bush(?) was trying for that exact same thing. The one big difference between us and them is the fact the US citizens didn't (at least not yet?) rally behind the propaganda that terrorists (muslims) were the cause of our problems. With the dropping dollar, the housing bubble burst, and our expensive gas costs though, it probably wouldn't be that hard to get a large following of people in the near to blame it all on some race.
- grendel20, on 11/09/2007, -9/+15So, how many anti-right, anti-bush articles are going to get digged to hell based on the headline?
Anyone notice they're all from rawstory.com?
Anyone care?
Or should we just blindly digg?
:sigh: - Twoodge, on 11/08/2007, -3/+8No, please don't equate us with Republicans.
- rz8472, on 11/08/2007, -1/+6I see serious amounts of #1, 2, 3, 12, 13, and 14
Moderate amounts of #4, 6, 8, and 11
Little of #5.
However I'd be reluctant to call this a 'facism', since the term is used so liberally nowadays that it's irrelavent. More like irrational nationalism and illiberal democracy like what's happening in Russia, only somewhat less severe. - deusdiabolus, on 11/09/2007, -2/+6...so why are we still letting him have his way, again?
- ricree, on 11/08/2007, -0/+4I agree, but like I said in an earlier post, the answer is to actually use economic factors in place of racial (or gender, or whatever). Since economic status is the indicator of a problem, this sort of program would be self correcting.
- ricree, on 11/08/2007, -1/+5Agreed. Among other things, they tend to be far too open ended, without any means of telling when the program is no longer necessary, nor do they provide clear measures to tell the progress of the programs or how they need to be adjusted.
Personally, I advocate using an economics based approach whenever possible. Basically, all other things being equal, I feel that whoever has the worse economic background should get whatever is under consideration. While this isn't always applicable, it has a few nice features. Most importantly, though, is that it will be self correcting. If some group is actually disadvantaged, then they are statistically more likely to benefit. However, the benefit is inversely proportional to the disadvantage of the group members, so when the program works and removes the inequality, then the program will no longer benefit the formerly unequal group.
When you compare this to a system like affirmative action, the benefit is clear. Even if affirmative action were to work, it would open up another whole can of worms when we have to go about tearing it down. I mean, when have people ever really been happy about giving up power or advantage over others. - MJG2007, on 11/08/2007, -2/+6The fact is that when the democratic party supported civil rights in the 1960's, it coincided with the rise of republican party in the south because the republicans are the party that embraces racists. You failed to mention a lot of former democratic politicians switched parties because the democratic party became associated with the civil rights movement.
And you really haven't changed in that time. Just look at the demographics of the last Congress controlled by republicans:
Just look at the demographics of Congress:
There were 43 African-Americans serving in Congress....ALL were DEMOCRATS!
There were 26 Hispanics serving in Congress...20 of them were DEMOCRATS!
There were 6 people of Asian/Pacific Island descent serving in Congress....5 were DEMOCRATS!
There were 82 women serving in Congress....54 wereDEMOCRATS!
There are 154 Catholics serving in Congress...87 are DEMOCRATS!
There were 37 Jewish people serving in Congress...33 were DEMOCRATS!
We are the TRUE party that includes ALL types of Americans.
It is no slam against us that tax-paying, law-abiding people of different races, sexual orientation, religions, and gender not only VOTE for democrats, but that we actually elect a true variety of people to represent our party.
The party of Lincoln has now become the party of the plutocrats and seems hostile to equal rights. Yet you people and gripe that the democrats are bigots? Get a clue. There is a reason why you have such a hard time attracting the minority vote. - mattsw84, on 11/08/2007, -4/+8Affirmative Action is a minority's biggest weakness.
- rz8472, on 11/08/2007, -0/+4I agree with you; if there's any special cases universities should consider, it should be economical, as poorer people tend to have to work a lot harder to get to a university as a richer person works to get to the same university. If there is rampant racism in the area, it tends to be reflected in the economic situation, or at least makes for a very deep acceptance paper.
However I hope you understand why it was implemented in the first place; because of the rampant racism that did exist in the 60s and 70s. Also, I would also warn against the prospect of 'unofficial' segregation where peoples' preference to be with ones' own race eventually segregates societies; such an environment could lead to factionalism and eventually outright racism. But unfortunately I can't seem to think of a way besides AA to stop this, although there has to be a better and less damaging way. - mattsw84, on 11/08/2007, -2/+6No but believe it or not this country existed before you were born.
- saigumi, on 11/08/2007, -3/+6It can't be helped, being anit-Bush and anti-American has become quite the fad. Rawstory fuels it by making intentionally slanted articles that take truth, cut out the bits they don't want, and are left with a lopsided story that they lap up without considering and then call anyone who disagrees with it "sheep".
- hays, on 11/08/2007, -1/+4According to the summary, affirmative action is a civil right now? Wow. Case closed. Didn't realize some people might object to that or think it's actually harmful.
- aldenhg, on 11/08/2007, -5/+8According to recent news, you're right.
- kindrobot, on 11/08/2007, -3/+6Can't afford boots. But we managed to scrape up enough to buy some armor for a soldier. Cause he wasn't Blackwater.
- spyd3rweb, on 11/08/2007, -2/+4Maybe its some shadow government experiment to see just how much the American people will let slide.
- kindrobot, on 11/08/2007, -1/+3Wow. Flashbacks to living in a small town in California. Biggest criminals in town were all related to the cops. (well, the ones that kept getting away with it anyway)
- goldfishey, on 11/08/2007, -1/+3but are the Republican and Democrat parties the same today as they were 100 years ago? I know that in Australia, the Labor Party today does not resemble the original party at all. Once the Labor party was exactly that, working class representatives who represented working class people. Now its more closely aligned to the liberals, with actual working class members a bit of a scarcity. They are still aligned with the unions, but only because they represent a power/economic base.
So I was wondering, it is valid to say the Republicans did this, or the Democrats did that 100 years ago, if their nature has completely changed to be something else today? - Bdog2g2, on 11/08/2007, -1/+3You make this statement:
"generally just shows you to be an immature twit"
And to demonstrate your maturity you add this:
"Die in a fire." - vade79, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2I thought he might have been an ***** too, but now that you said it with caplocks i know it's true.
- Toallpointswest, on 11/08/2007, -2/+4Exactly! The Republican party of today is NOT the party of Lincoln or Liberty (for anyone black or white) Loneranger needs to learn that things have changed over the past hundred years and stop spewing lies.
- WhiteRaven, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2@staticneuron
I have a question for you. Doesn't the employer have a basic right to have a preference and to act on it? - Terr01, on 11/08/2007, -2/+4Agreed. The problem is NOT about race. It's related, but that's not it.
The problem is primarily socioeconomic. It's rich and poor.
Back when that correlated more closely with ethnicity, it wasn't such a bad thing do base things on ethnicity, but we need to keep our eye on the ball.
And while we must be blind to race on a case-by-case basis, we must also be vigilant to ensure nobody is stacking the deck in either direction or missing some factor. - AlexWills, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2Ironic, the very same people that Bush likely replaced in these civil rights panels would want you in jail for that politically incorrect slur.
- Berkana, on 11/09/2007, -3/+5I don't agree with affirmative action, but I'll say this much: it matters very little to me that Bush appointed the first black-woman to secretary of state (Condoleeza Rice), and the first hispanic attorney general (Alberto Gonzolez). Bush is likely the biggest disaster to ever befall this nation. Why the hell can't we get him impeached? Do the dems realize how bad things can get in the coming year with a idiot and a Sith lord at the helm?
- inactive, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2You pink slippered Republican................
- laTda, on 11/08/2007, -3/+5BUSH IS AN *****…
- staticneuron, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2You would be surprised. I have seen situations in which several qualified people applied for a job but the employer was going to choose the white guy based off of preferance alone. It makes me wonder...... if affirmative action wasn't there would it happen more?
I agree to hire someone just for the sake of hiring someone is beyond idiotic but after working in several jobs I am starting to wonder if it is doing its job. Would we have seen more of an economic gap if certain "companies" and employers just felt it best to hire a guy they think they will get along with better? - Dush, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2Affirmative action is nothing more than politically acceptable racism by people who don't really want every human to be equal but want to make it look like they do.
- vade79, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2I submit George ***** Bush
- Innova69, on 11/09/2007, -0/+2Welcome to the USA.
- inactive, on 11/08/2007, -1/+2Do you know how much it costs to run a fleet of buses? Imagine what it would cost now that gas is over $3 a gallon. That money could have been spent on improving schools. How do you think those inner city kids felt when they went to those fancy suburban schools and saw how the other half lived? How do you think those inner city kids felt when suddenly their schools were being repaired simply because white kids started going there? Busing never resolved anything. It didn't resolve crime and poverty in the inner cities. It didn't solve dropout rates. It just changed some colors around. But liberals are satisfied with the symbolic and superficial. It's the thought that counts to them, not the results.
- ZenMojo, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1The conservative alternative is always, of course, "Do nothing." Lovely solution that was.
- inactive, on 11/08/2007, -2/+3No, they aren't the same. The Republicans have become gutless. They won't even fight something as obviously heinous as abortion. That's why I'm no longer a Republican. But Democrats are still committing crimes against humanity. Look at what FDR did to Japanese Americans. It was a Democrat who was the only president to actually USE nukes. LBJ once voted against an anti-lynch law. Although Kennedy made a lot of promises to blacks to get their vote, he is not responsible for a single piece of civil rights legislation. Clinton never put any blacks in the highest tiers of the federal government, except for Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, who didn't survive the experience. No black national security adviser, no black secretary of state, no black supreme court appointments. And, as I said, Democrats revile any blacks who break away from the liberal plantation and think for themselves. If you are black and you don't think, speak, and particularly, vote the way Democrats want you to, you are dirt. Democrats hold blacks in chains of ideology just as surely as they used to hold them in chains of iron.
It is most certainly valid to say that Republicans did this or Democrats did that 100 years ago. That's what made our country and the world what it is today. That's what prevents us from repeating mistakes. And that's why public schools no longer teach American history and civics. That's why liberals fight so passionately against school vouchers. Liberals can't allow our children to know what went into the making of our country and who was responsible. - inactive, on 11/08/2007, -1/+2What civil rights did you have eight years ago that you don't have today? Slandering the president is certainly one you retain.
- irvman21, on 11/08/2007, -1/+2Affirmative action is the term for politically correct racism. Giving someone preferential treatment on the basis of their skin color is wrong.
- Loonacy, on 11/09/2007, -1/+2Robots.
- Roger_Ramjet, on 11/08/2007, -1/+2Don't you guys ever get tired of the never ending Bush Derangement Circle Jerk? I mean, get a hobby for crying out loud.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 100 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is