BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Peace
Date: 28 May 04 - 11:43 PM

dianavan: it went to Ontario, NS, BC, Sask Alta and Manitoba. Tomorrow it goes to as many of the US states as I can find e-mail addresses for. Then Britain, NZ and Oz. It took me a half hour after school. I have the article with appropriate addresses and the poem set to cut and paste. Most of the work is finding the addresses of the various teacher federations, unions, 'colleges' and associations. However, by the end of the first weekend in June I expect to be done. Maybe in the grand scheme of things it will do some good. We have to stick up for our colleagues.

Bruce M

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Strick
Date: 29 May 04 - 12:28 PM

The fact remains that I still believe the elusive "Dr." Britt is a fraud and any claims his article is based on valid science are ridiculus. I'm glad that my argument that using that kind of word loosely is fundamentally wrong either resonated with some other posters or they came to the same conclusion themselves.

If you argue we're approach fascism now, what are you going to say when the real danger emerges? And who will listen after you cry wolf?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: dianavan
Date: 29 May 04 - 01:16 PM

Brucie - The union should have any of the addresses you should need. I'll look around for a list.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Peace
Date: 29 May 04 - 03:20 PM

Thank you, d. Appreciate that. BM

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 29 May 04 - 06:37 PM

I have an unanswered question in this thread from last January. I wrote:

'Well, if "Fascism" is incorrect, what IS the word for The Way Things Are Going?

' "Authoritarianism" seems too general to be precise; "Nazism" is way too specific.

'Buscism?'

Hows about it?

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: dianavan
Date: 30 May 04 - 01:06 AM

Clint - How about Corporate Multi-nationalism.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 May 04 - 07:56 AM

How abour "post-American"?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 30 May 04 - 09:52 AM

I was trying to avoid starting another thread because we have had so many about our Orwellian slide. The protocol here is that you don't just start a new thread out of laziness if there is a prior one that addresses the topic. The title of this thread seemed to indicate it was appropriate for the article about creeping Fascism. I didn't realize at the time that this was the snake pit piece on the internal standards of this forum. Shambles rose up when he saw the thread had been resuscitated, hoping for another round of his favorite whine. So I could have chosen more accurately.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Peace
Date: 30 May 04 - 01:30 PM

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Peace
Date: 30 May 04 - 07:33 PM

Bullshit works for me, Clint, but it may be too close to the truth of the matter. Slavery?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 May 04 - 08:39 PM

But perhaps Bobert gave us the asnwer to Clint's question, in Huey Long's prediction: "If Fascism comes to America it would be on a program of Americanism"

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 30 May 04 - 10:08 PM

Bullshit it is, and more unpleasant than most BS
"Corporate Multi-nationalism." is good - & precise.
"Post-American" is a litttle too good. It makes me want to weep.

I've heard the Huey Long quote before, and I think about it a lot since 9/11.

And I've heard several different versions of it; does anyone know the original source?

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: dianavan
Date: 31 May 04 - 02:34 AM

How about Americorp.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: dianavan
Date: 31 May 04 - 02:36 AM

?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: dianavan
Date: 31 May 04 - 02:37 AM

or Americon?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST
Date: 31 May 04 - 04:55 AM

What you call it matters little. The first thing is to know how to recognise it and the second is how to combat it - where ever you find it.

I didn't realize at the time that this was the snake pit piece on the internal standards of this forum. Shambles rose up when he saw the thread had been resuscitated, hoping for another round of his favorite whine. So I could have chosen more accurately.

My point is exactly that this idea that you can dabble in some areas of you life with restricting freedom of speech, whilst at the same time, safely critising Governments and institutions for doing the same, that I find so damaging and hypocritical. It IS just my view and I do beleive that I am entitled to express it here?

Back to Amos's cut and paste. If these young poets where writing poems that supported race-hate, beating women and terrorism, I suspect and are led to beleive that curtailing their freedom to do this may be supported by some here.

Poems that critise our Governments are OK though.....

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 May 04 - 06:07 AM

The Shambles coming in as an un-named GUEST?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 05:18 AM

You do seem to be able to work out who that post was from and it is not (yet) against the 'rules' is it?

Nor it seems is posting as a unknown, un-named 'guest' to defend your actions in deleting the posts of other contributors because it was 'cut and paste' and was considered not to have any original comment. Or that both these actions are defended because they considered the post in question to be a 'no brainer'.

There was never any real need to create any more threads, there is already two of these and also the following with the comments on the unknown guest who deletes the contributions of others (and I had earlier provided a link to this one). If indeed the post in question in this thread, did come from this person, as there is no way to tell?
Deleted post

Those who would deny our freedoms and attempt to justify this, will always try to hide behind the so-called 'rules' and find many solid sounding reasons for their actions. This why it is so important for us to always be consistent in supporting this freedom, even or especially when the views being expressed are not to our taste.   

Freedom is, and will always remain a pretty scary concept. There never will be a simple (or a tidy) answer.

Other that being prepared to accept that others should always be permitted to have the same freedoms that we accept as our right, no matter how strongly we may disagree with the views being expressed..............

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 02:16 PM

"Americon" works on several levels--

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 03:24 PM

Those who would deny our freedoms and attempt to justify this, will always try to hide behind the so-called 'rules' and find many solid sounding reasons for their actions. This why it is so important for us to always be consistent in supporting this freedom, even or especially when the views being expressed are not to our taste.

Freedom in a communal domain such as the Mudcat also invokes responsibility. Especially when the medium is someone else's property, and not just a God-given imaginary natural plain somewhere. So if you step on toes, and get a post edited or deleted in consequence, it is not some diaboloical affront aga9inst your natural freedoms. It is the management of a community establishing the standards of the community as best they can--a responsibility which is theirs to carry out...

A

A

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 04:12 PM

Over here "Conservative" and "Tory" are equivalent terms.

I gather in America the two terms have drifted apart. Maybe it's time they came together again. Tory sounds a very appropriate term to use for your "neoCons".

(Mind, in USA terms, many of our Tories would be counted as dangerous liberals.)

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 06:02 PM

Er, no, here Tory means Americans who sided with the British during the American Revolution.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 06:12 PM

Precisely. Traitors, in other words. Very appropriate for those people today who are undermining that revolution.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 06:56 PM

Our "neocons" are very similar in spirit to the Tories of 1770 -- reactionary, authoritarian, royalists eager to establish domination of others by the use of rented violence, to be conducted by others.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 06:57 PM

Freedom in a communal domain such as the Mudcat also invokes responsibility. Especially when the medium is someone else's property, and not just a God-given imaginary natural plain somewhere. So if you step on toes, and get a post edited or deleted in consequence, it is not some diaboloical affront aga9inst your natural freedoms. It is the management of a community establishing the standards of the community as best they can--a responsibility which is theirs to carry out...

Those who would deny our freedoms and attempt to justify this, will always try to hide behind the so-called 'rules' and find many solid sounding reasons for their actions. This why it is so important for us to always be consistent in supporting this freedom, even or especially when the views being expressed are not to our taste.

Whether this is on our forum, in the USA or anywhere else.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 07:03 PM

CHrist, Roger, you are being unusually thick. Do you think the owners and managers of this site OWE you bloody bandwidth and storage space? You keep asserting your "freedoms" as if in some political confrontation. This is similar to renting a room in a Bed and Breakfast and then insisting on striding naked through the halls and common rooms because you paid for a bedroom. The house belongs to someone Other, pal, and the rules they define are the rules that obtain whether you like it or don't.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 07:07 PM

Actually maybe it's a bit hard on the 1770s "Tories" to liken them to the present bunch. They just picked the losing side in a Civil War. The present lot are engaged in a much shadier project.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 08:21 PM

Opps, sorry. I had no idea that this thread had morphed into nudist bed and breakfast...

Think I'll be on my way now...

Like I said, sorry...

Bobert

(Backs slowly thru the front door, back ever so slightly bent forward, hands clasped in front of him apologitically thinking to himself "Hmmmm, so this is what fascisim is about?...)

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 08:28 PM

Quote from the original 'cut and paste' post, that started these two threads.

7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting "national security," and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

There is not an obsession with 'national security' on our forum but from the measures and justifications, it sometimes appears as if it were thought by some to be of a similar level of importance. I am also sure that there is no intention of oppressing anyone, but there would appear to be an obsessional need for our forum's ruling elite, (not the site owner) to judge and find reasons to delete the contributions of some other posters and of always justifying this action. Instead of simply ignoring the offending posts and allowing us to decide their worth.

The general treatment of any poster who questions the need for these (secret) activities and double standards, also looks at times as if these contributors are seen as treasonous, just by expressing a view that may be different to the accepted one, when expressing views is pretty much the whole point of our forum.

There was no issue of national security in the 'cut and paste' about the school poets but again the 'rules' are invoked there to protect the public, as if there were. I think that most of us would agree that whatever action to limit our freedom of speech, is thought necessary by our guardians to protect us, should be proportionate and consistent. I feel that it would also help and not be so divisive, if it were as open as possible and not clothed in unnecessary secrecy.

However, I do find it strange that folk who have stated their reasons here in the past, (at length) for 'guests' to use a name, (just to post) do not appear to have a problem with an unnamed 'guest' who deletes the posts of others, and then posts to justify this and still remains unknown. Given the amount of discussion on the subject of 'guest' simply posting, I am amazed that unknown 'guests' who are empowered to delete posts and threads, is just accepted without question or comment......

I strongly feel if we are to discuss general attempts to limit freedom of speech on our forum, we accept that putting-up with and even justifying this type of practice here that is counter-productive and out of all proportion to the size and nature of the original problem. After all, this is part of the Mudcat set aside for all of OUR contributions. Some tidying may need to be done (usually at the request of the poster) but I can't see any need for many of the actions, and attitudes expressed by those who feel they are in position to judge the worth of our contributions.

Yes we do indeed all have responsibilities, to go along with our rights. And that includes those who would judge us but appear to think that they do not have any responsibility to us or that they should not have to answer to us. This on the part of the Mudcat set aside for our contributions.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jun 04 - 09:55 PM

Oh, hell. I quit, Roger. Good luck finding someone to listen to you unilaterally.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jun 04 - 12:12 AM

"Precisely. Traitors, in other words."

You mean British patriots.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Jun 04 - 12:31 AM

In Canada the Americans who came North because they didn't agree with the revolution were called 'Loyalists'. That is, they were still loyal to the queen.

Politics evolve just like everything else. Change is the only truth. What we have now in the U.S. is, I think, best described as 'Americon'. The Bush administration 'conned' their people (and Britain and Australia, too), big time. They have also 'conned' the media. So instead of referring to Bush and company as Fasicts or Neo Conservatives or whatever... They're Americons to me. That goes for their sidekicks, too. The melding of big business and right wing conservatives using Christ as their sword - Americons.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jun 04 - 02:49 PM

If you do not agree with what someone is doing but go along with this, mainly because you feel (or trust) that they are 'on the side of the angels' – it may eventually turn out that you have in fact been supporting 'the devil's work', all along.

I don't really buy the idea of 'evil' but there may well be folk who consider themselves or their actions to be intentionally evil. However, I feel that the vast majority of things we now see as ending up as evil, usually start off as someone, (no matter how misguided they may turn out to be) honestly believing that they are doing the right thing. They are usually able, by their certainty alone, to convince others that this is the case and are in turn, further convinced by this blind support, that they are doing the right thing.

It is not difficult to see many examples of this, throughout history. But sadly this does not seem to prevent us from allowing history to repeat itself.

There is a rather effective UK TV advert, designed to get people to use their vote. It has a chap who does not vote, because he is not interested in politics. He is told by his friend, that politics affect him anyway, and the only way to have a say or to change anything is to vote. This is demonstrated as every time the first chap moans about an issue that is affecting him. His friend points out that he said he was not interested in politics.

So no, I am not making a political issue of freedom of speech – it IS always political issue and everywhere, including this forum. If we are to feel that on this forum we can criticise Governments and other institutions when they attempt to limit our freedoms, is it foolish not to address the same methods and hollow justifications given to limit our freedoms on this forum?

All I ask is that you read the justifications given here and while you do this, try to forget for a moment that the individuals concerned are nice folk and this is only a website etc. I am sure that all of the volunteers are well-intentioned. Just read the justifications given for the actions taken and decide if they are really proportionate to the stated purpose, especially the secrecy aspect. I simply feel that a stand must be made, before the next well-intentioned attack on our freedom of speech is made and justified. And the next one – for there is only one way this ever goes.

It is always only necessary for good folk to do nothing………

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Jun 04 - 03:26 PM

"Precisely. Traitors, in other words."

You mean British patriots. Or perhaps a different type of American patriot?

But in the circumstances of the 1770s, the same thing.

In the circumstances of 2004 and the USA, the "British patriots" definition ceases to be a relevant one. That leaves the other one floating in the air, and available for political discourse and invective.

Earlier it was suggesting that it would be appropriate to use the term "Fascist" in the USA context, as a kind of balance for the way the term "liberal" has been used.

I think that line of reasoning works better when applied to the suggestion that people consider using the term "Tory" to refer to Conservatives over there, as it always has been used back here - but with the added sting in its tail that in the USA it implies a kind of treachery. (Though quite a lot of us see it as having that implication here as well, though for different reasons.)

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 03 Jun 04 - 03:41 PM

Excellent suggestion, Wolfgang! :>)

Buncha damn neoTories!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Jun 04 - 02:51 PM

Excellent suggestion, Wolfgang! :>)

Knowing Wolfgang, I am sure it was an exellent suggestion - but what was it????

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 04 Jun 04 - 03:17 PM

I thought Wolfgang had suggested the use of the term Tory, but it seems to me it was McGrath. Sorry, all.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Jun 04 - 03:45 AM

Is there any chance that you will be saying sorry for the things you said here to this poor chap, when you were supporting those who had deleted his posting, when our unknown volunteer considered it was OK to delete his 'cut and paste'? This was before you posted yours here.

Subject: RE: Deleted post
From: Amos - PM
Date: 28 Apr 04 - 10:40 AM

AD:

Ta. If you had provided an analysis of what you thought were the merits of the issue it might have done more than just copying and pasting someone else's chestbeating. I have nothing against beating chests, mind you, but ya wanna see what you can come up with that will enhance the dialogue. No-one needs generalized negativity about how bad things are. We all know how bad things are! :>)

Amos I have no personal issue with you but there does appear to be different strokes for different folks. For I can't see that you did much different, when you re-started this thread with a 'cut and paste' that is open to the same critism (and worse). Not only was your 'cut and paste' safe from deletion, folks were later posting to thank you for posting it.

Perhaps they would have done the same with our friends 'cut and paste' contribution - had they not been denied the chance to?

Given that the vast majority of threads are not started with 'cut and paste', perhaps a little room and toleration can be found for the few that are, (like this one) and the readers left to decide the merits of them? It would be better than supporting what is pretty clearly a double standard.