Contributors

Saturday, May 10, 2008

"Liberal" Fascist Thought of The Day

Today marks the beginning of a new regular series here at Notes From The Front: The "Liberal" Fascist Thought Of The Day. It is my hope that it will enter the much enshrined ranks of the Grab Bag and the Shit Sack. So, without further adieu, I give you my "liberal" fascist thought of the day.

In looking for the roots of fascism in this country, one need only look at the reaction of a certain side of the political aisle when a student refuses to stand and recite the pledge of allegiance.

26 comments:

tom h. said...

Goldberg is either a fucking moron or a swindler trying to make a quick buck off of the...what did you call it, Mark?...the "tap into your inner rage and pass your feelings off as fact" crowd. Maybe he's both.

Remember, a key element of fascism is nationalism. It is quite apparent that the right has more nationalistic pride than the left and therein lies the problem. The left want cultural diviristy and a more global approach to issues. They start with the world as a whole and work down from there. The right starts with the United States and work outward from there, disparaging anyone that doesn't follow our way of doing things. That's nationalsim and that's where the roots of fascism are found.

elizabeth said...

Well said, tom. To put it in more of a lay person phrase, fascists would say "It's our way or the highway." Let me think here for a moment....who has that exact same trait?

I still say that Goldberg is reacting to the left calling the right nazis with all of the maturity of second grader--No, you are!

Markadelphia said...

Tom, I would add "tap into your inner, INGORANT (willfully or unwillfully) rage..."

It's more about an unwillingness to accept or even accomedate any new information or views. A great example of this would be Vietnam. They can't deal with the fact we lost. Many are single minded in their belief that we went in to protect our country from Communism (another trait of fascism btw) and if it wasn't for Jane Fonda and John Kerry, we would've won. They refuse to accept that we lost because the policy was flawed on a multitude of levels.They refuse to accept that we went in because, as often has been the case in the last 44.5 years, the defense industry runs our government.

With any sort of nationalism, especially the current nationalism of the right, there is no wavering from the greatness of America. To say otherwise is treason. The simple fact that they chide the left for being reflective in regards to our foreign policy proves that Goldberg's central thesis is wrong.

sw said...

who has that same trait elizabeth? according to the time to sprint entry, markadelphia now has that trait. Just read the entry - it's his way or the highway.

pl said...

The left want cultural diviristy[sic] and a more global approach to issues. They start with the world as a whole and work down from there. The right starts with the United States and work outward from there

I actually like that. Well said tom. I believe you've nailed a key difference between left and right square on the head.

That being said, I think it's ridiculous to use "nationalism" as a dirty word. But I won't delve into that, as I don't want to ruin this warm and fuzzy moment.

Markadelphia said...

SW, actually, no. What I am saying is that you can't accept a point of view that is so willfully ignorant and whose central tenets do great harm to this country.

There are a multitude of ways to solve or country's problems...many would be more effective than mine....but I know for sure that Bush et al's way is horribly wrong. The consequences have proven me right.

eddie said...

Hey Mark, long time no post. I just wanted to let you know that there is a post over on Smallest Minority that blames the cyclone in Myanmar on....wait for it....the COMMIES!

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't this the same group that filleted you over the coals about Bush and his responsibility with Katrina. I thought that governments were NOT responsible for deaths in natural disasters? What a bunch of fucking hypocrites.

sara said...

Yeah, and he somehow manages make fun of Al Gore and climate change in that post too. Did you see that link?

eddie said...

Yeah, I think that is the Gestapo news service a la former PM Howard. Seig Heil! Of course now the right is attempting to tie both fascism and communism to liberals. Sheesh are they desperate now or what?

HF said...

Hey Eddie - The Government of India warned the Government of Myanmar ahead of time that the cyclone was on the way. The government of Myanmar did not communicate that to the people of their country.

Markadelphia said...

Eddie and Sara, just read it. Wow. Talk about hypocrisy. And the Al Gore thing......that was really in poor taste.

HF, if you are going to criticize the government of Myanmar for not doing enough to help its people, that's fine. No doubt, they are guilty. But then so is the Bush Administration for its response to Katrina. You can't have it both ways.

Kevin said...

there is a post over on Smallest Minority that blames the cyclone in Myanmar on....wait for it....the COMMIES!

Well, what we have here is either a problem in reading comprehension, or coginitive dissonance, (or just plain insanity) and I know which diagnosis I think is correct.

No, the cyclone is not the fault of the Commies, the incredible death-toll from it IS.

Yes, once again, a notional "socialist" government is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of its own citizens.

Deny it all you want, but that's the facts, Jack. They did not warn their citizens, they are not allowing aid to their citizens, and as a result thousands are dead, and thousands more are dying and will continue to die.

And the government of Myanmar is responsible. Not for the cyclone, but for the deaths resulting from neglect.

The Bush Administration and Katrina? Why didn't the government of New Orleans and the government of Louisiana use the disaster plans they had on hand? Were people not warned of the oncoming storm? Were they not advised to evacuate? Did the government actively prevent aid from reaching the victims?

Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath is NOT the equivalent of what is happening in Myanmar.

The quote that begins this comment illustrates the entire point: it is impossible for you to think rationally. Nobody called "tom h." on his characterization of that post as blaming the cyclone on Myanmar's government. No, you all joined the chorus, with the exception of "hf". And Markadelphia states in response "if you are going to criticize the government of Myanmar for not doing enough to help its people, that's fine. No doubt, they are guilty." And that's the whole point of the piece - Myanmar's government is killing, through malignant and depraved indifference, its own people. (But hey, they went ahead with the vote on their new constitution! Gee, too bad turnout was way down.)

No, Mark concedes that Myanmar's government is being naughty but finds it equivalent to the Bush Administration's actions post-Katrina.

Here's a clue: Louis Armstrong International Airport opened for humanitarian aid the day after the storm moved through New Orleans. Myanmar's government is still refusing aid more than a week afterwards.

Kevin said...

Sorry, "tom h." - I meant "Eddie".

Markadelphia said...

Kevin, no one is denying how despicable the government of Myanmar is and what they have done to its people-both now and in the past.

But once again, a blind eye is turned toward our government when it comes to its laissez faire reaction to Katrina. What is the outcome of preventing aid from coming in and what is the outcome of a massive under reaction based on a failed ideology? Exactly the same. People don't get help.

Now, in the case of Katrina, you said it was not the federal government's responsibility to take care of the victims. But in Myanmar it is?

Kevin said...

In Myanmar it is their federal government's minimum responsibility to NOT HINDER AID FROM REACHING PEOPLE IN NEED.

And I did not say "it was not the federal government's responsibility" - it's the local and state government's responsibility FIRST. They had plans in place. They did not use them. Instead, they packed people into the Superdome without sufficient supplies, and yelled "COME SAVE US!"

The Coast Guard (federal) was landing helicopters at JRB airport the afternoon after the storm moved through. The USS Bataan carried four MH-53 Corpus Christi and the two standard equipment MH-60 helicopters that were on site in New Orleans on August 30 - the day after the storm doing search and rescue.

The Harry S. Truman (nuclear aircraft carrier) provided 13 helicopters, food services and clean water (nuke ships have excellent water processing plants).

But read this timeline in the Boston Globe and explain to me how it was ALL Bush's fault?

It's so typical of you to keep drawing equivalence between these two completely different events and absolving the local and state governments of Louisiana from any culpability.

There's a difference, Mark, between disorganization, confusion, and indecision, and depraved indifference and malignant neglect.

Markadelphia said...

"they packed people into the Superdome without sufficient supplies, and yelled "COME SAVE US!"

This is a fine example of what I mean when I say you are stuck in a belief system aka tone deaf. That is not what happened. Really divorced from reality, dude.

I have also never said it was ALL Bush's fault. He bore some of the responsibility as do the state and local authorities. A disaster on the magintude of Katrina require massive amounts of federal help and Bush, as seen in several videos, didn't seem to care, didn't light a fire under anyone's ass, and showed the world his low level of competence.

Kevin said...

And you're claiming that is the equivalent of the Myanmar governments refusal to allow aid into the country.

Yet I'm the one "stuck in a belief system."

Anonymous said...

OmG. who CARES whether it was "REFUSAL..." or complete lack of respect, humanity and negligence towards a huge number of people not in your 'class' who don't even make a blip on your radar screen. BOTH attitudes are inhuman, negligent, distressing and deplorable, both are equal in my view. If i don't actively HELP people, with all my powers, when i CAN because i'm the highest authority in the nation, then i'm definitely part of the PROBLEM. We're arguing about DEGREES of BLAME, when both attitudes towards human beings are disgusting?? Fuck them both for being assholes, in both situations. Just my pov. Joanne.

Anonymous said...

And on that note, instead of funneling (sp?) a fresh $170 billion dollars of (little-fish) americans hard-sweated for cents (because the sharks find a way NOT to pay their much lower capital gains taxes,) most of which will KNOWINGLY go to ultra beyond corrupt Iraqi puppet leaders, who will want the Americans to stay forever, while telling iran we love you too, because this is Vegas on a roll for losers who would never be in power otherwise, just to save faces of their asshole pals the u.s. losers (i don't give a shit which party they belong to,) who never admit anything, preferring to wade through a river of the younger generation's blood on a self-empowering 'path to victory,' -- the same billions which are fueling the insurgency killing americans, in a cause which has lost all integrity (see: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080513/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq_corruption;_ylt=Au0WBRXa3To_TfaT95BmKGys0NUE ) instead of doing a meaningless and self-destructive thing like that,,, why don't we use some of those billions to be flushed down a toilet of iraqi leaders' swiss bank accounts, to create an inventory over the next year or two of thousands of levees across america, which the Army Corps of Engineers, says in 2008, it still doesn't have a fucking clue about? ( see: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080512/ap_on_re_us/river_levees_2) Joanne

Markadelphia said...

"BOTH attitudes are inhuman, negligent, distressing and deplorable, both are equal in my view."

Exactly, Joanne. I hope Kevin can understand this.

Anonymous said...

i can see whay kevin said what he said. removed from all context, and making a direct comparison, it's logical.

my thinking is only, why do we always set the bar so low for the US, based on political preference, rather than judgements that should be solution-oriented and founded on our universal human values (all men are created equal)? we're 'one nation under God,' or not? Suddenly we compare ourselves to Burma (Myanamar's) military dictators, who are accountable to zip, and we say well we're slightly better (i don't mean kevin says or thinks that, at least certainly not the way i simplified it,)
because 1 government allows their people to die in a disaster, another only subjects them to prolongued misery, homelessness, abject poverty & negligence in a disaster.

if this is the comparison, what kind of weird comparison is it? in the richest, most powerful nation on earth, which is meant to be an example of freedom and democracy to the rest of the world? Jn

one government

elizabeth said...

Well, that's the point we have come to, really. We are only slightly better than our enemies. I don't know about the rest of you but I would like to say we are a whole lot better.

sw said...

"That is not what happened. Really divorced from reality, dude."

then tell us what did happen.

Steve

Markadelphia said...

There was a failure on every level of government with Katrina, Steve. The magnitude of the crisis necessitated a much more organized response from the Bush administration and, since it was filled with cronies, they had no idea what they were doing.

No doubt that the city and state share the blame but one would think that the Bush administration, who is the great champion of national security, would not let a port city go to shit. It still amazes me to this day that conservatives give him a pass on Katrina when the only thing they think government is good for is protecting the nation against an attack. How easy would it have been to sneak into the port in NO a few days after the dust settled?

sw said...

i didnt think we were talking about the response. i thought Kevin was talking about the events leading up to the failed response which you are trying hard to dismiss.

Steve

Markadelphia said...

The events leading up lead to the poor response. Have you seen the video of President Bush being briefed on the severity of the storm? He looks bored and has trouble paying attention. They also made several key errors in preparing and that was largely due to the incompetent people that he appointed. Kevin's point about Burma is valid as their government purposely goes out of its way to fuck people over.

Our government was a little different in that they just didn't care. So malice vs. apathy...take your pick. Although, there are some that think that our government employs a "shock" doctrine.

http://www.amazon.com/Shock-Doctrine-Rise-Disaster-Capitalism/dp/0805079831/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=IPLOJW4YE0GMZ&colid=2332G0F2FNA58