Democrats versus Republicans

[Sunbeam]

Liberals are fascists. While liberals rightly denounce totalitarianism of the right, they are quite acclimated to similar behavior on the left. From campus speech codes, to the suppression of Huckleberry Finn, to economic regulation up the ass, liberal fascism lacks only the goose step and the nazi salute.

Originally Posted by craigimass

Here is a pretty good listing:

Umberto Eco

In a 1995 essay "Eternal Fascism", the Italian writer and academic Umberto Eco attempts to list general properties of fascist ideology. . He uses the term "Ur-fascism" as a generic description of different historical forms of fascism.

The features of fascism he lists are as follows:

* "The Cult of Tradition", combining cultural syncretism with a rejection of modernism (often disguised as a rejection of capitalism).
* "The Cult of Action for Action's Sake", which dictates that action is of value in itself, and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science.
* "Disagreement is Treason" - fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action.
* "Fear of Difference", which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate, often in the form of racism or an appeal against foreigners and immigrants.
* "Appeal to a Frustrated Middle Class", fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups........

------------------------------
Actually, it is pretty scary reading that - because we see a LOT of that in our country and media today. In fact, I have clearly seen ALL of it in the last decade.

[craigimass]

Originally Posted by Sunbeam

You're beginning to make some sense!

Well, if you can determine that after 4 posts I consider it a compliment!


Unlike many other here, I cannot say that I know more than all the cabinet members, advisers and staff in the white house.

I can guess....

[craigimass]

Oopss..
Cape Cod Phyliss is b a c k......

[craigimass]

FYI. moderators, it's pretty easy to get rid of folks like CCP if you want to.

I'm sure you have IP's and email addresses. You can complain to their ISP's or even more. I once had the police go knock on the door of a forum abuser.....he shut up real quickly.

It is not legal to be places where you have been informed not to be, especially if you are sowing seeds of hate, etc.

[OsmundL]

Originally Posted by wind_magic

Here are the only theories I can come up with for why the administration and the Congress are currently trying to ride roughshod over bond holders in favor of GM's UAW workers.

You are probably right on more than one score here.
I came to your point 4 and thought “that’s of course what the Swedes did to GM over Saab, only they didn’t bother to pretend and fart around first. The same day GM whined, “we need government help,” the minister came out and said “not on your nelly” (words to that effect), and the government has not wavered from the stance since.

Which is when I thought of something…
I wonder if Americans have come to misunderstand the system they have created? For all the talk, it seems to me that both Republicans and Democrats promote a system that is anti-market.

I am often surprised at the Democrats’ readiness to grant benefits without the necessary counterbalances to prevent abuse, and at the Republicans’ never-ending pork barreling for industry sectors. Over the years, we have observed subsidies or market protection for the steel industry, the vehicle industry, wheat, beef exports – the list is a whole lot longer. Even development aid is a local industry affair neatly disguised as “bilateral aid”: I recall the Tanzanian minister telling us how they took millions from the USA only on condition they spend it on Ford tractors, “which we have no facilities for repairing or fuelling, so they rust away.”

As for Democrats, they are even more protectionist. Common to both seems to be a view that American industry cannot compete without a leg-up.

So, it hardly surprises that GM is such a hornet’s nest. The government in this “free market” economy would still like to help the workers, the bond holders, the lenders, and of course the auto industry. Where in all this did “free market” enter the equation? Absent is the cut and dried view both you and PZbeer (and I) have of a failing company: that it ought to fail, it is meant to, and someone will suffer.

The one country in EU that attempted a protective measure during this crisis was France, wanting to give money to Peugot on condition it went only to factories in France. The French got a lot of pepper for it – this is simply not the accepted way of doing things. I see the current US administration toying with a concept of “Buy American” – and we don’t hear an awful lot of angry voices over that. Do you or don’t you want a free market?

[craigimass]

I don't want a free market.
I want a market which is regulated in a fashion so as to protect consumers, workers, the environment and the general posterity.

I think most people have forgotten the original concept of a corporation. A corporate charter REQUIRED that your firm would benefit the public. It was not designed as a license to steal or avoid liability.

I am for global trade - but not fooling ourselves by moving everything to China so they can pollute the air, and then we get to breathe that air when it comes floating over the west coast.

I am for reason and for the understanding that people should be first.

As to our competitiveness - in general you have right. Our industries are now hobbled by health care and other such costs. The current figure is over $8K per person per year. That means if an American worker is head of a family of 4, then someone is paying $32K a year. The costs are shuffled around, but they are very real and part of the GDP.

The current system is working very well as a "race to the bottom". Notice the co-pilot of the recent commuter plane crash who made 16K a year and had to have a 2nd job at a coffee shop. Not being able to afford a motel or having sleeping quarters provided by the employer, they often fly short on real rest. One pilot with 27 years experience claimed that he could rarely find time to eat - and that the airline charged him for the peanuts and cheese crackers.

The short and sweet of it is that the costs of war and health care are breaking us and making us non-competitive, and the country seems to like it. What can you do?

[wind_magic]

Originally Posted by OsmundL

Which is when I thought of something…
I wonder if Americans have come to misunderstand the system they have created? For all the talk, it seems to me that both Republicans and Democrats promote a system that is anti-market.

I am often surprised at the Democrats’ readiness to grant benefits without the necessary counterbalances to prevent abuse, and at the Republicans’ never-ending pork barreling for industry sectors.

Welcome to the party.



Encourage people to come join us for a day of protests on the 4th of July, guaranteed to irritate both Democrats and Republicans. Rumor has it there are going to be a LOT MORE anti-Republican signs this time around to help disassociate the tea party protesters from the Republican party. Republican leaders have not been allowed to speak at the podium, and that is not going to change, we are simply not interested in what Republicans have to say anymore, they have failed us, and Democrats have failed us too.

Over the years, we have observed subsidies or market protection for the steel industry, the vehicle industry, wheat, beef exports – the list is a whole lot longer. Even development aid is a local industry affair neatly disguised as “bilateral aid”: I recall the Tanzanian minister telling us how they took millions from the USA only on condition they spend it on Ford tractors, “which we have no facilities for repairing or fuelling, so they rust away.”

As for Democrats, they are even more protectionist. Common to both seems to be a view that American industry cannot compete without a leg-up.

So, it hardly surprises that GM is such a hornet’s nest. The government in this “free market” economy would still like to help the workers, the bond holders, the lenders, and of course the auto industry. Where in all this did “free market” enter the equation? Absent is the cut and dried view both you and PZbeer (and I) have of a failing company: that it ought to fail, it is meant to, and someone will suffer.

The one country in EU that attempted a protective measure during this crisis was France, wanting to give money to Peugot on condition it went only to factories in France. The French got a lot of pepper for it – this is simply not the accepted way of doing things. I see the current US administration toying with a concept of “Buy American” – and we don’t hear an awful lot of angry voices over that. Do you or don’t you want a free market?

OsmundL, thank you for your interesting post. We have had a lot of debate about protectionism over on the market thread, I could dig up some of the more lively and interesting posts if you are interested in reading them. This has been a concern of a lot of us especially since this financial crisis got into full swing, because everywhere you turn people are putting protections in place which harms all of us. In the United States right now there is an increasing uproar by people everywhere (populist uproar) about contracts being funded by the tax payer that end up helping foreign companies, and those voices are starting to get what they want, they are starting to get assurances that only U.S. companies can benefit from this or that, and that Canada (the main party in the debate) can go to hell. Of course, Canada has turned right around and put restrictions on some of its own projects which has harmed U.S. companies in the north as a result.

One of the leading causes of Great Depression 1 was protectionism. As things got worse countries put up trade barriers and caused all sorts of problems around the world, it became competitive, populist voices came out in droves demanding that countries protect this industry or that, and we ended up in terrible shape as a result. I think we are headed in that direction again, when people are afraid they do whatever they can to protect themselves in very selfish ways, they pull back and hide, and I think we are starting to see the ugliness of protectionism again and that it is only going to get worse.

[wind_magic]

Make it .. never. I'd like to see Fox and MSNBC go out of business, they are both fear mongers who try to incite people with their non-sense, dividing the country up between two opposing parties which they like to keep equally divided. Just say no to potato heads .. THINK FOR YOURSELF.

[OsmundL]

Originally Posted by wind_magic

Welcome to the party. .

I'm interested in it because I saw it in Australia. Today the place is pretty vibrant, but when I first arrived in late 70's protectionism ran high and the gospel was that it couldn't survive without. Duties on shoes, textiles, autos were sky high. Of course, two factories making cars for 14 mill people couldn't be very large, so they had copies of Fords and GMs that took years between retooling - it was too expensive to update models. It was a slow but certain death.
The barriers came down to loud screams of doom, but miraculously the ripple effects helped all the other industries whose costs came down.

The real fear today, in all countries, is that the loud voices are the largest companies, and each time you assist them the cost is transferred to small business and elsewhere in the economy. Lunch is freer for some...

[craigimass]

Probably less than 5% of the people in the USA watch either MSNBC or FOX news......don't give them too much credit or power.

We each tend to think that others do what we do. It's not true. Most people could care less.

Here's a stat for you that should make your heart glad:
"Fox News Channel's daytime and primetime skeds the absolute oldest, clocking in with a median age above 65."

Limbaughs audience? 67.

The young people and the people in the prime of life who will be forging our future are not watching or listening to either of these folks.

Oh, MSNBC tracks the youngest of all...at about 55.

That should tell you something - to put it bluntly, the networks of sad and unhappy old farts.

Makes my heart glad. How about yours?

Again, don't give too much power to things which really have none at all. They may scream and shout, but they are caged dogs.