NationStates Jolt Archive

*this is how our corporate facist media makes TV programming irrelevant today--theres no social justice messages

AMY GOODMAN: A lot of people are looking at Hollywood and politics with the release of Michael Moore's film. You have a long history dealing with the politics of Hollywood. Your film, the TV series, "M.A.S.H.," is still seen all over this country and different channels. Young people that didn't see it at the beginning are now seeing it. It was seen as an anti-war TV series.

MIKE FARRELL: Appropriately so. That's what we were.

AMY GOODMAN: How do you get away with it?

MIKE FARRELL: A good question. It started with a book with Korea. It then segued into Robert Altman's wonderful movie, which was very deliberately seen as an anti-war motion picture, the "M.A.S.H.," the motion picture and 20th Century Fox decided, this is a business now. They might want to make a television series out of it, and fortunately for us they got people like Gene Reynolds and Larry Gelbart, who had a distinctive view of what war is and what we ought not to be doing. Then they hired their people like Alan Alda who had a very specific view himself. It was kind of the magical moment that happened in television, I think.

AMY GOODMAN: How did people respond?

MIKE FARRELL: People loved it. They embraced it. Took it to their hearts and continue to. I hear from people every day about how much they loved the show, how much it meant to them, how much it means to them on an on-going basis. Named children after it. It's been extraordinary.

AMY GOODMAN: So, would you say that the dissent space allowed for it has actually tightened up, has closed down now?

MIKE FARRELL: Very much so. "M.A.S.H." could not be on the air today. They would not put ton the air today. Secondly, if they did, it would be some sort of utterly, I think irrelevant piece of garbage that would be all about dropping your pants and doing terribly stupid and inane things, because that's what television has reduced itself to. And if we were continuing -- if we were actually on the air saying the sorts of things that we said at the time, there would be all of these protests. You know, the same people that took the Reagan movie off the air by protesting and the same people that have insisted that you cannot do this, you cannot do that, the same people that are fighting Michael Moore's movie are trying to suggest that the American public shouldn't have access to information.

AMY GOODMAN: So, what does that do to you as an artist and as an actor? What is it doing to people in Hollywood?

MIKE FARRELL: Well, I think it's cheapening the business in general, but it infuriates those of us who have a social conscience who say that you know, we as citizens -- forget artists -- as citizens have a right to protest and a right to demonstrate. It's because we have achieved some success in the business and the immediate media pays attention to us, and we want to speak out and it offends some people, so be it.

AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to actor Mike Farrell. You were in Honduras during the time that John Negroponte was ambassador to Honduras. He was ambassador from 1981 to 1985. Just this week he was sworn in as the new U.N. Ambassador to Iraq. In Honduras he presided over the largest C.I.A. station in the world. Honduras was the raising ground for Nicaragua.

MIKE FARRELL: I mean it's just a pathetic thing. I laugh about it now, but Honduras was the base for the Contras against Nicaragua. Honduras was also the repository of a great number of refugees from the horror in Guatemala and the terrible brutality in El Salvador. We were there trying to deal with the needs of the people who were refugees and who were being treated abominably by their own governments and by the United States if every way they could be. I remember coming back from Honduras and talking to the Assistant Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs. I told him about the brutality that was being visited on these people.

AMY GOODMAN: Is it Elliot Abrams?

MIKE FARRELL: No. I never had the painful -- thankfully, I never had the opportunity to cross with Elliot Abrams. His name is Tom something. I forget now. You have to understand, these people are the families and friends of the guerillas. I testified before the house version of the Foreign Affairs Committee. I said, if women and children are our enemy, then what is it that we have become? What is it that America is to not only to the people in that region, but to us, if we're going to be down there arming and training and supporting, and in some cases actually physically supporting the behavior of people who are papering and pillaging and murdering, and then what it is that we have become? That was 1982,1983, 1984,1985 when we were involved down there. Now, the same bloody thing is happening in Iraq, and the same people are responsible for our policies. It's just astonishing to me.

AMY GOODMAN: So, what do you plan to do about it? What are you doing?

MIKE FARRELL: I'm doing everything that I can. I'm speaking out and condemning this nonsense and condemning the people associated with it and urging the American people to not only know their history but know what's being -- what's being stolen from them by this administration and seeing to it that we change administrations as soon as we can.

AMY GOODMAN: What effect has programs that we see that, the proliferation of the cable news network programs, very fierce, right wing programs like The O'Reilly Factor, Hannity and Colmes. Those shows. You have been on these programs. What effect do they have on the American culture?

MIKE FARRELL: I think there's a terrible dumbing- down of the American consciousness, the drumbeat of uglyness and stupidity and sensationalism, and thoughtlessness and propaganda that is in these stations. I think it's across the border. It's not just in the right wing media. Takings across the board, the dumbing- down that's going on. I worry about it greatly, because I think we have listened to -- loosened connections that people feel toward this country and the values of this country. It's as though as took freedom and liberty and the kinds of concepts that built America and put them on a shelf somewhere and said we won them now. As long as they're back there, we can do anything that we want. Forgetting that those have to be living -- living values that we practice on a daily basis rather than just having them on a shelf that we polish periodically.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you think that Hollywood can be a force for good?

MIKE FARRELL: Absolutely. I think the media could be a very good force for good and I think Hollywood can as well. Today, Hollywood is the con strained by box office and ratings and all of those things that effectively bottom line, the corporate mentality has taken over in Hollywood and creativity is gone and asunder as a result to a significant degree.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you think the resistance is growing within Hollywood?

MIKE FARRELL: Sure. You see what Michael Moore's film has done. I don't know if you know about "Uncovered" Robert Greenwald's film. Robert and I were the co-founders of Artists United to Win Without War. We were the ones that created the thunderclap of opposition that was the hope of beginning some dialogue in this country. Robert is also doing a film that's going to be released soon about Fox News, about the kind of media manipulation that's going on about the garbage that's being shoved down people's throats with a particular political perspective at its root. He also did "Unprecedented" the film about the feeling of the election in Florida in 2000. So, we're seeing guerrilla filmmaking and good filmmaking. We're still seeing people caring enough to make motion pictures and television shows and matter. "West Wing" continues. It's harder and harder in the business that is more business than show today.

AMY GOODMAN: Mike Farrell, I want to thank you very much for being with us.

MIKE FARRELL: My pleasure.


www.democracynow.org

Have you NOTHING better to do?

You know, the Mods should give you your own forum, entitled "MKULTRA'S RANTS." It would save a lot of space in the General Forum.

Was Mike Farrell the one who wore women's clothing?

Was Mike Farrell the one who wore women's clothing?I have no idea I never saw this movie

Democracy now-fair, unbiased, unpolitical. Funny how you seem to grab everything you can about Bush from there, and all of it appears to be negative.

And I agree, you neeed your own forum for your random rants against Bush.

Thank you Fluffywuffy.

Of COURSE Democracy Now is fair and balanced, everyone knows that. :roll:

DemocracyNow is more fair, balanced and RESPONSIBLE journalism then Foxnews is and its more relevant then the pablum puking corporate beast media

I do not watch Fox news. In fact, I generaly refrain from watching the news, I usualy read the paper. Montgomery Advertiser and the Prattville Progress for me!

pablum puking liberal corporate beast media

Fox News is about as fair and balanced as any news show hosted by humans with an opinion can get. They also have the most debate shows.

pablum puking corporate beast media

*lmao* Is there like some Random Insult Generator that people use to get these things? I want to know where I can find it.

Just so you all know I don't give a fuck what this 'Mike Farrell' guy thinks.

*Marches into topic*
Recedite, plebes! Gero rem imperialem!
*pulls out a scroll*
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
*rolls up scroll, turns, then looks at MKULTRA*
Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre?

Latin is fun :)

pablum puking liberal corporate beast media

Fox News is about as fair and balanced as any news show hosted by humans with an opinion can get. They also have the most debate shows.theres no such thing as a liberal media--thats purgury the rightwing used when they hijacked our media--theres nothing at all fair or balanced about Foxnews in any sense of the word and even theyre "debates" are stacked unfairly to give rightwing corporate propaganda the edge--the so-called "liberals" on fox arent even liberal--theyre moderate whimps

Just so you all know I don't give a f--- what this 'Mike Farrell' guy thinks.but hes from Hollywood

*Marches into topic*
Recedite, plebes! Gero rem imperialem!
*pulls out a scroll*
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
*rolls up scroll, turns, then looks at MKULTRA*
Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre?

Latin is fun :)Te Moneo. Meus Patruus sicilianus est et mei consobrini centuriones sunt
Translation=Im warning you. My uncle comes from Sicily and my cousins are centurions :twisted:

Will you PLEASE limit yourself to one copy and paste a day. This is quite exceedingly annoying.
Don't make me get all moddy.


http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DrChaotica.jpg (http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/taunt1.mp3)
Myrth
Ruler of the Cosmos
Forum Moderator

Based on your sig, Myrth, do you watch Voyager?

Does anyone else think MK is a lot like TRA?

-----------------------------------------
"Basically, claims that the Holocaust didn't happen are as stupid as saying the Sun is made from Cheese."-English Republicans
Free your mind! (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)
I like big butts!
http://img63.photobucket.com/albums/v193/eddy_the_great/steatopygia.jpg

"Rightwing corporate fascism" sure is opressive, not locking you up or anything for speaking against the supposably corporate lobbied, one man, imperialistic, state. That is corporate fascism right?

Will you PLEASE limit yourself to one copy and paste a day. This is quite exceedingly annoying.
Don't make me get all moddy.


http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DrChaotica.jpg (http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/taunt1.mp3)
Myrth
Ruler of the Cosmos
Forum Moderatorits the rightys fault--they wont lay down

"Rightwing corporate fascism" sure is opressive, not locking you up or anything for speaking against the supposably corporate lobbied, one man, imperialistic, state. That is corporate fascism right?Im sure the right has wet dreams thinkin about the day they can do this--but theyre trying to get us to such a state incrimentally

always blame the right when you get into a corner! Typical liberal!

Besides, you started it :lol: :lol: :lol:

always blame the right when you get into a corner! Typical liberal!

Besides, you started it :lol: :lol: :lol:

I just started working at an elementary school, and I sometimes wonder where I hear "he started it" more often. :D

Im sure the right has wet dreams thinkin about the day they can do this--but theyre trying to get us to such a state incrimentally And who hasn't dreamt of having full control of a nation?

always blame the right when you get into a corner! Typical liberal!

Besides, you started it :lol: :lol: :lol:

I just started working at an elementary school, and I sometimes wonder where I hear "he started it" more often. :D

lol I know! An elementary saying but he did started it when he opened this thread! GIGGLES

Based on your sig, Myrth, do you watch Voyager?

Yep :wink:

Does anyone else think MK is a lot like TRA?

Erm... welcome to last month :shock:

Just so you all know I don't give a f--- what this 'Mike Farrell' guy thinks.but hes from Hollywood

And what, my fine little 'friend', is so important about that? Oh, he's an actor. That means he must know everything about government, and politics, and running the country!

And you'll note, of course, that none of these people, including you, MKULTRA, know anything about fascism. Fascism can not be used as a catch-all for dictatorships.

A democracy can not be fascist, and is unlikely to become fascist unless democracy was imposed.

And not a single policy of the American government is in anyway fascist. No corporatism and creation of massive employer-employee guilds for each industry...no eliminating (read, murdering) political opponents on spurious charges for idealogical reasons...no organic democracy...

nothing. Nada. Therefore, your opinion on this subject, and this actor's opinion on the subject, are absurd, un-needed, and meaningless.

Interestingly, both Mussolini and Hitler came to power through legitimate means, as the leader and the electoral choice of the majority of the population. Are you telling me that Bush is the rightfully elected President?

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0WwCSHX4c0zdZNcNHdzVjI2Y6tB5WP1!P8wT4iSaIFwQcUHCmEBZrMmebSCiaYMUW7xApq*1B2rJRx4WH3CL4tIDUHPpKGpohCvm *zB53bXkarueQfQW4nIJ7V40Wyj6PT2!EVSYVeVA/Alexander%20Black,%20small.jpg
Who guards the guards themselves?
That would be...me.

Just so you all know I don't give a f--- what this 'Mike Farrell' guy thinks.but hes from Hollywood

And what, my fine little 'friend', is so important about that? Oh, he's an actor. That means he must know everything about government, and politics, and running the country!

And you'll note, of course, that none of these people, including you, MKULTRA, know anything about fascism. Fascism can not be used as a catch-all for dictatorships.

A democracy can not be fascist, and is unlikely to become fascist unless democracy was imposed.

And not a single policy of the American government is in anyway fascist. No corporatism and creation of massive employer-employee guilds for each industry...no eliminating (read, murdering) political opponents on spurious charges for idealogical reasons...no organic democracy...

nothing. Nada. Therefore, your opinion on this subject, and this actor's opinion on the subject, are absurd, un-needed, and meaningless.

Interestingly, both Mussolini and Hitler came to power through legitimate means, as the leader and the electoral choice of the majority of the population. Are you telling me that Bush is the rightfully elected President?

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0WwCSHX4c0zdZNcNHdzVjI2Y6tB5WP1!P8wT4iSaIFwQcUHCmEBZrMmebSCiaYMUW7xApq*1B2rJRx4WH3CL4tIDUHPpKGpohCvm *zB53bXkarueQfQW4nIJ7V40Wyj6PT2!EVSYVeVA/Alexander%20Black,%20small.jpg
Who guards the guards themselves?
That would be...me.America is a closet facist society

<DP>

Amazing. You rebutted an entire argument with one line. :roll:

Amazing, and yet pathetic. Living proof we descended from apes, and that Lovecraft was right! Humans can devolve!

In a fascist society, you'd be dead. Hell, all of you anarchists would. As I keep mentioning, your actions only attack the one thing that keeps you from being shot/robbed/burgled/gassed.

Biting the hand that feeds you, indeed...

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0WwCSHX4c0zdZNcNHdzVjI2Y6tB5WP1!P8wT4iSaIFwQcUHCmEBZrMmebSCiaYMUW7xApq*1B2rJRx4WH3CL4tIDUHPpKGpohCvm *zB53bXkarueQfQW4nIJ7V40Wyj6PT2!EVSYVeVA/Alexander%20Black,%20small.jpg
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Who watches the Watchman? That would be...me.

Amazing. You rebutted an entire argument with one line. :roll:

Amazing, and yet pathetic. Living proof we descended from apes, and that Lovecraft was right! Humans can devolve!

In a fascist society, you'd be dead. Hell, all of you anarchists would. As I keep mentioning, your actions only attack the one thing that keeps you from being shot/robbed/burgled/gassed.

Biting the hand that feeds you, indeed...

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0WwCSHX4c0zdZNcNHdzVjI2Y6tB5WP1!P8wT4iSaIFwQcUHCmEBZrMmebSCiaYMUW7xApq*1B2rJRx4WH3CL4tIDUHPpKGpohCvm *zB53bXkarueQfQW4nIJ7V40Wyj6PT2!EVSYVeVA/Alexander%20Black,%20small.jpg
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Who watches the Watchman? That would be...me.but I dont like what its feeding me :P

Amazing. You rebutted an entire argument with one line. :roll:

Amazing, and yet pathetic. Living proof we descended from apes, and that Lovecraft was right! Humans can devolve!

In a fascist society, you'd be dead. Hell, all of you anarchists would. As I keep mentioning, your actions only attack the one thing that keeps you from being shot/robbed/burgled/gassed.

Biting the hand that feeds you, indeed...

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0WwCSHX4c0zdZNcNHdzVjI2Y6tB5WP1!P8wT4iSaIFwQcUHCmEBZrMmebSCiaYMUW7xApq*1B2rJRx4WH3CL4tIDUHPpKGpohCvm *zB53bXkarueQfQW4nIJ7V40Wyj6PT2!EVSYVeVA/Alexander%20Black,%20small.jpg
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Who watches the Watchman? That would be...me.but I dont like what its feeding me :P

If your going to rebutt an arguement rebutt it! Not with online but several lines!

I see I'm not going to get an argument out of you, so I dug up one of my old insults. I'll use it, unless you give me one good reason why you're fit to comment on American socio-economic/military policy, and why it is that you claim that Bush, like Hitler and Mussolini, is the rightfully elected President.

A democracy can not be fascist, and is unlikely to become fascist unless democracy was imposed.

I would disagree; I think that a mostly (or partially) democratic system can have fascist characteristics. I don't think that most forms of government are pure examples of the ideal.

If we take a look at principles of fascism (http://www.bartleby.com/65/fa/fascism.html), we can certainly see echoes. (Looking at a set of definitions apparently more embraced by the left (http://educate-yourself.org/cn/fourteencharacteristicsfascism03jan04.shtml), we can see even stronger parallels.)

There's definitely a tendency to glorify the state at the expense of the principles that made the state great. The increase in militarism and imperialism - in policy terms - could be seen as fascistic.

(not that I'm arguing that the US is a fascist state - just that no country transforms instantly from democracy to fascism.)

And not a single policy of the American government is in anyway fascist.

I think by either definition, you can certainly see fascist shadings (at the least) in US policy. If fascism is the unity of corporations and the state (corporatism, as Mussolini called it), does it matter whether the corporations or the state is nominally in control?

Personally, I think the most (classically) fascist policy of the current US government is the demonization of an external enemy for the purpose of control and ramming through unrelated policies with a free hand.

No corporatism and creation of massive employer-employee guilds for each industry...no eliminating (read, murdering) political opponents on spurious charges for idealogical reasons...no organic democracy...

I think you may be confusing instances of fascism with the principles behind it. I think there's definitely a pro-corporatism tendency in the US, including the bizarre acceptance of corporate persons. While in the past, fascist states may have tried to help both the worker and management, I think you can still have a fascist state without a concern for worker's rights and quality of life.

Interestingly, both Mussolini and Hitler came to power through legitimate means, as the leader and the electoral choice of the majority of the population. Are you telling me that Bush is the rightfully elected President?

Just a minor correction as we dance merrily with Godwin's Law - Mussolini was elected, Chancellor Hitler was appointed to power (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005480).

Props for the Lovecraft reference, definitely.

Was Mike Farrell the one who wore women's clothing?

No. That was Jamie Farr, who played the character of Max Klinger.

Mike Farrel played B.J Honeycutt, Hawkeye Pierce's roomate.

Was Mike Farrell the one who wore women's clothing?

No. That was Jamie Farr, who played the character of Max Klinger.

Mike Farrel played B.J Honeycutt, Hawkeye Pierce's roomate.
I wasn't talking about in the tv show. ;)

Roania,
No...a democracy cannot be facist by its very nature.
However, America is not a democracy.
We are a Democratic Republic.
The represenatives that are elected, can often be very much fascist.

dp

Based on your sig, Myrth, do you watch Voyager?

Yep :wink:

Oh yeah, I forgot about that Voyager Episode. To hijack a TRA thread, Voyager stunk, DS9 was the last good series. Enterprise sucks. TOS was good, the effects stunk, but the character ruled. I mean who hates Kirk, McCoy and Spock, not to mention Scotty. TNG was the best series, but I hated Picard. He was a wuss who never went on away missions, at least Kirk was fighting beside the red shirts when they died.

I would disagree; I think that a mostly (or partially) democratic system can have fascist characteristics. I don't think that most forms of government are pure examples of the ideal.

If we take a look at principles of fascism (http://www.bartleby.com/65/fa/fascism.html), we can certainly see echoes. (Looking at a set of definitions apparently more embraced by the left (http://educate-yourself.org/cn/fourteencharacteristicsfascism03jan04.shtml), we can see even stronger parallels.)

There's definitely a tendency to glorify the state at the expense of the principles that made the state great. The increase in militarism and imperialism - in policy terms - could be seen as fascistic.

(not that I'm arguing that the US is a fascist state - just that no country transforms instantly from democracy to fascism.)

I agree. But MKULTRA claims that the US is a fascist state. And patriotism, while it can be repellant, is not a step on the road to fascism. If that's the case, than Australia is Fascist, and so is that old body of repressive anti-populist dogma, the British House of Lords.

A society may not be able to change instantly from democracy to fascism. It may be able to.

But it is unlikely to if the democracy is accepted by the majority of the population, and isn't viewed as a failure, as it was in both Italy and Germany, the population of whom both felt that their nations had been hard done by.

I think by either definition, you can certainly see fascist shadings (at the least) in US policy. If fascism is the unity of corporations and the state (corporatism, as Mussolini called it), does it matter whether the corporations or the state is nominally in control?

Personally, I think the most (classically) fascist policy of the current US government is the demonization of an external enemy for the purpose of control and ramming through unrelated policies with a free hand.

Except that Nazism was primarily about demonising internal enemies, and that most (not all) policies of the Bush government are related to the war on terror.

I think you may be confusing instances of fascism with the principles behind it. I think there's definitely a pro-corporatism tendency in the US, including the bizarre acceptance of corporate persons. While in the past, fascist states may have tried to help both the worker and management, I think you can still have a fascist state without a concern for worker's rights and quality of life.

Fascist governments are nothing without the ideals behind them. Neither Mussolini or Hitler cared over-much about the unemployed or for worker's rights. All they did was set up the corporations so that the worker's would be tricked into giving up their rights and not complain over-much about the loss of trade unions.

I doubt that worker's rights were a concern for any fascist dictatorship. Also, the concept of organic democracy is a central part of the fascist ideals.

You can not have organic democracy working in a population as willingly de-politicised as that of the United States. The two party system itself is anathema to it.

Just a minor correction as we dance merrily with Godwin's Law - Mussolini was elected, Chancellor Hitler was appointed to power (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005480).

Still legitimate, by the laws of the state at the time. Also, Hitler deserved the power he was handed, as the NSDAP was the majority of the Reichstag.

Props for the Lovecraft reference, definitely.

You like?

I agree. But MKULTRA claims that the US is a fascist state.

Well, don't expect me to defend MKULTRA. I think the mods would be reasonable to implement a rate-limiter on the number of new threads a nation can post per day.

And patriotism, while it can be repellant, is not a step on the road to fascism.

I differentiate between patriotism and nationalism; being patriotic about your country and its ideals is not fascistic. However, this attitude of we're the good guys because of who we are - not what we do, or why we do it - is nationalism, not patriotism. The suppression of dissenting voices in the name of enforced unity that happened for a couple of years is not patriotic, and I think it is fascistic.

But it is unlikely to if the democracy is accepted by the majority of the population, and isn't viewed as a failure, as it was in both Italy and Germany, the population of whom both felt that their nations had been hard done by.

Ah, but right around 50% of the population of eligible voters fails to vote in current elections (http://www.gwu.edu/~action/electrte.html). In 1996, the voting percentage dropped below 50%. Most House races are not in contention because of gerrymandering. There's a lot of cynicism about politics and politicians, and the idea of government as a potentially positive force is definitely on the wane.

I don't think we're as far away from the cliff's edge as you do.

Except that Nazism was primarily about demonising internal enemies, and that most (not all) policies of the Bush government are related to the war on terror.

There was a strong anti-french, anti-Russian, and particularly anti-communist slant in Nazism. I think it's arguable what the primary motivation was, and it was different things to different people.

I believe that a lot of Bush poliices are only nominally about the war on (some) terror, and more about empire building and giving favors to friends. The policies on the environment, corporate wrongdoing, media consolidation, and even (I think) Afghanistan have nothing to do with any war on terror.

You can not have organic democracy working in a population as willingly de-politicised as that of the United States. The two party system itself is anathema to it.

Do we have a two-party system, or a system with two variations of the corporate party?
I'm not familiar with 'organic democracy', I'll have to read up on that.

Still legitimate, by the laws of the state at the time. Also, Hitler deserved the power he was handed, as the NSDAP was the majority of the Reichstag.

A legal ascent to power, certainly. NSDAP was the largest party, but not part of the majority coalition.

The US fascist??? HAHAHAHAHA That cracks me up everytime I hear that.

Yo, let's get back to the basics.

Nationalism is do it for the good(whatever mr or miss nationalist thinks what good is) country. However people in charge usually like to use someone they hate as a scape goat and they don't really care about the consequences of their choices. The far right wing form is Fascism while the far left wing form is Communism. The funny thing is that they hate each other.

The Republican party is not fascist. Here's two facts. An extreme nationalist ideal is a nonviolent country meaning gun control. Also, fascists/communists are uber-against religion. Most republicans are the complete opposite being pro-NRA and some are huge protestant Christians.

Also, Bush is pro-Israel. Hitler obviously had extreme hatred towards the Jews(Israelis). Isn't strange how the Europeans who compare Bush to Hitler are also the people are actually more Hitler themselves when they perpitrated anti-semitic acts like burning down synagogues not too long ago?

Patriotism is one's love of the country. Patriots are people whatever to help out their country. Thus that's probably why we(the US) have a large army despite it being the only volunteer army in the world. However, people have taken it too far. Plus, after 9/11 a lot of hypocrites came out as we saw a flag in every yard. If people were that patriotic, those flags would have been out there way before 9/11.


The problem is the propagandists have contol over the media that reaches the public. (Michael Moore, Rush Limbaugh etc.) These propagandists lead us to the back side of the world cow(fact collection machine) which feeds on grass(facts) and have us eat it's afterproducts(left wing/right wing propaganda). Instead we should take these people down and slaughter the cow to get at the nice juicy T-Bone or Prime Rib(the truth).

M*A*S*H was just a comedy. So what if it was a little anti-war. It shouldn't matter if it makes a lot of people enjoy themselves.

The US fascist??? HAHAHAHAHA That cracks me up everytime I hear that.

Yo, let's get back to the basics.

Nationalism is do it for the good(whatever mr or miss nationalist thinks what good is) country. However people in charge usually like to use someone they hate as a scape goat and they don't really care about the consequences of their choices. The far right wing form is Fascism while the far left wing form is Communism. The funny thing is that they hate each other.

The Republican party is not fascist. Here's two facts. An extreme nationalist ideal is a nonviolent country meaning gun control. Also, fascists/communists are uber-against religion. Most republicans are the complete opposite being pro-NRA and some are huge protestant Christians.

Also, Bush is pro-Israel. Hitler obviously had extreme hatred towards the Jews(Israelis). Isn't strange how the Europeans who compare Bush to Hitler are also the people are actually more Hitler themselves when they perpitrated anti-semitic acts like burning down synagogues not too long ago?

Patriotism is one's love of the country. Patriots are people whatever to help out their country. Thus that's probably why we(the US) have a large army despite it being the only volunteer army in the world. However, people have taken it too far. Plus, after 9/11 a lot of hypocrites came out as we saw a flag in every yard. If people were that patriotic, those flags would have been out there way before 9/11.


The problem is the propagandists have contol over the media that reaches the public. (Michael Moore, Rush Limbaugh etc.) These propagandists lead us to the back side of the world cow(fact collection machine) which feeds on grass(facts) and have us eat it's afterproducts(left wing/right wing propaganda). Instead we should take these people down and slaughter the cow to get at the nice juicy T-Bone or Prime Rib(the truth).

M*A*S*H was just a comedy. So what if it was a little anti-war. It shouldn't matter if it makes a lot of people enjoy themselves.I never said it was outright facist I said its closet facist

Well, don't expect me to defend MKULTRA. I think the mods would be reasonable to implement a rate-limiter on the number of new threads a nation can post per day.

No arguments here.

I differentiate between patriotism and nationalism; being patriotic about your country and its ideals is not fascistic. However, this attitude of we're the good guys because of who we are - not what we do, or why we do it - is nationalism, not patriotism. The suppression of dissenting voices in the name of enforced unity that happened for a couple of years is not patriotic, and I think it is fascistic.

It's dictatorial, certainly. However, nationalism is not inherently fascistic, and there is something to be said for unity for unity's sake.

Also, even the most free nation can become harsh during war-time, and that is what the USA is starting to fall into. A war. An actual war, not just something called a war. The most obvious comparison is between FDR and Bush Jr., with Bush Snr. playing Wilson.

FDR also made use of a terrorist attack upon the USA to send America to war. Is that fascistic? He also made provisions for (and use of) censorship. Compare that to now, when the media is free to report as it likes.

Ah, but right around 50% of the population of eligible voters fails to vote in current elections (http://www.gwu.edu/~action/electrte.html). In 1996, the voting percentage dropped below 50%. Most House races are not in contention because of gerrymandering. There's a lot of cynicism about politics and politicians, and the idea of government as a potentially positive force is definitely on the wane.

I don't think we're as far away from the cliff's edge as you do.

And I'd disagree. The USA has a tradition of democracy, and if the people are interested or not, it will remain one. For Organic Democracy, read centralised rule by mob. One man, executing the will of the entire people. That's essentially it. When the people are un-interested in politics, there can not be a populist dictatorship (which is essentially what Fascism is at its core, as I view it).

Fascism depends upon the 'will to power'. Do many Americans besides a few intellectuals and businessmen have a will to power? Would many of America's (left-wing) intellectuals make use of their power to bring a fascist dictatorship to power?

The greatest danger is not from the 'third way' of fascism. There is a higher risk of the USA becoming either a new East Germany/Tito's Yugoslavia from the left, or a military dictatorship from the military and conservative authoritarian right. Both of which are unlikely.

The highest risk, though, is the USA taking a Euro-Democracy route, with thousands of parties and positions. Then there'd be a real danger of fascism.

It's debatable which would be worse of those three options, but if I had to pick the most likely, I'd view Bush as the United States's Lerroux, the Spanish Third Republic's second prime minister, and the one immediately before Azana became president and set the stage for the Spanish Civil War.

And don't call Franco a fascist, it demeans both him and the idealogy...

There was a strong anti-french, anti-Russian, and particularly anti-communist slant in Nazism. I think it's arguable what the primary motivation was, and it was different things to different people.

I believe that a lot of Bush poliices are only nominally about the war on (some) terror, and more about empire building and giving favors to friends. The policies on the environment, corporate wrongdoing, media consolidation, and even (I think) Afghanistan have nothing to do with any war on terror.

I'd argue on Afghanistan, but I'd like to stay on topic. However, Bush is right about corporate wrongdoing, media consolidation doesn't seem to be doing too much to make the left media any friendlier, or the right media any less.

His policies on environment are, while generally deplorable, in no way a sign of him becoming a fascist dictator.

You can not have organic democracy working in a population as willingly de-politicised as that of the United States. The two party system itself is anathema to it.

Do we have a two-party system, or a system with two variations of the corporate party?
I'm not familiar with 'organic democracy', I'll have to read up on that.

Look up 8) , though I'm just using my own opinion as to it. And it's still a two party system, with there always being a 75% chance of a centrist president.

Which really isn't bad, if you think about it.

A legal ascent to power, certainly. NSDAP was the largest party, but not part of the majority coalition.

He was, briefly, and when he took power he formed a new coalition. Legitimacy was the debate, and for Liberals to compare Bush to Hitler means they admit he won the election fairly.

http://www.protestwarrior.com/nimages/signs/pw_sign_15.gif

FDR also made use of a terrorist attack upon the USA to send America to war. Is that fascistic? He also made provisions for (and use of) censorship. Compare that to now, when the media is free to report as it likes.

I have a problem here! December 7th 1941 was NOT a terrorist attack! It was a DECLARATION OF WAR on AMERICA! Japan never struck civilian targets when the bombed Pearl Harbor. Thus all the attacks were concentrated on The Fleet and the Military Air Fields. Also, attacked our forces elsewhere from Guam, the Phillipine Islands, Wake, and bombed Midway! (that was before the climatic battle between us and them on June 4, 1942)

Hmm.

Communism and Facism are NOT opposites. The opposite of facism is a economic communism and a governmental anarchy. THe opposite of Communism is actually anarchy with free enterprise.

The use of the terms "left" and "right" are not good enough, unless it is a completely economic scale.

By the way, about Hitler.

Hitler and the Nazi Party did a lot of backhand dealing, but yes, the NSDAP was the largest party in the Weimar Republic at the time. Hitler finally convinced Hindenburg to give him the Chancellorship, eventually, but Hindenburg HATED Hitler.

Ever read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich? Good book.

FDR also made use of a terrorist attack upon the USA to send America to war. Is that fascistic? He also made provisions for (and use of) censorship. Compare that to now, when the media is free to report as it likes.

I have a problem here! December 7th 1941 was NOT a terrorist attack! It was a DECLARATION OF WAR on AMERICA! Japan never struck civilian targets when the bombed Pearl Harbor. Thus all the attacks were concentrated on The Fleet and the Military Air Fields. Also, attacked our forces elsewhere from Guam, the Phillipine Islands, Wake, and bombed Midway! (that was before the climatic battle between us and them on June 4, 19421)

You'll note, though, that the Japanese attacked before the declaration of war was delivered.

Therefore, a terrorist attack.

FDR also made use of a terrorist attack upon the USA to send America to war. Is that fascistic? He also made provisions for (and use of) censorship. Compare that to now, when the media is free to report as it likes.

I have a problem here! December 7th 1941 was NOT a terrorist attack! It was a DECLARATION OF WAR on AMERICA! Japan never struck civilian targets when the bombed Pearl Harbor. Thus all the attacks were concentrated on The Fleet and the Military Air Fields. Also, attacked our forces elsewhere from Guam, the Phillipine Islands, Wake, and bombed Midway! (that was before the climatic battle between us and them on June 4, 19421)That climatic battle 17 millenia into the future?

FDR also made use of a terrorist attack upon the USA to send America to war. Is that fascistic?

No, Becuase The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was not an act of terrorism.
It was an act of open warfare.
When you send your Navy, to sink mine, thats a declaration of war.

The Republican party is not fascist. Here's two facts. An extreme nationalist ideal is a nonviolent country meaning gun control. Eh? Aren't the NRA always the ones saying that "an armed society is a polite society" and all that crap?
Also, fascists/communists are uber-against religion. Most republicans are the complete opposite being pro-NRA and some are huge protestant Christians. WASP: White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, the Kalling Kard of the white sheet brigade.

Also, Bush is pro-Israel. Hitler obviously had extreme hatred towards the Jews(Israelis). Isn't strange how the Europeans who compare Bush to Hitler are also the people are actually more Hitler themselves when they perpitrated anti-semitic acts like burning down synagogues not too long ago?You're right, I feel downright hipocritical comparing Bush to Hitler every time I burn down a synagogue.

Patriotism is one's love of the country. Patriots are people whatever to help out their country. Thus that's probably why we(the US) have a large army despite it being the only volunteer army in the world. However, people have taken it too far. Plus, after 9/11 a lot of hypocrites came out as we saw a flag in every yard. If people were that patriotic, those flags would have been out there way before 9/11.The only volunteer army? I live in Britain, I haven't been conscripted. Can you explain this point a bit more
The problem is the propagandists have contol over the media that reaches the public. (Michael Moore, Rush Limbaugh etc.) These propagandists lead us to the back side of the world cow(fact collection machine) which feeds on grass(facts) and have us eat it's afterproducts(left wing/right wing propaganda). Instead we should take these people down and slaughter the cow to get at the nice juicy T-Bone or Prime Rib(the truth). This bizzare metaphor aside (I think the main idea was to say that the media feeds us bullshit), I think you do have a point about an over-reliance the mass media to give us information, which is inevitably twisted to support their own biases.

M*A*S*H was just a comedy. So what if it was a little anti-war. It shouldn't matter if it makes a lot of people enjoy themselves.MASH was not just a comedy. It was a fantastic show that was both comic and had an anti-war message. Personally, I think they could have been much heavier with their condemnation, mostly the impression is that the war for them is just a bit of a laugh, and something of an inconvieniance, more like a noisy neighbour in Friends or something.

FDR also made use of a terrorist attack upon the USA to send America to war. Is that fascistic? He also made provisions for (and use of) censorship. Compare that to now, when the media is free to report as it likes.

I have a problem here! December 7th 1941 was NOT a terrorist attack! It was a DECLARATION OF WAR on AMERICA! Japan never struck civilian targets when the bombed Pearl Harbor. Thus all the attacks were concentrated on The Fleet and the Military Air Fields. Also, attacked our forces elsewhere from Guam, the Phillipine Islands, Wake, and bombed Midway! (that was before the climatic battle between us and them on June 4, 19421)That climatic battle 17 millenia into the future?

Thanks for letting me know that my fingers hit the 1 after I typed 1942! Thanks!

Thanks for letting me know that my fingers hit the 1 after I typed 1942! Thanks!(I'm not certain if you took my good-natured humor the way it was intended, but I was just kidding around)

Thanks for letting me know that my fingers hit the 1 after I typed 1942! Thanks!(I'm not certain if you took my good-natured humor the way it was intended, but I was just kidding around)

I knew but still thanking u for pointing it out :lol:

Thanks for letting me know that my fingers hit the 1 after I typed 1942! Thanks!(I'm not certain if you took my good-natured humor the way it was intended, but I was just kidding around)

I knew but still thanking u for pointing it out :lol:Ok, good.

You know, the Mods should give you your own forum, entitled "MKULTRA'S RANTS." It would save a lot of space in the General Forum.

You remind me of TRA who posted articles and refused to follow-up on them; he was deleted for that.

America is not facist.

You know, the Mods should give you your own forum, entitled "MKULTRA'S RANTS." It would save a lot of space in the General Forum.

You remind me of TRA who posted articles and refused to follow-up on them; he was deleted for that.Derscon does, or MKULTRA does?

You know, the Mods should give you your own forum, entitled "MKULTRA'S RANTS." It would save a lot of space in the General Forum.

You remind me of TRA who posted articles and refused to follow-up on them; he was deleted for that.Derscon does, or MKULTRA does?

I think he is talking about Derscon! Though I don't know how he is making that comparison!

You know, the Mods should give you your own forum, entitled "MKULTRA'S RANTS." It would save a lot of space in the General Forum.

You remind me of TRA who posted articles and refused to follow-up on them; he was deleted for that.Derscon does, or MKULTRA does?

I think he is talking about Derscon! Though I don't know how he is making that comparison!It appears that way, but Tuesday already said on another thread that she is tired

I I hope he is talking about MKULTRA. I don't believe I have ever created a thread in the General forum.

You know, the Mods should give you your own forum, entitled "MKULTRA'S RANTS." It would save a lot of space in the General Forum.

You remind me of TRA who posted articles and refused to follow-up on them; he was deleted for that.Derscon does, or MKULTRA does?

I think he is talking about Derscon! Though I don't know how he is making that comparison!It appears that way, but Tuesday already said on another thread that she is tired

That who is tired? Derscon?

That was my polite way of correcting you, Tuesday is a not a "he"

That was my polite way of correcting you, Tuesday is a not a "he"

oh :lol: sorry my bad! I'm tired too!