Renegade Public Forums
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » How did this get passed?
How did this get passed? [message #146654] Wed, 30 March 2005 09:38 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
SuperFlyingEngi is currently offline  SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma:
General (1 Star)
Aircraftkiller

"Neoconservatism" is ironic. "Neoconservaties" are not conservatives whatsoever. I don't know who invented this new buzz word but they're an idiot. You can't be a neo-conservative because that goes against all conservative values... It's like calling a conservative a Communist, two different idealogies.

Don't forget that fascism as we know it today was started by Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist party. Hitler was a liberal in today's views, and so was his Nazi party. Fascism is a liberal invention, and saying "neoconservatives" are fascists is like saying a donkey is an elephant.

If anything, people like SuperFlyingEngie are fascists.


Why, yes, it would be hard to have modern conservatives, if "neocons" followed traditional political concepts and values at all. The majority of the Republicans in the last 15-20 years are conservative by name only. Hence neocon.

Just so you know, fascism was really started by Benito Mussolini, with the creation of the Fascist Party in 1919, which Hitler then copied. Mussolini was a socialist as well, but the point is irrelevant. While fascist nations may be founded on liberal ideas of progress, they don't hesitate to recognize themselves as anti-liberal. Fascists before World War II in Italy and Germany were undoubtedly anti-Communist.

If anything, neocons are trying to develop fascism in America. Let's go over a definition...

Fascism - a political system headed by a dictator that calls for extreme nationalism[a] and racism[b] and no tolerance of opposition.[c]

[a] - How many times have you heard "It's unpatriotic to criticise the president during times of war..." and other talking points along those lines? I mean, look no further than Nodbugger and cowmisfit.

[b] - What's with the huge anti-Gay movement all of a sudden? Exact same thing happened in Nazi Germany with the Jews, America just doesn't have an absolute dictator yet, although George Bush is twisting the Secret Service more and more into his brown shirts, what with them arresting protestors at his events and hustling them out as fast as possible [The secret service doesn't actually have this power] And speaking of rascism, what about the direct link between concentration camps and American interrogation centers like Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib? Instead of Jews, we're persecuting Arabs. Hitler never had any concentration camps in Germany, they were in Poland. And with good reason, just like now.

[c] - Look no further than this bill right here. Fascism, however liberal it may be, has a desire to repress liberal ideas, and this bill is just one example of that. And now, if the media even tries to be centrist, they are quickly denounced as being far left. Look at when the New York Times ran a story above the fold about 350 tons of RDx going missing in Iraq. 350 tons of one of the most powerful conventional explosives known to man is pretty important, isn't it? And for this one story, ACK here denounced it as the media going "apeshit" over this story. It only ever appeared in mainstream TV media with phony-baloney stories after it about how there were never any explosives there anyways. Rathergate is another example. I like how, when George Bush denounced Putin about shutting down a news organization, Putin responded, "Why do you say these things? We did not denounce you when you had Dan Rather fired." <-- Not exact words, but the point remains.


"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)

The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Terri Shiavo
Next Topic: Tribute to Terry Shiavo
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Feb 19 01:08:23 MST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01355 seconds