<p>Allmusic,</p>
<p>You said:
Perhaps my original remarks were not clear enough for you,
You also wrote,
Just so Im clear, isnt saying someone has a problem with superiority, arrogance and smugness an ad hominem attack? From this should I assume that you are a self-hating “ad hominem attacker”?</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>
True, the 50 year old has to spend a lot more on skin cream.:)</p>
<p>CGM,</p>
<p>Would it help if I posted in Braille?
I never said that people should only use the dictionary definition of “fascist.” To that effect I said,
However, what I did say was that those who claim to be experts, speaking as “scientists,” “social” or otherwise, should not liberally diagnosis unnamed strangers as being dreaded “fascist,” unless they in fact are fascists, by academic definition:
Can you seriously not see the difference? If not, Ill add this
CGM,
not that you’ll need my encouragement, but you call anyone you want a fascist–all the time–and dont let anybody tell you otherwise.</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>
Hah that was the first funny thing you ever posted. Good job. :)</p>
<p>You must have freakin’ skipped the rest of the post–the part where I recommended skipping boomer praise altogether.</p>
<p>Face cream ain’t going to help, doll. 
Enjoy that skin and that body while you have it!</p>
<p>Not trying to make a point, but I find this interesting:</p>
<p>The word fasces is the plural of the the Roman word facis, meaning bundle. The fasces, an axe surrounded by bundled elm (or birch) rods, was a symbol of authority in ancient Rome. It was later adopted by Mussolini’s party during World War two, and is the origin of the word “fascist.”</p>
<p>On early American coins and other symbols, it symbolizes the unity of the colonies- a single stick may be broken, but a number of sticks bound together cannot be. But even the symbol on the US coins contained that axe. I still remember the mercury dimes that were redesigned after 1945, but still in circulation into the 50’s and even later. </p>
<p>Other uses of the fasces symbol (from Wikipedia):</p>
<pre><code>* Napoleon and the French Revolution; this emblem remains on the front cover of French passports and as part of the French coat of arms
The Spanish paramilitary police Guardia Civil
In the 1920s, Italian Fascism, adapating aesthetic elements of ancient Rome attempted to portray itself as a revival of its Roman imperial past, adopted the fasces for its symbol, as an emblem of the increased strength of the individual fascis when bound into the entire bundle.
Used as part of the Knights of Columbus emblem (designed in 1883)
At the Lincoln Memorial, Lincoln’s seat of state bears the fasces on the fronts of its arms.
The fasces appears on the state seal of Colorado, USA, beneath the All-seeing eye and above the mountains and mines.
Two fasces appear on either side of the flag of the United States in the United States House of Representatives, representing the power of the lower house and the country.
A frieze on the facade of the Supreme Court building depicts the figure of a Roman Centurion holding a fasces, to represent “order.”
Further, the official seal of the Senate has as one component a pair of crossed fasces.
The reverse of the United States “Mercury” dime (minted from 1916 to 1945) bears the design of a fasces and an olive branch.
On the seal of the New York City borough of Brooklyn, a figure carries a fasces; the seal appears on the borough flag.
Both the Norwegian and the Swedish police use double fasces in their logos
</code></pre>
<p>So, it’s interesting that the symbol itself did not take on the stigma of the Fascist Party, unlike what happened with the swastika.</p>
<p>“What on earth does that have to do with calling a class of American politicians fascists. Dose someone need to present data and brain imaging to question off-hand accusations of fascism on a message board?”</p>
<p>Well, gee, opps, guess all them definitions and all them other words in the theorororossus just weren’t good enough fer ya</p>
<p>Interesting that most of the definitions you opted to show missed that</p>
<p>Being fascist is ALSO having a mindset, a way of leading, of TRYING to lead, any collective group and just because one hasn’t yet attained a goal, does not mean that they might not have some of the intentions</p>
<p>I am speaking in general terms, and yes, i do think there are some politicians that like the corporate state, having two levels of society, having a class of educated and less educated, but it is more often shown through how they want to allocate money more than what they say</p>
<p>So, how’s them thar apples?</p>
<p>Dearest CGM,</p>
<p>I regret to inform you that a lunatic–with really bad English–has broken into your CC account. Send for help.</p>
<p>Sympathetic regards,</p>
<p>Emily</p>
<p>The English word ■■■■■■ also comes from fasces. The bunch of sticks.</p>
<p>Fountain Siren. You are a young woman lacking in consideration and respect for your elders. How dare you post such a thing without warning oldsters like me that we may choke to death on laughter!!!</p>
<p>a lunatic…yeppers…its all them big werds, they throwed me a bitt</p>
<p>But heck, as a sweet intalecktuall, meybee you can undastand that as one gits older, them grey sells starts to die…</p>
<p>i kin feel it happn everytime i read one yer posts…they age me so</p>
<p>Resorting to the use of terms like “fascist” - which has, as far as I can tell, no coherent current meaning other than “bad” - is an example of the “magic word” approach to analyzing things. That is, if you can just find the right linguistic pigeonhole to put whatever it is that your talking about in, you’ve answered all your questions about it. Once you are able to conclude that “Abortion is murder” you’ve pretty much answered all your questions, since murder is, by definition, immoral and criminal. What may seem to the rest of us to be a thorny socio-political issue is reduce to a tautology.</p>
<p>But “fascist” sin’t the only word with perceived talismanic power. “Socialist” and “Communist” have been used with the same, substance-free sneer in recent years. And the effort to denigrate one group or concept by tying it to another with an established bad reputation is a recurring theme. For some reason, one which has long rubbed me the wrong way was the 70’s feminist slogan “Pornography is rape.” I know they were trying to attack pornography, but to me what they actually accomplished was to trivialize rape.</p>
<p>I guess expecting people to deal with the reality of whatever is under discussion in all its complicated vagaries instead of simply distilling it into a known commodity like “fascist” is beyond hope.</p>
<p>How about…dare i say it…LIBERAL or CONSERVATIVE…2 of the most powerful words on the planet</p>
<p>Kluge,</p>
<p>I see your point and it is generally well-taken, but I don’t think liberals see socialism as a dirty word and some still view communism with affection. I doubt anyone outside of the Klan or the Aryan Brotherhood considers it tolerable to be called a fascist.</p>
<p>The definitions of fascism, even those used to above to paint the Bushies into that role, really miss an important distinction. Under Mussolini’s Fascism (and that described in the anti-Bushie diatribe), the state takes the leading role, and organizes the corporate and other sectors to meet its own ends.</p>
<p>I think we’ve long superceded that. For lack of a better term, I like to describe our current state of affairs as corporate socialism. While nominally competitive, corporate sectors (and those enriched by them) organize in their own class interests to restrict or eliminate competition, drive down the price of labor toward immiseration and eliminate as many environmental and labor protections as they can, promote a “global marketplace free for their own predations” (but not those of their competitors), and use the state as a tool, just one tool among many, to accomplish their own ends. It is socialist in that they organize the means of production among them in the interests of their class, and it is corporate because class carries beyond individual interests to that of corporate entities.</p>
<p>In fascism, the dog wags his tail. In corporate socialism, the dog IS the tail.</p>
<p>Without question, corporatism rules the US.</p>
<p>Combine Kluge and DJR4’s post (#92, 94) and you have solved the bedeviling riddle of this thread-- or at least, you would have seen my original point restated in baritone voice some pages latter. </p>
<p>For joe6pack–or CGM–to spit fascist off their tongues (in the spirit of, say, calling the stingy local dépanneur, “Soup Nazi”) would be no more than off hand English (French) for a bad or mean mo’fo’; for a scientist to use fascist in the same manner is very bad science; for a social scientist to casually use it, sadly, discredits the whole science–unnecessarily so.</p>
<p>Thats all I was saying, all along. </p>
<p>If only I could make everyone happyAllmusic, Kluge et al–I would be a liberal, and (re: Aries) a sagacious man. I could have even said it all while proudly <em>standing</em> upright over the commode looking wist-fully at a montage of Bill Clintons presidency hung lovingly, just above the toilet. <a href=“http://www.toiletmuseum.com/lgpic.php?photo=ladies/toilet2.jpg[/url]”>http://www.toiletmuseum.com/lgpic.php?photo=ladies/toilet2.jpg</a></p>
<p>.</p>
<p><a href=“They”>quote</a>…drive down the price of labor toward immiseration and eliminate as many environmental and labor protections as they can, promote a “global marketplace free for their own predations”… and use the state as a tool, just one tool among many, to accomplish their own ends.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That’s what ‘they’ get to do when ‘they’ have the power. That is the nature of human kind. I live in a socialist nation (which also has it’s foibles btw). It is possible for liberal socialists to gain power, mini, or are you too bitter to believe that?</p>
<p>Complicated question. In the U.S., no. But I see it happen all over the world. Funny, I don’t think of myself as bitter, just realistic. I’m involved inall kinds of optimistic (some might say way overly optimistic) work far from the belly of the beast. But it doesn’t change the nature of the beast, nor it being the main responsibility of Americans as attempting to mitigate its predations. I just call it as I see it, and move on. Funny, too, I never thought of you as a Marxist - what’s this about “the nature of human kind”?</p>
<p>How 'bout them Mets? ;)</p>
<p>Marxist. Very funny. Just a run-of-the-mill moderate liberal, too old to be a Marxist and too practically minded. I’d call myself a realist too, realistic enough to see that aggressive (testosterone driven) power grabs rule history–be they socialist, corporate, Catholic or communist.</p>
<p>I lament the lack of drive and talent in the American liberal scene, even on CC. Where is the young liberal counterpoint to FS and xiggi? Is it tlaktan?</p>
<p>Nevermind the mets, how 'bout that Landis?</p>
![http://www.toiletmuseum.com/lgpic.php?photo=ladies/toilet2.jpg[/url]](http://www.toiletmuseum.com/lgpic.php?photo=ladies/toilet2.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
