Today on Blogcritics
Home » Rummy is Right: Don’t Appease Fascists

Rummy is Right: Don’t Appease Fascists

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

The Doctrine of Fascism, according to Benito Mussolini, among other things, entails a state transformed into a religion conjoined with a commitment to the utter abnegation of the individual, and particularly the individual will.

The fascist is never an individual, but always a connected tentacle of some holy-yet-earthly state, and infused with that state’s generalized yearning to annihilate all those individual heretics who might oppose the religiosity of that state. All who are not tethered to that fascist state must therefore either die or soon become tethered. For the fascist, the state itself is the god to be both worshipped and obeyed.

Jews, conservative Christians, and free market, individualistic Americans, however, are not easily tethered to the state itself as God. We believe in individual autonomy rather than divine coercion. We, or at least we who have not been gulled into the despair of American liberals — for whom morality, beauty and even divinity itself are only manifestations of social and psychological determinism — we American conservatives are optimists. And we still embrace liberal democracy, which is to say we American conservatives still believe in a free will.

We who remain the unabashed enemies of fascism continue to believe in real choice, the choice of good and the choice of sin. We American conservatives embrace the will rather than hate it. That is what today’s fascists despise about liberal democracies and like about American liberals.

American liberals despair since they have reduced the will to no more than a series of coerced responses to the stimuli of society and psychology. But Islamist fascists despise American conservatives because we conservative members of liberal democracies embrace free will and thus we embrace creativity materialized via free enterprise.

Today’s fascists, on the other hand, who, this time around also happen to be Arab Islamists rather than German or Italian Christians, hate the will. They reject the individual’s ability to create the beautiful and the craven.

For the fascist, the will of the state is identical to the will of the individual. And today’s Islamist fascists, like their fascist forefathers, would be more than pleased to convert us to their state will or kill us in order to crush our individual free will, the human essence we conservative members of liberal democracies still hold so dear.

So the fascist state is not merely fundamentalist. Though fundamentalism may be a necessary condition for fascism, fundamentalism is certainly not a sufficient condition for fascism. Many who are fundamentalists are neither fascist nor dangerous nor even particularly frightening.

Fundamentalist Christians, for example, believe the rest of us wrong, but they also believe we could choose to be right, if only we would. Born again Christians hold free will so dear, in fact, they even hold themselves individually responsible for their own birth. So, coerced submission to God is utterly rejected by fundamentalist Christians. Coerced love of God is equally rejected by fundamentalist Jews, and likely even by most fundamentalist Muslims.

“Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in God hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And God heareth and knoweth all things.” [Al-Qur’an 2:256]

Yet more important, coerced submission, like coerced love, is utterly antithetical to liberal democracies including the theistic people, agnostic people, and even atheistic people thriving within liberal democracies.

Fascism, on the other hand, is herd morality opposed to individual liberty. All is coercion. All is submission: love, morality, obedience, religion, and death. And the genocide of those heretical peoples, like the Jews, who refuse to be coerced, the destruction of those horrid people, like the Jews, who in any way admire the creativity of individual will is an absolute good for fascists.

The fascist must crush the individual will and all who stand for the freedom of the individual will. For those who are opposed to the coerced religion of this fascist state, the Islamic fascist state, are those who also oppose the spirit of the Islamic fascist’s holiest of holies: the mystical melding of man and God into the state.

Those who are opposed to this fascist worldview, however, those who embrace individual freedoms including, if not especially, the freedom of speech and the freedom of the marketplace of ideas must oppose this.

So I agree with how conservatives frame this war. We are at war with Islamist fascists. But we are not at war with Muslim fundamentalists. This is rather a war between liberal democracies and a new oppressive variety of fascism. We are in a war to protect the freedom of the individual will from the coercion of the state.

This is a war to allow each of us within all the families of liberal democracy to pursue the maximum creativity of our individual wills and let the fruits of our creativity whither or grow freely in the marketplace of ideas and things. This truly is the war of liberal democracy against the infinite despair of Islamist fascism. This is a war; therefore, that brooks no appeasement by the despairing American liberal, that defeatist psycho/social babbler.

Powered by

About carmine

  • SFC SKI

    Rahter than call it Fascism and have people get wrapped up in definitions and distracted by possibly incorrect compaisions, why don’t we just call it another form of totalitarianism?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Goodish point there, Ski. The predilection to use hot button terms like fascism too freely diminishes their impact. Fascism has a specific meaning, and using it for something else is sensationalistic and ultimately counter productive.

    Our enemies in the war on terror really aren’t fascists. They’re theocratic authoritarians, but that isn’t nearly as catchy a description.

    Dave

  • http://stoppseudoscience.blogspot.com/ carmine

    Dave, Actually I think you are somewhat wrong here. The link between Arabs and fascism is pretty well documented.

    My argument is based on the liklihood that the fascism that now reigns in so many Islamic nations is indeed the direct descendent of Mussolini’s and “he who cannot be mentioned in blog-land’s” fascism. See the direct quotes from Mussolini on my blog Stop Pseudo Science

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    I know about tha Arab links to Nazism, but Nazism is certainly not fascism, and while they may borrow from Nazi ideology and Fascist ideology, if you accep the idea that fascism is a system of government as defined by Mussolini and others, then the Arab nations really don’t meet the criteria of fascist nations. Their economic and political structures are totally different, and the things which they share in common are the same things shared by all totalitarian regimes including the old Soviet Union, namely dictatorship, the ‘cult of personality’, and an artificial sense of persecution with a focus on combatting largely fabricated external enemies.

    In fact, they seem to have most of the worst elements of fascism, nazism and communism with none of the few good aspects of those political philosophies because they’ve added in a big dollop of theocracy too.

    And as for the connections to Nazism, most of the nationalist movements of the region like Hezbollah and the Baath and the various Mujehedin have a much stronger and more recent association with socialism/communism.

    Anyway, the point being that they’ve got something new and unique and in many ways worse than fascism and it deserves a new, specifically applicable word.

    Dave

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    I have to agree with all of Dave’s points here except for the last. You do not need a new name – you need an address – somewhere to send the smart bombs. Actally, two addresses. The addresses are Riyadh and Teheran.

    But for the sake of your own economy, your country needs to find a quick exit strategy from central Iraq that does not bring your soldiers to OUR country.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Ruvy, Israel is on the way to the ocean. I believe the route is a winding one that runs through Damascus, Riyadh and Southern Lebanon. Tehran we just nuke.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Dave sez…
    *And as for the connections to Nazism, most of the nationalist movements of the region like Hezbollah and the Baath and the various Mujehedin have a much stronger and more recent association with socialism/communism.*

    Dave, ya had me completely until this sentence….

    the Mujahadeen FOUGHT the russian communists and drove them out of afghanistan

    the Baathists of Iraq were an oligarchal totalitarian regime, by very definition of the terms

    now, Hizb’allah is closest.. it does remind one of the old soviet usage of small insurgencies, financially backed to run a coup.. or legit take over of the government… but it does stop there

    Hizb’allah itself is definately a cult of personality type thing, with a very clear theocratic totalitarianism in which the Qu’ran is used and abused to justify their actions.. as dictated by their masters in Iran

    just some Thoughts

    Excelsior?

  • Baronius

    Most definitions of fascism (and there are many) include corporatism, which is a blurring of the distinction between industry and government. What does that mean exactly? I dunno. It varies. It can mean that corporations run the government; it can mean nationalization of the industries; it can be called “public/private partnerships”. One of the sectors starts to dominate the other.

    The free-market conservative is instinctively at odds with corporatism. The modern liberal doesn’t share that instinct. Note: I’m talking about the political and economic worlds, which were more a part of Nalle’s analysis than Carmine’s.

    Does corporatism exist among the Arab states? Only in small industries like oil production. (Sorry, I couldn’t help myself.) Also banking, construction, shipping… Enough to argue the case that Arab culture is fascist in the political and economic spheres too.

  • Dean

    “So I agree with how conservatives frame this war.”

    Which war?

    We have so many going on.

    And so litle good news.

  • Dean

    btw, do you pretend to speak for all conservatives?

    Or just those conservatives conned by the neo variety?

    A new word is needed — “neo-conned”.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    a Thought for Baronius…
    you are spot on with the corporate tie in with fascism… but far less of it in the arab world

    now here in the States… a decent argument can be made that some of our governmental policies border on corporate fascism… like multibillion dollar no bid contracts with Haliburton, or Bechtel…

    both of whom have gotten in trouble (not!) for overcharging or shoddy work (Bechtel and the Big dig fer shoddy, and the GAO has numerous reports about Haliburton/KBR overcharging and skimming)

    yet BOTH they and others STILL receive billions in no bid contracts…

    so much for fre market capitalism, eh?

    Excelsior?

  • http://theglenblog.blogspot.com Glen Boyd

    Personally i think anyone who tries to drop a bomb on Isreal (nuclear or otherwise) is in for one hell of a surprise.

    But thats just me…

    -Glen

  • SHARK

    And move over, Jon Benet Ramsey, you’re about to be swamped by a distorted historical analogy to World War II!

    Thanks for the preview of the new pre-election MARKETING STRATEGY of the Neo-con Right;

    “facism” — oohhh, scary!
    “appeasers” — oohhh, a wimpy liberal who wants to hand Europe over to Hitler!

    (“cut and run” appears to have lost its impact — ahahahahaha — Only to be replaced by the new, improved SCARE TACTICS of the now discredited Republicans. “cut and run” — please have a seat next to “axis of evil” and “weapons of mass destruction”!)

    And move over, Jon Benet Ramsey, you’re about to be swamped by a distorted historical analogy to World War II!

    Never mind that:

    1) the real “war on terrorism” starters [on 9/11], Bin Laden and Al Kayda, are still at large;
    2) Iraq has diverted billions of $ and U.S. military & intelligence from that pursuit — in the process, creating a virtual recruiting office/training ground for future terrorists;
    3) at least one “Islamo-facist STATE” in the Middle East also happens to be an “ally” and the Bush family’s personal friends, SAUDI ARABIA;
    4) “Islamo-facists” don’t meet your “state” owned criteria.
    5) If the U.S. weren’t so addicted to OIL, we wouldn’t give a flying fuck about the entire Middle East — and these terrorists wouldn’t be fucking with us.

  • Clavos

    If the U.S. weren’t so addicted to OIL, we wouldn’t give a flying fuck about the entire Middle East

    True. But we’re past the point of changing that in the short term–at least not without significant sacrifice, which candy-assed, spoiled, pampered Ameicans will never accept.

    and these terrorists wouldn’t be fucking with us.

    We are the richest, most powerful nation on Earth–the biggest target. Someone will ALWAYS fuck with us. Out of envy, if for no other reason.

  • Dean

    We have had 33 years since 1973 to switch from Middle East oil. We saw the handwriting on the wall at the time, but instead of doing something constructive, we now consume much more oil. To top that off we have a Middle East foreign policy that sucks wind.

    “We are the richest, most powerful nation on Earth–”

    We are also the dumbest.

  • Bliffle

    “So I agree with how conservatives frame this war. We are at war with Islamist fascists. But we are not at war with Muslim fundamentalists.”

    Oops! How does that figure? Muslim doctrine calls for submission to god (and mohamed) so is contrary to the idea of Personal Will you have presented. So ALL islam defies your idea.

    It’s as if you suddenly couldn’t go where your logic was leading you. Failure of courage?

    Of course, the article may have been a parody of Ayn Rand. Only the author can know.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Clavos sez…
    *True. But we’re past the point of changing that in the short term–at least not without significant sacrifice, which candy-assed, spoiled, pampered Ameicans will never accept.*

    well Clavos.. i can give you a simple Answer, than can be accomplished in mere months that woudl radically reduce our dependence on foreign oil significantly

    a tax credit for each and every tractor trailer out there to convert to biodiesal, another tax credit to every truck stop gas station that converts a tank/pump to biodiesal… and a last one ( oh.. say some of the billions from the “energy plan” that paid off big oil in a year of record profits) to establish a biodiesal refinery/distribution company…

    there…one paragraph… and the millions of truckers out there shift from consuming billions of gallons of oil into burning bio fuel THAT WE CAN GROW RIGHT HERE DOMESTICALLY!!!

    hey, you can even cut some farm subsidies, and have them shift to growing soybeans, or whatever works best for creating bio fuels…

    you can send me my Nobel prize now….

    Excelsior?

  • Clavos

    Good idea, gonzo. But, though I AM half Swedish, I have no pull with the prize committee.

    Has any done a study to see how much oil actually would be saved by doing what you suggest? Are there hard numbers ou there?

  • Kinoun

    Perhaps the “conservatives” time would be better spent NOT searching for enemies among their own fellow citizens. The same old crap flung at the “liberals” – in this case ANYONE who dares to question the Bush Adm., is waisted on Americans in general. No one’s falling for it. Perhaps it worked during the Vietnam Era. And, given the state of mind in America during the last election it did manage to sway enough voters in the Red states who weren’t willing to spend a few more minutes questioning matters… But even that’s begun to change…

    As much as despise “conservative” philosophy as it stands now (almost as much as I dispise the old knee-jerk “liberal” philosophy that so many democrats cling to) I do have to agree with Sinclair Lewis:

    “When fascism arrives in America it will be clutching a bible and draped in the flag.”

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Clavos… no real Study has been done on it, but you can find just how many trucks are out there… the conversion kit costs between 300 and 500 dollars (cheaper for those fleets of trucks who have their own mechanics)

    do the same with diesal running cars and consumer trucks, and you have a huge percentage of what’s on the road off of foreign oil and literally growing our own economy…

    now, export it to Europe, India and China…

    Kinoun sez…
    *I do have to agree with Sinclair Lewis:

    “When fascism arrives in America it will be clutching a bible and draped in the flag.”*

    Quoted for Truth

    nuff said…

    Excelsior?

  • Dean

    When fascism arrives it is usually clutching a gun and draped in propaganda.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Dean… that’s the tactic AFTER they have usurped power fomr the legitimate government

    before hand, they try and appear “reasonable” and populist as much as possible, hiding their true Motivation…

    hence the Sinclair Lewis quote… which actually covers both, if you think about it a bit cynically

    your mileage may vary

    Excelsior?

  • Clavos

    The Bible IS a gun.

    The flag IS propaganda.

  • Dean

    Is that what Stalin, Hitler, Hirohito and Mussolini used?

  • Dean

    I forgot Mao.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    let’s see.. emperor Hirohito is considered “the son of Heaven” by the Japanese at the time, so his words have the effect of “biblical law” as well as the propaganda value of divine ill manifest in a political environment…

    Stalin used communist ideals as a de facto religion… literally replacing religion with communism… and the Motherland (flag) to stir up “patriotism” for the motivation of the people to engage in the “5 year plans”

    Mao.. see Stalin…

    Hitler and Moussilini supplanted religion with “our country right or wrong” (sound familiar?) to motivate using the old “us versus them” bit of agitprop.. their Nationality and “racial purity” became tied up with the “flag” to justify anything…

    so..yes…it IS what those you mentioned used

    hence the Truth of the Sinclair Lewis quote is borne out once again

    Excelsior?

  • Dean

    gonzo — “…that’s the tactic AFTER they have usurped power from the legitimate government”

    AFTER?

    After fascism has gained power, it doesn’t need anything else.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Dean… you are incorrect

    AFTER a fascist organization takes Power… i tneeds more and more Control over the population to maintain Power

    see Goebbels writings on the issue of propaganda…all of which pertains to remaining in power and fooling the citzens into thinking everything is ok, and going according to “plan”

    same in each of the examples you have cited

    Excelsior?

  • Dean

    Let’ s see.

    The Soviets had the Cheka. the GPU, the NKVD and the KGB. Were they carrying Bibles and waving flags?

    The Nazis has the SA, the Gestapo and the SS. Were they carrying Bibles and waving flags?

    Mussolini had the OVRA. Was it carrying Bibles and waving flags?

    Hirohito, the 124th Emperor of Japan didn’t need Bibles and flags. His family had been well entrenched for over a millennium.

    Mao had his Red Guard. Was it carrying Bibles and waving flags?

    Fascism doesn’t need Bibles and flags.

  • troll

    but they all needed symbolism as powerful as that which drives religious belief and nationalism to maintain power…which is the point

    power emanates from the barrel of a gun only when you can convince somebody to pull the trigger

  • Dean

    Power emanates from the barrel of a gun when you can convince somebody you will pull the trigger.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    ummm…Dean.. each of your cited examples made the Flag a “holy object”

    check any of the footage and just try and count all the flags present… good luck

    and, as i stated, each of those you cited shifted the Equation so that the State (Motherland/Fatherland/Homeland) BECAME the “religion”

    from the bullshit teutonic mythos, to the remember Rome lie, to the Japanese Emeror BEING the “bible” for his people

    you seem to be missing the point

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.larrycwilson2000.net Larry

    Throughout human history every government has need–and used–“bibles” and “flags”.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    well said Larry…

    and hence the Point that was missed by Dean when referring to the Sinclair Lewis quote

    the Quote was NOT stating that was the ONLY way fascism comes to Power…

    just that he thought it woud be the Way it could take over in the US

    Excelsior?

  • Dean

    A gun is not a Bible and propaganda is not a flag.

    It only looks that way in your dreams.

  • gazelle

    carmine:

    i dont like bush. he is anti-democratic. he doesn’t support elected govts/heads such as in iran, palestine, lebanon, venezeula, chile,… but he does support unelected dictators/families(!) (sometimes opposing elected-but-powerless parliments) in egypt, pakistan, jordan, kuwait, saudi, iraq,…

    so no, even the conservatives have NO will because they believe in the american way, liberty, the constitution and the bill of rights, washington adams jefferson and lincoln, freedom democracy – and that aint no fascism, ah cain tael you – even with senror Micarthy and prezden Boush now, using some force there, alittle here, alittle there. now if you dont think so, sir, you’re
    ANTI-AMERICAN !!! and will be charged by the departmen of WAR and PROPAGANDA, now DEFENSE.

    best

  • carmine

    Bliffle,
    I think Ayn Rand was a nut and her loveless, philosophy peurile at best, so I would not spend the effort for the sake of the Randian cult. No I really mean just what I said, fascism once defined as Mussolini defined it includes these fascist Islamist haters of freedom and free will and free enterprise. Again recognize that it is not an exageration to remember the extremely close link between WWII fascists and Arab leaders of the time, those very Arab leaders who continue not to recognize Israel.

  • Dean

    Just to set the record straight…

    Fascism is a governmental system controlled by a dictator having absolute power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting industry and commerce, and taking an aggressive posture toward other countries to dominate them.

    Benito Mussolini and Fascism

    Benito Mussolini (1883-1945) over the course of his lifetime went from Socialism – he was editor of Avanti, a socialist newspaper – to the leadership of a new political movement called “fascism” [after “fasces”, the symbol of bound sticks used a totem of power in ancient Rome].

    Mussolini came to power after the “March on Rome” in 1922, and was
    appointed Prime Minister by King Victor Emmanuel.

    In 1932 Mussolini wrote (with the help of Giovanni Gentile) an entry for the Italian Encyclopedia on the definition of fascism.

    Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism — born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it. All other trials are substitutes, which never really put men into the position where they have to make the great decision — the alternative of life or death….

    …The Fascist accepts life and loves it, knowing nothing of and despising suicide: he rather conceives of life as duty and struggle and conquest, but above all for others — those who are at hand and those who are far distant, contemporaries, and those who will come after…

    …Fascism [is] the complete opposite of…Marxian Socialism, the materialist conception of history of human civilization can be explained simply through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and by the change and development in the means and instruments of production…. Fascism, now and always, believes in holiness and in heroism; that is to say, in actions influenced by no economic motive, direct or indirect. And if the economic conception of history be denied, according to which theory men are no more than puppets, carried to and fro by the waves of chance, while the real directing forces are quite out of their control, it follows that the existence of an unchangeable and unchanging class-war is also denied – the natural progeny of the economic conception of history. And above all Fascism denies that class-war can be the preponderant force in the transformation of society….

    After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage….

    …Fascism denies, in democracy, the absur[d] conventional untruth of political equality dressed out in the garb of collective irresponsibility, and the myth of “happiness” and indefinite progress….

    …iven that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority…a century of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State….

    The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State. The conception of the Liberal State is not that of a directing force, guiding the play and development, both material and spiritual, of a collective body, but merely a force limited to the function of recording results: on the other hand, the Fascist State is itself conscious and has itself a will and a personality — thus it may be called the “ethic” State….

    …The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone….

    …For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. Fascism is the doctrine best adapted to represent the tendencies and the aspirations of a people, like the people of Italy, who are rising again after many centuries of abasement and foreign servitude. But empire demands discipline, the coordination of all forces and a deeply felt sense of duty and sacrifice: this fact explains many aspects of the practical working of the regime, the character of many forces in the State, and the necessarily severe measures which must be taken against those who would oppose this spontaneous and inevitable movement of Italy in the twentieth century, and would oppose it by recalling the outworn ideology of the nineteenth century – repudiated wheresoever there has been the courage to undertake great experiments of social and political transformation; for never before has the nation stood more in need of authority, of direction and order. If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it.

    — Paul Halsall Aug 1997

  • http://stoppseudoscience.blogspot.com/ carmine

    #38 Dean,
    Thank you!! I had included some direct quotations from Mussolini’s “Doctrine of Fascism” to demonstrate my points about the denial of the individual will and the elevation of the State into God, but the new blog censors made me eliminate them. There is a weird lefy censorship in blogland: they are too beholding to “goofball’s law” to allow for actual mention of “He who must not be named” and “he whose politics must not be named”

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Carmine. I didn’t edit the article. But I did look at it quickly before it was edited. I think the problem with your mussolini quotes wasn’t the content of them, but their length and positioning right up front in the article. I was planning to come back and publish the article for you, but someone beat me to it. What I’d planned to do is move the quotes into offset boxes accompanying the text instead of having them be right at the beginning. I think that would have worked fairly well.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    regimenting industry and commerce

    This is where I disagree with the application of the term fascism to the islamic world. Since there is no industry the vital fascist element of government control of corporations just isn’t there. That’s one of the reasons why I think we need new and better terminology.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    ummmm…”no industry”?

    can you say OPEC?

    how about just *oil*

    or don’t you count that?

    or count the fact that due to it being oil, we Americans are actually paying for both sides fo the *war on terror*

    since it is, for the vast majority of cases, oil money that finances each and every one of these terrorist organizations and the regimes that support them

    just sharing a Thought

    Excelsior?

  • Dean

    The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries are: Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    my Point, Dean was to counter the claim that there is no “industry” involved as per comment #41

    i woudl hope all can admit that the oil industry is indeed involved

    and that it IS an industry

    and that revenues from said industry are being used to further the political/jihad agenda of terrorist organizations and their state sponsors

    THAT was the point… not that ALL of OPEC is involved, but that some of the member nations are
    example:Saudi Arabia and the Wahabi schools
    or
    Iran and Hizb’allah

    you get the point

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    how about just *oil*

    Where is the oil in Lebanon and Afghanistan?

    Dave

  • JP

    Yet another bastardization of the word “fascism.” Rumsfeld, Bush, and the rest of the gang have proven they are unable–not just unwilling–to reconsider strategy in light of new facts. Rumsfeld needs to go, and that’s just the beginning.

  • Nancy

    Dean #38: Sounds just like Dubya and his gang. As Gonzo says, ’nuff said.

  • Bliffle

    Carmine:

    “So I agree with how conservatives frame this war. We are at war with Islamist fascists. But we are not at war with Muslim fundamentalists.”

    Oops! How does that figure? Muslim doctrine calls for submission to god (and mohamed) so is contrary to the idea of Personal Will you have presented. So ALL islam defies your idea.

    It’s as if you suddenly couldn’t go where your logic was leading you. Failure of courage?

  • Dean

    Muslim doctrine calls for submission to god.

    What religion doesn’t?