I came across this recently and thought it had some connections to our concerns with today's government, both local and national. The list with descriptors (and a brief intro to the author of the list) can be found here:

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html

In short, here are the characteristics:

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
2. Disdaim for the importance of human rights.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
5. Rampant sexism.
6. A controlled mass media.
7. Obsession with national security.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
9. Power of corporations protected.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
14. Fraudulent elections.

Well, how does your chosen leader (Bush, Clinton, Cheney, Kulongoski, Dan Packard, etc.) rank? Let's set up a scoring ruberic:

0-2= beloved philosopher king
3-5= Mike Brady's parenting style
6-8= Bill Cosby's parenting style
9-11= Joan Crawford's parenting style
12-14= "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."

(Sidenote: I'm taking off early tomorrow for a three week road trip, andnot taking the laptop. Have fun with this thread and enjoy your summer!)

Sounds a lot like the Demo's

Perhaps it does. Please specify the actions/policies of the Dems that match up with this list.

I don't present this with bias - well, with too much bias. But Hitler comparisons are made often, and charges of fascism are made often. Let's see who is really fascist, and to what degree.

Dan Packard = 1

He's gotta coupla small things he needs to see happen and will do what it takes to make sure it does. (Controlled Mass Media is the closest one that applies here to this forum.) That's the only reason for any score at all. Essentially, the rights of the people here will not trump the value of PDXRadio.com. The bar for reaching this point is as high as it can be, without crossing that core judgement. A small amount of this is a necessary evil. Role Model for me personally, where Internet Communities are concerned.

@ Dan --you are one of the greats.

(Introducing a bit of new school internet lingo here. The "@" character is a very quick way to direct a short comment toward another group member in a casual fashion. I kind of like it.)



Bush: 13

Rather than list all the applicable ones, I'm gonna come out and say he's somewhat soft on the sexism hard line. (I know, pro life, but not anti-women getting out there and sweating it for minimum wage, just like anyone else! )

He's a facist mo-fo.



Clinton = 3

He hits home on 6, 9 & 13, otherwise not facist, and well loved



Thompson = 11

I don't think 11, 4 and 2 apply to him. There is a case for #2, but I'm not there yet.

Better than Bush, but still pretty facist. He exhibits strong potential for becoming a better liked facist mo-fo.



Edwards = 2 - 2.5

6 and 9 will apply. Maybe a little of 8, depending on what the national culture is, should he make office.

He will be similar to Clinton. Well loved and solid leader overall. He could easily be better than Clinton.



KSKD: = 2.5 - 4

I hit home, and have strong and or growing facist tendancies in the following areas:

12 -- The rule of law is being undervalued and underappreciated. We, Americans, are soft on crime. We could use some reconsideration on what is crime and what is not, and punishments however. There is hope for me in this. I do worry about overcorrecting though...

8 -- This is an overcorrection. Normally, there is some tolerated balance, but too many people, given an inch, have taken a mile. So, none of this should be permitted and we should be active in ferreting these matters out and dealing with them. I'm a facist mo-fo here. (too many bad life experiences I've yet to get healthy with Sorry all, sometimes one sucks.)

3 -- Corporations, the ruling elite, neo-con, et al. all fall under one umbrella for me personally. We need to take these clowns down a peg. I am an establishment facist in many ways. This has run deep with me for a very long time. I've no shame however. Local is good, community is good. Both good to the point where I am adamant about it.

1 -- Our nation needs to be more of a focus for more people. American first. My views on this score are becoming extreme, largely because of my growing aversion to divisive politics. Danger of becoming facist here. Not sure if I have shame here or not.

---

quote:

I propose a rule on this thread:

No judgement may be made on any forum member, unless one also engages in some solid introspection, that is defensible, as I have above.

(Perhaps ChickenJuggler can moderate again)

Given we can follow this rule, the resulting discussion will be entertaining and valuable, IMHO. I think we all have facist tendancies. Let's get 'em on the floor and poke each other a bit. We will be better for it! Don't do this, unless you can remain friends and stay healthy throughout the engagement --please!

I used quote to get some attention, not self-pimp.

---

I said democrat, who was in charge when Vietnam, Korea and Vietnam started, Presidency, and both houses of congress?

Which party choses to kill unborn babies?

Passes laws discriminating against white men?

Controls the major news networks? Has over 80% of the national news persons as members?

Tries to mnake their religion the state religion (athiesm.)

Refuses to let the labor members views be represented?

Tries to push their favorite art on everyone?

Has rigged the most election, (Heck mayor daley himself, could set that record).

Has the weakest critical thinking skills?

Wow, talk about a topic where you can get yourself riled up assigning the worst possible motivation to people you don't agree with.

You must be this tall to go on this ride. Have fun, but don't fool yourself into thinking you're doing some critical thinking, no matter what side you're on.