Home > Archive > Cobol > March 2005 > OT -socialism
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Howard Brazee 2005-03-24, 3:55 pm |
|
On 23-Mar-2005, "James J. Gavan" <jgavandeletethis@shaw.ca> wrote:
> 11:35 - Fascism
Does anybody have definitions of fascism and National Socialism that are not
emotionally connected to the states we associate them with?
I get the idea that these are states where nominal ownership of companies is the
people, but the state runs them. But those aren't the main things people
object to - and often times modern states emulate those. They object to the
dictators who run the state that runs those businesses - especially because
those dictators do bad things elsewhere.
| |
| James J. Gavan 2005-03-24, 3:55 pm |
| Howard Brazee wrote:
> On 23-Mar-2005, "James J. Gavan" <jgavandeletethis@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Does anybody have definitions of fascism and National Socialism that are not
> emotionally connected to the states we associate them with?
>
> I get the idea that these are states where nominal ownership of companies is the
> people, but the state runs them. But those aren't the main things people
> object to - and often times modern states emulate those. They object to the
> dictators who run the state that runs those businesses - especially because
> those dictators do bad things elsewhere.
Using the time-piece analogy 11:35 = Fascism and 12:25 = Communism - not
too much difference between the two - different segments of the clock,
but both finish up promoting a 'patriotic national identity', as
defined by their own images and impose dictatorial regimes.
Jimmy
| |
|
| Here's a quote that sums up fascism pretty well:
"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth
of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic
State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism - ownership of government
power by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."
-President Franklin Delano Roosevelt
| |
| docdwarf@panix.com 2005-03-25, 8:55 pm |
| In article <Xns9624ABD78B723SpamKillerNoSpamOrg@216.196.97.140>,
Ron <NoSpam@NoSpam.org> wrote:
>Here's a quote that sums up fascism pretty well:
>
>"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth
>of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic
>State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism - ownership of government
>power by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."
>
>-President Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Yes, but that was changed by the 1939 revisions...
.... whoops, sorry, wrong thread. Carry on.
DD
| |
| James J. Gavan 2005-03-26, 3:55 am |
| docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
> In article <Xns9624ABD78B723SpamKillerNoSpamOrg@216.196.97.140>,
> Ron <NoSpam@NoSpam.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Yes, but that was changed by the 1939 revisions...
>
> ... whoops, sorry, wrong thread. Carry on.
>
> DD
>
Me too ! I was completely non-plussed, so I traced back. Under the
thread 'Prezs and Foreign Policy', I described my time piece for Daniel.
Howard picks up on it, queries the word 'Fascism' and the nearest we get
is he throws in 'National Socialism'. But Howard then starts a new
thread "OT: Socialism" to make his comment, would you believe, about
"Fascism". Howard, please do keep up - you do know the difference
between Fascism and Socialism ? You sir are responsible for creating the
confusion :-)
Pity our 'unofficial' Moderator just took off for a holiday/vacation in
Blighty - he might have kept us straight on this one.
Jimmy
| |
| James J. Gavan 2005-03-30, 8:55 am |
| Howard Brazee wrote:
> On 23-Mar-2005, "James J. Gavan" <jgavandeletethis@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Does anybody have definitions of fascism and National Socialism that are not
> emotionally connected to the states we associate them with?
>
> I get the idea that these are states where nominal ownership of companies is the
> people, but the state runs them. But those aren't the main things people
> object to - and often times modern states emulate those. They object to the
> dictators who run the state that runs those businesses - especially because
> those dictators do bad things elsewhere.
Using the time-piece analogy 11:35 = Fascism and 12:25 = Communism - not
too much difference between the two - different segments of the clock,
but both finish up promoting a 'patriotic national identity', as
defined by their own images and impose dictatorial regimes.
Jimmy
| |
|
| Here's a quote that sums up fascism pretty well:
"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth
of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic
State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism - ownership of government
power by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."
-President Franklin Delano Roosevelt
| |
| docdwarf@panix.com 2005-03-30, 8:55 am |
| In article <Xns9624ABD78B723SpamKillerNoSpamOrg@216.196.97.140>,
Ron <NoSpam@NoSpam.org> wrote:
>Here's a quote that sums up fascism pretty well:
>
>"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth
>of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic
>State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism - ownership of government
>power by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."
>
>-President Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Yes, but that was changed by the 1939 revisions...
.... whoops, sorry, wrong thread. Carry on.
DD
| |
| James J. Gavan 2005-03-30, 8:55 am |
| docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
> In article <Xns9624ABD78B723SpamKillerNoSpamOrg@216.196.97.140>,
> Ron <NoSpam@NoSpam.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Yes, but that was changed by the 1939 revisions...
>
> ... whoops, sorry, wrong thread. Carry on.
>
> DD
>
Me too ! I was completely non-plussed, so I traced back. Under the
thread 'Prezs and Foreign Policy', I described my time piece for Daniel.
Howard picks up on it, queries the word 'Fascism' and the nearest we get
is he throws in 'National Socialism'. But Howard then starts a new
thread "OT: Socialism" to make his comment, would you believe, about
"Fascism". Howard, please do keep up - you do know the difference
between Fascism and Socialism ? You sir are responsible for creating the
confusion :-)
Pity our 'unofficial' Moderator just took off for a holiday/vacation in
Blighty - he might have kept us straight on this one.
Jimmy
|
|
|
|
|