Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

NeoliberalismKills wrote

http://rense.com/general37/char.htm

The US meets all 14 categories. It just paints it with a veneer of democracy. Now is it all in on all 14 categories? No. But it wouldn't take much to help push "us" even further. Another 9/11 and we are full Orwell.

6

sudo wrote

It meets most of them, but some of them it only half-qualifies for.

For #2, Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights, it half-meets. The US always makes a big deal out of other countries abusing human rights, but it says nothing about when it does the same thing. Occasionally, when it gets called out for abusing human rights (like with the Guantanamo Bay prison), it will do this, but usually it tries to keep this as hushed-up as possible.

For #11, I don't think it meets this one. Higher education is viewed pretty well over there, as far as I know. Going to college is pretty much an expectation, if you want to have a career, instead of hopping from service job to service job. But I think that's because higher education rarely tries to criticize the government. As far as the arts go, mainstream art is the same way. There are some artists who do make work critical of the US, but most people aren't interested in non-mainstream art (i.e. the kind you'd have to go to a museum to see), and those who are would probably just analyze the work, but not take its message to heart. So, I don't think the US fits into this one.

Same with #14 - as far as I know, the elections aren't fraudulent. But it doesn't matter, because the people are just choosing which flavor of evil capitalist they want to be president.

So, there are a few that it doesn't meet, but that's mostly because the US doesn't have to worry about the problems those ones address. The rest, it definitely meets, so I'd say it is fascist.

3

DissidentRage wrote

For #11, I don't think it meets this one.

Anti-intellectualism not only has run rampant for generations culturally and politically, it's also part of the doctrine of the corporate elite. The Powell Memorandum suggests the injection of corporate apologeia and supportive actors into higher education, as it's recognized as a threat to liberalism. It's been a guiding principle to the elite since it was penned in the 70s.

Same with #14 - as far as I know, the elections aren't fraudulent.

Electoral college and gerrymandering basically render them so. On account of the first, Trump won the election in spite of being down 3 million votes. As for the latter, in some areas it's effectively impossible to elect someone who isn't an overtly-liberal/fascist Republican, as it is on one of the Carolinas (I can't remember which).

5

Catsforfun wrote (edited )

There are some people who make elections equipment (software?) Who have come out to say that politicians have tried to pay them to rig it. I'm not saying all elections are rigged but there is a very strong possibility that at least some of them are.

4

sudo wrote

Is there a source for that? I'm not saying someone made it up, but it's always a good idea to check sources, just in case it was. That and sometimes the telephone game way of passing on news ("I heard that he heard that she heard that X happened") can lead to distortions.

2

Catsforfun wrote

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1thcO_olHas

I guess it could be fake, but it seemed credible to me when I watched it while ago. Let me know what you think

3

sudo wrote (edited )

That's good enough. This tells us that one person asked him to rig the elections, so we don't know how many others might have asked other people. But he said a telltale sign of this is a gross difference between exit polling data and the actual tabulated results, so I would look for that to see if an election has been rigged, when these proprietary voting machines are in use.

Thanks for linking to the source.

2

NeoliberalismKills wrote

America has always had a strong anti-intellectual strain that ebbs and flows. And it's difficult to find a truly dissident voice in academia. But this category is probably the one the US is probably least likely to qualify for.

Having 2 parties that are essentially the same is fraudulent to me. Is the integrity of the actual elections usually compromised? No. But the Supreme Court gave Bush Jr the job by circumventing a recount. That's as good as fraudulent.

2