Yeah thats right, rather attack the message and argue about technicalities and deflect from the fact that literal fascism was happening back then (and of course is still).
Fascism is a broad term and can mean anything from anti socialist to nazism, both the german and italian wikipedia articles are pretty clear about that (now go on with “wiKiPedIa iS nOt An aCtUal soUrCe”).
Fascio is just the italian word for alliance and Obama continued the use of the Nato alliance that Bush began for Afghanistan. In fact he ordered the deployment of 17000 soldiers to it in whats known as “the surge”.
We also know that this fascio invoking was based on false and partly manufactured “evidence” (see allegations of weapons of mass destruction), this in itself is straight out the fascist manual, like Poland attacking a German radio station was manufactured to start WW2.
Obama had 2663 days at war, which is more than Hitler and like Hitler he directly ordered the killing of civilians in other countries. That doesnt mean that he was as bad as Hitler of course, but it means that he is a fascist.
If you lost a loved one at a wedding that Obama bombed you would use the exact term fitting for Obama, which is fascist.
Its easy to downplay the daily killing of people on a false premise from a cozy home far away isnt it?
I’m actually very sympathetic to this. What the US did, and continues to do, is far worse than what the fascists of the 1920s-40s attempted.
The Nazis and Japanese fascists tried (and failed) to acheive what the US sucessfully did: the colonization and eviction of hundreds of native peoples, and clearing of an entire region for the “master race”. All under a far more stable form of government for colonialism : bourgeois democracy.
Lebensraum failed, but manifest destiny succeeded.
I’ve been thinking that we should probably find another term then “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie”. Not because it’s wrong but because people don’t know who bourgeoisie are anymore.
My proposal is “electoral dictatorship of the billionaires”, even tho it might be slightly misleading.
I agree with this sentiment. In general, I think that leftist political ideas are quite popular when you swap out the leftist terminology. “The real culture war is between the shareholders and the workers” doesn’t raise a person’s guard like “The bourgeoisie are oppressing the proletariat”. It also forces you to explain a little about your meaning to somebody who maybe doesn’t already know what these terms mean. Whenever I’m trying to talk politics with someone who is open-minded but not explicitly leftist, I try to use this tactic so I don’t immediately run into a wall of conditioned responses.
Ml users throwing around the word fascist like it’s going out of style. Surely nothing bad can come from diluting the meaning of this word
Yeah thats right, rather attack the message and argue about technicalities and deflect from the fact that literal fascism was happening back then (and of course is still).
Fascism is a broad term and can mean anything from anti socialist to nazism, both the german and italian wikipedia articles are pretty clear about that (now go on with “wiKiPedIa iS nOt An aCtUal soUrCe”). Fascio is just the italian word for alliance and Obama continued the use of the Nato alliance that Bush began for Afghanistan. In fact he ordered the deployment of 17000 soldiers to it in whats known as “the surge”.
We also know that this fascio invoking was based on false and partly manufactured “evidence” (see allegations of weapons of mass destruction), this in itself is straight out the fascist manual, like Poland attacking a German radio station was manufactured to start WW2.
Obama had 2663 days at war, which is more than Hitler and like Hitler he directly ordered the killing of civilians in other countries. That doesnt mean that he was as bad as Hitler of course, but it means that he is a fascist.
If you lost a loved one at a wedding that Obama bombed you would use the exact term fitting for Obama, which is fascist.
Its easy to downplay the daily killing of people on a false premise from a cozy home far away isnt it?
Your opinion is objectively wrong.
I’m actually very sympathetic to this. What the US did, and continues to do, is far worse than what the fascists of the 1920s-40s attempted.
The Nazis and Japanese fascists tried (and failed) to acheive what the US sucessfully did: the colonization and eviction of hundreds of native peoples, and clearing of an entire region for the “master race”. All under a far more stable form of government for colonialism : bourgeois democracy.
Lebensraum failed, but manifest destiny succeeded.
Not only that, but committed countless other atrocities, unparalleled in history.
I’ve been thinking that we should probably find another term then “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie”. Not because it’s wrong but because people don’t know who bourgeoisie are anymore.
My proposal is “electoral dictatorship of the billionaires”, even tho it might be slightly misleading.
I agree with this sentiment. In general, I think that leftist political ideas are quite popular when you swap out the leftist terminology. “The real culture war is between the shareholders and the workers” doesn’t raise a person’s guard like “The bourgeoisie are oppressing the proletariat”. It also forces you to explain a little about your meaning to somebody who maybe doesn’t already know what these terms mean. Whenever I’m trying to talk politics with someone who is open-minded but not explicitly leftist, I try to use this tactic so I don’t immediately run into a wall of conditioned responses.