1st of all, leftests are like the opposite of fascists. 

Really? Read Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism (a term coined by liberal author H.G. Wells as praise, not criticism, by the way), then try to seriously claim that leftists are like the opposite of fascists. He (and Glenn Beck, BTW), correctly point out how early 20th century liberals, aka progressives, were quite enamored with fascism in general and Mussolini in particular.

I will be the first to admit that Bush started us once again down a fascist path and I deeply regret that I ever voted for him. On the other hand, the One is taking us in the same extremely messed up direction, only much faster.

This thread brings my piss to a boil.

First off I live in America.

Secondly I guess you could say Im left wing, but I prefer looking at politics in a 2 dimensional fashion rather than the american single dimension. Im on the top of the political diamond, a pure combination of liberalism and socialism.

Social Libertarianism! Or Anarchism though that word is scary sometimes, and wouldnt be possible in the near future (Utopian) so a Eco-centric libertarian government would be best for now I think.

My view is that right now the American government is split between two large parties who really represent one ideal. Sure the democrans and rebublicrats disagree on plenty of social issues, but they both tend to agree that big government is good government. Country is in danger? Lets violate people's privacy with the patriot act! Economy is in trouble? Lets throw taxpayer money around! Healthcare system is failing? Lets make a new one run by the government! Lets not forget that alot of the economic trouble we find ourselves in was caused by government meddling in the past, fanny may freddy mac ect fucked up banking and loans all across America. Though dont worry left wingers out there the only thing as bad as government fucking things up is uncontrolled corporations fucking things up!

So really Bush and Obama aren't very far apart. Neither are any of the assholes sitting in congress or the house of representetives. They'll argue all day but will band together to maintain the status quo, namely there are TWO FEDERALIST PARTIES and anyone else who wants a shot at political power needs to suck their dicks to get it.

Socialized Healthcare is not Socialist. Its Fascist, or Communist (scary words huh?) or more accurately its STATIST. Power to the state. Maybe this means that SOMEHOW the government will run something with a degree of efficiency for once (doubtful) and socialized healthcare will be more efficient. My real gripe is that means we have to look to the STATE to get treatment, putting another huge pile of bargaining chips in the hands of the state. Can you imagine an America where disagreeing with the state means no healthcare for you? I can.

I have little respect for any of the talking heads on TV but I actually have more for Glenn Beck than any of the others, though not by much. Hes a bit of a nut but he points out some things I agree with, on occasion...

Oh and Obama is a joke. He created a cult like following and promised vague but fanciful things to appeal to small minds and got elected. Then he didnt change much at all and is just dicking around trying to put more and more aspects of our already cookie cutter American existence into the direct control of the state.

We need to replace the dems and GOP with the Libertarians and Greens, or better yet get rid of all of them.

good post.

Jonah Goldberg actually claims that organic food is fascist. His reasoning?

"Nazis were obessed with the concept of organic, [...] that we were all part of the organic whole. The first european green movement feeds into nazism."

And when pointed out that liberalism centers on the belief of the importance of individual freedom as opposed to fascism which favors the state over the individual, he replies by arguing that "that was classical liberalism, not the modern american one". He counters a fact by claiming that others simply got the meaning of the word wrong.

I assume that Goldberg is a reasonably intelligent man and also an idealist. Thus he must have noticed that one of the most important american values - individual freedom - is a liberal concept.

And in order to solve this internal conflict (no good conservative can say 'liberal' without a sneer) he decided the 'liberals' got the word wrong and are really just nazis in hiding.

"Liberal Fascism" is simply an opinion piece and should not be treated as some kind of scientific work to be used to prove an assertion correct.

yes, fascists are indeed opposites of leftist/communists/progresseives. It's just that they are so opposte and radical (not that all liberals are radicals) that their actions are almost identical, though their motives remain opposites. In the end most of those become totalitarian/statist/authoritarian governments.

Potato, potatoe.

Dan 'Confucious' Quayle

The only problem Goldberg has is that everyone he's interviewed by is a damned idiot.

The classical definition of liberal is based on the origin of the word, liberty.  The group in US politics that defines that would be the libertarians.  They are both socially and fiscally hands off.  The government should be as small as possible, only doing that which is necessity.  By necessity, they mean actual necessity, not these horse shit excuses we keep making these days.  A defense force is necessity, a highway system is probably necessity, much further than that and you're shit out of luck.

The self ascribed modern liberal is no such thing.  They are the exact opposite of liberty, as they continually tell people how to do things.  It's supposedly for their own good, but you cannot take control from the populace and be a classical liberal at the same time.  They claim to be liberals because those evil conservatives have all them irritating moral issues.  What they really mean is they want buttsex, open borders, etcetera.  They are however going to tell you how to raise your kids, who you can hire, what kind of church you can have, the list goes on.  Pushing for organic foods is yet another thing the state is trying to tell you to do.  Any compulsory requirement is the opposite of liberty.  The dissolution of the flop house was an infringment on liberty, rent control is an infringment on liberty, our needing a permit and a perc test to stick a septic system on 780 acres is an infringment on liberty.  Control and freedom are incompatible.

Classical liberalism died in this country with the rise of the progressive movement in the late 1800's, and it hasn't resurrected since.  That progressive movement was the rise of fascism in Europe and communism in Russia.  Your education sucks though, so you never learned that they were all the same brand of trash with minor differences.  The only pertinent difference between them was their level of success.  All of them led to more dominant central governments, less liberty.

Instead of expressing disbelief that anyone believes Beck, you should delve into history for yourself.  You needn't go back very far, freedom has had a rather brief, and likely soon to be gone stint.  It's not even hard to find the information.  All you have to do is avoid your school text books, they're approved by those same wolves pretending to be sheep.  You could try some economics while you're at it, truly depressing how well that brain washing has taken.

Uh-huh.

So your fear of buttsex drives your hate against liberals?

And conservatives want to uphold values of living but are against being told how to raise their kids?

Strange. I always had the impression that it was conservatives trying to protect their kiddies from the dangers of buttsex. By the force of law.

But kidding aside: Compulsory requirements (such as laws) aren't the opposite of liberty. They are the borders in which liberty can thrive. Some might argue that borders are nothing but a cage and liberty doesn't exist inside a cage. But unlimited freedom is nothing but chaos. We have this proverb "Your freedom ends where someone elses freedom begins". Rules define where freedom ends. "Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not steal.". 

Ok, demanding that you eat organic foods is not on the same level as not killing your neighbour - and some liberal ideas are as whacky to me (in my case veganism - i assume that's liberal, too) as some viewpoints of the conservative tinfoil brigade - but trying to change the rules of the country doesn't make them fascists.

Oh, and thank you for telling us that our (or my) education sucks. I thought that was funny coming from an american and I had a good laugh.

Let's share buttsex some time.

I knew that would the first comeback.  Bait a hook, works every time.

Kinda depends on the proposed rules, wouldn't ya think?

Predictable as always.  You can't actually read anything that disagrees with your viewpoint or it would be obvious that I just trashed both sides for being control freaks.  I despise federalists in general, liberals are just the more dangerous of the two to me personally.

"Classical liberalism died in this country with the rise of the progressive movement in the late 1800's, and it hasn't resurrected since."

If it's been dead for over a century, it obviously can't be one of the two parties that have frequently held power since.  If conservatives actually were conservatives, marriage licenses would be a violation of the peoples rights.  If the right to have a family isn't one of the unlisted rights, there aren't any.  By definition, anyone that wants the state to control who can get a marriage license has already breeched the requirements for being a real conservative by accepting that government should have anything to do with it at all.

Your argument against unrestricted liberty on the otherhand is quite wonderful.  Unfortunately, you fail to grasp it entirely or you wouldn't be posting such nonsense.  Everything the progressive movement has accomplished has been an infringment on one persons liberty to "help" someone else.  The entire concept of progressing society through government is that you force people to behave in a way you think they should.  It is the opposite of personal liberty.  That nearly every accomplishment has been catastrophic to the target would be poetic if it weren't so damned sad.

Actually, I'm for both.  Not that it matters to you.

Aroddo, off topic but I find your posting style pretty repulsive at times.

Sort of an.. I'm so clever attitude.

detracts hugely from any point you might be trying to make I'm afraid.

It's sort of like when someone says.. I don't smell.. leave it to others to let u know how smelly... or clever.. you might be.

My 2c.