• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News

Status
Not open for further replies.
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
speculawyer said:
Fascism is if we just give into the corporations and don't make them pay much in taxes and allow them control the government through lobbying and campaign donations. And Citizen's United and McCutchen moved us in that direction.
Click to expand...
That would be news to Mussolini and Hitler.

And FDR. ;)
 
S

speculawyer

Member
benjipwns said:
That would be news to Mussolini and Hitler.

And FDR. ;)
Click to expand...

No, it really wouldn't.


Fascist corporatism[edit]

Fascism's theory of economic corporatism involved management of sectors of the economy by government or privately controlled organizations (corporations). Each trade union or employer corporation would, theoretically, represent its professional concerns, especially by negotiation of labour contracts and the like. This method, it was theorized, could result in harmony amongst social classes.[31] Authors have noted, however, that de facto economic corporatism was also used to reduce opposition and reward political loyalty.[32]

In Italy from 1922 until 1943, corporatism became influential amongst Italian nationalists led by Benito Mussolini. The Charter of Carnaro gained much popularity as the prototype of a 'corporative state', having displayed much within its tenets as a guild system combining the concepts of autonomy and authority in a special synthesis.[33] Alfredo Rocco spoke of a corporative state and declared corporatist ideology in detail. Rocco would later become a member of the Italian Fascist regime Fascismo.[34]

Italian Fascism involved a corporatist political system in which economy was collectively managed by employers, workers and state officials by formal mechanisms at the national level.[35] This non-elected form of state officializing of every interest into the state was professed to reduce the marginalization of singular interests (as would allegedly happen by the unilateral end condition inherent in the democratic voting process)
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism#Fascist_corporatism
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Uh, right. Fascism recognized the failings of Communism in destroying old orders and institutions, and sought instead to co-opt them under the State. And justified its totalitarian collectivism via the Nation rather than by the Class.

Thus the bundle of sticks.

As such, Mussolini and Hitler (and FDR) didn't do away with or nationalize corporations, unions, the church, etc. but instead decreased the number (in Hitler's case this was often down to "one" because of his paranoia) and increased the size of the institutions so that all the "important powers" of society could meet and enact the "best path" for the State.

Make no mistake. A corporation wasn't free to produce whatever it wanted on terms it wanted, it had to follow State diktat, but unlike in the Communist countries, the corporation was still free to profit and obstinately existed in "private" hands. The fascists recognized that the individual power of institutions including the corporation but also the union and church and social groups were strong unifying forces that maintained efficiency much better by "operating under their own ways" to enact State policy rather than also being managed by the State. This is why they were much more successful than the Soviets in not killing their citizens trying to improve the economy. (Hitler was then free to kill them for other more rational reasons.)

The institutions went along because something is better than nothing, and eliminating all your competitors is a small price to pay for being even further entrenched as an elite class or group. The alternative was the State crushing them and replacing them.

In fact, one of the very institutions so important to the Fascist regimes was "the law" which is why Hitler spent so much time getting t's crossed and i's dotted when he likely could have seized power much earlier by toppling the Weimar regime in a coup. (And why "just following orders" wound up being the defense used...it was the law.)

Citizens United, campaign donations, lobbying, and other aspects of the freedom of the press are in opposition to fascism because they provide avenues for inter-corporate competition. The fascist state controlled the press and prevented inter-corporate competition because inter-corporate competition allows corporations to pursue their own ends instead of the ends of the Nation which was the single priority and duty of citizens in a fascist state.

Alter is claiming that corporations and citizens owe a duty to the State, namely America, and should be signing "loyalty oaths" to it where they pledge to act only in the interests of the State with an explicit threat that anyone who doesn't Pledge Allegiance will be considered an enemy of America. This, on the other hand, is pretty much fascism.


EDIT: For some reference, from your own Wiki quote:
Fascism's theory of economic corporatism involved management of sectors of the economy by government or privately controlled organizations (corporations). Each trade union or employer corporation would, theoretically, represent its professional concerns, especially by negotiation of labour contracts and the like. This method, it was theorized, could result in harmony amongst social classes.[31] Authors have noted, however, that de facto economic corporatism was also used to reduce opposition and reward political loyalty.[32]

In Italy from 1922 until 1943, corporatism became influential amongst Italian nationalists led by Benito Mussolini. The Charter of Carnaro gained much popularity as the prototype of a 'corporative state', having displayed much within its tenets as a guild system combining the concepts of autonomy and authority in a special synthesis.[33] Alfredo Rocco spoke of a corporative state and declared corporatist ideology in detail. Rocco would later become a member of the Italian Fascist regime Fascismo.[34]

Italian Fascism involved a corporatist political system in which economy was collectively managed by employers, workers and state officials by formal mechanisms at the national level.[35] This non-elected form of state officializing of every interest into the state was professed to reduce the marginalization of singular interests (as would allegedly happen by the unilateral end condition inherent in the democratic voting process)
Click to expand...

EDIT2: Fascism lost The War but basically won the war.
 
A

alstein

Member
The problem is corporatism is just as much as subversion of the free market as communism. Both are about destroying competitive markets and market power equality between labor/capital/consumer- both of which are the cornerstone of a free market economy.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
RustyNails said:
In 2010, the polls showed a record low approval for incumbent re-election, along with a record high of voters saying their Congressman deserves to be re-elected.

We all know Democrats got that ass beat in 2010. But right now in 2014, it's looking even worse than 2010:

And for the first time ever, majority of people believe their own Congressman does not deserve to be re-elected:

What does this all mean? I don't really know, especially since we gerrymandered the fuck out of districts in 2010. There's conflicting polling for sure when you consider all the other races where GOP is leading.
Click to expand...

Most people don't know who their congressman is, and also about 40% of the country thinks democrats control congress.
 
A

Avon Barksdale

Member
PhoenixDark said:
Democrats will have a net loss of seats in the house imo. Just don't get the impression turnout is going to be decent, which is probably why democrats are so desperately bringing up impeachment. Yea republicans started it and some are serious about it...but I think we all know it's not going to happen. Although admittedly, if Obama goes through with an executive action on immigration it could open the door.
Click to expand...

How dare Democrats bring up something Republicans brought up first!
 
F

Fuchsdh

Member
Doesn't the whole inversion thing sort itself out? All you have to do is cut eligibility of those companies to participate in government contracts and remove any subsidies they get. The companies either rediscover their American heritage or American companies fill in the gaps.

Absent congressional support for something that would hurt "their" companies as well as the ones they love to hate, though, I don't see how much he can do.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Brownback lol

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R) offered a theory to KSHB-TV when asked why significant numbers of Republican primary voters cast ballots against incumbents on Tuesday.

Brownback won, but his little-known primary opponent Jennifer Winn (R) received 37% of the vote.

Said Brownback: "I think a big part of it is Barack Obama. That a lot of people are so irritated at what the president is doing, they just, they want somebody to throw a brick."
Click to expand...
What a buffoon.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
Now that the House has approved a lawsuit against President Obama and impeachment cries have increased, a few conservative groups have put together "National Impeach Obama Week."

The groups are organizing protests during the week of August 23 to call for Obama's impeachment, according to a blog post by activist Robert Ogden on the conservative blogging site, Western Journalism.

"Gerald Ford said after the Nixon was forced to resign under threat of impeachment that an 'impeachable offense' is whatever the Congress will vote for at a given time. We are not here to argue about what is impeachable, but to demand that this lawless, subversive and anti-American president be removed from office," the organizers wrote on the Impeach Obama Week website.

The groups offer a list of Obama's impeachable offenses and call on other activists to organize rallies during the last week of August.

Only a few groups have endorsed the impeachment week so far, including the Tea Party Patriots of Brookhaven in New York and the Ventura County Tea Party in California.
Click to expand...

QU2Gk4q.gif
 
A

Averon

Member
"Gerald Ford said after the Nixon was forced to resign under threat of impeachment that an 'impeachable offense' is whatever the Congress will vote for at a given time. We are not here to argue about what is impeachable, but to demand that this lawless, subversive and anti-American president be removed from office,"
Click to expand...


They can't even name one, credible impeachable offense. "We don't like him!!" is apparently good enough for them.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) basically seems to have unwittingly endorsed a WPA program.

Robert Doar, former commissioner of the New York City Human Resources Administration, administered welfare programs to New York’s neediest during the height of the Great Recession.

In that roll, he made controversial moves that helped New York slash the number of people on welfare from more than 1 million to fewer than 350,000.

In a paper for the American Enterprise Institute – a conservative think tank – Doar outlines some of the difficult lessons he learned about how to tackle welfare, and what the nation as a whole could learn from his experience reforming New York's welfare programs under Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

The biggest lesson, he says, is that people need to take responsibility for their own future. That means social workers need to resist the urge to take credit for their clients' success, and it means welfare recipients need to get a job.

“It makes... their lives just much more productive,” he said. “It also brings greater income into their household.” Asked what people should do when they can't find a job, Doar said his department put people in programs that mirrored the rigors of work, and that helped create a schedule and a mindset that prepared them for work and gave them the confidence to believe they could do a job.
Click to expand...
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/lessons-of-a-welfare-reformer-130850944.html
 
A

Aylinato

Member
benjipwns said:
They will. The upset against Snyder dissipated months ago.

Schauer got the nomination by default because nobody else was willing to waste money as early as he was. Only he didn't spend it on anything useful and I would be reluctant to term his operation a "campaign" in any traditional sense. Although it's certainly not like Virg's.
Click to expand...


Synder is in a bad spot.

Virg was just awful
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Aaron Strife said:
But I thought it was Democrats who were talking about impeaching Obama?
Click to expand...

Yes . . . just a few pages back, Benji explained to us that it is just the Democrats talking about impeachment, not Republicans. And I learned that FDR was a fascist.

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said Sunday that Republicans should take a “serious look” at impeaching President Obama if he uses executive action to expand deferrals for illegal immigrants.

"I think Congress has to sit down and have a serious look at the rest of this Constitution and that includes that 'I' word that we don't want to say," King said in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.”

ADVERTISEMENT

King said that if Obama moved ahead with an order to prevent the deportation of more illegal immigrants amid the border crisis, lawmakers would be forced to act.
"I think then we have to sit down and take a look," King said. "Where would we draw the line otherwise? If that’s not enough to bring that about, then I don’t know what would be."

King is one of a handful of GOP lawmakers to suggest impeachment, even as House leaders dismiss those calls.
Click to expand...
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/2...-immigration-action-could-lead-to-impeachment
 
A

Aylinato

Member
speculawyer said:
Yes . . . just a few pages back, Benji explained to us that it is just the Democrats talking about impeachment, not Republicans. And I learned that FDR was a fascist.


http://thehill.com/homenews/house/2...-immigration-action-could-lead-to-impeachment
Click to expand...

Benji is in a bubble if he believes republicans haven't been talking about impeachment since he got into office. (Note to benji, don't make me dog through every instance of republicans stating to impeach Obama for the last 6 years, I'll do it if you deny it once more)
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
speculawyer said:
Yes . . . just a few pages back, Benji explained to us that it is just the Democrats talking about impeachment, not Republicans. And I learned that FDR was a fascist.


http://thehill.com/homenews/house/2...-immigration-action-could-lead-to-impeachment
Click to expand...

BUT BUT BUT DEMOCRATS!!!

What’s that, you say? Republicans keep bringing it up? Sure, there’s that elected official Sarah Palin who started the whole frenzy a few weeks ago. Funny how we’re always told not to take the former Alaska governor seriously, until just about everybody in the media contradicts itself and, you know…does.

Then there’s Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, who also broached the I-word on Tuesday, except the Huck hasn’t been running the show in the home of the Razorbacks since 2007 (and is now a Fox News host). Elected officials like congressman Steve King (R-Iowa) over the weekend, or Walter Jones (N.C.), Steve Stockman (Texas) Michele Bachmann (Minnesota) and Louie Gohmert (Texas) also have raised the issue, leaving 229 Republicans in Congress who haven’t, or less than one percent.

Overall, according to a Review of the Congressional Record by The Hill, Democrats have said the word impeachment 86 times on the House floor since the start of the 113th Congress.

Republicans? Four whole times.

No matter–it’s still all the rage on cable news—and especially on one channel. But don’t take my word for it: Here’s stats guru (and America’s most respected election prognosticator) Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com and his analysis through July 30th alone:
Click to expand...

Even PoliGAF's man boner Nate Silver said it!!

For every mention of impeachment on Fox News in July, there have been five on liberal-leaning MSNBC. This data comes from a Lexis-Nexis search of transcripts on each network. It counts each mention of the words “impeach” or “impeachment.” The terms were used 32 times in a single episode of MSNBC’s “The Ed Show”. Fox News has 95 mentions of impeachment, and MSNBC 448. That works out to about 2.7 mentions per hour of original programming on MSNBC, or once every 22 minutes.
Click to expand...

http://www.mediaite.com/online/conc...86-4-lead-over-gop-in-mentioning-impeachment/
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
If the so-called "Texas Miracle" is proof that conservative policies lead to unbridled economic success, then how come we don't see that happening in..oh, pretty much every far right Red state then?
 
W

WayneMorse

Banned
Oblivion said:
If the so-called "Texas Miracle" is proof that conservative policies lead to unbridled economic success, then how come we don't see that happening in..oh, pretty much every far right Red state then?
Click to expand...

The Texas "miracle" has nothing to do with conservative policies, the majority of business moves to Texas were because the Perry administration offered big cash rewards to businesses who moved. Government intervention in the markets.
 
Metaphoreus

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
Aylinato said:
Benji is in a bubble if he believes republicans haven't been talking about impeachment since he got into office. (Note to benji, don't make me dog through every instance of republicans stating to impeach Obama for the last 6 years, I'll do it if you deny it once more)
Click to expand...

(Note to benji:

EgiCsIo.gif
)
 
A

Averon

Member
WayneMorse said:
The Texas "miracle" has nothing to do with conservative policies, the majority of business moves to Texas were because the Perry administration offered big cash rewards to businesses who moved. Government intervention in the markets.
Click to expand...

Which, theoretically, conservative are suppose to be against. Of course, what conservatives say and what they actually do seldom match.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Oblivion said:
If the so-called "Texas Miracle" is proof that conservative policies lead to unbridled economic success, then how come we don't see that happening in..oh, pretty much every far right Red state then?
Click to expand...

Well it is happening in North Dakota too. But I just can't put my finger on why those two red states are doing so well but others like Kansas & Mississippi are not. Hmmm, what ever could it be?
self-avatar-quote
 
B

Bam Bam Baklava

Member
It's becoming more and more clear that no matter how much the economy improves unless it does something miraculous no one will care.

Not with every news channel going CRISIS SCANDAL CRISIS SCANDAL in 24/7 rotation.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Bam Bam Baklava said:
It's becoming more and more clear that no matter how much the economy improves unless it does something miraculous no one will care.

Not with every news channel going CRISIS SCANDAL CRISIS SCANDAL in 24/7 rotation.
Click to expand...

It is crisis more than scandal. Very few scandals. I've been thinking of making a thread on the summer from hell 2014 . . . Malaysian Jet lost, Ukraine crisis, Egypt meltdown, Crimea, Israel/Gaza, Ebola, Malaysian Jet shot down, Libya melting down, ISIS takes over part of Iraq, cold war is back, etc. Things are out of control.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
speculawyer said:
It is crisis more than scandal. Very few scandals. I've been thinking of making a thread on the summer from hell 2014 . . . Malaysian Jet lost, Ukraine crisis, Egypt meltdown, Crimea, Israel/Gaza, Ebola, Malaysian Jet shot down, Libya melting down, ISIS takes over part of Iraq, cold war is back, etc. Things are out of control.
Click to expand...

Didn't you know? Obama shot down the jet while simultaneously infecting the middle easy with Ebola and kicking Israel. huge scandal that you'll only read about on Red State, Breitbart, and Drudge.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
speculawyer said:
Well it is happening in North Dakota too. But I just can't put my finger on why those two red states are doing so well but others like Kansas & Mississippi are not. Hmmm, what ever could it be?
self-avatar-quote
Click to expand...

So you're saying said growth is happening due to reasons that have very little if any at all, to do with conservative cure all of tax cuts and deregulation? :O

The funny thing is that even when conservative standard bearer, Ronaldus Magnus enacted his tax cuts, even during what everyone knows as the greatest period of economic growth since the dawn of civilization, Reagan still wound up losing revenue. Now what do you think would happen in a place like Kansas, that wasn't exactly an economic powerhouse to begin with?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom