Control
February 27th, 2008 by jacob
I am curious, all of our left leaning friends here declare fascism to be anathema, but do they really know what fascism means? Here is a set of current laws, enacted for the public good, or some well meaning official tried to enact them.
1. You are required by law to sterilise your pet
2. You are not allowed to smoke in public
3. You are not allowed to own a gun
4. Fast food companies are required to put calorie information next to the item
5. Tobacco companies are liable for people using their product correctly
6. The government sets the temperature in your home
7. You are not allowed to smoke in your own home
8. You are not allowed to serve your own 18 year old son having a beer at your kitchen table
9. You are not allowed to park an SUV on the street
10. If you are obeise you can be denied government health benifits
My question is are these fascist in nature or not? Any and all are welcome to answer.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 27th, 2008 at 9:14 am and is filed under Philosophy. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 27th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Not to be interpreted as an endorsement of these proposals, I am sure that I could find equally intrusively laws or proposed laws put forward by the Right. We could start with defining who you can marry…
February 27th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Depends on how fascist is defined. Marc, proprietor of Those Fascists summarizes it as “Because if I don’t like it, it must be fascist”.
February 27th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Jacob,
#4 is not fascist. It is required on food you buy in the store. Sometimes people need to know what is in the sauces or mains so as to avert allergies or calorie intake.
#8 doesn’t hold true if you are on a military reservation. Elsewhere it would be fascist in my own home under my supervision.
#9 is stupid. I don’t park mine on the street because of all the racing julios we have. Don’t want it to be a statistic as some on my street already have been.
The marrying one that Troll eludes to might also be fascist. Then again, getting hauled to court because you refuse photographic services for a homosexual wedding DEFINATELY is fascist!
February 27th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
“…getting hauled to court because you refuse photographic services for a homosexual wedding DEFINATELY is fascist!”
Um…I don’t hink the court systems really play a role in a fascist world.
February 27th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
I guess #4 is sort of fascist, because if you did not know a Big Mac was a high calorie item you’d have to be kind of clueless. But then again, it is helpful to know what you are getting when you buy something, so as much as I hate to admit it I think there is a role for government here.
February 27th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Troll,
“Um…I don’t hink the court systems really play a role in a fascist world”
Care to substantiate that?
February 27th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
fascism: “a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition”
does requiring restaurants to provide nutrition information qualify? eh, I’m not so sure about that…
also, where’s “no puffin’ on a pot pipe” in your list?
February 27th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
“#8 doesn’t hold true if you are on a military reservation.”
My understanding is that this has been changed, and that one must be 21 even on post. I’ll try to verify that for you.
February 27th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
>> where’s “no puffin’ on a pot pipe” in your list?
I must agree with you there, puffalump.
February 27th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Flinn,
that has become the common usage, anything we do not like is fascist. the question I am asking, so then, since we cannot use ‘I dont like it’ as a criteria, what is.
February 27th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Marshmallow,
where did you get your definition from, which dictionary?
As for the pot pipe, you and Jack may very well be right. Which in turn opens up a whole new can of worms, can we back away from that, but I think it would make for a kewel posting some time in the future.
February 27th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
All,
Is government outlawing suicide ‘fascist’?
February 27th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Care to substantiate that?
I am just saying that seeing as how the judiciary system is in part a check on the legislative and administrative branches, it does not follow that having your case heard in court is in keeping with a “fascist” philosophy.
February 27th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Sorry, Troll, but to what does “that” refer?
February 27th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Eric,
utter blather. the courts in Germany where used to rubber stamp the rabid antisemitism of the Nuremberg laws.
February 27th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Joe - I disagree on #4. It takes all responsibility away from the consumer. People claim ignorance at all levels of consumerism and our courts are swamped with suits taking retailers, food providers and service providers to task over utter nonsense.
The average person can handle an occasional Big Mac. If someone weighs 500 pounds and sues McD’s over the calorie and fat content - and wins - look out for gov’t cheese. You’ll get a hunk of fat free mozarella with your red wine.
February 27th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
webster’s
February 28th, 2008 at 12:40 am
Why do you automatically assume all “left-leaning” people would support the items you list. I’m against most of the items on your list, so there. As someone pointed out you also left out government regulation of drugs. And you left out interference in people’s sex lives (though I suspect you think that’s OK). Or how about attempts to censor the Internet and other media? What your list mostly proves is how silly it is to assume that everything you are against is necessarily the fault of people on the left. There are plenty of people on the right who want to take away people’s liberty.
February 28th, 2008 at 1:36 am
i think there’s a hierarchal aspect of fascism. There’s the feurer or duce or pharaoh at the top, who enjoys all the privileges of the society, on down to an “inferior” class of slaves of some sort. There’s some sort of “social darwin” idea that justifies the higher-ups having more privileges, etc.
I think in this list you’re using fascist and totalitarian interchangeably. A fascist regime is about an ideology that justifies a social hierarchy. A totalitarian regime is all about control. I think the items on your list are moving toward the totalitarian side of things, but not toward fascism. that’s what the republican agenda does.
February 28th, 2008 at 8:57 am
Jacob,
Do you really seriously wish to suggest that our court system is even close to the equivalent of the “courts” of WWII Germany? Again, you all have so little faith in the US Constitution and the system our founders put in place - cue the hysterical paranoia…
February 28th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Troll,
The idea of being taken to court for refusing to do a service is ludicrous! Kinda like a detailing business that only does cars worth over a hundred grand and you bring in your Toyota Camry. It’s okay to refuse you because I don’t want to spend my time on your garbage.
Also, when Congress enacts laws and the court system blatantly subverts or ignores them, is that the kind of system you were referring to?
February 28th, 2008 at 10:07 am
zimzo,
“Why do you automatically assume all “left-leaning” people would support the items you list. I’m against most of the items on your list, so there”
actually I had no one in mind. I feel that there is a lot of misunderstanding as to what facism really is. Even the dictionary definition provided by SPMM does not really get it. You are making assumptions here, not born out by the words in the post.
February 28th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Marshmallow,
“i think there’s a hierarchal aspect of fascism”
interesting, that is probably true, but is that just human nature us v. then, or is it explicit to the idealogy?
“I think in this list you’re using fascist and totalitarian interchangeably.”
Am I? Or are you extrapolating what I wrote above to vigorously?
” A fascist regime is about an ideology that justifies a social hierarchy”"
That does appear to be your take on it, as you wrote above, again is that outcome engineered, or stumbled into?
February 28th, 2008 at 10:14 am
Eric,
“Do you really seriously wish to suggest that our court system is even close to the equivalent of the “courts” of WWII Germany?”
No, you just made what I considered to be a careless statement. Courts can be fascist in nature, there is nothing intrinsic about a court that shields it from taken on the ideology.
February 28th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
It’s been engineered in Fascist regimes I can think of. Italy and Germany. They were all about the “social darwinism” and spent all kinds of time coming up with racial stratifications that put western europeans on the top rung, and justified using the “lesser” groups or whatever they called them as expendable slave labor. The term Fascist comes from ancient Rome, they had a stratified, top-down sort of society. and think of the Pyramid imagery in Egypt.
February 28th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
The term “fascist” comes from fasces.