Skip to main content

View Diary: DKos Polling Aggregate: Is This Why Republicans Hate Education? (44 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Franco's Spain did have a religious aspect (0+ / 0-)

    Catholicism was promoted by the state, and the Catholic Church promoted fascism. The Republic that was overthrown in the Spanish Civil War had been anti-clerical.

    The thing that's different here is that there's no likelihood that elections would be ended. So rather than out-and-out fascism, we'd have an increasingly corporate state, but with formal trappings of constitutional government still in place to whatever degree the ruling class found convenient.

    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

    by MichaelNY on Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 05:08:47 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Are you kidding? "no likelihood that elections (0+ / 0-)

      would be ended?" They had elections in Soviet Russia and Iraq under Saddam, too, and who can doubt that Republicans aren't trying to get to the point of sham elections. While Hitler did end elections after declaring a state of emergency, and considered dmocracy decadent, virtually every other fascist government at least did a feint toward holding elections.

      Two hundred million Americans, and there ain't two good catchers among 'em. --Casey Stengel

      by LongTom on Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 06:28:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

        When were there elections in Mussolini's Italy or Franco's Spain? Those are the two classic fascist regimes.

        "Sham elections" is exactly the point - to keep the sham of constitutional government while making it an empty shell.

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 12:52:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Under Mussolini, there were sham elections for (0+ / 0-)

          Parliament in 1929 and 1934. Franco pretended to restore the monarchy, and so I guess he and Hitler are about the only fascist dictators who never held "elections."

          For you to say there's "no likelihood that elections would be ended" under Republicans is optimistic bullshit. Whatever elections are left under a Republican-dominated government won't be any more "real" than those under Mussolini or Brezhnev.

          Two hundred million Americans, and there ain't two good catchers among 'em. --Casey Stengel

          by LongTom on Sun Sep 30, 2012 at 09:47:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What part of my "sham elections" paragraph (0+ / 0-)

            was unclear to you? It's irritating to get a response that purports to be an argument to a point I clearly didn't make.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Sun Sep 30, 2012 at 01:06:26 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Okay, so what IS your point? (0+ / 0-)

              When you said there's "no chance that elections would be ended" in the US under Republicans, you were talking about BOTH real AND sham elections? The retention of sham elections isn't much of a comfort, is it?

              Two hundred million Americans, and there ain't two good catchers among 'em. --Casey Stengel

              by LongTom on Sun Sep 30, 2012 at 05:39:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No, it isn't a comfort (0+ / 0-)

                Is this unclear? I'll clarify any point that isn't clear if you ask me to:

                there's no likelihood that elections would be ended. So rather than out-and-out fascism, we'd have an increasingly corporate state, but with formal trappings of constitutional government still in place to whatever degree the ruling class found convenient.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Sun Sep 30, 2012 at 10:43:14 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site