Fascism; What Is It?

By -

Well I see no point in arguing about what is the true meaning of "fascism" when everyone  seems to define it as including anyone but me.   I am still working my way through the Goldberg book and I find it to be quite intelligent, and well worth reading. Just delete the word "fascist" everywhere you find it and read it for the points he makes about the ideas that have won so much popularity among vast segments of the intellectual classes the past 100 years.   Frankly, I have little trust in what "professors" in the current university classes have decided, as their thinking represents the problem to me. 

    I tend to look at politics on this axis. On the one had are those who prefer freedom, free markets, and regard government as a necessary evil to be kept in check and minimized.  Government is dangerous because people are fallible and greedy and not to be trusted with too much power.   Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. 

On the other hand are those that distrust freedom, distrust free markets, distrust businessmen and corporations and prefer that government would control as much as possible.   For example, all those persons in this country who want to replace a free market for medical services and replace it with some sort of single provider government system.    Such people distrust human beings, except people who work for the government.  On the far extreme you would have some kind of Socialist state where the government owns the means of production. 

 You can label these two poles any name you like.   The little end and the Big end, the browns and the blues.  It is the basic concepts that matter. 

Why some people trust government so much, and some so little is an interesting question, which I do not know the answer to.  I would love it if you would explain it to me. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How About Kids Accounts?

By -
posted by Bob Clasen Mr. President, Let's Share the Wealth By DAVID BROOKS Published: February 8, 2005 President Bush said he was open to other people's ideas on how to fix Social Security, so I hope he'll listen to mine. My idea starts with a blunt political observation. Personal accounts - as they are currently envisioned - are going to be hard to pass. Every important Democrat opposes them. Jim McCrery, the Republican who is chairman of the House Social Security subcommittee, says the president's plan will have to fundamentally change if it is to have a chance. So my idea is this: If the president's current version of personal accounts stalls, he should consider another version - one that is more likely to win broad support, and that achieves all the goals of an "ownership society." The personal accounts I'm thinking of would be inspired by a proposal called KidSave, which was floating around in the late 1990's. KidSave wa...
Read more

Democrat Party: "Dependency-Bureaucracy Complex"

By -
by George Will ____________________________ If Sept. 11 had never happened -- if debate about domestic policy had not been drowned out by the roar of war -- the potential domestic ramifications of this election would give it unusual nation-shaping power. To understand why is to understand some of the Democratic rage about the specter of a second term for George W. Bush. He has a multifaceted agenda for weakening crucial components of the Democratic Party, factions that depend on cosseting by the federal government. Consider trial lawyers and organized labor. John Kerry's selection of John Edwards as running mate was a blunder, and not just because Kerry probably will lose Edwards's North Carolina. The Edwards selection ratifies a provocative fact: trial lawyers have become the Democrats' most important faction. This has energized small-business owners, the self-employed, doctors and others who worry that they live one lawsuit away from ruin. Such people, now arous...
Read more

Victory in Fallujah

By -
_____________________ by Ralph Peters New York Post November 11, 2004 -- IN the Second Battle of Fallujah, military operations are ahead of schedule. Our casualties have been blessedly light. The terrorists who haven't fled are being killed by the hundreds. Our troops will soon achieve their goal of eliminating Iraq's key safe haven for terrorists. Our Marines and soldiers have carried the ball inside the 10-yard line. The media's response? Move the goalposts. The legions of pundits ("Will talk for food") now suggest that a win in Fallujah will be meaningless because we failed to kill or capture the terrorist leadership, because some of the thugs ran away and because Fallujah won't resemble Darien, Conn., by next Sunday. On Tuesday, as our troops handily pierced the defenses terrorists had spent months erecting, The New York Times carried two front-page stories implying that our forces were facing possible defeat. The Times' military analysis...
Read more