Noam Chomsky: The GOP is not exactly, classically fascist

[pecksniff]

Story here.

Chomsky, however, draws one distinction between the Trumpified GOP of 2021 and the 1930s fascism of Germany's Adolf Hitler and Italy's Benito Mussolini, a.k.a. Il Duce: the GOP of 2021, for all its faux populism, remains committed to economic "neoliberalism."

Indeed, some fascists of the past, including Spain's Francisco Franco, a.k.a. El Generalissimo, at least believed in having some type of social safety net; Trumpified Republicans don't.

Chomsky told Polychroniou, "The term 'neoliberal proto-fascism' captures well both the features of the current (Republican) Party and the distinction from the fascism of the past. The commitment to the most brutal form of neoliberalism is apparent in the legislative record, crucially the subordination of the Party to private capital, the inverse of classic fascism."

Chomsky, BTW, calls himself a "libertarian socialist," so he's kinda free with political labels. Otherwise, he does appear to be spot-on here.

 

[nowisthetime]

"Indeed, some fascists of the past, including Spain's Francisco Franco, a.k.a. El Generalissimo, at least believed in having some type of social safety net; Trumpified Republicans don't."


This point here is SPOT-ON!

In this largely heterogeneous nation, modern day GOP supporters wish to cut off their noses to spite their faces, in that, they believe social safety nets promote "laziness", nod at the racially-loaded, "welfare queens" term <wink wink>. They simply do not want "those people" to benefit from any social policies. This is essentially what keeps the GOP politicians' seats very warm.

 

[pecksniff]

Even Bismarck, that crusty old Prussian Junker, established social safety nets. Granting some of their demands was his way of keeping the Socialists out of power.

 

[WillJ8787]

Story here.



Chomsky, BTW, calls himself a "libertarian socialist," so he's kinda free with political labels. Otherwise, he does appear to be spot-on here.

Neo-facist....facism(it's definition) is still under debate in academic circles. Authoritarians is probably closers.

They use mix of current law and legislation....the ones that are expedient for their goals.

 

[CornusKousa]

Story here.



Chomsky, BTW, calls himself a "libertarian socialist," so he's kinda free with political labels. Otherwise, he does appear to be spot-on here.

Libertarian socialism is a thing.

Chomsky isn't free with his labels, he's accurate.

Neo-facist....facism(it's definition) is still under debate in academic circles. Authoritarians is probably closers.

They use mix of current law and legislation....the ones that are expedient for their goals.

Authoritarian??

The neo-liberalism says no...the fact that we don't want any centralized authority and control makes us definitively not authoritarian.

The (D)'s and their push for maximum federal authority and control, are the party of authoritarianism.

 

[Dribble]

Fascism is Fascism. Why call it other than what it is? Is it true today’s GOP is different from Hitler? Yes. But it is their goal that matter...not the masks they wear. They are Fascists.

 

[Cubantripod]

Story here.



Chomsky, BTW, calls himself a "libertarian socialist," so he's kinda free with political labels. Otherwise, he does appear to be spot-on here.

That term is an oxymoron.

 

[Cubantripod]

Neo-facist....facism(it's definition) is still under debate in academic circles. Authoritarians is probably closers.

They use mix of current law and legislation....the ones that are expedient for their goals.

The Democrats spent the entire Covid pandemic trying to consolidate more power and the Republicans (who suck in other areas) spent most of the time fighting them. It was great Emperor Biden who said that if we got to 70% immunity, he might let us have a bbq with family.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Fighting a pandemic due in large part to the former guy's incompetence is now being retconned as "Democrats consolidating their power".

Who knew? Que knew!

 

[Rightguide]

A known Communist claims the GOP is fascist.

 

[Rightguide]

Fighting a pandemic due in large part to the former guy's incompetence is now being retconned as "Democrats consolidating their power".

Who knew? Que knew!

Another highly pressurized lie squeaks forth from a wrinkled but wide open space in Texas.

 

[Lazaran]

.
Neoliberal Proto-fascists, committed to the most brutal form of neoliberalism, suborning the party to private capital. Their ultimate goal is to suborn the entire country to private capital.

No thank you.

 

[pecksniff]

Fascism is Fascism. Why call it other than what it is? Is it true today’s GOP is different from Hitler? Yes. But it is their goal that matter...not the masks they wear. They are Fascists.

The goal is different. E.g., it includes no elements of military aggression or territorial gain. It's controlled by business corporations, and they think in entirely different terms. Also, part of the idea classic fascism is to get all of society marching in step to accomplish grand collective goals -- the GOP does not appear to have any such thing in mind.

 

[pecksniff]

A known Communist claims the GOP is fascist.

When will you learn that leftists are not all the same? Nowadays, even invoking the c-word does nothing but date you. You sound like you should be standing next to Phyllis Schlafly at the 1964 GOP Convention. You make Chomsky look young, and he's 92.

 

[Jesus_Ateo]

They're pretty close to fascist. At the very least they're authoritarian. They've made it clear that they're strongly opposed to American-style democracy.

 

[WillJ8787]

When will you learn that leftists are not all the same? Nowadays, even invoking the c-word does nothing but date you. You sound like you should be standing next to Phyllis Schlafly at the 1964 GOP Convention. You make Chomsky look young, and he's 92.

It's too comply.an argument to make, that is why he doesn't do it.

His head will explode

The mice who follow this sort of propaganda would tune out any factual nuanced discussions of how the left isn't monolithic just as they tune out their own parties dissenters (which is vast and large enough to loose them the 2020 election)

This is their problem going forward..." Give me gum gum dumb dumb" is about as deep as they will go.

 

[Dribble]

The goal is different. E.g., it includes no elements of military aggression or territorial gain. It's controlled by business corporations, and they think in entirely different terms. Also, part of the idea classic fascism is to get all of society marching in step to accomplish grand collective goals -- the GOP does not appear to have any such thing in mind.

Again...I fear you are incorrect. Maybe no territorial gain. But when the ex president openly talked about wanting the military to step in and overturn the election...AND NO REPUBLICANS REBUFFED HIM...that tells me if he could have gotten the military to do it...it would have happened. It is intent that matters. This is Fascism...100%

 

[WillJ8787]

Again...I fear you are incorrect. Maybe no territorial gain. But when the ex president openly talked about wanting the military to step in and overturn the election...AND NO REPUBLICANS REBUFFED HIM...that tells me if he could have gotten the military to do it...it would have happened. It is intent that matters. This is Fascism...100%

Read...."How Democracies Die.". It covers this pretty good. Your 100% correct that if the military had supported him then we would be in a whole knew world.

Democracy is being undermined by these Republicans step by step...it's a slow process which will use our internal existing laws and will involve the subversion of election systems through the USA for them to first gain legitimate elected power and then they will dilute existing legislation towards the path of a more authoritarian state of control.

At some point, Republicans in this situation would reveal themselves as actually being for a centralized federal system to control all States and all of us....not for our betterment in terms of education, healthcare, housing and jobs but via police and quasi-military crack downs and the dilution of social programs and safety nets.

We can't let it happen!

 

[toeskr]

Story here.



Chomsky, BTW, calls himself a "libertarian socialist," so he's kinda free with political labels. Otherwise, he does appear to be spot-on here.

Good hell oreo. Did you not get the shit kicked out of you before? Were you not exposed as the simpleton with not only no white friends but no friends... anywhere, anyhow? Anything? No life experiences?

Tell us what you have been up to since your latest ban.

I see that you know how to post out of your ass but all of us fart on occasion. Tell us all about your black friend (s).

 

[toeskr]

Even Bismarck,...

Lawlz.

Too good to be true.

Next it will be quoting ror.
Wait...

 

[CornusKousa]

When will you learn that leftists are not all the same? Nowadays, even invoking the c-word does nothing but date you. You sound like you should be standing next to Phyllis Schlafly at the 1964 GOP Convention. You make Chomsky look young, and he's 92.

You're all close enough, collectivist authoritarians.

Democracy is being undermined by these Republicans step by step...it's a slow process which will use our internal existing laws and will involve the subversion of election systems through the USA for them to first gain legitimate elected power and then they will dilute existing legislation towards the path of a more authoritarian state of control.

At some point, Republicans in this situation would reveal themselves as actually being for a centralized federal system to control all States and all of us....not for our betterment in terms of education, healthcare, housing and jobs but via police and quasi-military crack downs and the dilution of social programs and safety nets.

We can't let it happen!

Explains how we're using our existing laws to win to block (D) authoritarianism.

Then explains how at some point (R)'s are going to do EXACTLY what (D)'s have been doing all along.....so they can de-regulate?? and liberalize our system???

Thanks for explaining why (R)'s are NOT the authoritarians here

Poor willJ and the other lefties will tie themselves in knots trying to explain how it's really the de-regulators and de-centralizers (the R'z) that are the fascist. They want to give you maximum liberty and for you to keep as much of your labor, property and money as possible. HOW HORRIBLE!!

LOL

 

[pecksniff]

Then explains how at some point (R)'s are going to do EXACTLY what (D)'s have been doing all along.....so they can de-regulate?? and liberalize our system???

What the GOP is always trying to do in the economic sphere is everything and exactly what the corporations want. It is not an economic-libertarian agenda as such, it is only a pro-established-business-interests agenda. A consistent economic libertarian would be just as hostile to crony capitalism and fat government contracts as to high taxes, but you won't see the GOP Congresscritters crusading against the former. They can no longer even be relied on to be free-traders -- they never pushed back against Trump's protectionism, which was the opposite of libertarian.

Chomsky is entirely right. "The commitment to the most brutal form of neoliberalism is apparent in the legislative record, crucially the subordination of the Party to private capital, the inverse of classic fascism."

 

[pecksniff]

You're all close enough, collectivist authoritarians.

That is not true. The Democrats are not Social Democrats (if only!), Social Democrats are not Socialists, Socialists are not Communists, the Greens are their own thing off to one side, and none is "close enough" to the others to justify your lumping them all together as Communists as you always do. You might as well equate the Libertarians with the Nazis, there would be exactly the same measure of justification for it.

 

[CornusKousa]

What the GOP is always trying to do in the economic sphere is everything and exactly what the corporations want.

That's both parties, the only difference is which corporations.

It is not an economic-libertarian agenda as such, it is only a pro-established-business-interests agenda.

Which is largely an economically liberal agenda.

Capitalism is the liberal economic model.

A consistent economic libertarian would be just as hostile to crony capitalism and fat government contracts as to high taxes, but you won't see the GOP Congresscritters crusading against the former. They can no longer even be relied on to be free-traders -- they never pushed back against Trump's protectionism, which was the opposite of libertarian.

That's why they are neo-liberal nationalist, not globalist anarcho-libertarians.

Chomsky is entirely right. "The commitment to the most brutal form of neoliberalism is apparent in the legislative record, crucially the subordination of the Party to private capital, the inverse of classic fascism."

See, even ol' Chomsky understands they are neoliberals.

And he's right about it being the inverse of fascism.

So?? What's wrong with the government being subordinate to private citizens??? Especially the ones doing the do and making things happen??

 

[pecksniff]

That's why they are neo-liberal nationalist, not globalist anarcho-libertarians.

"Globalist" is always better than "nationalist," and "neo-liberal nationalist" is a contradiction in terms. Eliminating barriers to international trade and economic globalization is the main point of modern neo-liberalism.

So?? What's wrong with the government being subordinate to private citizens???

Nothing, if those "private citizens" are simply the voters. A lot, if those "private citizens" are corporate executives and boards of directors.