BF2S Forums [D&ST Political Slider 2010]

eleven bravo wrote:

dude.   youre the one that brought race up.  you made a claim, now grow a pair of nuts and back it up or move along.

This.

again, show me where I defined racism.  not hard at all lowing.

eleven bravo wrote:

again, show me where I defined racism.  not hard at all lowing.

again, if you have any sort of postal evidence that I am a racist defined racism, please provide it. If not, you are nothing more than a typical liberal retard who can not form an argument without using your typical liberal retarded dismissals, denials, and re-directions. You can not back up your argument or your claim with any factual evidence and toe to toe debate

eleven bravo wrote:

again, if you have any sort of postal evidence that I am a racist defined racism, please provide it. If not, you are nothing more than a typical liberal retard who can not form an argument without using your typical liberal retarded dismissals, denials, and re-directions. You can not back up your argument or your claim with any factual evidence and toe to toe debate

Actually that is the argument, you never defined it, all you have done is throw it around and never in the context of the definition of the word.

You have defined it by your usage, and it has always been wrong.

eleven bravo wrote:

its like debating somebody with an 8th grade education

you do not debate, you are the king in this forum of one line smart ass comments that contribute nothing to the discussion at hand.

eleven bravo wrote:

so you cant.  pebble time

I have adopted your standard of proof I guess, I don't need any......all I have is your idiocy and misuse of the word.

eleven bravo wrote:

coming from you lowing I take that as a compliment.  Im just playing your game of deflection and dismissal.  you have yet to provide a single shread of evidence to support your claim.  not a single one!

as I said, go back and read your own posts and the context of which you use the word, this forum is proof. That pretty much is all there is to it.

and if you are stupid enough to consider being compared to ruis a compliment, so be it, enjoy your compliment

eleven bravo wrote:

hey dude dont get all hissy at me.  its not my fault the only way you could back up a claim is with insults instead of evidence.

I didn't insult, I complimented you remember?......or don't you know the definition of that word either?

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

fine go with what he already did.

fascism is also private companies controlled by govt. Anyway you can deny that?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31701

I know I know ya hate it, but...time for you to learn ot live with it what it means....Especially since you all are on a back to grassroots definition kick and all.

What is economic fascism? Define it, in your own words.

coulda swore I just did that.......oh well...........economic fascism as I meant it, is partial of the whole word fascism definition..

the part I was referring to is govt. control over private industry......It has happened and it fits in the definition of fascsim.

No you didn't. No it hasn't. No it doesn't.


In any case, just to avoid any confusion and keep it nice and simple for you, fascism = right, Obama = left (by US standards)

The terms fascist and socialist are pretty much mutually exclusive.

You've called him both. That doesn't make sense. It's like complaining he's too short and then complaining he's too tall. If you compared him to Stalin at least that would show show degree of consistency...

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Now that I think about it.. some of those highlighted points are where the Right complains he doesn't fall in line with..lol.

They say..
He doesn't wear the flag pendant everywhere he goes. (1)
He is hurting the Military (4)
He waste money supporting the arts. Uni professors are indoctrinating students to be liberal. (11)
Weak on National Security (7)
Isn't tough on crime. (12)
Supports Unions. (10)

Try reading the definition of fascism, and not what someone wrote as the characteristics of Hitlers Germany.

Those are the 14 characteristics of fascism as widely used by academics. They are not the charateristics of Hitler's Germany, they are the common elements between all fascist regimes. As you would know if you'd bothered checking his link:

Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism.

The OED definition of fascism is:

Fascism

/fashiz’m/

  • noun 1 an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government. 2 extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

Which does not describe the current administration in the US at all. Authoritarian? Right-wing? It just doesn't fit.

Though, your views on Islam could easily be described as being intolerant and extremely right-wing and therefore fascist. But there isn't much of a case for anything based on simple definitions of fascism, because, as even Wikipedia tells us:

Fascism is an authoritarian, nationalist  and corporatist ideology, but there is no single established definition of fascism.

What we have to go off when defining fascism, are papers by academics. The exact sort of paper Kmarion posted extracts from.

eleven bravo wrote:

its like debating somebody with an 8th grade education

I fail to see how it differs at all.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2010-05-04 11:31:32)

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

What is economic fascism? Define it, in your own words.

coulda swore I just did that.......oh well...........economic fascism as I meant it, is partial of the whole word fascism definition..

the part I was referring to is govt. control over private industry......It has happened and it fits in the definition of fascsim.

No you didn't. No it hasn't. No it doesn't.


In any case, just to avoid any confusion and keep it nice and simple for you, fascism = right, Obama = left (by US standards)

The terms fascist and socialist are pretty much mutually exclusive.

You've called him both. That doesn't make sense. It's like complaining he's too short and then complaining he's too tall. If you compared him to Stalin at least that would show show degree of consistency...

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Now that I think about it.. some of those highlighted points are where the Right complains he doesn't fall in line with..lol.

They say..
He doesn't wear the flag pendant everywhere he goes. (1)
He is hurting the Military (4)
He waste money supporting the arts. Uni professors are indoctrinating students to be liberal. (11)
Weak on National Security (7)
Isn't tough on crime. (12)
Supports Unions. (10)

Try reading the definition of fascism, and not what someone wrote as the characteristics of Hitlers Germany.

Those are the 14 characteristics of fascism as widely used by academics. They are not the charateristics of Hitler's Germany, they are the common elements between all fascist regimes. As you would know if you'd bothered checking his link:

Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism.

The OED definition of fascism is:

Fascism

/fashiz’m/

  • noun 1 an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government. 2 extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

Which does not describe the current administration in the US at all. Authoritarian? Right-wing? It just doesn't fit.

Though, your views on Islam could easily be described as being intolerant and extremely right-wing and therefore fascist. But there isn't much of a case for anything based on simple definitions of fascism, because, as even Wikipedia tells us:

Fascism is an authoritarian, nationalist  and corporatist ideology, but there is no single established definition of fascism.

What we have to go off when defining fascism, are papers by academics. The exact sort of paper Kmarion posted extracts from.

eleven bravo wrote:

its like debating somebody with an 8th grade education

I fail to see how it differs at all.

fas·cism   /ˈfæʃɪzəm/  Show Spelled[fash-iz-uhm]  Show IPA
–noun
1.(sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.


now lets see, a govt. having complete power, ( all democrat control which he has used to ram rod his programs.)

forcibly suppressing oppostion and criticism ( a proponent of the fairness doctrine )  check.

regimenting all industry and commerce ( now auto and health care industries are govt controlled for starters, he also decided to take control over how much a private citizen can make).

emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism ( Hmmmm Henry Gates Jr. the nutty proffessor " the ( white) police acted stupidly" and the ft hood shooter " lets not jump to any conclusions"


again here is my argument.....how can you deny this, (I mean with facts and not insults.)
as of yet, no one hs addressed these points of argument

Dilbert_X wrote:

The North Korean 'govt' has survived over a remarkable period of time, so has Cuba's, thats the point.

My dear Dilbert ... have you lost you reasoning capabilities as of late?

Survived and success is two completely different words, you can supress your own people for a remarkable amount of time, doesn't mean your government is a success ... Cuba on the other hand is an entirely different matter, Cuba albeit having a dictator-like leader is not an extreme form of government, Castro have build Cuba to be the best functioning communist state in the world ... he practice communism like it was meant to be, not perfect but still ...

eleven bravo wrote:

lowing wrote:

fas·cism   /ˈfæʃɪzəm/  Show Spelled[fash-iz-uhm]  Show IPA
–noun
1.(sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.


now lets see, a govt. having complete power, ( all republicans have control which he has used to ram rod his programs.)

forcibly suppressing oppostion and criticism ( a proponent of USAPATRIOTACT) check.

regimenting all industry and commerce ( the original bailout as well as the outsourcing of vital intelligence services to cronies with private contracting corporations).

emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism ( "god wants me to conquer iraq....orders for fallujah "kill everybody")

wow, these definitions sure are interchangable to the previous administration.

lowing you must have me on autoignore.


also, I see you CANNOT provide evidence for a claim you introduced and now just ignored the point wholly.  this is you in every debate.  every single one.