With Hillary or Frudy were get war,abortion, homosex, concentration camps,racism[antimuslim],loss of civil and religious rights,and big bloated government,sounds like fascism to me.The only sane candidate running is Ron Paul.

Three cheers for Dr. Gottfried and his message.  We should all recall that in 2006, William Kristol stated that he was a “liberal on illegal immigration.” Indeed, Kristol is a “liberal” in the contemporary meaning of the term, that is he is on the Left as his and his allies choice of terminology demonstrates.

Lancaster? Good! Now one of our local papers can read something other than Cynthia Tucker and David Brooks.

I am an anti-religionist. the law has reportedly
been written on our hearts. Thats why I don’t
understand the catholic religion.

I like the idea of fascism, even though I don’t
know all about it, but I will not support some
bible-toting evangelical sitting at the head of
our government. I wish I could have gotten down to
olympia to shoot out the tires of the trucks moving
the military equipment. I’d be happy to spend some
quality time in jail, but not here.

Professor Gottfried, what am I to think?  You voted for Santorum as recently as last fall?  True my oldest daughter was once secretary to David Horowitz, but that was fifteen years ago and she quickly learned her lesson.  When I reflect on how easily those of us who are supposedly “informed” are deceived, I get pretty pessimistic.  In a democracy the majority “decide” even if they don’t really rule, and how many of them are even in the ballpark of being informed?

Fascism is by and large a meaningless label today. It is used to magnify threats. Al-Quaida in Iraq today is estimated to have around 850 active fighters, but if you call it an Islamo-Fascist Organization you can make it sound more like 850,000.

As for the History Channel, me and my wife first saw it during a hotel stay. Hitler was always on. With the capital “H” in a corner of the screen, the message was obvious. Welcome to the Hitler Channel!

The slanderous term “Islamofascism” is being touted by the neonazi ziocons to cover up the holocaust being visited on the Iraqi people. Don’t forget these zionists are repeating the nazi history as farce and tragedy. While they commit holocaust in Palestine and iraq they use terms that would have made Hitler proud.
Areets the fifth column at AIPAC and turn them over to the International war crimes Tribunal.
These scoundrels and hypcrites deserve everthing that id coming to them.

Bin Laden is not a stand-in for Benito Mussolini, or for Hitler. He is an international terrorist, who must be combated for the most part through coordinated police actions and the selective use of military forces.

Amen, brother. That was precisely the view of Sir Michael Howard. His post 911 speech was spot-on and his predictions were accurate.

I am more impressed by the insistence of the German philosopher Nietzsche that “we should let the dead bury the dead

Luke 9:60 And Jesus said to him: Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou, and preach the kingdom of God.

Link to Sir Michael Howard Speech

http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/11/01/19888.html

I am an anti-religionist. the law has reportedly been written on our hearts.

Who wrote it, God? If so, then you are a religionist as religion means bond with God.

+++++++++++++++ begin quotes +++++++

‘Religion binds us [religat] to the one Almighty God.’ (St Augustine)

We are tied to God and bound to Him [religati] by the bond of piety, and it is from this, and not, as Cicero holds, from careful consideration [relegendo], that religion has received its name. (Lactantius)

If you really wish to insult someone, from a leftist angle, just call him a fascist. It is an epithet of far greatest resonance and opprobrium than calling someone a homosexual, a paedophile,drug dealer, brothel operator, or even a murderer. The most astonishing aspect is that people with higher education are the first ones to wield the execrable tag if they wish to attack or offend someone. It has become a new swear word since 1945 AH.

The symptoms of this disease is a plethora of antonyms . Someone like Pinochet, who rescued the country from the churnel house it had become under the communist, is insulted and vilified as a fascist murderer, in contrast we have a genuine murderer and bloody revolutionary like the scabious dog of Guevara being referred to as an icon, saviour and palladin for social justice.
A warrior for peace, freedom, universal justice and other abominable liberal plastic cliches are heaped upon his figure, whereas his actions and his life were embroidered by mass executions, spreading revolutionary violence , and shedding buckets of his enemies blood by his own hands. Decide for yourself; if you refer to the history channel ( his master’s anti-hitler voice) than you would understand the lethal effect of media indoctrination and propaganda. Dr Goebbels was a novice aprentice compared to the rotweilers and pit bulls in charge of the means of mass media and communications of today. Disinformation is their currency and spreading falshoods and corruption their lingua franca

Ah, Dr. Gottfried, your vote for Rick Santorum makes you
another victim of the bait and switch tactics of the
neocons: promise traditional values (bait), deliver
the Iraq war (switch).

While there may not be a easy answer for achieving a
restoration of American values, falling prey to conmen
is **not** the way to do it. Sorry, but the next person
who comes to my house advocating traditional values gets
a thorough check up to see if there is any Pod residue
in him or her. Strip seach for neocon influence, if you
will.

On the other hand, if you want to consider the forces
that undermine traditional values, you might want to
take a look at the economic system, with an economy that
depends on people spending, spending, spending, and what
are the implications (saving as a lost art, the
inculcation that the more you have the happier you will
be, the instigation of workaholism, to the detriment of
family life, the praise of casual sexual relations because
they **do not waste time that would be better spend
earing money or spending it**). There is a reason why
on Chrismas instead of celebrating the Birth of Christ
we celebrate Santa and his rites are frenzied dash
into shopping malls dropping money at all the watering
spots.

The reason I ascribed to Nietzsche the maxim spoken by
Jesus in Luke is the context of Nietzsche’s remarks.
Unlike Luke, N was speaking specifically about the
evil of “historical abuse,” as practiced by those
who construct faulty parallels. I should have
explained the reason for my attribution but in a
column intended for general consumption, that might
have been hard to do. Nonetheless, since many of my
newspaper readers are Evangelicals, the biblical
passage might have been more familiar.

Sir;
Given your vastly superior knowledge on these matter I must bow to your differences with the term ‘Islamofascism’and the uses to which it is presently put.

Still, are you saying that there is no wide-spread movement, predominantly founded and funded by Moslems which has as a basic tenet the subjugation of all other cultures to that system and which actively engages in violence in pursuit of this goal?

These “islamofascism awareness” things would have been intersting like 10 years ago but it’s completely redudent now.  Are there people who aren’t aware of terrorism?  What awareness do we need beyond that? there are terrorists who are trying to kill us.  Are they going to have internet awareness day?

In response to the comment that I am overly eager to
dismiss the “fascist” label,” given the determination
of Muslims to “subjugate” other socities, I would
point out that the medieval church practiced the same
policy without becoming “fascist.” Not all
expansionist religions or empires have been “fascist.”
The term has been chosen because it resonates well
with neocons and other leftists. Former Senator
Santorum embraces it because of his decision to hitch
his falling star to the neocon media empire.

Any pro-lifer who voted last year for Rick Santorum suffered from acute ideological amnesia.  In 1997, Christine Todd Whitman--who never met an abortion she didn’t enthusiastically applaud--was fighting (and losing) for her political life in her quest for reelection as governor of NJ.  Guess who crossed the state line to campaign for her and, unfortunately, save her bloody bacon?  Yup: “Saint” Rick Santorum, patron of the Church of the GOP-no-matter-what and “pro-life” poseur.

I don’t do any sacraments. I don’t go to mass.
I’m not religious because I have no ritual practices.
Of course I don’t like calling myself spiritual
either. Unitarian/Universalist will suffice.

All this talk of fascism made me remember an incident in my teens. Our school building had been slightly vandalized one night, by a few drunken lads, resenting this their only alma mater. On a wall they had spraypainted crude genitalian imagery, as well as unfounded allegations about our headmaster’s sexual orientation. Come daylight, our janitor, a solemn Communist, stormed into the teacher’s lounge to loudly announce “Now the fascists are here!”

This utterly irrelevant use of the term “fascist”, has only now been bettered, by American thinkers applying it to radical Islamists.

The term is today used to conjure up images of dangerous military might, Panzer divisions, and polished boots. Never mind that a large part of the Jihadists are just bearded guys living in caves. Fascism is a good enemy because it has been beaten before, and therefore can be beaten the same way again.

The danger here is that the Islamist terrorists actually have means to harm our societies, and daydreaming about Mussolini prevents us from seeing the actual enemy as he really is, with all his strengths and weaknesses.

A more relevant case might be Europe’s victory over Communist terror groups, the RAF, the Red Brigades and the likes. They were ruthless and organized, and had much support on the fringes of the political movement. They were capable of hurting a civilian society quite deeply. Still, hard police work and intelligence gathering prevailed, and they are all but forgotten today. There might be a lesson in there somewhere…

North of the border, those who dare to associate Islam with tyranny might be branded as fascists.  Currently, liberal statists and their allies in the establishment media are currently murmuring over the alleged return of “intolerance” to Quebec, simply because the Bouchard-Taylor Commission on what constitutes “reasonable accommodation” for immigrants has encouraged some provocative discussion about the entire notion of Canadian citizenship.  The upshot is that Quebeckers who worry about the rising number of Moslem immigrants are automatically branded as far rightists.  It seems that those who disagree with the state’s idea of “tolerance” must be Hitlerites: this passes for sophisticated discussion in Canada.

The reason I ascribed to Nietzsche the maxim spoken by Jesus in Luke is the context of Nietzsche’s remarks

I assumed you used the quote appropriately.  I was just moved to quote Jesus because of the shock I had when I first read his words.

As for Mr. Santorum. I do not understand why you do not treasure him. Glenn Beck, “conservative” radio talker, has called him another Winston Churchill :)

This interest in Nietzsche lead Al Banna [founder of the Muslim brotherhood] to create a relationship [And spy network] with the 20th Century’s most powerful National Socialist, Adolf Hitler. ...
http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood

Frankly I dont know why people believe Nietzsche is a great mind.

The “Islamofascist” buzz word is simply a neocon buzz
word for the ongoing agenda of helping present day Israel
gain control of the middleast. 500 gangsters hiding in caves
with no air force, navy, mobilized army, or real support
is a joke!.....Concepts like, “If we just pull the troops
out, they will follow them home!”, is too funny! They don’t
have to follow them. They own maps. If an overweight cucumber
picker dragging a baby can sneak into our nation by the
millions over the past 6 years, where’s the terrorist?
A.I.P.A.C. owns our corrupt federal system, and securing our
own borders doesn’t pay as good as killing Arabs for our
politicians. “Blowback” is a real thing, as Dr. Paul has explained.
And if we stay on this course, “Antisemitism” will reach epidemic
proportions eventualy!.......If “Romanians” hijacked America’s
foreign policy, “Antiromanianism” would eventualy surface!
When Christian Evangelicals(Like Myself)realize what con-artist
ministers like John Hagee are, it will be ugly!...Ignorance
is all that holds it together now.

“They were post-fascist and post-communist terrorists who got here because the Immigration and Naturalization Service was not doing its job.”

They were doing their jobs: providing the appearance of border control while covering the actual policy of open borders.  They didn’t fall down, they never cared.  The terrorist violence was just a by-product of that policy, as is violence by MS-13.  And leave it to the Stupid Party, who’ve never done a thing to protect our borders, to seize on “anti-terrorism” as an issue and advance the police state that will inevitably be controlled by their (alleged) enemies.

Meanwhile the Patriot Act goes unoposed by all in government except for Ron Paul.  The most glaring example of our government run amok is the Patriot Act.  I wonder what they called it in Europe and Canada when they took the rights of the citizens away.  Is there any wonder no liberal democrat is running a campaign looking to repeal the Patriot Act?  No wonder Muslims fear us.  I hope to God that more than a handfull hiding out in caves realize what is in store for them when they are fully democratized.

@Adriana,

Good point about the spending.  It has reached insane levels.  Part of the insanity stems from the fact that everybody is brining up children in single family homes.  What all these single parents need to do is reconcile over not trying to outspend each other on Christmas.  The biggest dupes of the spending insanity are those who can afford it least.  You want to find someone with a killer stereo system, top of the line phone with all the gadgets, expensive cable, etc, just find some out of work twenty something with just enough earning potential to end up a million in debt when they die.  It’s no wonder the banks came up with new types of mortgages to allow people to “keep” their homes.  Look for future legislation to provide a way to pass on debt to one’s surviving relatives.

“If the public and the producers of the History Channel thought about the mass murders committed under communist tyrants as often as they do about Hitler’s killings, we would now be in the midst of “Islamocommunist Awareness Week.”

The public are passive consumers of what the media
owners decide to deliver.

The real question is WHY the incessant and neverending
focus on the evil Germans and the near absolute
black-out regarding the Bolshevik evil that predated and
surpassed the Germans in every category.

Maybe it has something to do with who these “commies”
really were and where they came from.

Maybe it is somehow linked to Solzhenitsyn’s latest
book not being available in English for Western
consumption.

Yes the truth is out there....somewhere.

In response to the comment that I am overly eager to dismiss the “fascist” label,” given the determination of Muslims to “subjugate” other socities, I would point out that the medieval church practiced the same policy without becoming “fascist.”

While I too reject the “Islamofascist” label, I don’t think it’s accurate to say that the mediaeval Church practiced the same policy as Muslims. One might be able to make the case for other religions being subjugated (such as the Jews being forced to live in the ghettoes), but I don’t think there are analogies to the Muslim practice of forced conversion or to the abomination of the Janissary corps.

Now wait a minute here buster, we so are too in the middle of World War IV....(World War III having been the Cold War and it’s proper denouement wherein Government was deemed a worthy thing by the Victorious “Conservatives” of America). World War IV is of course a kind of repeat of World War I where European Culture and it’s offspring and occupied territories are faced off across a No Mans Land of noxious odors and burnt umber hues comprising the heads inserted up arses of a too-large majority of mankind. Enjoy the dusky view friends, the incoming “bombings” are endless and the front static.

1. The problem with this misnaming of one’s enemies is that it creates inaccurate pictures of what is going on right now..  And what’s going on right now is a religious war, soon perhaps to approach the extent and intensity of the last super religious war, The Thirty Years War

I join in the excoriation of “Islamofascism” as a label, if for no other reason than the label hides rather than identifies the actual danger the West is facing.  Almost all the wars we have fought for the past 160 years have been nationalist conflicts – even the Cold War –, not religious conflicts.  And all the wars of the last 220 years have been ideological.  The conflict in Northern Ireland isn’t a religious conflict, at least not in this century; it is a nationalist conflict.  So also are the Zionist/Palestinian and the Croat/Serb/Albanian conflicts.  What is more, beginning with the Enlightenment, political order has been “liberal” in the best sense of the word, embodied in the “no test” clause and the first amendment of the US Constitution.  Religion was to be “privatized”, and social order would replace it with nationalism. 

But Osama is not a nationalist.  He is a man of religion.  His struggle is not against a national group or a political order.  He is fighting the West’s own conception of itself since 1689.  And the man of religious fights for different reasons, and fights differently, than the nationalist, ideologue, or someone pursuing The State’s interests.  If one wishes to defeat the man of religion, one needs to fight him differently.  The fifth chapter of Martin van Creveld, The Transformation of War, 1991, discusses “what war is fought for”, including religious war.  His book is obligatory reading in any case.

So to keep comparing a religious war to an ideological, nationalist, or statist war is a recipe for defeat.  We in the West are particularly caught short.  For we haven’t had a religious war since the Battle of the Boyne.  We better learn again what religious war is all about.  I also submit that a decadent and secular society will be defeated by a religious one.

2.Much harm indeed happens when terms are ill defined.  Fascism is used four ways, and it strikes me that only one of these ways is correct.

i.  For the pedestrian world, “fascist” has come to mean any coercive act.
ii. For Cultural Marxists, “fascist” means anyone who isn’t a....  Cultural Marxist.
iii. For many political thinkers, “fascist” is synonymous with the Browns, be they Nazi (extremist nationalist/racialist) or Fascists proper.  I think Roger Griffin’s work on fascism gives the best and most precise definition when used this way, a “palingenetic and populist form of ultranationalism”, – a particular kind of nationalism that looks for a violent rebirth of a nation.
iv. Finally, it means Mussolini’s movement, Fascism proper.  John Lukacs has argued for this meaning.

We can dismiss meaning i and ii.  I shall argue that the fourth meaning is correct, and the third is either to vague or obscurantist.

Fascism, Mussolini’s movement and Naziism are really quite different movement when seen in their respective “deep structure”.  Naziism is in fact simply extremist nationalism of the racialist, rather than tribal, sort.  Mussolini when out of his way in 1932 to ridicule Nazi racialism.  Only in 1938, to placate ‘Dolf, did he adopt racialist laws.  What is more, it is open to question if Fascism was even a nationalist movement.  It seems to me that there is a pronounced difference between, say, a nationalist like Gabriele D’annunzio and Fascism.  That difference, I submit, is twofold:

i. For a nationalist, The State is the servant of the “nation”; the nation in fact makes the state.  For Fascism, the relation is reversed: The State through force, hammers together a nation.  I follow John Lukacs here.

ii. Yet the ultimate telos of Fascism is more than nationalism.  Born out of the military experience of the arditi, and maturing in the squadristi, Fascism is almost a kind of warrior cult, glorifying struggle and war.  It would be worth asking if it is simply the Spartan polis reformed.  Its connection with Futurism almost makes me wonder if Fascism is a kind of aesthetic movement.  Emilio Gentile also seem to be on to something in seeing Fascism as analogous to religion.

3. Nietzsche hated all kinds of racialism and nationalism.  He might have liked Fascism, at least seen aesthetically.  Yet he would have hated Fascism’s populist dimension.

What difference does it make to me whether I live in fascist or communist regime? Private property? Are these not theories that in practice turn out similar results? I have read somewhere that it is easier for society to recover from fascism (national socialism) than from communism.

It was the viciousness and expansiveness of German Nazism, and Hitler’s particularly shocking brutality toward Jews, Poles and others whom he regarded as “subhuman, which has given the fascists a bad rap.

Fascism would have had gotten a bad rep no matter what had happened with the jews. The problem is that their disrespect for private property and individual rights made normal society impossible.

There was a reason why the Nazi’s chose to call themselves National Socialists. The problem that is socialism is the key to understanding the movement, and no revisionist history will redeem that.

It is a little disappointing to read Dr Gottfried’s unfortunate remarks about the “medieval church”.  It is disappointing because Dr Gottfried can nearly always be relied upon to approach a subject with intellectual honesty.

But I am not going to condemn him because I believe that his honesty will one day lead him to come to look at the medieval Church somewhat differently.

One writer here did try to correct Dr Gottfied, and did so very well, but I wanted to add another thought or two, so I scrolled down past Mr Cundiff’s usual eighty-seven paragraphs to see if anyone else brought up the point that the Catholic Church does not subjugate people.  Any people.

The issue of the Jewish ghettos was brought up but without the historical background that goes on to explain why such seemingly drastic action was taken.  If our Jewish friends realize (as we all have had to realize) that they are not, as a people, somehow “immaculately conceived”, do in fact occasionally commit terrible crimes (as, alas, have all peoples everywhere), and study honestly how and why the ghettos came into being in the first place then perhaps we can all start looking at this issue calmly and intelligently.  This is not to excuse harshness or a lack of charity committed by one people against another.  But there are two sides to every story.

That “other side” to the story can be found in the writings of Prof James J Walsh, Hilaire Belloc and William Thomas Walsh, among others and I could do no better than to recommend to readers the works of these authors.

Ron Paul proposed stopping immigration from terrorist producing countries after 9/11, but the Administration blocked it. I discuss that here at my blog.

What’s next?

“Hindu-Pinball Awareness Week”?

In all seriousness, methinks thou doth take such people as David Horowitz too seriously...I wonder if we all started ignoring the creeps they would all just go away?

“Fascist” is for the most part a meaningless epithet, usually applied by someone on the left, or someone wishing to attract the sympathy of the left, to someone whose politics he doesn’t like (usually, but not always, someone on the right).

This is the consequence of the well known phenomenon whereby the history of the vanquished is written by the victor. The real victor of the Second World War was Stalin. His followers, who were and are legion amongst the chattering class, were eager to portray that war as the “Great Patriotic War” in which heroic socialists defeated the forces of reaction. The conflation of Nazism with Fascism is a characteristic peculiarity of Soviet rhetoric and one readily taken up by the American left. Of course anyone acquainted with history knows that Hitler was allied with Stalin for almost two years at the beginning of WWII, and that long before that - dating back to Locarno - the Bolsheviks, who were not signatory to the Treaty of Versailles, had helped Germany to re-arm itself in violation of that treaty. After Hitler broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, these facts became inconvenient. Within the Soviet Union, where history was easily re-written, it disappeared down the memory hole, In the West, communist fellow-travellers in academia and journalism did their best to sweep it under the carpet.

In examining what Nazism and Fascism really were, we of course discover that they were movements of the left. Nazi, after all, is a colloquialism for National Socialist - what could be a more clear indication that Nazism is a branch of the collectivist family tree? As for Mussolini’s fascism, it developed out of his early experience as a socialist rabble-rouser, born to a family of socialist and anti-clerical convictions. Mussolini was a scoffer at religion, once defying God, if he existed, to strike him dead. As Umberto Eco observed, God had other fish to fry at the time. The Lateran treaty of 1929 was a coldblooded act of realpolitik on Mussolini’s part, rather than indicating any reconciliation with the Church. It laid to rest an issue that had been festering since the Risorgimento and made Italy easier for him to govern.

In trying to understand fascism we would do well to consider the career of the British fascist, Sir Oswald Mosley. Mosley was a member of the Labour party and quit it when he was disappointed in not being advanced to a cabinet-level ministry. He first formed the New Party in 1931 and then the British Union of Fascists in 1932. British fascism was largely devoid of the anti-Semitism of the Nazis, and did not need the belligerent nationalism of Mussolini’s Italy, with its fledgling steps towards imperialism in Libya and Ethiopia - Britain already was a powerful nation with an extensive empire.

What we find in Mosley’s fascism is the essence of the idea, stripped of these purely local German and Italian features. It is, simply, state control of everything without state ownership. In classical socialism, the state owns the means of production. In fascism, the state takes the lion’s share of business profits through taxation and exerts control over most of business policy through regulation - leaving nominal ownership to the private sector, and 100% of the liability should an enterprise fail. There is a welfare state, mucxh social control through bureaucracy, and a single government covering the European continent.

I suspect that Mosley would snort in disgust at the mush-drip of political correctness in which the modern European Union abounds, and would be alarmed at the large percentage of its population made up by non-European immigrants, but would broadly approve of the structure of the EU and of its economic and social dirigisme. It is in Brussels, and not amongst the votaries of al-Qaeda, that the spirit of Fascism lives today.

ickg65ilc71hr5 http://www.986455.com/1091684.html ji7jmp6itddk2p