Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Darkwolf377

I too love the style of conceding the talking points and then using the "logic" therein to prove that it still doesn't work, but lots of what was posted there is flat-out wrong.

With regard to corporate power, it is no secret that Fascist governments were notorious for Nationalizing vital industries. The Nazis did this quite a bit.

With regard to Religion and Government, Dr. Britt has a lot of explaining to do. Hitler's personal literature shows a great deal of disdain for Christianity. One of the Nazi goals was to establish a non-religious society, because they felt that organized religion was the creation of Jews, ergo the domain of the inferior. It is no secret that fascist regumes all around the world have executed all kinds of people across all kinds of lines. The Nazi regime executed the mentally ill, Jews, Catholics, Gypsies, and, of course, homosexuals.

The notion that organized labor is somehow a threat to fascism is also ludicrous. Unionization did not exist in America for nearly a century of our history, and not even the most extreme on the left argue that we had a fascist government around the time of the founding. By the way, the Native Americans did not have unions. Were the Native Americans fascist? Organized labor may have done many good things for certain groups of individuals, but they did not inherently lead to the prevention of fascism. Indeed, the fascists were largely fueled by the working classes in Germany and in Italy.

I would again return to the key differences between Nationalism and Patriotism in general. The terms are wrongfully used as equals, when in fact they are different. Nationslism is loyalty to a nation, as in race, while Patriotism is loyalty to a country, as in political organization. The implications of the difference here are obvious. Using Nationalism to describe Patriotism is a dishonest attempt to hoodwink the public into believing that love of country is equivalent to racism.

Curiously, Britt ignores the presence of various powerful government regulations in fascist societites that were aimed at bettering the public health. The Nazis were the first to prohibit smoking at certain social functions, for example.

I hardly know where to begin with the "disdain for intellectuals and the arts" business. One would truly have to be stupid to call this a common characteristic, given the famous stories about Hitler's insatiable appetite for collecting art. In addition, it is noteworthy that quite a number of Nazi officials were considered intellectuals in their day. For a group of peple who hated intellectuals and academia so much, the Nazis sure managed to amass quite a number of intellectuals and researchers to do their bidding. Indeed, more than a few intellectuals in America were sympathizers to the Nazi cause, largely because of its anti-semitic appeal. Anti-semitism persists among the intelligentsia to this day in some circles.

The only media we have in America that it predictably controlled by the state and atriculates a constant viewpoint is the NPR/PBS nexus. Ironically, I note that it consistently tilts to the left. The rest of the media has at least some component of diversity to it.

As a final point, quite a number of fascist societies embraced the pseudo-scientific movement known as Eugenics. Eugenics was concerned with the selective breeding of human beings to create physically and mentally superior offspring by design. At its core, Eugenics carries with it the classical elitist undertone that the government ought to be taking action to control the ability of citizens to reproduce. That is what Planned Parenthood was initially about, and one would therefore not be surprised to learn that Margaret Sanger, its founder, was a Nazi sympathizer. Amazingly, everyone remembers Father Coughlin and perhaps even Charles Lindbergh, but they curiously forget about Margaret Sanger.



The FDR response was very effective. I just figured that it would be fun to rip into the premise of "common threads" through the fascist regimes as well.

By the way, do I even need to mention that the fascists were all big fans of gun control?

I am fairly certain that minds greater than I have ripped into Britt's "thesis" to a greater extent.


23 posted on 02/11/2005 12:51:43 PM PST by AZ_Cowboy ("Be ever vigilant, for you know not when the master is coming")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: AZ_Cowboy
Excellent examination of this "Dr." and his little screed. (I also liked the point about art, seeing how one of the most famous facts about Hitler was his desire to paint, not to mention his love of German art and culture, Wagner, architecture, etc.)

When I was sent this thing it included a point by point agreement by some lib, and under the point about art the comment was "Just ask Spongebob Squarepants about Bush's censorship of the arts".

You can't make this stuff up, it just pours out of them...

24 posted on 02/11/2005 12:56:37 PM PST by Darkwolf377 ("What does 'Why not?' mean" -- the mark of a troubled mind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson