[BlackElk]

Maybe you can give us a short synopsis of the remarkable blend of fascism and communism which you, who also have no use for Francisco Franco, perceive in Mexicans? Pay particular attention to the definitions of those terms and how the two ideologies blend together as one despite the diferences noticed by most folks throughout the last century. For up to 20 points of extra credit, explain rationally why this Atzlan delusion has the remotest chance of becoming a governing and ethnic cleansing reality in the states formerly claimed by Mexico.

[Sparta]

Took my comments out of context. I was merely pointing out that the Mexicans were populists (socially conservative, economically liberal) which is nearly identical to many fascist leaders beliefs. I'm from Louisiana where we actually elect these populist losers to state office. Also, Communists are athiests. Most Mexican immigrants, illegal and legal, are devout Catholics which knocks them out of the Communist category. Which leads most fascist and communist governments to blend as one is control of a person's money, the presence of a police state, and the overall control by a person or group of unelected and unaccountable people. Example: Red China.

As for the Aztlan reconquest, I don't know if it will succeed or not, but if we don't seal the borders and take other measures to assimilate the immigrants already here, we'll have much increased tension which may lead to Civil War. Once the shots are fired in that Civil War, who knows.

[Sparta]

. In the future it is possible that the difference between Communists in power - Marxist-Leninists - and fascists will be considered unimportant. A new category - Classic 20th century Dictatorship - may be used instead. Both types of dictatorship had secret police and prison camps, prevented free elections, controlled the press, had no respect for law. Both were totalitarian . The only difference was in the freedom given to the aristocracy and owners of industry by the fascists; whereas the communists tended to nationalize industry and land. Nazis tended to run industry better, but used slave labor (so did Stalin), which in the long run would produce the same results as the Communists - shoddy goods. There is a historians' dispute about whether Hitler was knowingly imitating Stalin in his methods, that is whether Stalin's role was to enlarge the scope of what a nasty dictatorship could do. This is something which can't be proved. The danger is that neo-fascists may use such an argument to pretend that Hitler was not responsible for his actions: "Stalin made me do it!"

___________________________________________________________

An interesting comparison between the two.

http://www.angelfire.com/mac/egmatthews/worldinfo/glossary/fascist.html

The website I got this from.

I'll back with some more.

[Sparta]

Another thing that may be of interest to you.

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/debates/history.html

[RLK]

For up to 20 points of extra credit, explain rationally why this Atzlan delusion has the remotest chance of becoming a governing and ethnic cleansing reality in the states formerly claimed by Mexico.

----------------------------

The idea is not to bring the states in question under solitary Mexican rule. The idea is to make them de facto Mexican states while not relinquishing access to U. S. Federal programs. Given the political clout by the population of the states and the access to federal entitlements the U. S. will finance an invasion here and support of Mexico below the border until the two countries are merged with the approval of Bush and Fox.