I`m confused! how does believing in equality make me a facist?

**JPS** · 04-27-2012 04:16 PM

@ OP:

You shouldn't be confused, as the Tea Partier doesn't know what he's talking about. Fascism itself is a very specific set of ethical, political, and anthropological viewpoints that is rarely, if ever, espoused within the realm of liberal-democratic American politics. You stated initially that you are in favor of "equality," and I will assume that this means egalitarianism (i.e., a viewpoint which favors a more egalitarian distribution of rights in general). Fascism is explicitly anti-egalitarian (as mentioned in earlier posts) and anti-Liberal, which already eliminates the possibility of you being a "fascist." The vast majority of politically-minded Americans are Liberals in the European sense, including the Tea Partier (who is most likely a rabid partisan when his egregiously inaccurate use of political terminology is taken into account). He is probably just close-mindedly attempting to discredit your position without the use of actual logic.

**crazyeddie** · 04-27-2012 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by JPS

@ OP:

You shouldn't be confused, as the Tea Partier doesn't know what he's talking about. Fascism itself is a very specific set of ethical, political, and anthropological viewpoints that is rarely, if ever, espoused within the realm of liberal-democratic American politics. You stated initially that you are in favor of "equality," and I will assume that this means egalitarianism (i.e., a viewpoint which favors a more egalitarian distribution of rights in general). Fascism is explicitly anti-egalitarian (as mentioned in earlier posts) and anti-Liberal, which already eliminates the possibility of you being a "fascist." The vast majority of politically-minded Americans are Liberals in the European sense, including the Tea Partier (who is most likely a rabid partisan when his egregiously inaccurate use of political terminology is taken into account). He is probably just close-mindedly attempting to discredit your position without the use of actual logic.

Heh. Just wait until you explain to a Tea Partier that 1) they're a liberal, and 2) republicans are actually to the *left* of liberals!

The Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln's day had a lot of support from Germans who fled the failed Revolutions of 1848. Does anybody remember what important book was published in 1848? Hint: the cover was probably Red.....

**Brian1** · 04-27-2012 09:06 PM

Communist Manifesto, in London, by Marx and Engels

**Grunfur** · 05-19-2012 04:36 PM

Originally Posted by Feral sheep

I had a conversation with a tea partier sometime ago earlier in the week, he spit on me and called me this.

so, could someone use logic or their critical thinking skills and tell me where this came from cause im confused

From my experience many idiotic people I've argued with used this argument. What I suspect happened is by saying "I believe in equality" the person associated you with a communist, because that's the main ideology in some forms of communism. Then the person jumped to the conclusion that since communists like Stalin are dictators, communists are equivalent to fascists.

I may be wrong, but I think that's pretty much what happened.

**Mutatio NOmenis** · 05-21-2012 11:33 PM

Originally Posted by Feral sheep

I had a conversation with a tea partier sometime ago earlier in the week, he spit on me and called me this.

so, could someone use logic or their critical thinking skills and tell me where this came from cause im confused

Tea Party=/=Logic
Left=/=Fascist
Fascist=Rightwing

Tea Party is closer to Corporate Fascism than you are.

**Borrowed Lunacy** · 05-22-2012 05:08 AM

Originally Posted by Mutatio NOmenis

Tea Party=/=Logic
Left=/=Fascist
Fascist=Rightwing

Tea Party is closer to Corporate Fascism than you are.

It's true. Nazis got into office because they were more right ring than the right wing at a time when socialism/communism was gaining steam in Germany. In effect, Unions advocating socialism/communism led the middle class, upper class and antisemites (because of a trend in some parts of Europe associating Bolshevikism with Jewry). It's also interesting that the Nazi Party is called National Socialism in history's pages, I guess they chose this because they wanted to be viewed as revolutionaries vying for a better Germany, champions of the lower class. The Nazis would never have been elected if the Great Depression didn't make Germany's populace so desperate.

**Jennywocky** · 05-22-2012 05:40 AM

Originally Posted by cades

Correct me if I'm wrong but the other day I came up with something and I think it is true.
Conservatives (or at least tea partiers) are Pro-country, while liberals are Pro-humanity.
This doesn't mean either side is against the other side but more for their side. So this is why conservatives always restrict freedom for safety and go to war just if their is a chance their country is in trouble and why liberals are almost never for war.

Well, it's true in that sense... typically "pro-country" or "pro-tribal" splits things into an "us vs them" mentality. There are Outsiders / Others who are not like us, so they are threatening to our way of life and any interaction between us runs the risk of our tribe being changed/subverted/damaged in someway.

Meanwhile, while I consider myself moderate, i guess compared to the conservatives I'm a liberal -- I don't like war whatsoever and grieve at the times when I feel it is necessary, and I'm more "human philanthropist" than "tribal proponent." I see the whole human race as my family... and more than that, since if there were other sentient life forms, I would also look out for them and want to find a way for everyone to have their needs served.

Basically, there is a spirit of inclusiveness vs exclusiveness, the melting pot vs the outpost.

I guess our "founding fathers' only had to work with European white people for their melting pot; in reality, our melting pot is much bigger nowadays, but the principle is the same, it's ironic to me that the traditionalists often rely on the spirit of the founding fathers without realizing that nowadays those principles depend inclusion for many things they are fighting.