General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Get One Thing Clear: NSA Domestic Spy Op Is FASCISM [View all]HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)all comers your right to say it.
But I must take issue with your use of the term 'fascism'. There are many labels one can use to describe post-industrial America and what ails her, but 'fascist' is probably one of the least useful.
First of all, fascist states are noteworthy for being one-party dictatorships that mobilize broad-based mass support. Even if you maintain that the Dems and Republicans are two factions of the same uber-party, you still must explain the Greens, the Libertarians, and other lesser parties. These would not exist in any meaningful sense in a fascist state.
Second, fascist states do not generally allow free and fair elections. Once a fascist party has consolidated its power, it brooks no challenges to it via the electoral process. Bush relinquished power voluntarily in 2009; the Republicans in the House relinquished power in January 2007. Surely you're not saying the Democrats are a fascist party?
Finally, fascist states generally do not tolerate dissent. In a real fascist state, a post such as yours would earn you a quick trip to the camps (or, in Argentina's case, to the desesparacidos at 30,000 ft.).
That nomenclatural dispute aside, I would like to suggest that people who look at what they see and call it 'fascism' are right to feel very uneasy about what they see and to feel a deserved sense of grievance, even if in calling it 'fascism' they attach the wrong label to it. But it's important to look at reality clearly and dispassionately. We can only solve our problems if we have clearly identified the problems first. A crucial part of identifying said problems is labeling them properly.
I might suggest 'banana republic' or 'oligarchy' as closer descriptions of contemporary America, recognizing that you may equally quibble with my choice of words.