this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
5 points (58.1% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7228 readers
180 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
He's not. Genocide is not a prescript of Fascism. Pretending he's a fascist for this one thing is needlessly reductive and broadens the meaning of Fascism to the point that it doesn't mean anything useful at all.
You know who is a fascist? Donald Trump, who on Veterans Day called people on the Left "vermin" to be rooted out, mimicking Hitler's own words about Jews. Now, explain to me how he and Biden are similar enough to be considered cut from the same cloth.
Care to provide a definition for what you think fascism is? While there are a few accepted definitions of fascism, a common thread tends to be a militarized regime run by the oligarchs who control the industry. This is precisely what we see happening in US. Both Trump and Biden represent the interests of the oligarchs and this is reflected by decades of policy data:
Let's break down Biden point by point, shall we?
*: Not enough data to indicate his personal beliefs on this.
Biden is nowhere near Fascism based on that definition, and unless you can provide a better one that isn't " because the US is a defacto oligarchy and Biden is a warmonger," there's no way to square that circle.
Both US republicans and democrats are very much far right by any sensible standard
Read the study I linked above which clearly shows that US political system works in the interest of the elites, that's what a dictatorial system looks like.
LMFAO imagine thinking that US isn't ultranationalist
Again, see study above
All alternative parties are effectively excluded from participating in the US
LMAO, covid response where Biden admin sacrificed countless vulnerable people for the sake of the economy begs to differ
I think you and I are talking past each other. Your personal definitions for these words, based on your examples, are far too broad, in my opinion. I do not think there's anything on this topic that we can agree upon if we can't agree what these words mean.
Take care.
I'm not using personal definitions for any words, and I've even provided you a study analyzing decades of US policy supporting my points. If we can't agree on basic and obvious facts of the situation then any meaningful discussion of the subject is indeed impossible.
Take care.
How many times are you going to link that study? Doesn't it get old after a while?
As long as it stays relevant. I see it still gets under your skin.