Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Is USA moving towards Fascism or Socialism?

Posted 6 years ago on Oct. 31, 2011, 10:33 p.m. EST by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I would have to say the first one.

The executive branch has unlimited powers. And we still own our own property.

49 Comments

49 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 6 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 6 years ago

Neither. Neo-feudalism (with fascistic tendencies).

[-] 2 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 6 years ago

"Neofeudalism isn't just about the powerful taking over everything. It's about conditioning the poor to accept their designated role in society, even fighting to defend the ability of the wealthy to exploit them. It requires working people to do things that are against their own interests, and nowhere is this more true than in our current economic system."

[-] 1 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 6 years ago

Yes, that is key, and is evidenced by the hateful opposition we see on this site every day. Some are paid trolls, certainly, but many truly believe their interests are tied up with those of the elite. How do we change that?

[-] 2 points by nickhowdy (1104) 6 years ago

That's probably about right. Or may get into Fascism depending on how energetic our populace is and how much the authorities need to oppress the people..

There is another choice.

[-] 2 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 6 years ago

There are other choices. I'd personally like to return to the solid liberalism of the 40s-70s. The right mix IMO. Then there is the Scandinavian model, etc. This idea that it's either pure free markets(minarchy/anarchy) on the one hand, or fascism or communism on the other, is flawed and tired and sad. No creativity, no critical thinking, just fear.

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 6 years ago

Well have to go with what actually stands up to reality, a more pragmatic approach that puts individual freedom and liberty as its highest, most honored value..We as Citizens must help others to achieve, to their best ability, this independence....

Capitalism, Socialism, Communism are all just ideas. All these "isms" have failed because they do not take into account a finite world...

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

Please explain, Im not familiar with it

[-] 10 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 6 years ago

From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/garrett-johnson/slouching-towards-neofeud_b_568972.html (good read):

Neofeudalism is a concept in which government policies are designed to systematically increase the wealth gap between rich and poor while increasing the power of the rich over the poor. It's a party-neutral idea. There is no cabal pushing the plan, merely the sum effect of pressure from the wealthy elite.

Those policies can be seen today. Just look at the fact that earned income are taxed at a higher rate than unearned income, and the repeal of the inheritance tax.

Other ways are harder to measure but no less real, such as white collar criminals receiving slaps on the wrist, while the poor feel the full weight of the law. It's a system with two sets of rules, one for the rich another one for the poor, and that is the definition of neofeudalism.

Another manifestation of neofeudalism is the growing power of corporations, that leave the poor dependent on private interests more powerful than the government, a situation resembling traditional feudal society.


More, because it's good:

Noam Chomsky in Hegemony or Survival had this to say:

If working people depend on the stock market for their pensions, health care, and other means of survival, they have a stake in undermining their own interests: opposing wage increases, health and safety regulations, and other measures that might cut into profits that flow to the benefactors on whom they must rely, in a manner reminiscent of feudalism. Neofeudalism isn't just about the powerful taking over everything. It's about conditioning the poor to accept their designated role in society, even fighting to defend the ability of the wealthy to exploit them. It requires working people to do things that are against their own interests, and nowhere is this more true than in our current economic system.

How is it that we have a politico-economic system in which the government's explicitly stated goal is to entice people to take out loans for houses and cars they don't even need? 150 million cars on the road and we must keep buying new ones? Millions of vacant housing units and we need to build new ones? Homes so full of Chinese junk that half of it goes into off-site storage, and we need to shop more? For whose benefit? Ever heard of debt-slavery? How about feudalism? Here's an even better word: peonage. It always amazed and confused me how everyone in America is obsessed with their credit rating. It's almost as if people don't realize that credit equals debt. Debt is something that people have feared for thousands of years, because unlike Americans today, historically debt was always associated with another scary term - slavery. Debt bondage, indentured servitude, slavery, they all mean the same thing. Yet somehow the establishment has convinced us that the ability to "manage" our slavery is something to be proud of. They even have a rating system for it. I'm not being facetious. Being heavily in debt means you don't have the freedom to quit your job. People who have lost their job are unable to move because the enormous debt tied to homes they can no longer afford.

Being tied to a piece of land is the definition of serfdom.

[-] 3 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 6 years ago

"One sometimes wonders, in this era of Market religion, where the skeptics and freethinkers have gone. What has happened to the Voltaires who once exposed bogus miracles, and the H. L. Menckens who blew shrill whistles on pious humbuggery? Such is the grip of current orthodoxy that to question the omniscience of The Market is to question the inscrutable wisdom of Providence."

Yes!

The Vatican (I know) calls it "idolatry of the market."

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 6 years ago

where can I find a slave manager? {Freedom Inversion thru Corporate Oppression} my fico score is low.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 6 years ago

You are my guru, and no I'm not being sarcastic. I'd honestly begun to think that critical thinking was a lost art.

[-] 3 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 6 years ago

Oh man. I'm a guru in my own mind as well, but in reality I'm just an angry impotent rebel like most of us. Many see the problems, some of us even see them relatively clearly, but solutions? How do we get back on a course towards a just, stable, prosperous society? I haven't a clue. The gap is a chasm. The single biggest problem is how many of us are working at cross-purposes, against our own interests as a people. Chomsky sees it.

BTW, this is a good read: http://occupywallst.org/forum/facts-and-statistics-proving-ows-is-right-plus-an-/

[-] 2 points by riverwoman (37) 6 years ago

Thank you Lockean. It is a true pleasure to read a critical mind.

[-] 1 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 6 years ago

Thank you. :)

[-] 4 points by harry2 (113) 6 years ago

First you need to define socialism - there are educational miss understandings of what socialism is in this country. Most even put socialism and fascism and communism into the same pot.

Socialism a society a community, helping fellows, and pro life, I mean “pro” as not letting people die because they cannot afford healthcare, or free education for a secure future.

What we have now is almost only based on making money - if that is all there is then - Good night America

Elected Presidents = Based on Money, instead of quality, (just look at the candidates) Politics + lobby = Money Universities = Money (200.000 a student) Healthcare = Money (Instead of healing drugs – long term drugs) I stop here – it makes me puke

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

sorry man. If your gonna spew, spew into this...

[-] -1 points by moediggity (646) from Houston, TX 6 years ago

I love that movie

[-] 4 points by demcapitalist (977) 6 years ago

Well since Reagan and thru Bush we've been pretty fascist based on this contemporary definition.

"Mussolini and the Fascists took advantage of the situation by allying with industrial businesses and attacking workers and peasants in the name of preserving order and internal peace in Italy.[91]

Fascists identified their primary opponents as the majority of socialists on the left who had opposed intervention in World War I.[89] The Fascists and the Italian political right held common ground: both held Marxism in contempt, discounted class consciousness and believed in the rule of elites.[92] The Fascists assisted the anti-socialist campaign of the political right by allying with the right in a mutual effort to destroy the Italian Socialist Party and labour organizations committed to class identity above national identity.[92]"

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

Nice, where did you get that?

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 6 years ago

Wiki

[+] -4 points by gr57 (457) 6 years ago

Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NAZI Party) stands for National Socialist German Workers' Party

[-] 3 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 6 years ago

"Socialist" is propaganda tailored to get the support of people who liked socialism. Fascism is rabidly anti-communist and anti-egalitarian.

[-] 3 points by Kumbaya (7) from Queens, NY 6 years ago

What does Wallstreet want? Fascism or Socialism? What is better for business. Fascist A. Hitler threatened in 1939: "If the financial jewish oligarchy in and beyond Europe succeeded to draw the peoples once again into a World war, then the result would not be bolshevist rule of the world and thus victory of jewish supremacy but an annihilation of the jewish race in Europe."

He had the wicked idea that the financial elites aim for Stalin's bolshevist communism. He was an evil madman. I would argue that the financial elites support fascism against communism. Wallstreet is your litmus test. Tea backs it - Occupy attacks it.

[-] 2 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

the usa is in fact a corporate oligarchy. this has more in common with socialism than it does with capitalism. With the presidency of Bush we crossed the rubicon into patent fascism, and the presidency of obama has furthered that slide and decline.

http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Corporate_Oligarchy

Aside from this, we have what is called a neo liberal economics and political system, but i think this really fails to name the core issue what it is.

[-] 2 points by looselyhuman (3117) 6 years ago

Agree, also with Lockean above.

[-] 2 points by GreedKills (1119) 6 years ago

Fascism, and I believe it started in the 70s with Nixon and took hold with the Bush/Reagan Administration in the 80s. And no, that is not a typo ;)

[-] 2 points by blocade (81) 6 years ago

we are working toward a true global democracy and world peace, this has never been attempted before and there is no one word generalization that can describe what it is we are building. It is essentially heaven on earth and most of us want to put in the effort of building it.

Those who would stand against it are evil.

Boycott Capitalism and let us build an advanced civilization

learn more & sign up --- http://wesower.org

[-] 2 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 6 years ago

If you support the Tea Party Republicans we are moving towards a Christian Theocratic form of Government.

[-] 2 points by PandoraK (1678) 6 years ago

Agreed.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5184) 2 months ago

Drunken turkey slices tossed with конституционный дерьмо котенок made by дедушка of 杂碎店 so the dish will be lovingly fascist: e pluribus unum, seek no personal happiness "until their Führer sits victoriously in the White House."

Puerto Rico has closed schools and hospitals. If properly retrofitted, they can house the illegal-entry asylum-seeking families with dependent children. The increased demand for services can perk up the economy. The linguistic barrier is also less there so the staffing up should be easier and quicker.

[-] 1 points by Whiterose (6) 5 years ago

Neo-feudalism sounds about right to me with fascist tendencies. You've got the fed owned privately. Kennedy tried printing U.S. $10 notes independent of the fed. We are all on a treadmill. Then we have the neocons implementing the "starve the beast," strategy to full effect. It's working very well starve the government of resources and have people vote against their interests. Not to mention PRISM. Hope I stayed within the rules. Ciao

[-] 1 points by GeorgeMichaelBluth (402) from Arlington, VA 6 years ago

Agreed. First one.

[-] 1 points by barb (835) 6 years ago

Its going towards fascism because eventually all of American businesses that can leave will leave and whats left is a poverty level that is so high that dictatorship is inevitable. You only have to study history in previous civilizations that the masses were poor and as such slaves with one ruler. The reason the U.S. started the way it did is become people from other countries brought their wealth with them along with the poor but it was more equal in terms of numbers. We have many resources in which to market and thus grew to be very wealthy and now we are going in reverse. The elite funneled most of the money their way thru buying politicians which make the laws and this created a vacuum of our money being sucked out of us leaving us vulnerable to slavery.

[-] 1 points by AnonDan (27) 6 years ago

It's moving toward fuckedupism

[-] 1 points by reddy2 (256) 6 years ago

Fascist (militarized) police state.

But after the brutality against peaceful protestors I would have thought this was obvious.

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1251774258001/the-drone-war-coming-to-a-town-near-you/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment

http://lewrockwell.com/rockwell/fascist-threat192.html

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 6 years ago

There will definitely be further attempts to pacify poverty. I find the entire scheme rather demoralizing, but they will be successful precisely because they evade all attempts to label.