Hezbollah Democrats

OrnotBitwise said:
Wait a minute, here. Are you seriously rejecting the notion that negative bias -- bigotry -- sometimes arises out of fear of the object? That's pretty extreme, Damo.

It's pretty well accepted, I believe, that at least one common cause of hatred for homosexuals is indeed homophobia. That's especially true of the more extreme and violent cases.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. I have never stated anything of the sort. "Phobes" is used to term all bigots... It really doesn't fit. "Accepted" or not.

Newest terms that I have heard...

"Islamophobia"... That one was from a UK article.
"xenophobia" ... this one was used to describe somebody stating that we need to open legal immigration while closing down the border for illegal crossing...
etc...

Attempting to limit this in its entirety to "homophobia" is attempting to disregard the point of the original post.

"phobe" is not fitting, in fact it has less correlation than "fascist" does with the other. That a minority of people who are bigots might be "scared" of homosexuals that certainly doesn't make "homophobia" the norm as it is used.

It is accepted terminology among the left. We still like to make fun of people who use it. Phobophobia and realistphobia run rampant in the left.
 
Cypress said:
They have perverted their religious dogma, and made it acceptable to commit horrific acts of terror and violence on innocent people, in an attempt to force us all to live in their 5th Century social world... that IS fascist.

Put down the Karl Rove kool aid.

"forcing us to live in the 5th century" has nothing to do with the formal definition and historical practice of fascism. Look it up in any dictionary or encylopedia.

What you're describing is an extremist theocratic movement, based upon a perversion of islam.
Click to expand...

fas·cism (fshzm)

often Fascism
1. a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.


Why don't YOU pick up a dictionary and tell me how this isn't describing the Islamic radical "movement" you keep yammering about? Replace "nationalism" with "radical fundamentalist Islam" and you have "Islamofascism" plain and simple. Of course, you never were the sharpest knife in the drawer.
 
Seems like number 2 fits rather well... And number 1 has many similarities that make it an actual logical fit. Good one there, Dix!
 
Dixie said:
fas·cism (fshzm)

often Fascism
1. a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.


Why don't YOU pick up a dictionary and tell me how this isn't describing the Islamic radical "movement" you keep yammering about? Replace "nationalism" with "radical fundamentalist Islam" and you have "Islamofascism" plain and simple. Of course, you never were the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Click to expand...


A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

I see you cherry-picked the most generic definition possible. But, ooops....even the most generic defintion possible, doesn't fit. Al Qaeda is not based on "extreme nationalism, and racism".

Al qaeda is the exact opposite of a "nationalist" and "racist" movement. Al Qaeda is a pan-nationalist regional or global movement, which is as likely to support black sudanese muslims as they are asian indonesian muslims.
 
Cypress said:
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

I see you cherry-picked the most generic definition possible. But, ooops....even the most generic defintion possible, doesn't fit. Al Qaeda is not based on "extreme nationalism, and racism".

Al qaeda is the exact opposite of a "nationalist" and "racist" movement. Al Qaeda is a pan-nationalist regional or global movement, which is as likely to support black sudanese muslims as they are asian indonesian muslims.
Click to expand...
I see that you conveniently ignore the second definition because you don't want to see that you have been arguing nonsense throughout the thread saying that it "doesn't fit" when it actually does....

Plus, I have explained how there are similarities (not the same but similarities) between nationalism and centrist attitude of the Caliphate beliefs... As well as twinges of "racism" found in the ideation of "Us or Them" mentality that is present in Nationalism and Racism and found within those with these beliefs.

Ignoring inconvenient truth doesn't make you right.
 
Cypress said:
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

I see you cherry-picked the most generic definition possible. But, ooops....even the most generic defintion possible, doesn't fit. Al Qaeda is not based on "extreme nationalism, and racism".

Al qaeda is the exact opposite of a "nationalist" and "racist" movement. Al Qaeda is a pan-nationalist regional or global movement, which is as likely to support black sudanese muslims as they are asian indonesian muslims.
Click to expand...

Even though you cherry picked the most generic definition you could find, it still described Hitler and Mussolini to a tee....but fails to desribe Al Qaeda.

Indeed, Hitler and Mussolini based their ideology on extreme nationalism and racism. i.e., the "exceptionalism" of the aryan, and "roman" races, respectitvely. And they both were unitary, iron-fisted dictators.

Al qaeda, in contrast, in pan-nationalist, and certainly not at all racist. They support black sudanese muslims and well as asian muslims. They make no distinction based on nationality or skin color.

And, fundamentalist islamic theocracies are somewhat decentralized. There is no equivalent of an iron-fisted, singular unitary leader - as your definition requires. This is partly a function of the islamic religion, which itself is highly decentralized. In islamic theocracies, there isn't an iron-fisted unitary executive who wields all the power. There are councils of mullahs and religious clerics who make judgements based on sharia law. And local islamic councils carry out that sharia law with a relative amount of autonomy.
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

I see you cherry-picked the most generic definition possible. But, ooops....even the most generic defintion possible, doesn't fit. Al Qaeda is not based on "extreme nationalism, and racism".

Al qaeda is the exact opposite of a "nationalist" and "racist" movement. Al Qaeda is a pan-nationalist regional or global movement, which is as likely to support black sudanese muslims as they are asian indonesian muslims.
Click to expand...

VERY good point Cypress
 
Al qaeda is the exact opposite of a "nationalist" and "racist" movement.

This is not correct. As I pointed out, replace "nationalism" with "radical Islamic fundamentalism" and it's the same thing. Their "nation" is "perverted Islam" and they have rallied around this perverted philosophy to perpetrate fascism through terrorism. They are racist in every sense, because they advocate hate for "infidels and jews" which are groups of people they practice profound prejudice against.

As for the "iron-fisted leader" required by fascism, that would be Allah, according to the radicals. It is he, who has ordained them the right to perpetrate terror on the rest of us in his name.

And, fundamentalist islamic theocracies are somewhat decentralized.

Perhaps you should Google the word "Caliphate" and see what it says, because these people do indeed have a cenralized goal of theocratic domination.
 
Even though you cherry picked the most generic definition you could find...

It came straight from dictionary.com and I didn't even have to edit it, I posted exactly what the dictionary definition of "fascism" is. You are the one who wants to articulate some specific political ideology from the 1940's to define the word, and that is an incorrect assertion. Certainly, 1940's Italy is a good example of Fascism, but it's not the only thing that can be Fascism.
 
This is not correct. As I pointed out, replace "nationalism" with "radical Islamic fundamentalism" and it's the same thing. Their "nation" is "perverted Islam" and they have rallied around this perverted philosophy to perpetrate fascism through terrorism. They are racist in every sense, because they advocate hate for "infidels and jews" which are groups of people they practice profound prejudice against.
//

So does that mean that there is a nation for all groups scattered around the world that believe alike ?
The Bush nation :)
 
uscitizen said:
This is not correct. As I pointed out, replace "nationalism" with "radical Islamic fundamentalism" and it's the same thing. Their "nation" is "perverted Islam" and they have rallied around this perverted philosophy to perpetrate fascism through terrorism. They are racist in every sense, because they advocate hate for "infidels and jews" which are groups of people they practice profound prejudice against.
//

So does that mean that there is a nation for all groups scattered around the world that believe alike ?
The Bush nation :)
Click to expand...
He seems to want to be able to call any authoritarian movement "fascist" if it pleases him to do so.
 
OrnotBitwise said:
He seems to want to be able to call any authoritarian movement "fascist" if it pleases him to do so.
Click to expand...

That wasn't what I said at all. We are talking about a specific authoritarian movement with specific radical perverted elements of fascism and theocracy. You guys are real good at lumping everything in a great big box and claiming we are against "all" of something, why is that? No one has ever claimed to hate ALL Muslims, or ALL radicals, or ALL fundamentalists, or even ALL fascists. No one has said that ALL of anything is the same as the isolated enemy we are discussing, yet that is what you people continually try to convey as your understanding of our positions. My question is, why do you feel compelled to be so intellectually dishonest about it?
 
uscitizen said:
This is not correct. As I pointed out, replace "nationalism" with "radical Islamic fundamentalism" and it's the same thing. Their "nation" is "perverted Islam" and they have rallied around this perverted philosophy to perpetrate fascism through terrorism. They are racist in every sense, because they advocate hate for "infidels and jews" which are groups of people they practice profound prejudice against.
//

So does that mean that there is a nation for all groups scattered around the world that believe alike ?
The Bush nation :)
Click to expand...

No, it means, in the context of "fascism" as it applies to radical Islamic fundamentalists, the "nationalist" element is replaced by "religious perversion" of Islamic faith. I am merely attempting to explain something you didn't seem to understand, I am not making some broad-based proclaimation about all groups around the world being their own "nation" or any other bird-brain analogy you throw up as a straw man.
 
Dixie said:
Al qaeda is the exact opposite of a "nationalist" and "racist" movement.

This is not correct. As I pointed out, replace "nationalism" with "radical Islamic fundamentalism" and it's the same thing. Their "nation" is "perverted Islam" and they have rallied around this perverted philosophy to perpetrate fascism through terrorism. They are racist in every sense, because they advocate hate for "infidels and jews" which are groups of people they practice profound prejudice against.

As for the "iron-fisted leader" required by fascism, that would be Allah, according to the radicals. It is he, who has ordained them the right to perpetrate terror on the rest of us in his name.

And, fundamentalist islamic theocracies are somewhat decentralized.

Perhaps you should Google the word "Caliphate" and see what it says, because these people do indeed have a cenralized goal of theocratic domination.
Click to expand...

As I pointed out, replace "nationalism" with "radical Islamic fundamentalism" and it's the same thing

LMAO!

Just like I told damo, Rove's soldiers want to re-write and replace formal definstions, by shoe-horning their definition of theocrats, into the dictionary fascist definition.

Dude, you can't pound a sqaure peg into a round hole. Nore cab you change a word's definition. A religious inspired movement, pan-nationalist is theocratic.

I could just as well "replace" some of the words in a dictionary definition of "Horse", to make it seem like a Cow.
 
He posted the definition from dictionary.com... It seems to fit better than assumptions about the definition. Especially number 2.
 
Damocles said:
He posted the definition from dictionary.com... It seems to fit better than assumptions about the definition. Especially number 2.
Click to expand...

read my previous response. Fascism requires extreme nationalism and/or racism, and the existence of an iron-fisted dictator with unitary powers.

None of which apply to the pan-nationalist, non-racist al qaeda goal of the spread of islamic theocracies governed by sharia law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top