Fascist Britain

[Steve James]

Afa "fear," let's get one thing straight. "Fascists" base their entire arguments on fear of ___, and express it as anger at ___. No doubt, fear is not the answer. Fear is the tool.

Afa what one can do: stand up for what you think is right; stand up against what you think is wrong.

I'd say it's better to hold principles that apply to everyone, as you'd want them to apply to you. If someone begins with a different premise, he should not expect others to accept his conclusions.

It'd be easy to quote the saying "the only thing necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." Yeah, but the question is, how does a man decide what's evil in the first place? Like I said before, it's easy when it's directed at him.

[GrahamB]

I think there are some worrying signs of fascism returning, that's all. Just felt the need to vent, if you don't think times are changing and this is nothing new then that's cool. Stay safe!

[Steve James]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-diB65scQU

[middleway]

Just felt the need to vent, if you don't think times are changing and this is nothing new then that's cool. Stay safe!

Fair enough bro. Your response to me when i posted SH podcast on Isis Motivations was "true, but (for me) the bigger question is the practical one - what do we do?"

I guess its worth thinking about here too. I hope the Venting helped. And you!

Afa what one can do: stand up for what you think is right; stand up against what you think is wrong.

I agree. I believe in peace, freedom and equality.

'Standing up' doesnt have to mean resisting in the traditional sense of fighting fire with fire, however. Instead we could fight fire with water!

Extreme groups of any persuation thrive off resistance, they need something to butt up against to maintain their stance and have things to point too to rally weak minded people to their cause. I love RobPs responce to fascist marches ... dont give them coverage, dont turn up, let them walk through empty streets with no news, no people, no nothing .... then they all walk home none the better for it. In the modern world i guess that is simply impossible however ... but what a wonderful sight it would be.

It'd be easy to quote the saying "the only thing necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." Yeah, but the question is, how does a man decide what's evil in the first place? Like I said before, it's easy when it's directed at him.

"the only thing necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."

That really is the first question. Who is the 'good man'?

To the ISIS fighter surrounded by blasphemy, the western world is evil. To the skinhead Fascist, the peaceful Sri Lankan woman with a differnt colour skin to them is evil. To the socialist extremist, the Millionare CEO of a green energy company is Evil. I dont think anyone really thinks they are evil, but are committing attrocity in the name of something they consider worthwhile (there are of course psychopathic exceptions) ... and there in lies the problem.

It is my belief that the only things that fuel the march torwards equality and freedom, are democracy, freedom of speech and rationality. I believe if we reject any of these, we forget the lessons of history. We forget the attrocitie of the Third Reich, of Stalin etc

Hopefully peace and rationality prevails in these times.

[GrahamB]

You really store these things up and remember them? I had no idea. I feel privileged

[Steve James]

It is my belief that the only things that fuel the march torwards equality and freedom, are democracy, freedom of speech and rationality.

Here's the problem: is a democracy with freedom of speech and slavery be rational? The answer is "yes" for some. Therefore, it is the meaning of "Democracy" and "freedom" that must be answered first, or else they become mantras thrown around for effect. Everybody wants to be equally "free." All laws restrict freedom, and always have. If they restrict everyone the same, then they're fair or just.

[cloudz]

The Bills been passed; I heard a Conservative MP discuss it briefly on the Radio. He voted Remain and believes the Bill does offer Government unprecedented powers - which he thinks are excessive. He also believes that some if these will be curbed and toned down in Commitee. He voted for it to go through on the basis of it not going through at this critical time will result in problems we really don't want and don't need.. That seems like a very reasonable position to take; Bills rarely make it through the democratic process as is, things like this are pretty common. Throwing around terms like Fascism over this seems a little strong and sensationalist to me at this point.

You only need really look around the world to notice that we are still very lucky in the UK in terms of Government and Democracy (let's just pray Comrade Corbyn never makes it into Number 10). Heck we even have the decency to stand by our own referendum votes!

[middleway]

You really store these things up and remember them? I had no idea. I feel privileged

Not store up, just recal things. I found the conversation amusing, So it stuck in there.

The Bills been passed; I heard a Conservative MP discuss it briefly on the Radio. He voted Remain and believes the Bill does offer Government unprecedented powers - which he thinks are excessive. He also believes that some if these will be curbed and toned down in Commitee. He voted for it to go through on the basis of it not going through at this critical time will result in problems we really don't want and don't need.. That seems like a very reasonable position to take; Bills rarely maske it through the democratic process as is, things like this are pretty common. Throwing around terms like Fascism over this seems a little strong and sensationalist to me at this point.

You only need really look around the world to notice that we are still very lucky in the UK in terms of Government and Democracy (let's just pray Comrade Corbyn never makes it into Number 10). Heck we even have the decency to stand by our own referendum votes!

Amen.

Here's the problem: is a democracy with freedom of speech and slavery be rational? The answer is "yes" for some. Therefore, it is the meaning of "Democracy" and "freedom" that must be answered first, or else they become mantras thrown around for effect. Everybody wants to be equally "free." All laws restrict freedom, and always have. If they restrict everyone the same, then they're fair or just.

No slavery is not rational in any environment and freedom of speech and democratic process 'weed out' slavery as the democracy matures. Democracy works to destroy slavery, and creates greatest freedom of any current model we have. It has happened in all true democracies.

Is any democracy perfect? No. But throwing democracy out of the window entirely is never a good solution, history has shown us that time and again. Which is exactely why i voted to leave the EU which is not a democratic institution.

[GrahamB]

Is any democracy perfect? No. But throwing democracy out of the window entirely is never a good solution, history has shown us that time and again. Which is exactely why i voted to leave the EU which is not a democratic institution.

It appears to me that a bill that enables a government to make its own laws without going through parliament is exactly "throwing democracy out of the window". Isn't it?

[Steve James]

Ancient Greece was a slave state, so was Sparta, so was the United States. All claimed to be democracies. There's nothing inherent in democracy that prevents slavery. If it were irrational, it wouldn't start.

The issue is always a matter of defining the "demos". Nationalists define people out. Jews were as German as as the Nazis who despised them.

I couldn't care less about your Brexit. You support it because leaving will be good or better for you.

[middleway]

Ancient Greece was a slave state, so was Sparta, so was the United States. All claimed to be democracies. There's nothing inherent in democracy that prevents slavery. If it were irrational, it wouldn't start.

The issue is always a matter of defining the "demos". Nationalists define people out. Jews were as German as as the Nazis who despised them.

I couldn't care less about your Brexit. You support it because leaving will be good or better for you.

Did you read what i said? ... '

weed out' slavery as the democracy matures.

Can you name a current Mature Democracy where slavery is accepted?

Rationality is not an inherrent part of democracy ... especially ancient democracies. However, Nazi Germany ceased to be a democracy when the Nazi party gained power.

This is why I said ALL three were needed. Freedom of speech for all, A basis in rationality, and Democratic process. I challenge you to point to a better political process that is working today.

It appears to me that a bill that enables a government to make its own laws without going through parliament is exactly "throwing democracy out of the window". Isn't it?

I am NO fan of the conservative party and did not vote for them. So in some ways i agree with you.

However, you seem to have your position confused. If you are against this bill, why are you not against laws being passed by the EU that directly impact the UK without ANY involvement from the UK populace or government? You seem to trust the EU parlimetnary process when laws are passed with no democratic process in place. But when the UK passes a similar process you have a problem with it?

Regarding the bill. I never agree with giving the government ANY more power than it has. It is my thought that The bill allows the government to transfer laws from the EU without going through parliment to make the process faster. As George pointed out, Passing a bill without amendment is extremely rare, in fact it almost never occures. This bill HAD to pass to make the trasition away from the EU smoother and faster. Even some Labour front benchers agreed.

I hope that the UK government will not abuse this bill ... and i highly doubt that they will.

[GrahamB]

Chris - which EU law in particular are you looking forward to us being free of? Please name one.

[Steve James]

Can you name a current Mature Democracy where slavery is accepted?

Well, there's no such thing as a "mature" democracy because democracy means different things to different people. I just used to point out that it was not contradictory to democracy. Democracy means nothing without reference and administration by people. The ancient Greeks, the 18th century U.S.americans, and the 20th century Jim Crow advocates all claimed to be democratic.

I could ask you whether there is a present day democracy where there is not oppression or repression of some group. I could ask whether there is a capitalist country without large numbers of poor people. Slavery (or wage slavery) is unnecessary for democracy, but necessary for capitalism. However, my point is not rhetorical.

Rationality is not an inherrent part of democracy ... especially ancient democracies. However, Nazi Germany ceased to be a democracy when the Nazi party gained power.

Well, afa rationality, that's what I said, isn't it. Your next sentence doesn't follow, and, for one thing, Germany became a nation-state in the 19th century. There were only two "democracies": i.e., nations not ruled by a king or queen (US and France). Hitler was elected "democratically," but he legislated the country into rule by decree dictatorship. However, Germans certainly considered their nation a democracy, albeit in the way they defined democratic.

This is why I said ALL three were needed. Freedom of speech for all, A basis in rationality, and Democratic process. I challenge you to point to a better political process that is working today.

As a matter of fact, the US is a republic, not a democracy. The founders didn't want a democracy because that would mean that everyone would have power. I.e., to vote. Today, here, there are still people who try to limit voting and peoples' (the demos) right to vote. It's not necessary to go back to ancient civilizations.

That's why the word "democracy" doesn't impress me at all. I have no clue what it means. I have plenty of experience with people who say they want it. Here, they fly the flag and talk about how great the system is ... or was. Every year they celebrate kicking off your oppressive yokes and gaining their freedom. So, no, I can't say I know of a better system than the one I live in.

However, is you NHS democratic or socialist? Does the term really matter when it comes down to it?

No one is against democracy because they're against fascism. The two are not connected except when they're really describing the same thing, which is possible. Being against fascism is not the same as being against free speech. I don't think that imams should be permitted to incite terrorism, but that doesn't mean I'm against free speech, or Islam. I support everyone's right to say what he wants, and everyone's right to react. If someone makes a threat, take it seriously. It's not theory.

[liokault]

This is a great thread.

I'm glad that I live in times like these. The salty tears of the failed left sustain me.

Peak Corbyn passed, (slightly higher than Brown when he lost the office) article 50 and a new badger cull. Great days, great days.



LGTB people marching against Islam....oh the thought crime.

[middleway]

Graham, why not address the question i asked you first? It is a hard one, being faced with your own logical fallacy, but throwing a straw man my way doesnt really help.

Hi steve. What system is better than democracy in the world today? In general i agree with you. The remedy of course is standardisation of definition and a march towards that goal. But point me to something better.

There are problems with democracy but they are outweighed by the benefits... if we look at history. I am yet to see a better system .... monarchys, dictatorships, socialist, fascist governments etc none seem to work as well. And i hate to say it but the US system also seems inferior to the British one to me. You essentially have a 'king' in the executive branch and his power to bypass the rest of the government seems a real problem to much of the rest of the world. Add to that the limitations of a two party system and the level of money in government and it seems to be a system designed for a simpler time.

Just my thoughts of course.

Thanks