Wednesday, June 13, 2007

An immigration compilation

First, we have the new Ann Coulter column:

'No Drug Smuggler Left Behind!'
I didn't realize "living in the shadows" meant in the shadows of palm trees around the pools at taxpayer-funded houses.

Then I discovered that CAUSA (read criminal enablers) has a new YouTube channel. I see some familiar faces in their videos.

I have also heard, though can't find internet proof, that Avel Gordley is outraged that people would dare to enforce the law in Portland. Here is a photo I took of Gordley in Portland:

Yes, that's your "representative" standing in front of a foreign flag and a picture of Che Guevera. This is the kind of person who supports lawlessness.

31 comments:

compilation continued said...

Most Americans Back Stalled Senate Immigration Bill, Poll Shows

By Heidi Przybyla

June 13 (Bloomberg) -- Most Americans back a guest-worker program and a proposal allowing illegal immigrants to become U.S. citizens that were part of legislation the Senate shelved last week after it failed to gain sufficient support ...

A new Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll shows that at least a plurality of Americans favors the two most contentious provisions of the bill, the proposal to offer 12 million undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship and the program for temporary workers ...

Moreover, most of those surveyed appear to reject one of the central arguments deployed by the bill's opponents: The poll finds that less than a third of all respondents, including Republicans, believe illegal immigrants take jobs away from Americans who need them ...

Read it and weep, guys.

Calhoun said...

Here's an interesting poll from Rasmussen. Read it and weep, illegal aliens.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Just 20% of American voters want Congress to try and pass the immigration reform bill that failed in the Senate last week. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 51% would like their legislators to “take smaller steps towards reform” while 16% believe they should wait until next year. The survey was conducted on Monday and Tuesday night as the President was publicly attempting to rally support for the legislation.

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of voters would favor an approach that focuses exclusively on “exclusively on securing the border and reducing illegal immigration.” Support for the enforcement only approach comes from 84% of Republicans, 55% of Democrats, and 69% of those not affiliated with either major party.

Overall, just 21% are opposed to the enforcement-only approach.

Just 30% would favor legislation that focused “exclusively on legalizing the status of undocumented workers already living in the United States.” Fifty-seven percent (57%) oppose that strategy, including 63% of Republicans, 52% of Democrats, and 55% of unaffiliated voters.

Fifty-seven percent (57%) favor a proposal giving “all illegal aliens up to three years to leave the United States. After leaving, the illegal aliens would have to get in line and wait their turn for legal entry into the United States.” Support for that concept comes from 67% of Republicans, 49% of Democrats, and 56% of unaffiliated voters.

Scott said...

Danlie:
Here is Avel Gordly's statement.

Ben Dover said...

God, you're an idiot. How do you feed yourself?
Oh, and by the way...

Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris
Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris
Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris
Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris
Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris
Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris

Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris Paris

Fascist Watch said...

Attention class, your homework assignment for tonight will be to read the following essay by Umberto Eco. Read carefully … with special attention to 3-7, 9-10, 12 and 14. For extra credit, please be prepared next session to identify how many of these apply to you:

Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt

By Umberto Eco

In spite of some fuzziness regarding the difference between various historical forms of fascism, I think it is possible to outline a list of features that are typical of what I would like to call Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism. These features cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it.

1. The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition.

Traditionalism is of course much older than fascism. Not only was it typical of counterrevolutionary Catholic thought after the French revolution, but is was born in the late Hellenistic era, as a reaction to classical Greek rationalism. In the Mediterranean basin, people of different religions (most of the faiths indulgently accepted by the Roman pantheon) started dreaming of a revelation received at the dawn of human history. This revelation, according to the traditionalist mystique, had remained for a long time concealed under the veil of forgotten languages -- in Egyptian hieroglyphs, in the Celtic runes, in the scrolls of the little-known religions of Asia.
This new culture had to be syncretistic. Syncretism is not only, as the dictionary says, "the combination of different forms of belief or practice;" such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and although they seem to say different or incompatible things, they all are nevertheless alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth.
As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth already has been spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.
If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores, are labeled New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine, who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge -- that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.

2. Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism.

Both Fascists and Nazis worshipped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon blood and earth (Blut und Boden). The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life. The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.

3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action's sake.

Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism, from Hermann Goering's fondness for a phrase from a Hanns Johst play ("When I hear the word 'culture' I reach for my gun") to the frequent use of such expressions as "degenerate intellectuals," "eggheads," "effete snobs," and "universities are nests of reds." The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values.

4. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism.

In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.

5. Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity.

Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.

6. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration.

That is why one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups. In our time, when the old "proletarians" are becoming petty bourgeois (and the lumpen are largely excluded from the political scene), the fascism of tomorrow will find its audience in this new majority.

7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country.

This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time inside and outside. In the United States, a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found in Pat Robertson's The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many others.

8. The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies.

When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers of Ur-Fascism must also be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.

9. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.

Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such "final solutions" implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament.

10. Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies contempt for the weak.

Ur-Fascism can only advocate a popular elitism. Every citizen belongs to the best people in the world, the members or the party are the best among the citizens, every citizen can (or ought to) become a member of the party. But there cannot be patricians without plebeians. In fact, the Leader, knowing that his power was not delegated to him democratically but was conquered by force, also knows that his force is based upon the weakness of the masses; they are so weak as to need and deserve a ruler.

11. In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero.

In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. It is not by chance that a motto of the Spanish Falangists was Viva la Muerte ("Long Live Death!"). In nonfascist societies, the lay public is told that death is unpleasant but must be faced with dignity; believers are told that it is the painful way to reach a supernatural happiness. By contrast, the Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life. The Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.

12. Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters.

This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons -- doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.

13. Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say.

In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view -- one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.
Because of its qualitative populism, Ur-Fascism must be against "rotten" parliamentary governments. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak.
Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in Nineteen Eighty-Four, as the official language of what he called Ingsoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning. But we must be ready to identify other kinds of Newspeak, even if they take the apparently innocent form of a popular talk show.

Ur-Fascism is still around us, sometimes in plainclothes. It would be so much easier for us if there appeared on the world scene somebody saying, "I want to reopen Auschwitz, I want the Blackshirts to parade again in the Italian squares." Life is not that simple. Ur-Fascism can come back under the most innocent of disguises. Our duty is to uncover it and to point our finger at any of its new instances — every day, in every part of the world. Franklin Roosevelt's words of November 4, 1938, are worth recalling: "If American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by peaceful means to better the lot of our citizens, fascism will grow in strength in our land." Freedom and liberation are an unending task.

Source --- New York Review of Books, 22 June 1995, pp.12-15. Excerpted in Utne Reader, November-December 1995, pp. 57-59.

Rick Hickey said...

compilationcont...IF you read the Charles Krauthamer article in the S-J, you would have been FULLY informed that the EXACT Poll you refer too, on the last page shows...69% FAVOR Arrest & Deportaton!
Also, if you go to msn.com you will read the ewest WSJ/NBC Poll which shows Pres. Bush & Congress at an all time LOW...Because they support this Amnesty Bill...Hello?

Daniel, delete the long post crap please, idiots trying to ruin your blog

Anonymous said...

Maybe Avel will give us half of her mind as that would leave her with zip.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Anonymous said...

Hickey's advice to Daniel that he "delete the long post crap" conforms perfectly to No. 3 in the essay above.

Anonymous said...

Hey Dan'l:
Can you please cut out the repetive junk along with the book reviews(excerpts)as they add or show nothing of the individuals own thoughts.The commentators show nothing except their own stupidity. Any one can copy others thoughts,but its hard to develop your own

Anonymous said...

Fascist Watch

People with nothing to say, always say the most.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps that is what accounts for 28 months of Daniel's political musings.

R Huse said...

The funny thing is some of the big intellectual "Fascist Watch" types probably don't get the fact that they are defending people marching in front of a Che flag. Its especially funny given the condescending start of the post while seeming to miss that obvious fact.

Che's one redeeming feature was that he was the most photogenic of modern day totalitarians. It is interesting how this seems to make all the difference with so many deep thinkers. It makes me wonder what Hitler's place in history would have been had he just worn his mustache a little differently.

cincinatus said...

The Review of Books piece was not intended for the "enforcement" people on this blog.

Who was it intended for?

The piece was intended for folks who might be open to an enforcement approach...that come from the left side of the political spectrum that wonder into this blog from time to time.

That was an intimidation piece to keep other center/left people on the plantation (Too bad they even listen to such psycho bable).

Funny though, facism is a political philosophy of the left; it wants more state-control. Limited government and fiscal responsibility are opposite.

While we want control of the border (a basic function of any nation-state) we generally want less government and lower taxes.

These long pieces demonstrate the left is desperate and is afraid of not just losing this argument, but losing followers as well.

Anonymous said...

Fred Thompson is going to lose the 2008 presidential election.

FW said...

RHuse, yes, I would defend people marching in front of a Che banner. I would also defend people marching in front of a Nazi swastika ... or a French flag, or a British flag, or a US flag. I would even defend you, so long as what we're really talking about here is the concept of freedom of speech. Gotta problem with that? Then you'd better go back through Mr. Umberto's list ...

R Huse said...

I simply said it was inane and fairly humorous for you to be calling fascists those of us who have problem with people who tend to have a racist outlook, speak in front of a Che flag, and encourage violation of our law. Where did it pop into your head that I had a problem with free speech?

I don't have a problem with you or U. Eco. I just think that one has to admit that it is pretty damn funny that you have such a condescending tone and yet missed the complete irony of what you were saying when coupled with the picture.

Sorry for trying to point out why it was funny. Yeeesh. Why is it the pious seem to never have a sense of humor.

barney said...

The truth...Many Democrats are starting to question a Democratic leadership that pushes amnesty:

Which will lower wages, push Americans out of jobs that were once well paying, and raise their taxes and reduce the quality and amount of public services.

Around 50 percent of Democrats and Democratic leaning voters are against the Amnesty Act of 2007.

The leftys who come to this blog are theoretical wannabe elites parroting what they think is the party line.

Meanwhile, rank and file, lunch bucket Democrats feel betrayed.

Give credit to the Republican rank and file who don't just follow the party-line from the top.

In some sense, this must be the most unsettling display to center/left party-line enforcers: It provides an example to the independent minded in their own party.

Could it be that center/right folks think the way they do because of their own life experiences and not because some party higherups told them "this" is the party-line?

Food for thought.

Bobkatt said...

Open borders=chaos
Chaos=more restrictions
More restrictions=Fascism.
Open borders, George W., destroy the middle class, sell off the country, collapse the economy, North American Union, one big plan.
Which side are you on?

Anonymous said...

How about the side of working people?

Anonymous said...

06.13.07 - Lou Debates La Raza

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q_ENvzmE2s

Anonymous said...

I see Bob Katt has been dipping into the medical marijuana laced with PCP. Sheesh...

barney said...

Who is on the side of the American working people?

Rank and file Republicans or the Democratic leadership?

When you put it that way, I think the answer is obvious.

Polish Immigrant said...

It's very simple. Democrats need voters. Poor, uneducated people vote for Democrats. This is why Democrats want to ruin our economy by raising taxes: rich people don't vote for Democrats (unless they are really, really rich and don't draw much from income.)

So Democrats will always support open-border policies.

Anonymous said...

Barney: You are living in a fantasy land.

Opinion polls this week show massive discontent with BOTH political parties. Bush, meanwhile, is at an all-time low of 29 percent approval (which means, according to the logic of some confused souls, that 71 percent of the population is "anti-American") and Congress doesn't fare much better. Anyone who believes that the problems of ordinary working-class and middle-class Americans can or will be solved by Republicans or Democrats is kidding themselves and needs to wake up. Now.

Anonymous said...

2+3=29 duh,uh, ba...da Polish Immigrant is drunk again. Figures that even the anti-immigrant immigrants are a bunch of stupid drunks that can't come up with anything intelligent to say. Hey Polish, why don't you run another failed attempt to get elected to city council and leave the half-wit commentary to Daniel, ya douche.

Bobkatt said...

Anon 6:33 and 12:21, what intelligent comebacks. Sheese.

barney said...

To anon1032pm:

Who is visibly fighting this Amnesty bill tooth and nail?

1. Rank and file Republicans.

2. Center/right commentators and analysts.

2. Visible Republican Senators.

Of course, Bush and his cabal are leading this, but that's not "the Republican Party".

Yes, the Republican Party is divided with the vast majority against this bill.

Where is the Democratic Party?

Democratic majority leader Senator Harry Reid? Supports the bill.

Ted "Lion of the Senate" Kennedy is leading the charge for the bill.

The majority of the Democratic caucus in the Senate voted for cloture.

Where are the visible Democratic opponents to the bill?

So, to your argument neither party is for the working man based on polls: those polls measure general disatifaction with the Congress and the President.

The polls fail to measure which party the American people believe is fighting hardest against this amnesty, or which party is more for or against this amnesty act.

So actually you side-stepped the basic contention in my post.

My basic contention was this: the rank and file Republicans who are fighting this bill are doing more for the working man than the Democratic leadership.

I'm aware that a majority of rank and file Democrats are against this bill. But the Democratic leadership, commentators and analysts, and "Democratic opinion leaders" are definitely not making much noise against the bill.

Where are the Democratic presidential candidates on the bill?

While 9 out of 10 Republican presidential candidates are against the bill with the notable exception of McCain, and he's dead man walking.

Next time you say I'm in a "fantasy land", you need to do two things: Directly answer the assertion, which you didn't. And explain why your answer is more accurate, again, you failed to that.

I know it's hard to stomach the very idea and the plain fact that rank and file Republicans care more about the working man than the Democratic leadership.

Read'em and weep.

R Huse said...

Anon 10:32 and Barney

I think you are really missing the point here.

"Anyone who believes that the problems of ordinary working-class and middle-class Americans can or will be solved by Republicans or Democrats"

That's the problem right there. Government will never solve problems for you. They only have the ability to impede you. No matter what hand out, they may give you or program they may establish, that funding came from somewhere, other hard working Americans. Government only has the power to tax and regulate, and thus destroy. It has the power to create nothing. It will never solve your problems unless it is at the expense of someone else.

barney said...

To r huse856am:

You miss my point entirely.

My point: Rank and file Republicans are looking out for working Americans in terms of this amnesty bill, more so than the Democratic leadership.

This amnesty bill will depress wages and degrade working conditions as the lack of enforcement already has depressed wages and working conditions (the Del Monte working conditions were criminal).

I'm not talking about government giving working class Americans anything other than a reasonable market for their labor and wages, and the rule of law to allow workers to have an arms length negotiation posture with their employers.

Your position if taken to its logical conclusion would leave the law of the jungle, not the rule of law.

Sovereignty works to the benefit of all citizens. Defense of the border is specifically stated in the U.S. Constitution.

Equality of Citizenship is central to the American ideal, "All Men are created Equal".

To ensure that all men are treated equal, the rule of law is established. We require government to ensure, execute and give forums for redress of grievences (criminal and civil courts of law).

R huse, please reconsider your intemperate statement in light of my response's points.

Read the comment and correctly comprehend the point.

R Huse said...

Barney:

"You miss my point entirely.

My point: Rank and file Republicans are looking out for working Americans in terms of this amnesty bill, more so than the Democratic leadership."

Uh, no.

If you read my post it starts with the quote from anon 10.32. Now he may have been rebutting your initial point incorrectly, but I was quite clear I was addressing that quote and your response to it.

"This amnesty bill will depress wages and degrade working conditions as the lack of enforcement already has depressed wages and working conditions (the Del Monte working conditions were criminal)."

Yep, I pretty much agree with that.

"I'm not talking about government giving working class Americans anything other than a reasonable market for their labor and wages, "

How in the world does government provide a reasonable market for anything? If I wake up tomorrow and decide I am a world class banjo player, is it governments responsibility to provide me a reasonable market for my labor? Is it to assure reasonable wages for me? When in the world did anyone ever sit down and decide government provides a reasonable market for anything? Government doesn't provide a market, it regulates an existing market. That was my point.

"and the rule of law to allow workers to have an arms length negotiation posture with their employers"

What the hell does this mean? Sure, you can have whatever law you want. It doesn't create wealth. Pass a law tomorrow that says everyone gets union wages. Does that create the wealth to pay those wages? NO!

Government doesn't create wealth, it regulates. That was my point which you obviously totally missed.

Good lord, are we really back in economics 101 here?

As for rule of law, boarders, sovereignty and equality of citizenship, who cares. I never mentioned them and have no idea how you could translate a simple economics point into being against borders or sovereignty.

barney said...

To r huse856pm:

We are talking past each other and I believe the root of the problem was you responding to both my comment and the other at the same time.

I was inartful in using the word "giving". Regulating as you use the term is a better description.

But economics is not totally seperate from politics as you imply. "Political economy" was the traditional phrase used to label economics because you can't seperate politics and economics as you would have us do.

Government has been involved in markets since time inmemorial.

My views and yours are similar in regards to the level of involvement: Less is better.

But your inability to see the connection between the rule of law and a fair marketplace identifies you as a pure "market" advocate.
Fine. But can you really say "the rule of law has no place in the maret place?" Surely you understand the "law of contracts" has a central role in ensuring a stable and predictable market place?

Arms length negotiation is the key "tool" ensuring both sides to a economic transaction are truly engaged in a voluntary exchange.

Government does not create wealth, I agree.

You state "As to the rule of law, sovereignty, and equality of citizenship, who cares." Immigration policy is all about those three concepts and certainly that was the reference of my comment.

Lastly, economics is very much involved in the immigration debate.

Why do you think corporations want amnesty? My answer is for cheap labor. Cheap labor has everything to do with economics.

Your devotion to market principles is admirable, but your analysis falls short in articulating the complete picture confronting America in regards to the immigration debate.

Conflating my comment and the other comment which never really responded to my comment in the first place did reveal your refusal to admit the connection between immigration, economics, and the rule of law.

Thank you for the opportunity to illustrate the contrary, not withstanding your protests.

Rank and file Republicans agree with me and the group of thinkers you belong to will continue to fail to see the power of the illegal immigration debate in American politics.