|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On September 07 2018 10:57 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2018 10:53 Plansix wrote:On September 07 2018 10:42 Introvert wrote:On September 07 2018 10:36 Plansix wrote:On September 07 2018 10:23 Introvert wrote:On September 07 2018 06:23 Plansix wrote:On September 07 2018 06:01 Introvert wrote:On September 07 2018 05:58 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 07 2018 05:57 Introvert wrote:
Now is one of those times my schedule makes me sad, this thread looks like so much these past few days!
Anyway, here is by far the best clown story of this clown show today, or even yesterday:
Remember when we all agreed that Booker is a shameless stuntman? We should remember that, because right now is a preview of 2020 dem primary. We are, however, missing Gillibrand so were stuck on level 12 hysterics instead of 13. So why did Cornyn and the rest spend half an hour making a huge deal about it then. Presumably they took Booker at his word and had no information of their own. They wont do that again. So in other words, the Republicans got played hard by Booker after he called their bluff on withholding documents they knew were relevant? The Republicans lied and dunked on today before of it? Let’s not beat around the bush, Republicans ditched the standard bipartisan agreement on documents that will be released and decided cherry pick which documents they wanted withheld. The Democrats objected and finally decided they were going to dump documents and force the Republicans to try, and fail to remove Booker and others from the Senate. Republicans knew their bluff was called and caved early this morning. But Booker decided to make them look like real fools and publicly call them on their bullshit, upstaging them in the political theater game. Man it really sucks that the Democrats have stopped playing by the rules the Republicans haven’t been playing by for years. And forget the theatrics, the Republicans tried to withhold documents from the public showing our boy Brett might have lied under oath and flat our lied to Susan Collins. Lets forget the Booker and the Democrats were right to demand those documents be released. On September 07 2018 05:58 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 07 2018 05:57 Introvert wrote:Now is one of those times my schedule makes me sad, this thread looks like so much these past few days! Anyway, here is by far the best clown story of this clown show today, or even yesterday: https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1037751510556454912Remember when we all agreed that Booker is a shameless stuntman? We should remember that, because right now is a preview of 2020 dem primary. We are, however, missing Gillibrand so were stuck on level 12 hysterics instead of 13. So why did Cornyn and the rest spend half an hour making a huge deal about it then. Cornyn lied when he said the documents were relevant, maybe he is full of shit about this too. Maybe they released them to Booker and others, but didn’t want them released to the public. Also who clears docs at 4 am? And if they cleared them at 10 am, that was after the hearing started. This is them doing damage control once their bluff got called. There is so much, let's just start small. From my reading, the documents Hirono released today and the ones Booker did were different. So that should be noted. This is the statement Booker released today: + Show Spoiler +So his best defense that this point, I suppose, is to claim willful ignorance. He asked for the documents to be made public last night, and throughout the entire morning today, didn't bother to find out if his request had been granted before going up there claiming he was at risk of removal from the Senate. That part should be a dead giveaway, because we all know that the Democrats have a better chance of stopping Kavanaugh than Booker does of being expelled. in fact the wording of the statement almost makes it seem like he did know, but it's more ambiguous. So far, I have seen no claims of ignorance, which would be a sad defense by itself but it's at least more plausible. We can stop here or move into the "lie" to Susan Collins, but somone must point out how I am not sure that all legal scholars refer to Roe as the settled law of the land at the Supreme Court level since Court can always overrule its precedent, and three current Justices on the Court would do so. and saying Roe is "settled law." Roe is precedent that can be overturned. And many scholars have criticized it for it's garbage reasoning, even if they like the outcome. Even the articles I skimmed looking for exact quotes note "legal scholars" vs his views distinction. But also, he is doing the dance every nominee does. The next Democratic appointees will get questions about Citizens United, will call it "precedent" and then refuse to say how they would rule in the future. That's how this works. I still don’t understand why you post like this with me, like I’m some political novice who doesn’t understand how the nomination process works. I literally taught US history and government. I know how the mother fucking senate works. I know he doing the dance. The man is a feckless political operative that is going to erode federal power in the name of textualism, or simply asserting his political viewpoint and saying the founding fathers agreed. The problem is the dance is now effective lying or simply refusing to answer any questions. The thing is the rules are changing. And conservatives don’t like it because they liked the dance. They could game it. But people are tired of this dance. They see through the artifice and understand this man is full of it. He will, in his time on the court, take a scalpel to Roe until it doesn’t effectively no longer exists. He called birth control “abortion pills”. So our boy Brett says all the right things and everyone is pretty much responding “You’re full of shit and we know it,” because it’s true. I post that way because it seems you are being dense on purpose. Those two statements were in no way "lies," but now we're just going to focus on the fact that no one answers questions? it's been that way for several decades, and att his point it couldn't work any other way. I am far more concerned about the Senators and their antics, we have hundreds of opinions from Kavanaugh (not getting 1/10th the attention, tellingly). Yes, we know more or less what he will do. We've known that since after David Souter. Probably the last "surprise" justice appointed. See, you just admitted it. They don’t have all the documents. They knew this guy drafted a billion emails when he worked for Bush and to vet all of those would take months. And they knew once that was done, he would never be confirmed because those emails were all the nails in the coffin. That is why they are rushing. That is why there is no bipartisan agreement on what documents will be released, as there has been in every other nomination. That is why they are withholding the documents for no real reason and releasing them when the Democrats call their bluff. This man would not survive a true nomination with proper transparency to the public. To slam him through and get wet dream court the conservatives want. The Republicans are the judicatory committee are full of shit and they know it. They are liars and they are getting caught lying. It doesn’t matter, the conservative court it coming. But not only do you folks want the court, but you don’t want to pay the price. You don’t want the blow back for “we won, deal with it style of politics”. It’s fine, the Democrats didn’t want it either in 2008. But this is your ACA, so be happy. It will likely surivive the blow back like the ACA did. We will find out if it worth it 8 years from now. I admit that I don't care about the documents. The unprecedented volume requested was a deliberate ploy to delay this as long as possible. None of these documents so far have been anything they were claimed to be, including the one I was trying to talk about. If this wasn't a show, we'd hear more about his written opinions. but the tone of this post makes clear that it doesn't matter. Just go straight to generalities. Fine.
Volume doesn’t matter. A complete picture of the nominee for a life time appointment matters. He was appointed because big money donors love him and his dislike of federal power/regulation. So, despite being a turd, they nominated him and knew they could never vet him fully before the Midterms. Hence what happened today, where the Democrats said this process is a sham because this thing is super rushed.
And the documents showed he likely lied under oath. But again, it doesn’t matter, so don’t worry. Come hell or high water, the conservative court will happen. Just don’t be like the Democrats and be shocked that conservatives take it in the teeth for slamming through wildly unpopular thing because it’s been your dream for forever.
Edit: And I'm not surprised you don't care about the documents. You are getting what you want and have never really been that concerned about bipartisan support for anything. Just own it.
|
Watch the video of Kavanaugh answering Ted Kennedy's questions for his confirmation to the circuit court, and compare to his emails showing his involvement in the Pryor nomination. He lied.
|
The full transcript is here, including Kavanaugh admitting he may have taken part in a moot court session, but doesn't remember. Which seems to imply that his answer of not "handling" the nomination was very narrow, as he also points out that he wasn't assigned to it. There are a few other things that make me think this wasn't nefarious, but that's the main one. I think everyone forgets that nominees often give true, but narrowly tailored answers. I know everyone is already convinced, but for those of you don't know, follow the link. I think there is a good reason the Democrats focused on the other issues today (documents generally), instead of perjury claims.
Edit: at any rate you couldn't get the proof needed... and since you can't get that or proof that exonerates, this will live on forever.
|
On September 07 2018 10:57 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2018 10:53 Plansix wrote:On September 07 2018 10:42 Introvert wrote:On September 07 2018 10:36 Plansix wrote:On September 07 2018 10:23 Introvert wrote:On September 07 2018 06:23 Plansix wrote:On September 07 2018 06:01 Introvert wrote:On September 07 2018 05:58 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 07 2018 05:57 Introvert wrote:Now is one of those times my schedule makes me sad, this thread looks like so much these past few days! Anyway, here is by far the best clown story of this clown show today, or even yesterday: https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1037751510556454912Remember when we all agreed that Booker is a shameless stuntman? We should remember that, because right now is a preview of 2020 dem primary. We are, however, missing Gillibrand so were stuck on level 12 hysterics instead of 13. So why did Cornyn and the rest spend half an hour making a huge deal about it then. Presumably they took Booker at his word and had no information of their own. They wont do that again. So in other words, the Republicans got played hard by Booker after he called their bluff on withholding documents they knew were relevant? The Republicans lied and dunked on today before of it? Let’s not beat around the bush, Republicans ditched the standard bipartisan agreement on documents that will be released and decided cherry pick which documents they wanted withheld. The Democrats objected and finally decided they were going to dump documents and force the Republicans to try, and fail to remove Booker and others from the Senate. Republicans knew their bluff was called and caved early this morning. But Booker decided to make them look like real fools and publicly call them on their bullshit, upstaging them in the political theater game. Man it really sucks that the Democrats have stopped playing by the rules the Republicans haven’t been playing by for years. And forget the theatrics, the Republicans tried to withhold documents from the public showing our boy Brett might have lied under oath and flat our lied to Susan Collins. Lets forget the Booker and the Democrats were right to demand those documents be released. On September 07 2018 05:58 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 07 2018 05:57 Introvert wrote:Now is one of those times my schedule makes me sad, this thread looks like so much these past few days! Anyway, here is by far the best clown story of this clown show today, or even yesterday: https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1037751510556454912Remember when we all agreed that Booker is a shameless stuntman? We should remember that, because right now is a preview of 2020 dem primary. We are, however, missing Gillibrand so were stuck on level 12 hysterics instead of 13. So why did Cornyn and the rest spend half an hour making a huge deal about it then. Cornyn lied when he said the documents were relevant, maybe he is full of shit about this too. Maybe they released them to Booker and others, but didn’t want them released to the public. Also who clears docs at 4 am? And if they cleared them at 10 am, that was after the hearing started. This is them doing damage control once their bluff got called. There is so much, let's just start small. From my reading, the documents Hirono released today and the ones Booker did were different. So that should be noted. This is the statement Booker released today: + Show Spoiler +So his best defense that this point, I suppose, is to claim willful ignorance. He asked for the documents to be made public last night, and throughout the entire morning today, didn't bother to find out if his request had been granted before going up there claiming he was at risk of removal from the Senate. That part should be a dead giveaway, because we all know that the Democrats have a better chance of stopping Kavanaugh than Booker does of being expelled. in fact the wording of the statement almost makes it seem like he did know, but it's more ambiguous. So far, I have seen no claims of ignorance, which would be a sad defense by itself but it's at least more plausible. We can stop here or move into the "lie" to Susan Collins, but somone must point out how I am not sure that all legal scholars refer to Roe as the settled law of the land at the Supreme Court level since Court can always overrule its precedent, and three current Justices on the Court would do so. and saying Roe is "settled law." Roe is precedent that can be overturned. And many scholars have criticized it for it's garbage reasoning, even if they like the outcome. Even the articles I skimmed looking for exact quotes note "legal scholars" vs his views distinction. But also, he is doing the dance every nominee does. The next Democratic appointees will get questions about Citizens United, will call it "precedent" and then refuse to say how they would rule in the future. That's how this works. I still don’t understand why you post like this with me, like I’m some political novice who doesn’t understand how the nomination process works. I literally taught US history and government. I know how the mother fucking senate works. I know he doing the dance. The man is a feckless political operative that is going to erode federal power in the name of textualism, or simply asserting his political viewpoint and saying the founding fathers agreed. The problem is the dance is now effective lying or simply refusing to answer any questions. The thing is the rules are changing. And conservatives don’t like it because they liked the dance. They could game it. But people are tired of this dance. They see through the artifice and understand this man is full of it. He will, in his time on the court, take a scalpel to Roe until it doesn’t effectively no longer exists. He called birth control “abortion pills”. So our boy Brett says all the right things and everyone is pretty much responding “You’re full of shit and we know it,” because it’s true. I post that way because it seems you are being dense on purpose. Those two statements were in no way "lies," but now we're just going to focus on the fact that no one answers questions? it's been that way for several decades, and att his point it couldn't work any other way. I am far more concerned about the Senators and their antics, we have hundreds of opinions from Kavanaugh (not getting 1/10th the attention, tellingly). Yes, we know more or less what he will do. We've known that since after David Souter. Probably the last "surprise" justice appointed. See, you just admitted it. They don’t have all the documents. They knew this guy drafted a billion emails when he worked for Bush and to vet all of those would take months. And they knew once that was done, he would never be confirmed because those emails were all the nails in the coffin. That is why they are rushing. That is why there is no bipartisan agreement on what documents will be released, as there has been in every other nomination. That is why they are withholding the documents for no real reason and releasing them when the Democrats call their bluff. This man would not survive a true nomination with proper transparency to the public. To slam him through and get wet dream court the conservatives want. The Republicans are the judicatory committee are full of shit and they know it. They are liars and they are getting caught lying. It doesn’t matter, the conservative court it coming. But not only do you folks want the court, but you don’t want to pay the price. You don’t want the blow back for “we won, deal with it style of politics”. It’s fine, the Democrats didn’t want it either in 2008. But this is your ACA, so be happy. It will likely surivive the blow back like the ACA did. We will find out if it worth it 8 years from now. I admit that I don't care about the documents. The unprecedented volume requested was a deliberate ploy to delay this as long as possible. None of these documents so far have been anything they were claimed to be, including the one I was trying to talk about. If this wasn't a show, we'd hear more about his written opinions. but the tone of this post makes clear that it doesn't matter. Just go straight to generalities. Fine.
I don't get why you're surprised. Democrats have been outraged over the hostage taking of the Supreme Court seat ever since the Republicans did it.
Of course they're kicking off and trying to make this as messy and painful as they can. They can't stop the process, but they can try and make it a black mark in the public's mind. Hard to tell whether it'll work or not, of course, but it seems like the political weather's on their side on this one.
On September 07 2018 14:34 Introvert wrote:
Edit: at any rate you couldn't get the proof needed... and since you can't get that or proof that exonerates, this will live on forever.
Obviously. Need the spectre of BENGHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZI be summoned to remind you of how this plays out from the Republican side of the spectrum?
Or indeed, Obama's birth certificate, a horseshit conspiracy so well-peddled that people still claim Obama isn't an American citizen after the man who invented the entire nonsense admitted it was nonsense.
|
On September 07 2018 14:34 Introvert wrote:The full transcript is here, including Kavanaugh admitting he may have taken part in a moot court session, but doesn't remember. Which seems to imply that his answer of not "handling" the nomination was very narrow, as he also points out that he wasn't assigned to it. There are a few other things that make me think this wasn't nefarious, but that's the main one. I think everyone forgets that nominees often give true, but narrowly tailored answers. I know everyone is already convinced, but for those of you don't know, follow the link. I think there is a good reason the Democrats focused on the other issues today (documents generally), instead of perjury claims. Edit: at any rate you couldn't get the proof needed... and since you can't get that or proof that exonerates, this will live on forever.
It is very strange that the Democrats would focus on something that would have disqualified someone from being considered not even a decade ago. Very very strange.
Edit: Also there is this factor: the president refusing to talk to the FBI during an investigation. The politics of this nomination are so naked that even the general public has seen it, which is why the nominee is so unpopular.
|
On September 07 2018 19:07 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2018 14:34 Introvert wrote:The full transcript is here, including Kavanaugh admitting he may have taken part in a moot court session, but doesn't remember. Which seems to imply that his answer of not "handling" the nomination was very narrow, as he also points out that he wasn't assigned to it. There are a few other things that make me think this wasn't nefarious, but that's the main one. I think everyone forgets that nominees often give true, but narrowly tailored answers. I know everyone is already convinced, but for those of you don't know, follow the link. I think there is a good reason the Democrats focused on the other issues today (documents generally), instead of perjury claims. Edit: at any rate you couldn't get the proof needed... and since you can't get that or proof that exonerates, this will live on forever. It is very strange that the Democrats would focus on something that would have disqualified someone from being considered not even a decade ago. Very very strange. Edit: Also there is this factor: the president refusing to talk to the FBI during an investigation. The politics of this nomination are so naked that even the general public has seen it, which is why the nominee is so unpopular. https://twitter.com/JesseFFerguson/status/1037851627154288640
Looks like coincidence to me, Bob.
|
Oh and so Trump will preside the UN security council in three weeks it looks like. It sounds like a plot for a Simpson episode but well. This is 2018. I am curious how his bs will play at that table. Probably not very well.
|
Former president Obama is accepting an award at my college today, and I just walked past the building he's inside, while he's currently giving a speech accepting the award. I saw a group of maybe 5 protesters, one of which was holding a sign depicting him as the Joker and saying "CULTURAL MARXIST". I would have stayed and talked with the protesters, but it's raining and I don't have an umbrella. Sorry about the late notice, I was in class when it started.
Here's a picture I took while walking past (sorry about the Snapchat format, I forgot to save it unedited).
+ Show Spoiler +
Here's the livestream.
mediaspace.illinois.edu
Cheers
|
On September 08 2018 01:43 Howie_Dewitt wrote:Former president Obama is accepting an award at my college today, and I just walked past the building he's inside, while he's currently giving a speech accepting the award. I saw a group of maybe 5 protesters, one of which was holding a sign depicting him as the Joker and saying "CULTURAL MARXIST". I would have stayed and talked with the protesters, but it's raining and I don't have an umbrella. Sorry about the late notice, I was in class when it started. Here's a picture I took while walking past (sorry about the Snapchat format, I forgot to save it unedited). + Show Spoiler +Here's the livestream. mediaspace.illinois.eduCheers
Anyone who uses the term « cultural marxist » is a clown. It’s neo fascist bullshit that doesn’t even mean anything and the exact rethoric that got left wing kids slaughtered like livestock in Norway. Seriously fuck those guys.
|
It’s bullshit that doesn’t even mean anything
like the «neo fascist» term?
|
On September 08 2018 01:49 Sent. wrote:like the «neo fascist» term?
Are you saying the Neo Tokyo is a meaningless, bad name that doesn’t mean New Tokyo? What do you have against the classic that is Akira? Even the term Cultural Marxism had a meaning until it go run into the ground by intellectual light weights on the internet. Now its just "People I don't like."
|
On September 08 2018 01:49 Sent. wrote:like the «neo fascist» term?
No not like neo fascism. Neo fascism is a well rounded concept that has existed for a long time and is perfectly well defined.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-fascism
Cultural marxism is also a very precise concept that is related to the Frankfurt School, and that the alt right morons who use it don’t understand at all, because they have probably never even heard of the Frankfort School and have an Alex Jones level idea of Marx to start with. Just read the diarrhea Breivik produced before his mass murdering rampage to get an idea of how stupid the whole use of the term is.
|
To put it one way, the term "cultural Marxism" is much closer in definition to "those damn kids and their jazz music" than anything described by folks using the term today.
|
On September 08 2018 02:21 farvacola wrote:
To put it one way, the term "cultural Marxism" is much closer in definition to "those damn kids and their jazz music" than anything described by folks using the term today.
There are days I think you are a time traveler from the 1950s.
|
On September 08 2018 02:05 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2018 01:49 Sent. wrote:It’s bullshit that doesn’t even mean anything like the «neo fascist» term? Are you saying the Neo Tokyo is a meaningless, bad name that doesn’t mean New Tokyo? What do you have against the classic that is Akira? Even the term Cultural Marxism had a meaning until it go run into the ground by intellectual light weights on the internet. Now its just "People I don't like."
Obligatory shitpost because it is one of my favorite images of all time:
+ Show Spoiler +
On a less shitposty note:
This whole ordeal with "can Trump be subpoenaed" is really weird from the right. My impression is that no one is even remotely concerned with the question of Trump did something illegal. It feels like it is a foregone conclusion and that tribalism is so strong among the right, with their obsession with hierarchy, that it isn't even a big deal. Trump is their big strong man, and identifying with that big strong man makes them feel big and strong. And since he is their leader, he must be protected at all costs. There is no concern whether he did something illegal or not because, well, he's their leader.
Why is it not a bad thing that he is fighting tooth and nail to prevent being subpoenaed?
|
On September 08 2018 01:49 Sent. wrote:like the «neo fascist» term?
It's sounding more and more like <<Term Used Negatively About My Allies>> is a bullshit meaningless term, but <<Term Used Negatively About My Enemies>> is well-rounded, well-defined, specific, and accurate. Then we all have a good romp about how people that think differently than me don't have a clue about the terms, and people like me who've done all the right research know about the many differences. It's way too much group-membership debate and semantics for me.
|
On September 08 2018 02:21 farvacola wrote:
To put it one way, the term "cultural Marxism" is much closer in definition to "those damn kids and their jazz music" than anything described by folks using the term today.
To emphasize the point danglars is making, while this is undoubtedly true, the way in which howie is using neo-fascist is much closer in definition to "those damn kids and their jazz music" than to its narrow definition (which the wikipedia entry describes accurately).
Moaning about people using cultural marxism wrong and then calling them neo-fascists in the same sentence without having the foggiest clue what their ideology actually is, is... culturally marxist.
|
On September 08 2018 02:52 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2018 01:49 Sent. wrote:It’s bullshit that doesn’t even mean anything like the «neo fascist» term? It's sounding more and more like <<Term Used Negatively About My Allies>> is a bullshit meaningless term, but <<Term Used Negatively About My Enemies>> is well-rounded, well-defined, specific, and accurate. Then we all have a good romp about how people that think differently than me don't have a clue about the terms, and people like me who've done all the right research know about the many differences. It's way too much group-membership debate and semantics for me.
If you did any reading at all in this thread, or outside this thread you wouldn't have typed this.
As stated above Cultural Marxism rose out of the Frankfurt School, being an academic's way of describing anti-capitalist parts of cultures. Like Christianity promoting charity and collective support of the poor, for example. However idiots like Alex Jones(RIP twitter clown) turned it into a grand conspiracy to destroy western civilization because, again, they are uneducated idiots who don't read.
Neo Fascist is also a defined term, which means New Fascist. It is post WW2 fascism and all its xenophobic, authoritarian trappings.
None of this is complex stuff. Neo Facist practically describes itself. The history of these words and their meanings are well documented for anyone to find and learn about.
|
On September 08 2018 02:52 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2018 01:49 Sent. wrote:It’s bullshit that doesn’t even mean anything like the «neo fascist» term? It's sounding more and more like <<Term Used Negatively About My Allies>> is a bullshit meaningless term, but <<Term Used Negatively About My Enemies>> is well-rounded, well-defined, specific, and accurate. Then we all have a good romp about how people that think differently than me don't have a clue about the terms, and people like me who've done all the right research know about the many differences. It's way too much group-membership debate and semantics for me.
Before someone misconstrues your argument, do you agree with that sign, and that Obama is a cultural Marxist, or just the direction their argument is aimed at?
|
On September 08 2018 03:02 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2018 02:52 Danglars wrote:On September 08 2018 01:49 Sent. wrote:It’s bullshit that doesn’t even mean anything like the «neo fascist» term? It's sounding more and more like <<Term Used Negatively About My Allies>> is a bullshit meaningless term, but <<Term Used Negatively About My Enemies>> is well-rounded, well-defined, specific, and accurate. Then we all have a good romp about how people that think differently than me don't have a clue about the terms, and people like me who've done all the right research know about the many differences. It's way too much group-membership debate and semantics for me. If you did any reading at all in this thread, or outside this thread you wouldn't have typed this. As stated above Cultural Marxism rose out of the Frankfurt School, being an academic's way of describing anti-capitalist parts of cultures. Like Christianity promoting charity and collective support of the poor, for example. However idiots like Alex Jones(RIP twitter clown) turned it into a grand conspiracy to destroy western civilization because, again, they are uneducated idiots who don't read. Neo Fascist is also a defined term, which means New Fascist. It is post WW2 fascism and all its xenophobic, authoritarian trappings. None of this is complex stuff. Neo Facist practically describes itself. The history of these words and their meanings are well documented for anyone to find and learn about.
I don’t really see the distinguishing factor between “fascist” and “neo fascist”. Post WWII versus pre WWII doesn’t really seem significant on its own. Fascists by definition have always been authoritarian and xenophobia seems like it has almost always been a part of classical fascists. So why use “neo fascist” at all?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/U8jFcOj.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/PS7KN0t.jpg)
