What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Just who are the Fascist? (1 Viewer)

ok, got it.  So based on your admittedly variant definition of fascism in the world of Trump, Carlson, being a conservative, is also a Fascist.  So, like I originally said, calling out conservatives under the guise of being fascists is not acceptable nor should it be encouraged.  
Id say youd have to alter the definition of conservative to fit Carlson or any Trump fan into that category.

 
Id say youd have to alter the definition of conservative to fit Carlson or any Trump fan into that category.
Just curious what Carlson has said that supports anything like an authoritarian regime.  People tend to throw around the term fascist, which basically says you support an authoritarian regime, suppress opponents, and want the government to control the economy.  We haven't ever had anything close to a fascist regime in our country, even though it's now popular to state that.  I'm not a fan of some of Trump's rhetoric but there's a big difference in rhetoric and talking about someone who would forcibly suppress opposition.  We had a free and open election this week just as a point of reference.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just curious what Carlson has said that supports anything like an authoritarian regime.  People tend to throw the term fascist, which basically says you support an authoritarian regime, suppress opponents, and want the government to control the economy.  We haven't ever had anything close to a fascist regime in our country, even though it's now popular to state that.  I'm not a fan of some of Trump's rhetoric but there's a big difference in rhetoric and talking about someone who would forcibly suppress opposition.  We had a free and open election this week just as a point of reference.
I think youd have to go through Mc's other link and his explanation.

But the word conservative simply doesn't apply to Trump or his followers like Carlson.  And he may not be 100% an authoritarian regime, but he sure tries to act like one.

 
I think youd have to go through Mc's other link and his explanation.

But the word conservative simply doesn't apply to Trump or his followers like Carlson.  And he may not be 100% an authoritarian regime, but he sure tries to act like one.
Trump called Bernie Sanders a Communist as well.  It's pretty good rhetoric, but wasn't true.  It shouldn't take a long explanation if Carlson is a fascist.  He's on television 5 nights a week.  It should be pretty easy to say, Carlson stated he supports XYZ policy which forcibly suppresses those who dissent from him.  Or perhaps, Carlson stated something about overturning election results to ensure someone he supported stays in power.  Those would be the types things a fascist by definition would do.

 
Trump called Bernie Sanders a Communist as well.  It's pretty good rhetoric, but wasn't true.  It shouldn't take a long explanation if Carlson is a fascist.  He's on television 5 nights a week.  It should be pretty easy to say, Carlson stated he supports XYZ policy which forcibly suppresses those who dissent from him.  Or perhaps, Carlson stated something about overturning election results to ensure someone he supported stays in power.  Those would be the types things a fascist by definition would do.
The reason I'm not keen on getting in to all of this again is that (despite your dismissive attitude), this actually does take a long explanation. It takes a long explanation because fascism is a difficult thing to define, by its own nature. It takes on aspects of the country in which is arises that results in structural differences from other forms of fascism. As such, there aren't examples of what you're asking for; but, I (and others) argue, that doesn't mean Carlson hasn't allied himself with a fascist movement.

To show you where I'm coming from, I'm going to link to a series of videos. I'm skeptical that you'll watch them, as they combine to nearly an hour and they are not in any way unbiased (they were produced by a liberal parody news show that spun off of Cracked.com). However, I do think (as did, I believe, @Maurile Tremblay, who no one would confuse with a socialist like myself) that they are a good attempt at explaining why I believe that Trumpism is an American variant of fascism. These videos were produced after I made the original post I linked to in this thread, and did not form the basis of my own belief on this, but they are a more well produced and sourced method of explanation than I have the time or ability to compile on my own:

 
Ramblin Wreck said:
What happened to the first thread about this?
Joe edited the title because he doesn't agree that Antifa is a left wing group. Despite the fact that they are a left wing group.

The Antifa (/ænˈtiːfə, ˈæntiˌfɑː/)[1] movement is a conglomeration of left wing autonomous, self-styled anti-fascist militant[2][3][4][5][6] groups in the United States.[7][8][9] The principal feature of antifa groups is their use of direct action.[10] They engage in varied protest tactics, which include digital activism, property damage, physical violence, and harassmentagainst those whom they identify as fascists, racists and right wing extremists.[11][12][7][13][14][15] Conflicts are both online and in real life.[12] They tend to be anti-capitalist[16] and they are predominantly far-leftand militant left,[17][10] which includes anarchists, communists and socialists.[18][19][20][21] Their stated focus is on fighting far-right and white supremacistideologies directly, rather than politically.



The majority of the comments were people defending Antifa's actions, claiming Tucker deserved to be harassed and threatened.

And a few people who think if you start a thread about a current event that you must respond to every single post or you are just a troll.

I deleted the thread because it turned into the predictable troll fest that happens any time someone starts a thread that does not fit the agenda here.

Also, it was pretty disappointing to have the owner censor the title because it made the left look bad.

 
The reason I'm not keen on getting in to all of this again is that (despite your dismissive attitude), this actually does take a long explanation. It takes a long explanation because fascism is a difficult thing to define, by its own nature. It takes on aspects of the country in which is arises that results in structural differences from other forms of fascism. As such, there aren't examples of what you're asking for; but, I (and others) argue, that doesn't mean Carlson hasn't allied himself with a fascist movement.

To show you where I'm coming from, I'm going to link to a series of videos. I'm skeptical that you'll watch them, as they combine to nearly an hour and they are not in any way unbiased (they were produced by a liberal parody news show that spun off of Cracked.com). However, I do think (as did, I believe, @Maurile Tremblay, who no one would confuse with a socialist like myself) that they are a good attempt at explaining why I believe that Trumpism is an American variant of fascism. These videos were produced after I made the original post I linked to in this thread, and did not form the basis of my own belief on this, but they are a more well produced and sourced method of explanation than I have the time or ability to compile on my own:

I'm just using the definition of fascism that I most readily found online, which is: a form of radical authoritarian ultranationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy.  

I merely asked, what specifically has Carlson stated in a policy belief that fits this?  Because nobody has stated a policy espoused by Carlson that fits the definition above. This should be pretty straightforward.  You're right, I don't really feel like I need to watch videos as the definition is pretty clear.  He either is a fascist or he isn't by that definition, not an arbitrary one.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
David Roth‏ @david_j_roth

Like most normal people, I'm more disturbed by 20 antifa dudes ringing the doorbell at Tucker Carlson's manse than I am by the latest quarterly mass-killing-by-gun. One of those things reflects a real social crisis to me, and it's the one a normal person would choose.
I know this is your usual snarky "X is worse than Y so you can't talk about Y" posts, but I am coming around to the view the divide I really care about is the Preserve Norms camp versus the Burn It All Down camp.  Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, and Mitt Romney are are on team Preserve Norms.  Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Sean McElwee, and Antifa are on team Burn It All Down.  This is a different way of sorting people into groups that have very different policy preferences, but I think policy should take a back seat for the moment to basic civic responsibility.  I find myself sympathizing more with Pelosi these days than I do McConnell even though I like McConnell's policy outcomes more than Pelosi's.  

Admittedly, that's easy for me to say.  I'm a libertarian.  That means that if you pick a major-party figure, I'm going to have particular areas where I agree and disagree with them.  So it's probably easier for me to discard party labels and sort along other lines than it is for some.  

But yeah, people who terrorize the family of some guy on television deserve condemnation for the same reason that Trump deserves condemnation for inciting violence.    

 
I know this is your usual snarky "X is worse than Y so you can't talk about Y" posts, but I am coming around to the view the divide I really care about is the Preserve Norms camp versus the Burn It All Down camp.  Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, and Mitt Romney are are on team Preserve Norms.  Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Sean McElwee, and Antifa are on team Burn It All Down.  This is a different way of sorting people into groups that have very different policy preferences, but I think policy should take a back seat for the moment to basic civic responsibility.  I find myself sympathizing more with Pelosi these days than I do McConnell even though I like McConnell's policy outcomes more than Pelosi's.  

Admittedly, that's easy for me to say.  I'm a libertarian.  That means that if you pick a major-party figure, I'm going to have particular areas where I agree and disagree with them.  So it's probably easier for me to discard party labels and sort along other lines than it is for some.  

But yeah, people who terrorize the family of some guy on television deserve condemnation for the same reason that Trump deserves condemnation for inciting violence.    
Great post.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
The fascists I really hate are the grammar Nazis who insist on following stupid rules like subject-verb agreement.
I'm slightly more angry at fascists like Mussolini and Hitler, but to each their own. 

 
I'm just using the definition of fascism that I most readily found online, which is: a form of radical authoritarian ultranationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy.  

I merely asked, what specifically has Carlson stated in a policy belief that fits this?  Because nobody has stated a policy espoused by Carlson that fits the definition above. This should be pretty straightforward.  You're right, I don't really feel like I need to watch videos as the definition is pretty clear.  He either is a fascist or he isn't by that definition, not an arbitrary one.  
You chose the little blurb that comes at the top of the Wikipedia article. If you would bother to read any of the previously mentioned thread, or watch any of the videos I provided, or hell, just read more of the Wikipedia article, you'd know that there are many different definitions of fascism. The videos I linked to are based on the writings of Umberto Eco and Robert Paxton, two renowned scholars on the subject (and both referenced heavily in the Wikipedia article). If either of us is using an "arbitrary" definition of fascism, I'd think it is the person using literally the first thing they googled. I've provided ample material for you to get an understanding of why I believe Carlson (and anyone else associated with Trumpism) is a fascist. I'm not going to devote any more of my life to doing so if you're unwilling to go to the least amount of effort to take in what I'm putting out.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The reason I'm not keen on getting in to all of this again is that (despite your dismissive attitude), this actually does take a long explanation. It takes a long explanation because fascism is a difficult thing to define, by its own nature. It takes on aspects of the country in which is arises that results in structural differences from other forms of fascism. As such, there aren't examples of what you're asking for; but, I (and others) argue, that doesn't mean Carlson hasn't allied himself with a fascist movement.

To show you where I'm coming from, I'm going to link to a series of videos. I'm skeptical that you'll watch them, as they combine to nearly an hour and they are not in any way unbiased (they were produced by a liberal parody news show that spun off of Cracked.com). However, I do think (as did, I believe, @Maurile Tremblay, who no one would confuse with a socialist like myself) that they are a good attempt at explaining why I believe that Trumpism is an American variant of fascism. These videos were produced after I made the original post I linked to in this thread, and did not form the basis of my own belief on this, but they are a more well produced and sourced method of explanation than I have the time or ability to compile on my own:

Just want to say thanks for introducing me to Some More News. That dude is outstanding. His podcast is great too.

 
Is it surprising to anyone that this thread has played out the same way as the other Antifa Tucker Carlson protest thread? The OP starts something that is arguably fishing or trolling, then runs away and doesn't post in the thread again (13 hours and counting).

 
Just want to say thanks for introducing me to Some More News. That dude is outstanding. His podcast is great too.
Yeah, I loved it on Cracked.com and was really sad when they nuked all of their video programs. Was really happy to see them strike out on their own and become so successful.

 
You chose the little blurb that comes at the top of the Wikipedia article. If you would bother to read any of the previously mentioned thread, or watch any of the videos I provided, or hell, just read more of the Wikipedia article, you'd know that there are many different definitions of fascism. The videos I linked to are based on the writings of Umberto Eco and Robert Paxton, two renowned scholars on the subject (and both referenced heavily in the Wikipedia article). If either of us is using an "arbitrary" definition of fascism, I'd think it is the person using literally the first thing they googled. I've provided ample material for you to get an understanding of why I believe Carlson (and anyone else associated with Trumpism) is a fascist. I'm not going to devote any more of my life to doing so if you're unwilling to go to the least amount of effort to take in what I'm putting out.
Again, which policy did he espouse that is fascist?  That's all I asked.  If he's a fascist, this should be simple.  It doesn't take multiple paragraphs, it could be done in one sentence.  

 
Is it surprising to anyone that this thread has played out the same way as the other Antifa Tucker Carlson protest thread? The OP starts something that is arguably fishing or trolling, then runs away and doesn't post in the thread again (13 hours and counting).
Not surprised he posted something unpopular and the same trolls with no self control respond to it every time.  Or that you troll with this response and don't address the topic

 
Not surprised he posted something unpopular and the same trolls with no self control respond to it every time.  Or that you troll with this response and don't address the topic
I addressed the topic on Page 1 if you bothered to read the thread. Here is one of my responses:
 

Surprisingly, Tucker Carlson is a trending hashtag at the moment on Twitter talking about the protest.

https://twitter.com/search?q="Tucker Carlson"&src=tren&data_id=tweet%3A1060610628681981958

Not sure what the delay was since this incident happened on Wednesday.

 
Let me know when he has to move out.

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/08/665407589/kavanaugh-accuser-christine-blasey-ford-continues-receiving-threats-lawyers-say?

Christine Blasey Ford has had to move four times. She had to hire a private security detail. Harassment and death threats are incessant. People have posted her personal information online. And she hasn’t been able to return to her job as a professor.
This is atrocious.  Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for people who become public figures.  I don't honestly know if it always like this, but I strongly suspect not. 

 
Let me know when he has to move out.

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/08/665407589/kavanaugh-accuser-christine-blasey-ford-continues-receiving-threats-lawyers-say?

Christine Blasey Ford has had to move four times. She had to hire a private security detail. Harassment and death threats are incessant. People have posted her personal information online. And she hasn’t been able to return to her job as a professor.
All because she wanted to do the right thing.  But I'm sure that GoFundMe page is making it all ok as the millions pour in.

 
Ramblin Wreck said:
Not surprised he posted something unpopular and the same trolls with no self control respond to it every time.  Or that you troll with this response and don't address the topic
We need every thread to be about bashing Republicans.   If they are not we need to:

1.  whine to the mods to have it removed or locked.

2.  Ignore the topic and bash Republicans.

This place is so diverse and so excellent.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov said:
The fascists I really hate are the grammar Nazis who insist on following stupid rules like subject-verb agreement.
Especially the ones with Russian sounding names.  Those are the worst.  

 
CBF had to move four times? Come on, you guys don't have to repeat everything you read. Much like her rape accusation, I doubt she has made four police reports concerning this.  

 
Herb said:
All because she wanted to do the right thing.  But I'm sure that GoFundMe page is making it all ok as the millions pour in.
Her testimony and identity should have been kept confidential.  Unfortunately, that wouldn't have helped anybody politically.  As Pelosi said, "if there is some collateral damage...so be it."   

 
We need every thread to be about bashing Republicans.   If they are not we need to:

1.  whine to the mods to have it removed or locked.

2.  Ignore the topic and bash Republicans.

This place is so diverse and so excellent.   
And your post and the one you replied to are part of the problem.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
I know this is your usual snarky "X is worse than Y so you can't talk about Y" posts, but I am coming around to the view the divide I really care about is the Preserve Norms camp versus the Burn It All Down camp.  Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, and Mitt Romney are are on team Preserve Norms.  Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Sean McElwee, and Antifa are on team Burn It All Down.  This is a different way of sorting people into groups that have very different policy preferences, but I think policy should take a back seat for the moment to basic civic responsibility.  I find myself sympathizing more with Pelosi these days than I do McConnell even though I like McConnell's policy outcomes more than Pelosi's.   

Admittedly, that's easy for me to say.  I'm a libertarian.  That means that if you pick a major-party figure, I'm going to have particular areas where I agree and disagree with them.  So it's probably easier for me to discard party labels and sort along other lines than it is for some.  

But yeah, people who terrorize the family of some guy on television deserve condemnation for the same reason that Trump deserves condemnation for inciting violence.    
Of course they deserve condemnation. Lots of people do lots of stupid things that deserve condemnation.  And I don't have any desire to burn it all down (nor does Sean McElwee, by the way).  I'm just tired of having people who applaud or sit on their hands as this administration and right-wing extremists commit hundreds of sins that are orders of magnitude worse than hassling a rich fraud and his family at a mansion he built on the profits of the lies and fear he vomits across American TV screens every night so that other sleazebags can sell old people reverse mortgages and medical equipment.

Yesterday there was another mass shooting, killing 11. The second double-digit body count mass shooting in two weeks. The last one targeted Jews based on lies and fearmongering related to immigration- lies and fearmongering pushed by Tucker Carlson and his cohorts at Fox News, as it turns out. We also saw the Governor of the state of Florida, backed by the president of the United States, call in state law enforcement to stop vote-counting for the stated reason that it's endangering his win in a Senate race and for no other reason. The nation's chief law enforcement officer is a comically unqualified lying far right Fox News lie-peddler installed specifically to block a national security-related law enforcement investigation. The administration is ignoring duly enacted federal law regarding treatment of asylum seekers in service of white nationalism. Two weeks ago someone else, also clearly triggered in part by the President's rhetoric, tried to murder a dozen Democratic leaders including two former presidents and bomb CNN's offices and it barely gets mentioned any more. We still haven't held accountable the monsters who ripped thousands of childrens out of their parents arms and threw them into detention centers. And yesterday the White House Press Secretary disseminated a doctored video it got from a right-wing "news" source that hassles the parents of the 6 year old children murdered in an elementary school, raising troubling questions about both their professionalism and about why the hell people in incredibly powerful positions are getting their news from insane conspiracy theory websites in the first place.

Yes, we all have the capacity to care about more than one thing. And I condemn the people responsible for disturbing Carlson and his family at their home, as has basically everyone. But if you think this glorified ding-dong-ditch episode deserves even one minute of coverage and attention with all this stuff going on, I think you're crazy.  Frankly I don't even think the concern is sincere.  It makes no sense to be more troubled by this than by even one of the things I listed (and we both know I could go on for hours with more examples, maybe days), and yet many people seem to be behaving that way.

 
urbanhack said:
Let me know when he has to move out.

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/08/665407589/kavanaugh-accuser-christine-blasey-ford-continues-receiving-threats-lawyers-say?

Christine Blasey Ford has had to move four times. She had to hire a private security detail. Harassment and death threats are incessant. People have posted her personal information online. And she hasn’t been able to return to her job as a professor.
Yep, this is despicable as well.  Wish we could catch the people behind things like this and make examples out of them.  I'm not sure what the laws are for these types of things.  Not sure if it would really help but the trend is one I hate to see where people are being harrassed at their homes and jobs.  Regardless of which side of the political argument, anyone decent would agree that this is wrong.

 
While I vehemently disagree with those who have done this to Carlson's family, it's worth pointing out that Tucker's "Daily Caller" has doxxed several critics of the alt-right by revealing names, phone numbers and addresses of left-wing activists and their family/friends.  I'm not an "eye for an eye" person by any stretch but this is the type of behavior that Tucker Carlson has fueled in the other direction. 

 
Absolutely.  We must cleans the forum of unpure thoughts.  Liberals in this forum are never in the wrong.  
Again...posts like this are the problem jon.  When you make false assertions.

Nobody is saying liberals are never wrong.

You, however, are claiming things like this:

We need every thread to be about bashing Republicans.   If they are not we need to:

1.  whine to the mods to have it removed or locked.

2.  Ignore the topic and bash Republicans.

This place is so diverse and so excellent.   
And doing so replying to someone complaining about another poster not talking about the topic (while he avoids talking about the topic).

What I quoted from you there is 100% false.  Hell, look at the Acosta/Trump reporter thread.  There are so many instances of trolling in that thread.  A ton of bogus assertions made not by the "left".

The place can be diverse...I propose its up to the actual good posters from the right to step up and be good posters.  

The thread on this that was removed was done by the person who started the thread.  The complaints about that thread were warranted given that poster's behavior and past on this board.  People defended you in starting another thread on the topic as being different than that poster.  Id agree that you are different than him.  

 
:goodposting: .   The rest of it really stunk.  Your low point of blaming Tucker for the mass shooting was very ignorant.   
If you think there's a factual error in my post, please point it out. Otherwise I really couldn't care less about the subjective opinions of a man who seems far more concerned about the "fascism" of a handful protestors who crossed the line than he does about the aspiring fascists running the country who kidnap children and throw them in detention centers, who ignore our duly enacted immigration laws regarding asylum, who threaten and bully the free press, who make baseless claims of "election fraud" that undermine our faith in democracy if not our democracy itself, who ignore the wishes of a Jewish community mourning mass murders in order to get a cheap photo-op and play the victim, who act at every turn as if they are above the rule of law.

You wanna know who the fascists are, Jon?  They're running the country, and your pathetic, transparent attempts at whataboutism and your political support for them and their allies enable them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you think there's a factual error in my post, please point it out. Otherwise I really couldn't care less about the subjective opinions of a man who seems far more concerned about the "fascism" of a handful protestors who crossed the line than he does about the aspiring fascists running the country who kidnap children and throw them in detention centers, who ignore our duly enacted immigration laws regarding asylum, who threaten and bully the free press, who make baseless claims of "election fraud" that undermine our faith in democracy if not our democracy itself, who ignore the wishes of a Jewish community mourning mass murders in order to get a cheap photo-op and play the victim, who act at every turn as if they are above the rule of law.

You wanna know who the fascists are, Jon?  They're running the country, and your pathetic, transparent attempts at whataboutism and your political support for them and their allies enable them.
:yes:   :goodposting:

 
Again...posts like this are the problem jon.  When you make false assertions.

Nobody is saying liberals are never wrong.

You, however, are claiming things like this:

And doing so replying to someone complaining about another poster not talking about the topic (while he avoids talking about the topic).

What I quoted from you there is 100% false.  Hell, look at the Acosta/Trump reporter thread.  There are so many instances of trolling in that thread.  A ton of bogus assertions made not by the "left".

The place can be diverse...I propose its up to the actual good posters from the right to step up and be good posters.  

The thread on this that was removed was done by the person who started the thread.  The complaints about that thread were warranted given that poster's behavior and past on this board.  People defended you in starting another thread on the topic as being different than that poster.  Id agree that you are different than him.  
People are excusing the behavior (suggesting Tucker is responsible for mass shootings), belittling the behavior (ding ding ditch), changing the subject (lots of discussion on threats against Ford), suggesting this is trolling....of course my post was sarcastic and exaggeratory, but some of the responses here are pretty bad.

 
People are excusing the behavior (suggesting Tucker is responsible for mass shootings), belittling the behavior (ding ding ditch), changing the subject (lots of discussion on threats against Ford), suggesting this is trolling....of course my post was sarcastic and exaggeratory, but some of the responses here are pretty bad.
Very few have excused the behavior...most have called it over the line and that people should be arrested if caught.  Apparently the police were called...did the people scatter?  Was the door actually cracked as claimed?

As for Tucker being responsible...the post was quite clear in saying rhetoric like his and those at Fox played a roll...given the shooters words, that appears to be a logical conclusion made by a poster.  

And yes...the previous thread and its starter was suggested as trolling...as is anyone who posts something blaming a "side" and then does not respond to any post.  When you make large assertions, don't back them up, and don't reply or engage when people are questioning the assertion, it leads a logical person to believe that it was done to elicit a reaction.  That is the very definition of trolling jon.

And your post was not the first time you and others have made assertions like that about the board...and its been false every single time.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top