7 ms·

In many cases I don't think it's being used casually.

by inetknght 6y ago

davidw 6y ago
I'm old enough to have seen it plenty in the past.
- inetknght 6y ago
  Can you describe how fascism has worked in the past? Can you imagine how it might be applied today with modern technology, laws, and court precedents? This isn't fascism of the past.
  - davidw 6y ago
    My reference was to people casually tossing around the word for "people on the right they dislike", when it wasn't really warranted. I'm not good at predicting much of anything, but best guess is that the model is something more like Venezuela/Hungary/Turkey/Russia rather than the variety from the 1930ies.
    - inetknght 6y ago
      > My reference was to people casually tossing around the word for "people on the right they dislike", when it wasn't really warranted. I'm trying to understand why you think it wasn't really warranted. Perhaps it really isn't warranted. But I also think it's possible you are, like you said below, not seeing a bigger picture. I'll take your next sentence in reverse though. > the model is something more like Venezuela/Hungary/Turkey/Russia rather than the variety from the 1930ies. I haven't been to Venezuela/Hungary/Turkey/Russia. I did study World War II in early school and a lot of what led up to it though. > I'm not good at predicting much of anything, but best guess is I understand not being good at predicting much of anything. Most people are like that! However, a lot of what our current presidency was doing prior to COVID-19 echoed very strongly about actual events from the late 1920s and early 1930s. And, as a software developer with a strong emphasis on data analysis, I see a lot of differences which make the current situation feel like the 1930s all over again but with liberal amounts of modern technology both overtly and also behind the scenes. I do think that there are a lot of people who throw words like fascist around just because their emotions are high. That unfortunately happens with any slur. But I also believe that there's a lot of eye-opening moments that make "fascist" less rhetorical than before the current US president was elected. To be fair, he's built his regime on a lot of laws and court precedent which was established before he was elected. But he's a completely different beast than any previous US president. And I think it's disingenuous to not consider slur in that light and to not combine it with the hidden facets of technology that most people don't think about or understand.
      - davidw 6y ago
        I kind of feel like people here are not reading what I'm actually writing. I think 45 and company are fascists, or fascist-curious or adjacent or something like that. In the past. Say, GHWB, people would call him a fascist because they didn't like some bit of policy. I didn't care for his policies by and large, but I also do not think he was a fascist. Is that clearer?
        inetknght 6y ago
        > I kind of feel like people here are not reading what I'm actually writing. Perhaps. I think I did read what you wrote. Let me look (again) at your top-level flagged post. I've now vouched for it, by the way. > It's a pity that some on the left in the past have been so ready with the word 'fascism'. It's a serious word describing a serious problem, and it should not be used casually for "people on the right I disagree with". I believe that the word is appropriate to describe this administration. Let me dissect this a little further. > It's a pity that some on the left in the past have been so ready with the word 'fascism' Now after our discussion, it's clear that you're not meaning "past today but in the context of Trump in general". I'd assumed that meaning since in general that's the context I've seen the word used. And indeed, Trumps election is in the past. > I believe that the word is appropriate to describe this administration. I don't remember this part being in your comment in my first reply. HN doesn't let me see edits or edit history or that a comment was edited. I'd like to think my memory's good enough to remember what I replied to, and there's also in general a netiquette of calling out substantial edits to messages. If you didn't edit your top level post then you are right; I didn't read it and I'm sorry for the confusion! Edit to add: > In the past. Say, GHWB, people would call him a fascist because they didn't like some bit of policy. I didn't care for his policies by and large, but I also do not think he was a fascist. I was under ten for the entire duration of GHWB's presidency so I don't have that experience to draw upon. My experience is almost solely on reading history books and following politics since around Bush Jr's election with the "hanging chads of Florida" being the most prominent political memory I have other than being in polling lines waiting for my mom to vote. Indeed, I can see how use of the slur during previous presidencies has significantly watered down its meaning today such that people skip over its use thinking it's political rhetoric. > Is that clearer? Yes, thank you!

In many cases I don't think it's being used casually.

davidw 6y ago

I'm old enough to have seen it plenty in the past.

inetknght 6y ago
Can you describe how fascism has worked in the past? Can you imagine how it might be applied today with modern technology, laws, and court precedents? This isn't fascism of the past.
- davidw 6y ago
  My reference was to people casually tossing around the word for "people on the right they dislike", when it wasn't really warranted. I'm not good at predicting much of anything, but best guess is that the model is something more like Venezuela/Hungary/Turkey/Russia rather than the variety from the 1930ies.
  - inetknght 6y ago
    > My reference was to people casually tossing around the word for "people on the right they dislike", when it wasn't really warranted. I'm trying to understand why you think it wasn't really warranted. Perhaps it really isn't warranted. But I also think it's possible you are, like you said below, not seeing a bigger picture. I'll take your next sentence in reverse though. > the model is something more like Venezuela/Hungary/Turkey/Russia rather than the variety from the 1930ies. I haven't been to Venezuela/Hungary/Turkey/Russia. I did study World War II in early school and a lot of what led up to it though. > I'm not good at predicting much of anything, but best guess is I understand not being good at predicting much of anything. Most people are like that! However, a lot of what our current presidency was doing prior to COVID-19 echoed very strongly about actual events from the late 1920s and early 1930s. And, as a software developer with a strong emphasis on data analysis, I see a lot of differences which make the current situation feel like the 1930s all over again but with liberal amounts of modern technology both overtly and also behind the scenes. I do think that there are a lot of people who throw words like fascist around just because their emotions are high. That unfortunately happens with any slur. But I also believe that there's a lot of eye-opening moments that make "fascist" less rhetorical than before the current US president was elected. To be fair, he's built his regime on a lot of laws and court precedent which was established before he was elected. But he's a completely different beast than any previous US president. And I think it's disingenuous to not consider slur in that light and to not combine it with the hidden facets of technology that most people don't think about or understand.
    - davidw 6y ago
      I kind of feel like people here are not reading what I'm actually writing. I think 45 and company are fascists, or fascist-curious or adjacent or something like that. In the past. Say, GHWB, people would call him a fascist because they didn't like some bit of policy. I didn't care for his policies by and large, but I also do not think he was a fascist. Is that clearer?
      - inetknght 6y ago
        > I kind of feel like people here are not reading what I'm actually writing. Perhaps. I think I did read what you wrote. Let me look (again) at your top-level flagged post. I've now vouched for it, by the way. > It's a pity that some on the left in the past have been so ready with the word 'fascism'. It's a serious word describing a serious problem, and it should not be used casually for "people on the right I disagree with". I believe that the word is appropriate to describe this administration. Let me dissect this a little further. > It's a pity that some on the left in the past have been so ready with the word 'fascism' Now after our discussion, it's clear that you're not meaning "past today but in the context of Trump in general". I'd assumed that meaning since in general that's the context I've seen the word used. And indeed, Trumps election is in the past. > I believe that the word is appropriate to describe this administration. I don't remember this part being in your comment in my first reply. HN doesn't let me see edits or edit history or that a comment was edited. I'd like to think my memory's good enough to remember what I replied to, and there's also in general a netiquette of calling out substantial edits to messages. If you didn't edit your top level post then you are right; I didn't read it and I'm sorry for the confusion! Edit to add: > In the past. Say, GHWB, people would call him a fascist because they didn't like some bit of policy. I didn't care for his policies by and large, but I also do not think he was a fascist. I was under ten for the entire duration of GHWB's presidency so I don't have that experience to draw upon. My experience is almost solely on reading history books and following politics since around Bush Jr's election with the "hanging chads of Florida" being the most prominent political memory I have other than being in polling lines waiting for my mom to vote. Indeed, I can see how use of the slur during previous presidencies has significantly watered down its meaning today such that people skip over its use thinking it's political rhetoric. > Is that clearer? Yes, thank you!