4 ms·

The burden of proof is with the accuser. I fail to see how the Republican party is fascist. I think it's a term the Left uses to demonize their opposition. I

The burden of proof is with the accuser. I fail to see how the Republican party is fascist. I think it's a term the Left uses to demonize their opposition. Ironically, that is kind of fascist-like. > The term fascist has been used as a pejorative,[74] regarding varying movements across the far right of the political spectrum. George Orwell noted in 1944 that the term had been used to denigrate diverse positions "in internal politics". Orwell said that while fascism is "a political and economic system" that was inconvenient to define, "as used, the word 'Fascism' is almost entirely meaningless. ... almost any English person would accept 'bully' as a synonym for 'Fascist'",[75] and in 1946 wrote that '"Fascism' has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies something not desirable."[76] Richard Griffiths of the University of Wales wrote in 2000 that "fascism" is the "most misused, and over-used word, of our times".[77]: 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism I assume you have good reasons to believe Republicans are fascist. I'm simply asking you and any others who believe this to share your reasons. Is that not reasonable?

spiderfarmer 2y ago
Even if I listed all reasons why the rhetoric during the campaign reeked of fascism, you’d simply dismiss them, like all the times before where this has been called out already. This is why people rightly feel people like you act like they’re in a cult. You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. Like right now, by editing your comment you're desperately trying to pose there is no accepted definition of fascism. Dismissing definitions only fits the bill.
- theonething 2y ago
  Ah yes, the "you're too stupid or unreasonable (i.e. deplorable or trash)" to reason with so I won't even try argument. > you’d simply dismiss them I'm a random internet stranger. How could you possibility know me so well? Again, it's just a blanket stereotyping and demonization of people who have different beliefs that you do. A mass ad hominem attack. That attitude is a root of many problems in the political arena. I expect that kind of rhetoric on Reddit, but am disappointed to encounter it here. > Even if I listed all reasons I'm a busy person and I assume you are too. Why don't you list one and we'll go from there?
  - spiderfarmer 2y ago
    You already try to dismiss an accepted definition, so why would I bother reiterating all the easy to find articles, videos and podcasts that literally quote and warn of Trump's rhetoric? Do you think you sound like a person that is trying to understand criticism of his party, especially right after voting for them?
    - theonething 2y ago
      > You already try to dismiss an accepted definition In this discussion, we've already defined it? where? That's news to me that I can dismiss something that I wasn't aware of. > Do you think you sound like a person that is welcoming criticism I am very welcoming of criticism of my party and the one I voted for. Trump can be a bombastic jerk. I voted for him because his policies align more with my values than Harris'. He was the lesser (much lesser) of two evils. I didn't vote for him in the primaries and I wish he wouldn't have won them. Anyway, you continue to make assumptions about me rather than discuss/debate the issue of why you think Trump is a fascist. It's not much of a discussion and so I'll opt out now. All the best to you.
      - spiderfarmer 2y ago
        If you think every debate should first have a discussion on definitions, before you can get to the heart of the argument, you should not be debating. We don't have to define it. That's the point. It's already been done for us. It's the same with asking me to list reasons or sources that explain the republican parties fascist tendencies, while that's been done thousands of times through the course of their campaign. If you were truly curious as to why people might feel that way, you could have done so at any point during the last few months. You did't accept the definition you bothered to look up and you didn't accept the valid concerns people had during the campaign. The real reason you're walking away from this conversation is because you don't care if I am right. You're not afraid of fascism, because you think you're in the right group.
        somerandom2407 2y ago

spiderfarmer 2y ago

Even if I listed all reasons why the rhetoric during the campaign reeked of fascism, you’d simply dismiss them, like all the times before where this has been called out already. This is why people rightly feel people like you act like they’re in a cult. You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. Like right now, by editing your comment you're desperately trying to pose there is no accepted definition of fascism. Dismissing definitions only fits the bill.

theonething 2y ago
Ah yes, the "you're too stupid or unreasonable (i.e. deplorable or trash)" to reason with so I won't even try argument. > you’d simply dismiss them I'm a random internet stranger. How could you possibility know me so well? Again, it's just a blanket stereotyping and demonization of people who have different beliefs that you do. A mass ad hominem attack. That attitude is a root of many problems in the political arena. I expect that kind of rhetoric on Reddit, but am disappointed to encounter it here. > Even if I listed all reasons I'm a busy person and I assume you are too. Why don't you list one and we'll go from there?
- spiderfarmer 2y ago
  You already try to dismiss an accepted definition, so why would I bother reiterating all the easy to find articles, videos and podcasts that literally quote and warn of Trump's rhetoric? Do you think you sound like a person that is trying to understand criticism of his party, especially right after voting for them?
  - theonething 2y ago
    > You already try to dismiss an accepted definition In this discussion, we've already defined it? where? That's news to me that I can dismiss something that I wasn't aware of. > Do you think you sound like a person that is welcoming criticism I am very welcoming of criticism of my party and the one I voted for. Trump can be a bombastic jerk. I voted for him because his policies align more with my values than Harris'. He was the lesser (much lesser) of two evils. I didn't vote for him in the primaries and I wish he wouldn't have won them. Anyway, you continue to make assumptions about me rather than discuss/debate the issue of why you think Trump is a fascist. It's not much of a discussion and so I'll opt out now. All the best to you.
    - spiderfarmer 2y ago
      If you think every debate should first have a discussion on definitions, before you can get to the heart of the argument, you should not be debating. We don't have to define it. That's the point. It's already been done for us. It's the same with asking me to list reasons or sources that explain the republican parties fascist tendencies, while that's been done thousands of times through the course of their campaign. If you were truly curious as to why people might feel that way, you could have done so at any point during the last few months. You did't accept the definition you bothered to look up and you didn't accept the valid concerns people had during the campaign. The real reason you're walking away from this conversation is because you don't care if I am right. You're not afraid of fascism, because you think you're in the right group.
      - somerandom2407 2y ago