Yes, it does. Fascism is far-right and that is a fact, whether some fringe idiots disagree with that or not.

''If liberals insist on imposing political correctness over freedom of speech such as those who may oppose gay marraiges or gay pride parades to insist they embrace certain alternative lifestyles which is in opposition to thier particular beliefs/faith..

That is a form of fascism. [/quote]

No, it is a form of egalitarianism, even if it is from a water-down ideology who do not really force anyone, per se (although they should. Intolerance should be eradicated, even if it means by force). Forcing tolerance is authoritarianism not fascism as the two terms are not mutually exclusive. All fascists are authoritarian, but not all authoritarians are fascist.

Then you are calling one of the most brilliant economic thinkers the world has produced an idiot, because F.A. Hayek made the point I am making here, but he made that point in a book (The Road To Serfdom) he wrote while WWII raged around him and he had witnessed first hand the rise of communism in Russia, of National Socialism in Germany and fascism in Italy and elsewhere. And it was Hayek who pointed out that was absolutely no differences between these movements that mattered a whit when push came to shove as ALL relied on totalitarian rule and the people, not matter what position or class they held were all slaves to the desires of the state as dictated by a totalitarian ruler. All other differences between the 3 are entirely meaningless.

And ANY ideology that would endorse totalitarian rule cannot be placed on the same side of the political spectrum as classical liberalism.

You imply that you have read conservative scholarly works which state fascism is a far right ideology. Pray tell, name these scholars and their works.



I reject the gibberish you've written here. Clearly you are out of your depth.

First of all, the traditionally used political spectrum (and one I don't believe is correct) places socialism on the left, liberalism (classical) in the center and conservatism (real, classical conservatism - god and king and all that) on the right.

But Hayek postulated the political spectrum was not at all linear, and reckoned it to be like a triangle with socialism, liberalism and conservatism positioned and each corner and tugging to move the spectrum in one direction or another.

I believe this a much more accurate representation of reality, and it has the nice plus of nullifying the century-old (and then some) propaganda campaign by leftists to redefine liberalism and conservatism which has led to a conflation of these 2 terms in the minds of the people.



Well fuck you too!

The only denier I see here is you! Of course if you were as "learned" as you pretend to be on this topic, you would have known of his writtings on this very topic.

My position on fascism is merely an adoption of Hayek's own. So you are essentially calling Hayek (an Austrian who fought against fascism/socialism) a "Holocast denier" and an "unsavory cretin." Something I strenuously reject.

DEAR GOD!!! Do you even listen to yourself?

Who the fuck died and made you the decider of what is and is not intolerant?

And just WHO would you put in charge to define what views can or can not be held or what religious views may or may not be expressed

Just that you say what you said above reveals you to be an extreme leftist.

No wonder you have no fucking clue about the political spectrum. You're clearly just another of the kool-aide drinking leftist myrmidons who believe all things left to be intellectually superior and thus worthy of being FORCED, at gunpoint if need be, on everyone else.

It is thinking like this that gives rise to totalitarianism. This is how Russia, Germany, Italy, Spain and other totalitarian regimes were born.

Just reading shit like this makes my flesh crawl.

*SHEESH!!!*

He called her a whore to amuse millions of male listeners.

I'd say he's got a lot more to apologize for than crude language. The "but everybody does it" defense was repudiated by mothers long ago: "If <insert random childhood friend's name here> jumps of a bridge, are you going to do it too?"

If you really can't see what's wrong with calling someone a f***ot who's going to burn in hell for eternity, then I think we're done here.

Wow, Angantyr...all I got to be was a 'fucking retarded indoctrinated' leftist.


Welcome to the club. We're thinking about getting tshirts.

Typical liberal knee jerk reaction. I expected a better response from you tgas. I'm a little disapointed by that comment from seeing that you always come off as a reasonable guy.

I don't call gay people derogatory names.I may disagree with thier lifestyle but I condemm persecution or violence being commited against homosexuals.

One of the best friends I had growing up was gay. I never brought up his sexual orientation he did and it didn't change my friendship with him.And though we lost contact over the years until just recently... I still value him as a good friend.

Heck I get called all sorts of things because of my beliefs on this forum alone..and calling religious or conservative people derogatory names seems to be perfectly okay..I see.

That being said I don't support same-sex marraige nor do I don't think the individual's rights should be censored based his/her religious or political beliefs(so long as those beliefs do not condone persecution or violence towards the gay and lesbian community )... in favour of political correctness which some liberals activists would like to impose on those whose who don't share thier socio-political values.

Rampant political correctness is what I call it a form of fascism on the left-end of the political fence.

How many times has Sarah Palin has been called some derogatory name by some liberal political pundit on TV, radio or magazine... who didn't like her political or religious views? The list is endless and some of them go much further to attack Ms Palin than even Limbaugh did with this young college student..

But because it is Sarah Palin that makes it okay to call her whatever derogatory name you can think of and even her family can also be attacked as well?

I don't condone the language Limbaugh used towards this woman and he should be severely reprimanded for his poor choice of words..having said that I do agree with him on the matter of the government having to pay for Miss Fluke's expenses concerning contreceptives.

Well, see, there's some truth in both sides of the argument about 'fascism'.

The fasces is a bundle of sticks from out of which an ax-blade protrudes. It was a symbol of power in ancient Rome. Like a sheriff's badge today. IIRC it was the lictors who carried the fasces.

This badge of power was adopted by the far-right ruling party in Italy during the 1920s, and accordingly they were called 'fascisti', the blokes with the fasces.

So pretty much, in political debate, 'fascist' means right-wing, associated with the sort of policies that were considered right and proper by Hitler and Mussolini.

Socially, however, the word 'fascist' has come to mean anyone who brooks no opposition. So one of the prefects when I was at school was called a 'right little fascist', though it was nothing to do with his political leanings.

But to refer to someone with generally left-wing leanings as 'a fascist' would generally be a bit foolish, as it will tend to confuse. Although someone in a left-wing candidate's election team might well refer to the candidate, in-house, as a 'bloody fascist' because of the way he treats his staff.

But, the reason why Sarah Palin is called abusive names is not because of her political views but because she is about as intelligent as the average vacuum cleaner, half as knowledgeable, runs away from hard work and still thought she was good enough to be your Vice President.

In the UK she'd struggle to get elected as a local councillor with her complete ignorance of everything other than how bully people.