In another thread, yet another "Hitler" slur was made. "Heil Yorick" was the latest.
So I thought in light of people continually ignoring the requests from Europeans to NOT bandy around such destructive terms with callous disregard for others, I thought I'd post the definition a wise and noble sagelike person I know gave me. Here it is: Quote:
Singapore for example bans many things certain Americans hold as representative of freedom itself. Singapore is a representative democracy and no-where near a fascist state. As evident from the above discourse, one is not a fascist if one supports 1.Gun control 2.Public smoking prohibition 3.No death penalty 4.Constitutional revisions For example. So let's keep the feelings of others in mind and keep the labelling off the international forum. [ 05-27-2003, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ] |
Quote:
On another note, it is my experience that it are usually the right wing people (against gun control, pro death penalty, etc) who complain about being compared to Fascists. |
no, no, no, Yorik. A facist is what you call someone how you do not agree with, when you want to belittle and dismiss them ;) It's also useful when you have run out of rational arguements.
|
Quote:
On another note, it is my experience that it are usually the right wing people (against gun control, pro death penalty, etc) who complain about being compared to Fascists. </font>[/QUOTE]The US Right is famous for using it to dismiss and belittle liberal causes as well. Notably EcoFacists and FemNazis |
Actually, Yorick, I don't like your definition. Webster's says: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. That one I agree with, without all of the slanted analysis.
|
Tell you what, you give me a slightly-insulting (but not in violation of TOS) pithy-sounding term to use when someone is so stubbornly unwavering on (1) an issue and also (2) forcing everyone else to see it their way and I'll quit using Fascist. ;)
As a show of good will, I hereby shelve Nazi from my IWF vocabulary. :D |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Here is the partial list you provide to garner sympathy. Why not finish the entire list out as to be completely honest. Oh and do paint them as you being "hounded" "crucified" "belittled" or whatnot, elsewise I will not know that they came from your keyboard. [img]graemlins/blueblink.gif[/img] As evident from the above discourse, one is not a fascist if one supports 1.Gun control 2.Public smoking prohibition 3.No death penalty 4.Constitutional revisions Being that we are *still* discussing number four, I'd say that your stance is hardly that of "minor,harmless, revisions". That is severely disengenious to assert so. Items one and two, and the way you put them, actually teem with what TL posted above. I havent seen a thread on the death penalty and your thoughts so I have no comment. Hows that? [ 05-27-2003, 02:20 PM: Message edited by: ElricMorlockin ] |
Quote:
Hey, guys, while you're at it I'm looking for a word to describe those who enter a discussion for the purpose of stating their view and enforcing it rather than exploring it. It's sorta the same concept as talking "at" people rather than "with" people. Or, as the old question goes: "When someone else is talking, are you listening or waiting to speak?" Anyone got a good term for this behavior?? |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved