What's the difference between neo-cons and fascists?

[Ecotopian]

For a long time, I thought that neo-cons were just a new breed of conservative. But I've read a posting from the Latest News Section (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=238775) about a GOP Plan to add a whole new slate of entitlements and subsidies to several industries. What inspired me a little was reading how several GOP budget-hawks were getting their feathers riled up over the issue of "entitlements". It showed me that conservatives aren't all that bad. Then a comment was made that the GOP faction that put through this budget isn't conservative at all. It seems that the new right wing is even more extreme than conservatives and at times even says that conservatives are not true to the philosophy of conservatism.

Is there any difference between the right wing neo-cons and fascists? They both have the mindset that conservatives are not true adherents and that liberals are an extreme threat to their existence. I admit that what might be the only difference now is that the neo-cons don't have violent enforcement squads like the Nazis did prior to taking over the Reichstagg, although local Police Forces and the FBI could easily fill this function.

It seems to me that most of the elements for the neo-cons to become fascists are there. The intolerance and outright disdain for the left, conservative student movements to blacklist liberal academics, an increasing reliance on the military, a growing militarization of the police, a greater reliance on secret police and tribunals, and increasing suspensions of freedoms and liberties. Among the examples are the Dick Cheney/Enron Energy Task Force secrecy provisions (for which the Sierra Club is suing to get access to), the illegitimate invasion of Iraq (in a more perfect world, Bush would face prosecution by the international courts), Bush's love for security (recently London, but even as far back as the unprecedented numbers of police at his inaugural address), the Faith-based Initiative (all of the money goes to Christian organizations), FBI surveillance of law-abiding protestors, Guantanamo Bay, and the PATRIOT ACT.

What do you think? Are neo-cons more similar than they are different from fascists? Do the neo-cons want to nudge America into becoming a theocratic fascist police state?

[kcwayne]

1. Neocons realized that uniforms and jack boots

were so 1940, and prefer that their wives dresses match their sofas.

[La_Serpiente]

2. If the neo-cons aren't brought down

they will become drunk on power. Starting wars all over the place doesn't bring stability...it brings INSTABILITY!!!

I am not really an expert on WW II Nazism...but I did know that they killed a lot of people and nobody in Germany or the rest of Europe thought that Hitler would rise to such a level of Chancellor and do they crazy shit he did. There is one difference between Hitler and Bush though. Hitler was a genius, however, he had no morals. Bush is a dolt, and whether he has morals is questionable.

PNAC isn't finished with the Middle East. I have no doubt in my mind that they are going to go at Iran and Syria. Why are we changing the Middle East when we aren't even solving the issue that gives legitimacy to the terrorists' excuses which is the Israeli/Palestinian Issue? If I were in the Middle East, and I heard Bush saying Sharon is a man of peace, I would become furious and think to myself that the war on Iraq was purely for reasons to satiate Israel.

I don't hate the state of Israel. I know people who don't think the state of Israel should exist simply because they feel perturbed by the fact that it is a country exclusively for ethnic and religious Jews. I know other minority groups are allowed, by the creation of Israel was specifically to give Jews a place of refuge for themselves. I will differ with them on this one simply because Jews have probably been the most persecuted people on the planet that I know. However, if they want to live in that region, they are going to have to be responsible for their actions and pull out of the settlements to get an upper hand in negotiations with the surrounding countries. Otherwise, they are negotiating in bad faith.

Sorry, just ranting here.

[JaySherman]

3. Read this:

http://www.cursor.org/stories/fascismintroduction.php

[MrSoundAndVision]

4. They are becoming fascists

Bear in mind that the fascists of Italy, Germany, Soviet Union, all of these manipulated the public mind to stay in power. None really came out and said "I'm fascist, and you my bitch!" They manipulated systems, and that's where we are now. Some time ago, a group of Republicans got together and mapped it all out (PNAC), how they would slowly unravel the fabric of society, and make a corporate police state. Even the sexation of society is used to further it's grip. I ask this: Where will it end? Do they want us dead? They must know that we will be replaced from within the working class. Do they want to force their beliefs on us? No, obviously they don't believe the religious beliefs they present to hold so dear. So the answer is this: they are power hungry idiots. It's a game.

You know, I read an article linked from http://www.kucinich.us, which was written by an established journalist about Dennis Kucinich. But it wasn't about his campaign per se, or the issues necessarily, it was about Kucinich the man. The journalist had a short conversation with Kucinich on a flight to some campaign stop, and he said that Kucinich mentioned that even power hungry bastards hell bent on destroying our democracy would have to be rehabilitated, not penalized! There's my president.

[HereSince1628]

14. The term neoconservatism is from the 1920's

Its a movement of which Leo Strauss-ophiles and students of conservative history should be aware.

Like today's movement, it favored a foreign policy that used the military to secure strategic interests in the interest of strategic values...

But being a movement that was overshadowed by the devastation of classical fascism its not included in high school textbooks.

Because of the way Wolfowitz and Kristol hide secrets out in the open under a vail of erudition everyone should probably pause and contemplate the historic neoconservatism as well as its contemporary namesake.

[brainshrub]

19. Becoming???!!!

They are already are!

NeoConservatism is facism w/o the racism.

[pasadenaboy]

5. great research on neocons by Christian Science Monitor

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/index.html

[Ecotopian]

8. Great link!

I checked out your link. I admit that it really helped me understand their cracked sense of reality. They actually believe they're partially liberal! Unbelievable! Maybe they mean in an economic sense where you free up trade barriers. In the moral sense, they have no sense of morality because they're more of the realpolitik practitioners. The two most disturbing aspects from your link is neocons faith in relying on American military power to tame the world (I've always known that they were conquest-hungry like the Nazis) and their connection to the Likud party (which has a similar conquest-mindset with the Palestinians but is likewise not doing so well). Essentially these Neocons are the American equivalent to the Likud! This to me is as shocking as it is incredible! This just makes me want to break their will even more.

[veganwitch]

6. one has a hypen?

didnt read the article but thats the first think i thought of.

[pink_poodle]

7. Who said there was a difference? -nm

:

[sam sarrha]

9. actually there is a differance...but only in the degree of "belligerent

nationallism".... they j just haven't used the storm killer troopers yet. But they are prosecuting Green Peace as terrorists because of a nonviolent free speech demonstration.. under a vague 1700's law.. something about harassing sailers..?? A definition of fascism from 'older American Heritage Dictionary'...."FASCISM:n,..a philosophy or system of that advocates or exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with an ideology of belligerent nationalism." The best description of NEOCON's is by Rep. Ron Paul of Texas..you have to go to his site..Rep Ron Paul>speeches>2003>july10,2003 'speeches' are in a yellow box to left toward the bottom..sorry no other way to get there. The NEOCON's base their philosophy on the writings of Niccolo Machiavelli, a dictatorial leader that rules by lies and constant warfare against someone..usualy smaller countries that cant defend themselves to acquire resources and to build an empire Read "Machiavelli On Modern leadership:why Machiavelli's iron rules are just as timely and important today as five centuries ago." These are the same people who in Reagan's day said their purpose was to ...'shrink the size of the government down to where they could drown it in a bath tub and kill it" they intend to overthrow the government, Bush Sr made several executive orders so that in case there was a .."national emergency" declared under any pretext the constitution and bill of rights would be suspended for 5 years and a magistrate government would be instalded..all money will be eliminated to stop the drug problem and an id card that will be a "fund card" will replace it. the movement of people will be controlled by the paper work being to difficult to deal with...

[Cary]

10. Historically there is a huge difference

I'm troubled by the notions of Neo-cons, too. But they're not fascists. At least, not yet.

The philosophical underpinning of our government is still based on John Locke and Thomas Paine, which emphasize the primacy of individual rights. That philosophical underpinning is powerful.

In terms of Germany, Italy, and Spain, the history is a little different and you can't truly equate Italian and Spanish fascism with Hitler. Focusing on Germany, it produced the world's greatest philosophers yet it had no philosphical underpinning for its government (the Weimar Republic). Bismarck united the German nation states and ruled them under the notion of the Real Politic--whatever works best. Subsequent leaders weren't as skillful as Bismarck and couldn't maintain this. Of course, World War I facilitated all sorts of changes and unleashed all sorts of forces, including National Socialism.

The SS was actually a later iteration. The SA came first and eventually Hitler did it in, along with its leader, in the Night of the Long Knives.

There is so much more to this. All I can say is that I think it's a bit extreme to deem Neo-cons to be fascists. They, like us, fall on various points of their spectrum. And, frankly, there is something to their idea that we need to be proactive in the Middle East.

I will say, unequivocably, that Neo-cons, like fascists, are ideologues. As such they aren't burdened with silly things like "reasoning". Ideology also lends itself to phenomena like "Ditto Heads". But just because they dismiss our thought without truly reasoning through it doesn't excuse us from not reasoning through their thoughts, and incorporating anything we deem correct.

We aren't always correct, any more than they aren't always correct.

I'd suggest reading "Paris 1919" and "The Peace to End All Peace". These books describe how the Great Powers messed up the Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, and how we're paying a price for that today. Does that justify the Neo-con approach to the problem? I don't think so but I'm equally convinced that we can't just sit here and wait for another 9/11.

Understand, too, that the Israelis have truly been given little choice as to how to deal with their problems--other than to just give up and leave the region. It ain't going to happen, folks. Unlike the Israelis, however, do have choices. So our resoning in terms of how we deal with the Middle East ought not to be the same as theirs.

Finally, just because they're ideologues, doesn't mean we have to revert to being ideologues.

[indepat]

12. Right: they are corporatists rather than fascists should there be

difference, well, at least a kinder, gentler Mussolini- type rather than Hitler-type. And yes, they are decidedly compassionate, well, at least compassionate to their corporate and other wealthy patrons.

[chiburb]

11. And lest we forget the influence of Leo Strauss...

http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-3-77-1542.jsp

snip (on edit):

Danny Postel: The neo-conservative vision is commonly taken to be about spreading democracy and liberal values globally. And when Strauss is mentioned in the press, he is typically described as a great defender of liberal democracy against totalitarian tyranny. You’ve written, however, that Strauss had a “profound antipathy to both liberalism and democracy.”

Shadia Drury: The idea that Strauss was a great defender of liberal democracy is laughable. I suppose that Strauss’s disciples consider it a noble lie. Yet many in the media have been gullible enough to believe it.

How could an admirer of Plato and Nietzsche be a liberal democrat? The ancient philosophers whom Strauss most cherished believed that the unwashed masses were not fit for either truth or liberty, and that giving them these sublime treasures would be like throwing pearls before swine. In contrast to modern political thinkers, the ancients denied that there is any natural right to liberty. Human beings are born neither free nor equal. The natural human condition, they held, is not one of freedom, but of subordination – and in Strauss’s estimation they were right in thinking so.

Praising the wisdom of the ancients and condemning the folly of the moderns was the whole point of Strauss’s most famous book, Natural Right and History. The cover of the book sports the American Declaration of Independence. But the book is a celebration of nature – not the natural rights of man (as the appearance of the book would lead one to believe) but the natural order of domination and subordination.

[glitch]

13. terrific link

Includes a reference list of links on Leo Strauss and Iraq. Here are a few of the free ones:

Jim Lobe, “The Strong Must Rule the Weak: A Philosopher for an Empire,” Foreign Policy in Focus, 12 May 2003
http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2003/0305strauss_body.html

Seymour Hersh, “Selective Intelligence,” The New Yorker, 12 May 2003 http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030512fa_fact

William Pfaff, “The long reach of Leo Strauss”, International Herald Tribune, 15 May 2003 <http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0515-09.htm>
Peter Berkowitz, “What Hath Strauss Wrought?”, Weekly Standard, 2 June 2003
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/717acusr.asp

“Philosophers and kings,” The Economist, 19 June 2003 http://www.economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1859009

Laura Rozen “Con Tract: the theory behind neocon self-deception”, Washington Monthly, October 2003 http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0310.rozen.html

[freesqueeze]

15. The Neocons Still Must Answer to the Electorate

Call me a hopeless optimist but I feel that with a fierce registration effort the Neocons can be voted out and with that comeuppance, they will slide back into their own spider hole.

REGISTER AND VOTE IN '04!

[Karenina]

16. Voting is merely "window dressing"

when the software is proprietary, developed and owned by folks who have the audacity to express PUBLICLY their commitment to "delivering" the vote to *dimwit and his thugs.

The forces that have seized control of the American government will STOP AT NOTHING to maintain their power. The "will of the people" is nothing more than a "focus group" to them. Their plans have been decade in the making. DECADES. Ousting them at this late date will cost the blood of patriots. I DO NOT MEAN THOSE BEING USED, ABUSED AND DISCARDED IN IRAQ FOR *CORPORATE FINANCIAL GAIN. I mean Americans on American soil who have learned the lessons of Nazi Germany. If you think I'm being "over the top," you haven't been paying close enough attention.

[Spinoza]

17. The Blood of Patriots?

Ummm, perhaps I am mistaken, but it seems you are advocating bloodshed in the U.S. Outside of the moral issue (for starters...what right do we have to force our opinions on other Americans thru bloodshed?) we would be fighting the U.S. Army, Navy, Marines, Airforce, State Militias, local police, FBI, CIA, AND THE MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. Gee. I wonder who would win.

[kaitykaity]

18. Please check out a book called "Friendly Fascism"

by Bertram Gross.

Excerpts here:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/Friendly_Fascism_BGross.html

Also, read anything you can get your hands on about
Leo Strauss, the philosophical guru behind the Kristols,
Brooks', and Wolfowitz's of this world.