Again for all those moderates in the front, moderate Democrats are worthless.
Nobody was shocked.
But Hasan Piker! Censure again for being Muslim! Bernie bros!
This is my shocked face.
Two centrist Democrats, Reps. Jared Golden of Maine and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, took the unusual step Tuesday of rescuing GOP leaders’ own agenda in the face of a conservative rebellion.
So what’s the excuse this time members of the Republican-lite brigade?
Argh why do you love Donald so much?!?!??
Don’t worry, Golden is retiring from the house and he’s likely to be replaced by Paul “I was Trump before Trump” LePage, so everything will be fine, right?
Oh no, you’ll get someone who will vote with the fascists! Oh wait…
Vote for a non-fascist enabler in the primary you bunch of moderate do nothings.
Proof once again, with a tent big enough to hold everyone, it doesn’t matter who goes in, the only thing you’re getting out of it is a circus.
Republicans like Rep. Chip Roy refused to support a Senate-passed funding bill that didn’t allow House conservatives to insert their own priorities, like provisions against what they call “mass surveillance” or more money for President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda.
There’s some element of good in not letting them push for more ICE funding in letting this go through. Still would just as soon see nothing function and send them all home for now until we can seat a new batch.
Ask a liberal which is worse, fascism or socialism and you might be surprised how many would say socialism is worse, if they were being honest. Not that they like fascism. Not at all, they hate it. They just hate socialism more. To them, fascism is the lesser of the two evils. And I’m not just making this up, a prominent liberal economist of the 20th century said it explicitly:
As you will understand, it is possible for a dictator to govern in a liberal way. And it is also possible for a democracy to govern with a total lack of liberalism. Personally I prefer a liberal dictator to democratic government lacking liberalism.
- Friedrich Hayek
Why would you even ask such a thing when fascism was already chosen a long time ago.
Your example would hold much truer for a conservative in the US. Most of them are anti liberal (they don’t know what it means but they hate it) and definitely would choose fascism. I don’t think that most people who consider themselves liberal would pick fascism.
Of course, the framing of the question is rather important. If you describe socialist policies without calling it that big bad scary word most people are very amiable to it.
Under fascism, if you’re not from a scapegoat minority, you still get to practice your religion, and if you know your place and stay out of things that aren’t your business (such as political questions, lofty ideas about human rights, or why a new family suddenly moved into the Rosenzweigs’ house across the street), you get to keep what you have, and if you’re lucky, you might even get some slaves.
The problem is, if you’re not from a scapegoat minority, that doesn’t mean you won’t wake up one tomorrow. The circle of who is “in the club” and who isn’t is ever-shrinking.
Not for long with these fashies in charge, they are no Franco, not even mussolini. Like stalin but older and dumber. Maybe meaner even but the dumb moderates the mean somewhat.
They will crash the economy, and ruin what remains of prosperity was what I meant to say.
Dictatorship and fascism aren’t synonyms.
That’s true. Does that mean you agree with Hayek?
He is right in the sense that there can be a benevolent dictator like Cinncinnatus who famously was made dictator, saved Rome from an invading army, and retired back to his farm after 16 days. At the same time a liberal democracy can vote that a minority ethnic group should all become slaves.
At the same time a liberal democracy can vote that a minority ethnic group should all become slaves.
That’s not what Hayek was talking about when he referenced a “democratic government lacking liberalism.” He was talking about Chile after the election of Salvador Allende, a socialist. Allende “sought to nationalize major industries, expand education, and improve the living standards of the working class.” No mention of mass enslavement. Although his replacement, Augusto Pinochet, who was supported by Hayek and the US, tortured and/or murdered tens of thousands.
The slavery thing is just an example. It’s a tyranny of the majority thing inherent to pure democracy. Hayek’s statement is right standing by itself. If he was alluding to a democratic society electing to be socialist when he was talking about a democratic government lacking liberalism, he is wrong. But that is to be expected from an economist. Most would rather give up democracy than capitalism.
