Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 01:30 AM
Original message
"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer"
Edited on Sun Apr-10-05 01:30 AM by lala_rawraw
In case you don't know that horrifying phrase, let me remind you of its American equivalent uttered very similarly by the American equivalent of Goebbels, Rove:

"one people, one government, one dictator"



Welcome to Amerika... does this sound familiar?

OLD World
...Between 1925 and 1931, the Fascists consolidated power through a series of new laws that provided a legal basis for Italy’s official transformation into a single-party state. The government abolished independent political parties and trade unions and took direct control of regional and local governments. The Fascists sharply curbed freedom of the press and assumed sweeping powers to silence political opposition. The government created a special court and police force to suppress so-called anti-Fascism. In principle Mussolini headed the Fascist Party and as head of state led the government in consultation with the Fascist Grand Council. In reality, however, he increasingly became an autocrat answerable to no one. Mussolini was able to retain power because of his success in presenting himself as an inspired Duce (Leader) sent by providence to make Italy great once more...


...

NEW World

In addition to organizing through small groups, some fascists have tried to participate in mainstream party-based electoral politics. In contrast to the first fascist movements, these new fascist parties do not rely on a military branch to fight their opponents, and they tend to conceal their larger fascist agenda. To make fascist ideas seem acceptable, some parties water down their revolutionary agenda in order to win voter support even from people who do not want radical change and a fascist regime. Instead of emphasizing their long-term objectives for change, the fascist parties focus on issues such as the threat of Communism, crime, global economic competition, the loss of cultural identity allegedly resulting from mass immigration, and the need for a strong, inspiring leader to give the nation a direction.


....

Thinking People Think

...Scholars disagree over how to define the basic elements of fascism. Marxist historians and political scientists (that is, those who base their approach on the writings of German political theorist Karl Marx) view fascism as a form of politics that is cynically adopted by governments to support capitalism and to prevent a socialist revolution. These scholars have applied the label of fascism to many authoritarian regimes that came to power between World War I and World War II, such as those in Portugal, Austria, Poland, and Japan. Marxist scholars also label as fascist some authoritarian governments that emerged after World War II, including regimes in Argentina, Chile, Greece, and South Africa.

Some non-Marxist scholars have dismissed fascism as a form of authoritarianism that is reactionary, responding to political and social developments but without any objective beyond the exercise of power. Some of these scholars view fascism as a crude, barbaric form of nihilism, asserting that it lacks any coherent ideals or ideology. Many other historians and political scientists agree that fascism has a set of basic traits—a fascist minimum—but tend to disagree over what to include in the definition. Scholars disagree, for example, over issues such as whether the concept of fascism includes Nazi Germany and the Vichy regime (the French government set up in south central France in 1940 after the Nazis had occupied the rest of the country).


OR just read the entire MSN Encarta entry in its full (missing 2000-2005) entry:

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761568245/Fascism.html#s2
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Fiendish Thingy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 01:41 AM
Response to Original message
1. Source for the Rove quote? Thanks n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. That wording is the translation
Of the German title, which is the strategy of Karl Rove as it is publicly known. Google "republican single party" or "single party rule" and Karl Rove. You will get a plethora of information with regard to a strategy in step with that quote.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Journeyman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 02:04 AM
Response to Original message
2. Yes. Please provide the source of the Rove quote. . .
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 02:36 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. That is not Rove, that is translation... I should edit to make clearer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Blast, I cannot edit it now...
I should have worded it a bit differently. That is not a direct Rove quote, that is translation of the German in the title. The policy, however, is much the same with regard to that sentiment and Rove speaks to a single party rule in various interviews, but that exact phrase is just the translation of the infamous german statement. Sorry for the confusion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
6. Mein Volk, Mein Reich, Mein Fuhrer, MEIN ÖL!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 02:54 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yes, all "mine" sentiment....n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pachamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 03:53 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Sein hunger fuer Oel wird das tod zum viele bringen....
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 04:11 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Oi Pachamama!
:hi: Tudo bem? :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 03:06 AM
Response to Original message
8. There will always be two parties even in a totalitarian version of the US
It would be incredibly stupid of anyone in the US to destroy any opposition party and thus prove beyond a reasonable doubt what his intentions are. It is best to keep two parties where one holds the power and the other is simply kept to maintain the illusion of debate and choice so as to be able to claim the title of a free republic.

Fascism will not return in a form that we will recognize. To abolish opposition parties and liquidate dissidents, to round up Arabs, to install a president for life--these are things that are too obvious a warning sign of what will come. People will react to that. If you want to decrease your chance of being detected, then you alter your approach each time, not use the same approach twice.

What would happen if tomorrow Bush and Congress tried to outlaw the Democratic Party? It's too obvious. What's more sensible is to weaken the party, to turn it into a vaccine against accusations of totalitarianism. A vaccine is simply the same bug except it is either dead or weakened such that the body can handle it. The point is to weaken the Democrats such that they can be handled thus ensuring a monopoly on power.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pachamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-10-05 04:00 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. The Democratic Party as a Vaccine against Accusations of the Truth
Wow...I never thought of it that way, but your description is right on...it would be crazy for Rove to ever abolish it...serves too much usefulness in its weakened state to help the GOP and the neo-con agenda...

They want to keep the illusion of a democracy alive....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC