I would have to say Mousillini, or Hitler or maybe Franco or maybe one of the Ceasers or a Pharaoh or something.

Of all the names on the list, I would say Bush.

If it were, "Most fascist Americans" I would probably say McArthy or something like that.

__________________
"Masters of War" by Bob Dylan
"When a man assumes public trust, he should consider himself as public property"
-Thomas Jefferson
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
-Albert Einstein
"One man with courage is a majority"
-Thomas Jefferson

Henry Ford edges out Prescott Bush by a nose.

Racist?

I thought this country was beyond that!?

LOL!!!


PROB

With the ground rules that you've established, I can't win. Fortunately, I can actually think for myself.


PROB

How did civilian society see "military methods" carried out to reduce unemployment and poverty? That seems like just a term thrown out that has little legitimacy. If anything it was a line of socialist methods and bureacratic reforms, but I don't see how the "military" provided any key model for reducing the great depression. It followed along the lines of Keynsian Economics, not military procedures.


and

Your sense of what is and what isn't facist is a bit perplexing to me. Because it seems you recklessly use the term to connote any state-sponsored program that attempts to redistribute wealth. The fact that these programs were pretty popular or that they contained metaphorical terms of "war", I don't think has any real reflection on it being a Fascist movement. Of course NO ONE wanted to lose a war, but that wasn't my point. No one wants to be in an economic depression (at least not the majority of people), just as in Germany and Italy. However the methods that Hitler used to emerge out of the depression were significantly different from those that Roosevelt used. Hitler nationalized several industries as did Mussolini while FDR created government programs. Now FDR did CREATE some state-owned industries such as the TVA because no private companies had the capacity to build such a far-reaching program, but it was built not to benefit the state, as many Fascist programs were designed to do, but to decrease power costs in the area and boost to the local economy.

Furthermore, while Fascist programs were primarily directed towards increasing military production, and social programs were secondary towards the overall goal. The increase in military spending gave tons of new jobs and secured a power dominance through military might. Had FDR focused solely on the military during the early parts of the great depression, as Hitler and Mussolini did, the nation would have surely escaped the pits of unemployment and recession. However, FDR avoided that path and focused almost strictly on social programs while military investment was ignored largely until the outbreak of war in Europe.

I dont think anyone can break the ties that FDR and Hitler had to socialism and their increase in state power, but the simple acknowledgment that this means fascism is honestly a large leap for me.

And for their similar popularity, I think it doesn't mean much. Elected officials often have a cult of personality that follows them. The difference being that the cult that Hitler had was enforced. Through salutes, propaganda, fiery speeches and an overall sense of military oppression, there was little room for dissent. This is not to say that people in Germany didn't idolize Hitler, but there wasn't much room to not idolize him.


Well I had honestly thought we were talking about depression-era FDR and not war time FDR, because A LOT changed in that space of time. I don't think anything excuses the Japanese Internment camps and order 9066 and that was probably his most facist policy in his entire administration. I can't argue with that one since it was ethnically-based program to enforce some kind of "security" that honestly didn't really need to be enforced.

Furthermore, FDR's policies during the war actually matched the militarization process of Nazi Germany far more than any point in his administration. But even this period of militarization can be excused somewhat because of the world wide war we were involved in. The only thing that made it different than Nazi Germany is that military supplies were being used to fight a war declared on the United States wereas Hitler was developing military arms to take over Europe.

Honestly, I am not trying to argue that Fascism is good or bad, nor am I trying to idolize FDR by purging him of any facists qualities, because he had several. However I am making a distinction between what has been recognized as Fascism by many historians and scholars and what FDR's programs were. The military-oriented dictatorship of Hitler had many similar programs to FDR, but I think the comparison is as adequate to comparing Hugo Chavez to Nixon because they have both put into place comprehensive health insurance programs for their countries. While both may have done similar social programs, its pretty apparent that Chavez has a much more socialist government than Richard Nixon was ever involved in. The comparison is similar to Hitler and FDR. Both had several socialist policies but FDR's differed greatly in the fact that his government was still democratic in nature and it focused on social spending rather than on militarization.

So even if FDR is the most SOCIALIST president of our entire history, I don't see why that has to directly correlate with him being Fascist. Of course National Socialism had socialist policies, but just because they both benefited from socialist programs does not make all socialist governments around the world Fascist. I think its a bit of a cop-out if you ask me, because Fascism is a segment on a broad band of socialist governments. Just because they happen to fall on the same band of socialism doesn't necessarily imply that they were fascist.

However since FDR was one of the most socialist presidents of our history, I guess he also was one of the most fascists, but I hardly believe he was fascist in any sense of the term.

__________________
Signature:

In the end, it does not matter exactly whether or not FDR was that similar to Hitler, but who in American history was the most similar.

Many people say that Bush is fascist, but when you take their arguments and apply them to FDR, then suddenly he becomes more fascist than Bush.

That is the purpose of this thread.

-

__________________
.

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.

--Murray Rothbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skinny. A liberal is just a libertarian who hasn't studied economics.

To me it still seems dumb when you have super-facists like George Rockwell and other true nazi-like organizations.

Even the consipiracy to overthrow FDR with general Smedley Butler was purposefully designed to set up a man exactly like Mussolini in the United States.

Everyone else looks like kittens in a lions den if you were to take a serious look at fascism in the United States

__________________
Signature:

If I am allowed to keep my definition

(Fascism: A system of government marked by stringent socioeconomic controls that are intended to maintain the existence of a usurious financial system at the expense of the population.)

I would have to vote for Wilson, primarily on account of his role in the creation of the Federal Reserve. That should be a no-brainer; Fiat currency backed by the IRS to bail out Wall Street every time speculators lose our deposits.

Even if I go with the original definition

(Fascism: a system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.)

Wilson get's the nod.

In my estimation, the Confederacy was the quintessential American brand of fascism. Wilson had Confederate blood. For example, he played a key role in the revival of the the KKK when he screened Hollywood's first blockbuster at the White House, and gave it rave reviews. The original name of the film was The Klansman. Later it was renamed Birth of Nation. Wilson also reintroduced segregation into the Federal bureaucracy.

Wilson led the United the United States into what I belive was the wrong side of WWI. For the first time, a United States president sent American boys to die for the greater glory of the British Empire. Wilson coordinated all of his foreign policy with his British masters. He was an extreme Anglophile.

This earned Wilson plenty of enemies, particluarly amongst those American citizens who knew their history. Not to worry! Under the Wilson Administration the U.S. Post Office banned the mailing of opposition literature. Finally, Wilson presided over the infamous Palmer Raids, in which countless members of the opposition were beaten, jailed, lynched or deported.

__________________
"Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money; it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits." FDR-First Inaugural Address

Under this definition, neither Hitler nor Mussolini were fascists. Neither of them sought to maintain the existence of a usurious financial system at the expense of the population. Both of them were for the people, and they both despised usury to the point where they called for death to be the punishment for it. Both of them constantly railed against capitalism, and they always talked about the people, or the volk. Franco might be considered fascist under your definition, though.

-

__________________
.

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.

--Murray Rothbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skinny. A liberal is just a libertarian who hasn't studied economics.

In the case of Hitler, I would say concentration camp slave labor to uphold the wheels of industry and finance qualifies. Even after Hitler's Germany became our declared enemy, the complex of usurious arrangements that grew out of Versailles were maintained with connections to the highest levels of Wall Street finance through the offices of Hjalmar Schact, Hitler's Nazi finance minister, who curiously escaped conviction at Nuremburg.

Did you know there are supposed to be records showing that SS guards at Auschwitz were paid from Standard Oil accounts? I have a hard time believing it. Here are a couple links I just dug up.

http://reformed-theology.org/html/bo...chapter_04.htm
http://www.tarpley.net/bush2.htm

__________________
"Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money; it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits." FDR-First Inaugural Address