02-14-2017, 05:08 PM
(02-14-2017, 02:21 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I didn't ignore your points, you ignored mine.
Compare all you want, what I'm telling you is your comparisons are silly because it won't end with the same path as Mussolini/Hitler. We have too many Checks and Balances in the system that won't allow that type of leader to emerge.
Except I am not talking about comparing to Hitler or Mussolini. I'm talking about much more generic comparisons. I agree that our system is well designed to hold off the end results of most authoritarian regimes, but that doesn't negate the troublesome behaviors that are exhibited by certain political figures. I would argue that it is necessary that we discuss these behaviors and the concerns they raise for the very fact that if they are not raised then our checks and balances, our system of accountability, falters.
I discussed the definition of fascism, to which you replied with comparisons to systems which have been in place for a while. I then provided you with an explanation as to why that was fallacious and you ignored it.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
