son of witless

Nice twisting of the facts Peter. Call all speech you dislike hate speech and shut it all down. She meant that Mussolini stopped free speech not that somebody stopped him. You of course knew that. You advocate silencing speakers at colleges. What next?

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Dead wrong on all counts.

Fascism defined:

A way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government. Very harsh control or authority.

Here's a few points that were well-defined in both Mussolini's Italy and Hitler's Germany:

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
Supremacy of the Military
Rampant Sexism
Controlled Mass Media
Obsession with National Security
Religion and Government are Intertwined
Corporate Power is Protected
Labor Power is Suppressed
Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fraudulent Elections

Now, you tell me how this "bears a scary resemblance to Our President in his stance, his gestures and persona", because I simply do not see it. And that's 'President Trump' to you, Snowflake.

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

If Pete isn't bright enough to understand her implication, he isn't bright enough to understand the explanation.

If on the other hand he did get it the first time, he'll deny it again and again.

Why try? Let these libprogs wallow.

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

He tells me there have only been two tax cuts and they both led to economic disaster. I debunk that, and now he's backpedaling, saying he meant just the Reagan and Bush II tax cuts. Totally incorrigible.

JW

You're partly right. Fascism is national socialism. Nationalism, certainly; but not willing collaboration from business or religion... unless it is your contention that Ford and GM happily made vehicles for Hitler.

EconomistDon

Peter, you need to take a look in the mirror. You post a fascist fist wrapped in the American flag, and you think that you are not a fascist! Wake up dude, you are a liberal fascist.
If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a ..........

buffalo Loc: Texas

Afraid your wrong JW. When it comes to war, money and profits, US big corporations have no scruples. Not then, not now.

But documents discovered in German and American archives show a much more complicated picture. In certain instances, American managers of both GM and Ford went along with the conversion of their German plants to military production at a time when U.S. government documents show they were still resisting calls by the Roosevelt administration to step up military production in their plants at home.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htm

Large American banks – and George W. Bush’s grandfather – financed the Nazis.

American manufacturing companies were big supporters of the Nazis. here are 6 historical examples …

http://www.globalresearch.ca/secret-history-the-u-s-supported-and-inspired-the-nazis/5439236

JW

No, I am not wrong. From your first link:

"Documents suggest that the principal motivation of both companies during this period was to protect their investments. An FBI report dated July 23, 1941 quoted Mooney as saying that he would refuse to take any action that might "make Hitler mad." In fall 1940, Mooney told the journalist Henry Paynter that he would not return his Nazi medal because such an action might jeopardize GM's $100 million investment in Germany. "Hitler has all the cards," Paynter quoted Mooney as saying."

Had cooperation with Hitler continued after Dec. 7, 1941, I would grant you a point. It didn't. The point was WILLING cooperation with fascist regimes. Neither Ford nor GM were willing accomplices. Both were in positions of vulnerability they were duty-bound to protect until hostilities were declared.

Both, Mussolini and Hitler, were socialists and it is socialism that demands control over industry; directly or through regulation.

That the American eugenics movement and people like Margaret Sanger and Henry Ford were models for many of the NAZI ideas may not be broadly known but they are not unknown. Even those were not WILLING collaborators with NAZI goals. They were simply the sources of NAZI theory, not compatriots in NAZI crimes.

The responsibility of business is to do business, protect its investors and advance its successes in the business realm. US and other businesses did just that until their responsibilities ended with the declaration of war. Once again, it is socialism that decrees business as vassals of the state.

son of witless

It was not his intelligence I put into question. I am sure his words were intentional.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Hitler and Mussolini mere not socialists.

The Spanish Civil War was the precursor to World War II. Fascist Francisco Franco was aided by Hitler and Mussolini during the Spanish Civil War. At this time GM, Ford, DuPont, and Standard Oil were working with Franco and supplying the fascist powers of Europe. At this same time many Americans were protesting the goings on in Europe as well as the involvement of American companies in helping the fascist powers. A group of American volunteer soldiers known as the Abe Lincoln Brigade went to Spain during this time to fight against Franco in defense of the Spanish Republic. This group was made up primarily of leftist American groups, such as members of American socialist parties and communist parties.

The following is excerpted from a report printed by the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary in 1974:

The activities of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler prior to and during World War II...are instructive. At that time, these three firms dominated motor vehicle production in both the United States and Germany. Due to its mass production capabilities, automobile manufacturing is one of the most crucial industries with respect to national defense. As a result, these firms retained the economic and political power to affect the shape of governmental relations both within and between these nations in a manner which maximized corporate global profits. In short, they were private governments unaccountable to the citizens of any country yet possessing tremendous influence over the course of war and peace in the world. The substantial contribution of these firms to the American war effort in terms of tanks, aircraft components, and other military equipment is widely acknowledged. Less well known are the simultaneous contributions of their foreign subsidiaries to the Axis Powers. In sum, they maximized profits by supplying both sides with the materiel needed to conduct the war.

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/american_supporters_of_the_europ.htm

JW

Mussolini was a trained and practiced socialist. His goal for creating a Fascist state was to create a government that controlled or outrightly owned the means of production.

"State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the State are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management.". Benito Mussolini

PeterS

Well Fascism is an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. A Fascist is someone who believes in it. I haven't missed the message at all--you guys, as usual, simply don't know what you are talking about. Now are you accusing the Berkeley liberals of acting like RWing fascists or are they just a bunch of meanies who are tired of right wing hate speech so shut it down? Only one characterization applies...

PeterS

So tell me. If Hitler was a socialist why did he persecute Communists, Socialists, and intellectuals, along with the Jews?

PeterS

No, I only call hate speech hate speech or are you trying to tell me that Coulter intent was to blow loving kisses to all those wonderful leftists? And the only reason that you guys love Coulter is because she articulates your hatred of the left. If she were actually objective politically she would be a none entity and ignored by everyone...thus welcomed to speak where ever she wants...

PeterS

For the record, you are spot on...