What governments can do to oppose the rise of fascism.

[dutch508]

Eyeball_Kid (6,346 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216340051

What governments can do to oppose the rise of fascism.

1. Narrow the gap between rich and poor.

Shift wealth downward. You can call it anything you want, as long as you shift wealth downward. If you want political and socioeconomic stability, you must shift wealth downward. Paradoxically, the wealthy would benefit more than could ever be imagined right now.

2. Do #1 by virtually giving away or heavily subsidizing education.

Educating the workforce can't just be a campaign slogan. Make education a defining value in the 21st century. Raise the status of educators. The downward shift of wealth can materialize as a vastly educated workforce on the cusp of a coming technological leap. Liberal Arts and Humanities improve our quality of life beyond an increase in income. Say it and back it up with money.

3. There must be a real promise of prosperity for a growing middle class.

Voters have to feel invested in the system and should expect real benefits from their place in the world. Voters are investors in a system that works for them.

4. Governments have a tendency to get pushed back on their heels in the face of "anti-government" instability and fascism. They need to listen to the instability and ask questions about how to enable stability. We cannot advance with a lopsided rich/poor gap. It won't work.


Fascism is rising for reasons. Reacting with rigidity will make matters worse. If governments don't do something about it, they'll get swallowed.

 

Fiendish Thingy (8,743 posts)

1. I'm the US that means ending the filibuster

So that government can actually work for the people.

That includes passing voting rights to end the tyranny of the minority.

 

Star Member llashram (4,002 posts)

2. ++

would be a good start...also marginalize fascist leaders such as the one building his cult in America and Canada now.

VarryOn (2,064 posts)

3. How practically would #1 be achieved?

I’m guessing you’d first have to determine who is wealthy and who is poor? So, what would those definitions be?

Suppose, my wife and I saved over our careers and built our dream home. Let’s say it’s $500,000. Would the govt confiscate that? What would we get in its place? Just trying to understand what “shift[ing] wealth downward” looks like.

Thanks!

Bernardo de La Paz (40,143 posts)

6. Taxation, duh, for starters. btw, your post is a right wing talking point and nonsensical. . . nt

 

Star Member Crunchy Frog (25,297 posts)

14. Who's talking about government confiscation of family homes?

Nobody except for your own RW strawman.

How about going back to Eisenhower era tax rates?

Its because people can see exactly what's happened every time a country tries to do this...

modrepub (2,603 posts)

5. You'll Never Get Past #1

As much as I agree that a lot of our problems stem from wealth disparity I can't condone a redistribution via some government pathway; politicians are too corrupt and will use their position to protect their interests, which rarely align with the public in general.

We'd be much better served if we'd concentrate on rewarding innovation and those who are resilient. Too much of government is controlled by people who protect their interests and stifle innovation that would benefit everyone. The fossil fuel industry is a perfect example. They project government policies that stifle any form of alternative energy. Knock their subsidies, take away their regulatory protections and I'd bet we wouldn't be so reliant on them.

And put the power back at the local level with some ground rules to prevent folks from manipulating the system to exclude those they don't like or agree with. Our centralized government is too easy to gum up. A single Senator can hold up any legislation. Better to have multiple pathways to success so they can't be blocked by the privileged.

These are hard things to make come about but we really need change and I'm afraid doing it in one grand sweep at the federal level isn't going to work. Better to try things out at a smaller scale and then scale the things up that actually work.

 

thatdemguy (46 posts)

9. I hate the word loophole.

A loophole is simply following the law as written, but not liking the law so you call it a loop hole. Its a catch phrase, that means I just dont like it. We need to be more specific, what dont you like and how would you want it changed.

My example...I am all for any capital gains being taxed at regular income rates, except housing profits.

The holy grail is Jimmy carter era taxes,

but the loop hole was pretty much all interest was tax deductible. No one paid 70%, infact the effective tax rates where very close to what they are today.

This will go over like a lead balloon, we need more tax income. BUT I feel we also need to spend less. I would bet it would be a lot easier to raise the max tax brackets a few % points, if we also made a law that made the gov spend a little less. Benefits everyone esp our grand children. Heck keep it as simple as not increasing the fed spending at a rate that exceeds the growth in the gdp for a few years.

Star Member Silent3 (11,967 posts)

15. Great advice... for a future generation

We're way too out of kilter now on so much of this stuff that none of this could possibly be acted on fast enough to save us from Republicans grabbing power in the upcoming elections.

And with voting rights legislation dead in the water, I think our only near-term hope is for inflation to be tamed before November, and for enough Republican scandal to finally break through to our idiot voters that they realize what an existential danger supporting Republican is.

I'm very worried right now, because the odds of the latter are low. That over 70 million idiots voted for Trump in the last election is a sign of monumental, staggering obliviousness and/or addiction to misinformation.

 

[67 Rover]

Fiendish Thingy (8,743 posts)

1. I'm the US that means ending the filibuster

So that government can actually work for the people.

That includes passing voting rights to end the tyranny of the minority.

Let's hold that thought for 10 or so months and then revisit it to see if you have a change of mind. I would bet you do a complete 180 or as you DUmmies like to say "you have evolved".

[DefiantSix]

Eyeball_Kid (6,346 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216340051

What governments can do to oppose the rise of fascism...

You DUmbasses keep using that word. It doesn't mean what you think -and I use that term very loosely- it means.

You can't have 'fascism' without GOVERNMENT, DUmb****s.

[Zathras]

Eyeball_Kid (6,346 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216340051

What governments can do to oppose the rise of fascism.

How about not supporting those that claim to be Antifascist but use the tactics of Hitler's Brownshirts.

[SVPete]

Eyeball_Kid (6,346 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216340051

What governments can do to oppose the rise of fascism.

1. Narrow the gap between rich and poor.

Shift wealth downward. You can call it anything you want, as long as you shift wealth downward. ... 1.

2. Do #1 by virtually giving away or heavily subsidizing education.  2. a.

... The downward shift of wealth can materialize as a vastly educated workforce on the cusp of a coming technological leap. Liberal Arts and Humanities improve our quality of life beyond an increase in income. 2. b. ..

3. There must be a real promise of prosperity for a growing middle class. 3.
...

4. Governments have a tendency to get pushed back on their heels in the face of "anti-government" instability and fascism. They need to listen to the instability and ask questions about how to enable stability. We cannot advance with a lopsided rich/poor gap. It won't work.  4.

1. Got it. Steal from "the rich" what they earned through product/service creation, creating jobs, and investing their $$ in other productive ventures. What will this utopia do when "the rich" stop producing what will be stolen from them and get their $$ and assets out of Dodge?

2. a. Primary and secondary education in the US already are "free" (taxpayer $$!). Gooberment, teacher's union, and activists have made it almost worthless in too many parts of the US by substituting social engineering crap for needed knowledge and skills.

2. b. How will this "coming technological leap" be produced by people with a "Liberal Arts and Humanities" education that largely eschews the knowledge needed for technology and encourages Luddite anti-progress activism (which is what Libs & Progs dumbed it down to being)?

3.         "What governments can do" implies actions, not a load of feely-goody         .

4.         "What governments can do" implies actions, not a load of feely-goody         . But since Eyeball_Kid is all , he should explain how the US advanced from a new nation barely able to provide for itself economically and defend itself militarily to one of the economically and militarily powerful nations in the world without all of Eyeball_Kid's utopian .  Etymologically, "Utopia" means "nowhere", an imaginary society. Eyeball_Kid sounds like a college undergrad or high schooler spouting of about socio-economic matters in which (s)he plays no part beyond finding a burger and some ... probably using gooberment $$ or OPM.

[Wineslob]

Pretty boring see yet another "anyone we don't like is a fascist/Nazi".

[ADsOutburst]

What governments can do to oppose the rise of fascism:

1. Stop being fascistic.

[jukin]

Ladies and gentleman, a presentation of the most intelligent critical thinkers of our time.

We ignore their sage wisdom at our peril.

[Kc25]

What governments can do to oppose the rise of fascism.

Stop electing authoritarian democrats?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

"Once we decree total control over all finances, the media, culture, education, vital services and ruthlessly prosecute and/or ostracize all who dare disagree, we will have thwarted fascism."

[jukin]

My guess the advice from the poogresive DUmmys would be for the government to fascist first... you know like Australia, all of europe and now Canuckstan. It is the only way to win the Fascist Wars, go totalitarian firstest and hardest.