Book reviews

Kelwin Delaunay wrote:

 > "Martha Bridegam" <bridegam DeleteThis @pacbell.net> wrote in message
 > news:40706C7C.9B866042@pacbell.net...
  > > The SF Chron book reviews include some good ones today:
  > > <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article-list.cgi?key=RV&directory=Reviews>.
  > >
  > > This one makes the underemphasized point that true fascism is not simply
  > > a state of dictatorship, but specifically a phenomenon of failed
  > > democracies, and one democracies must guard against continually. See
  > >
 > <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/04/04/R
 > VGUK5R5FB1.DTL>.
  > >
  > > /M
  > >
 > The second piece seems to be a political statement by a Bush supporter
 > rather than a review of the book. In the first part of the review he
 > declares without reason, "George Bush is no fascist," and by the end he is
 > making patronizing excuses for the author's observations: "Yet two of the
 > chief "mobilizing passions" of fascism, identified by Paxton, seem eerily
 > familiar to Bush's America. Fascists, Paxton thinks, thrive on "a sense of
 > overwhelming crisis" and "the belief that one's group is a victim, a
 > sentiment that justifies any action ... against its enemies, both internal
 > and external." Watching Bush's campaign ads, Paxton might be forgiven for
 > seeing in them, if not fascism, then at least its precursors."
 >
 > Kelwin

No, I think it's a distressed democrat speaking carefully.

/M<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews 

"Kelwin Delaunay" <kelwindelaunay.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<1072tb375rjoe5a.TakeThisOut@corp.supernews.com>...
 > "Martha Bridegam" <bridegam.TakeThisOut@pacbell.net> wrote in message
 > news:40706C7C.9B866042@pacbell.net...
  > > The SF Chron book reviews include some good ones today:
  > > <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article-list.cgi?key=RV&directory=Reviews>.
  > >
  > > This one makes the underemphasized point that true fascism is not simply
  > > a state of dictatorship, but specifically a phenomenon of failed
  > > democracies, and one democracies must guard against continually. See
  > >
 > <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/04/04/R
 > VGUK5R5FB1.DTL>.
  > >
  > > /M
  > >
 >

 > "Yet two of the
 > chief "mobilizing passions" of fascism, identified by Paxton, seem eerily
 > familiar to Bush's America. Fascists, Paxton thinks, thrive on "a sense of
 > overwhelming crisis" and "the belief that one's group is a victim, a
 > sentiment that justifies any action ... against its enemies, both internal
 > and external." Watching Bush's campaign ads, Paxton might be forgiven for
 > seeing in them, if not fascism, then at least its precursors."
 >
 > Kelwin


I was looking at Paxton's book today and I read it like you, Kelwin.

Three points though.

1. Paxton asks whether fascism is historical, in the sense of limited
to particular places and times. Not sure how he answers it, but
Martha's point is in the book. (God agreeing with both of you on the
same day)

2. The parts of the book dealing with Left-Right continuum, and the
fascist third way, to me seemed incomprehensible. First he says they
are inadequate and meaningless and then uses them in his analysis. (A
big reason I didn't buy it, though I will someday.)

3. It's not clear that alot of Paxton's conditions aren't often real.
There are overwhelming crises and there are victims. I assume Paxton
talks about the difference between real and imaginary enemies. Which
is one of the arguments going on right now.

Of course when they blow up the Big Ben or the Eiffel Tower, the
argument will be moot.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews 

"Kelwin Delaunay" <kelwindelaunay.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1072tb375rjoe5a@corp.supernews.com...
 >
 > "Martha Bridegam" <bridegam.TakeThisOut@pacbell.net> wrote in message
 > news:40706C7C.9B866042@pacbell.net...
  > > The SF Chron book reviews include some good ones today:
  > >
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article-list.cgi?key=RV&directory=Reviews>.
  > >
  > > This one makes the underemphasized point that true fascism is not simply
  > > a state of dictatorship, but specifically a phenomenon of failed
  > > democracies, and one democracies must guard against continually. See
  > >
 >
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/04/04/R
 > VGUK5R5FB1.DTL>.
  > >
  > > /M
  > >
 > The second piece seems to be a political statement by a Bush supporter
 > rather than a review of the book. In the first part of the review he
 > declares without reason, "George Bush is no fascist," and by the end he is
 > making patronizing excuses for the author's observations: "Yet two of the
 > chief "mobilizing passions" of fascism, identified by Paxton, seem eerily
 > familiar to Bush's America. Fascists, Paxton thinks, thrive on "a sense of
 > overwhelming crisis" and "the belief that one's group is a victim, a
 > sentiment that justifies any action ... against its enemies, both internal
 > and external." Watching Bush's campaign ads, Paxton might be forgiven for
 > seeing in them, if not fascism, then at least its precursors."
 >
 > Kelwin

Staggers, dressed as Lawrence of Arabia, over to Delaunay; 'how's the
leg?!!'


 >
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews 

ROBBIE wrote:

 > "Kelwin Delaunay" <kelwindelaunay DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
 > news:1072tb375rjoe5a@corp.supernews.com...
  > >
  > > "Martha Bridegam" <bridegam DeleteThis @pacbell.net> wrote in message
  > > news:40706C7C.9B866042@pacbell.net...
   > > > The SF Chron book reviews include some good ones today:
   > > >
 > <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article-list.cgi?key=RV&directory=Reviews>.
   > > >
   > > > This one makes the underemphasized point that true fascism is not simply
   > > > a state of dictatorship, but specifically a phenomenon of failed
   > > > democracies, and one democracies must guard against continually. See
   > > >
  > >
 > <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/04/04/R
  > > VGUK5R5FB1.DTL>.
   > > >
   > > > /M
   > > >
  > > The second piece seems to be a political statement by a Bush supporter
  > > rather than a review of the book. In the first part of the review he
  > > declares without reason, "George Bush is no fascist," and by the end he is
  > > making patronizing excuses for the author's observations: "Yet two of the
  > > chief "mobilizing passions" of fascism, identified by Paxton, seem eerily
  > > familiar to Bush's America. Fascists, Paxton thinks, thrive on "a sense of
  > > overwhelming crisis" and "the belief that one's group is a victim, a
  > > sentiment that justifies any action ... against its enemies, both internal
  > > and external." Watching Bush's campaign ads, Paxton might be forgiven for
  > > seeing in them, if not fascism, then at least its precursors."
  > >
  > > Kelwin
 >
 > Staggers, dressed as Lawrence of Arabia, over to Delaunay; 'how's the
 > leg?!!'

"Not so good. Since the Coulter Brigade switched from German shepherds to
Komodo dragons we've had a run on the penicillin supply...."

And, yes, I do see your point. Maybe we've all bought in to the atmosphere of
crisis a bit too much.

/M<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews 

Martha Bridegam <bridegam DeleteThis @pacbell.net> wrote in message news:<4071D3A2.FE2A26D1 DeleteThis @pacbell.net>...
 > ROBBIE wrote:
 >
  > > "Kelwin Delaunay" <kelwindelaunay DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
  > > news:1072tb375rjoe5a@corp.supernews.com...
   > > >
   > > > "Martha Bridegam" <bridegam DeleteThis @pacbell.net> wrote in message
   > > > news:40706C7C.9B866042@pacbell.net...
   > > > > The SF Chron book reviews include some good ones today:
   > > > >
 > <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article-list.cgi?key=RV&directory=Reviews>.
   > > > >
   > > > > This one makes the underemphasized point that true fascism is not simply
   > > > > a state of dictatorship, but specifically a phenomenon of failed
   > > > > democracies, and one democracies must guard against continually. See
   > > > >
   > > >
 > <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/04/04/R
   > > > VGUK5R5FB1.DTL>.
   > > > >
   > > > > /M
   > > > >
   > > > The second piece seems to be a political statement by a Bush supporter
   > > > rather than a review of the book. In the first part of the review he
   > > > declares without reason, "George Bush is no fascist," and by the end he is
   > > > making patronizing excuses for the author's observations: "Yet two of the
   > > > chief "mobilizing passions" of fascism, identified by Paxton, seem eerily
   > > > familiar to Bush's America. Fascists, Paxton thinks, thrive on "a sense of
   > > > overwhelming crisis" and "the belief that one's group is a victim, a
   > > > sentiment that justifies any action ... against its enemies, both internal
   > > > and external." Watching Bush's campaign ads, Paxton might be forgiven for
   > > > seeing in them, if not fascism, then at least its precursors."
   > > >
   > > > Kelwin
  > >
  > > Staggers, dressed as Lawrence of Arabia, over to Delaunay; 'how's the
  > > leg?!!'
 >
 > "Not so good. Since the Coulter Brigade switched from German shepherds to
 > Komodo dragons we've had a run on the penicillin supply...."
 >
 > And, yes, I do see your point. Maybe we've all bought in to the atmosphere of
 > crisis a bit too much.
 >
 > /M

Since I read your as Robbie, I assume that we is Martha et al and the
atmosphere of crisis you bought into a bit too much is calling Bush
and Balir et el fascists ad nauseum.

Is that right?

If so, prepare to be attacked.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews 

"Pete Bayle" <pete_bayle.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8d9486cd.0404051843.5c3a2e31@posting.google.com...

 > Since I read your as Robbie, I assume that we is Martha et al and the
 > atmosphere of crisis you bought into a bit too much is calling Bush
 > and Balir et el fascists ad nauseum.
 >
 > Is that right?
 >
 > If so, prepare to be attacked.

For which? Buying into the atmosphere of crisis a bit too much or pointing
out how Bush acts like a fascist as often as he does?

Kelwin<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews 

Kelwin Delaunay wrote:

 > "Pete Bayle" <pete_bayle RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
 > news:8d9486cd.0404051843.5c3a2e31@posting.google.com...
 >
  > > Since I read your as Robbie, I assume that we is Martha et al and the
  > > atmosphere of crisis you bought into a bit too much is calling Bush
  > > and Balir et el fascists ad nauseum.
  > >
  > > Is that right?
  > >
  > > If so, prepare to be attacked.
 >
 > For which? Buying into the atmosphere of crisis a bit too much or pointing
 > out how Bush acts like a fascist as often as he does?
 >
 > Kelwin

Always check the record before taking "paraphrases" at face value.

/M<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews 

For a word that flits about so readily, what exactly do the leftists mean by
fascism. It really does not have the same philosophical underpinnings that
Marx's Das Kapital has with the material dialectic and therefore I find
difficult to place it diametrically opposed to "communism".

Not that communism ever existed - in fact both the nazi thing and the stalin
thing were both evil, despotic, socialist ventures that had very much in
common.

Let's keep in mind that the workers paradise evolves after a hefty stage of
automated institutions where needs are provided without much labor and everyone
pursues their own leisure (much like on this news group)
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews 

moyehoist RemoveThis @aol.com (Moyehoist) wrote in message news:<20040407234418.29389.00000881 RemoveThis @mb-m11.aol.com>...
 > For a word that flits about so readily, what exactly do the leftists mean by
 > fascism. It really does not have the same philosophical underpinnings that
 > Marx's Das Kapital has with the material dialectic and therefore I find
 > difficult to place it diametrically opposed to "communism".
 >
 > Not that communism ever existed - in fact both the nazi thing and the stalin
 > thing were both evil, despotic, socialist ventures that had very much in
 > common.
 >

I agree in part.

I still don't fully (or maybe even partially) understand why socialism
is in the Nazi acronym, your question which no one answered.

I've also been convinced lately that the key problem they all share is
to argue they are on the side of history (no matter how far in the
future and at what cost to the present) and they all know what Man is.
Also that they were totalizing, in the sense of being all inclusive
rather than limited. An all or nothing, with little tolerance for
exceptions.

Horror justified by logic, history and biology.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews 

 >I still don't fully (or maybe even partially) understand why socialism
 >is in the Nazi acronym, your question which no one answered.

Germany was still voting in the days the NAZI acronym was thought up and since
social engineering was in vogue, I would imagine that they used it as a selling
point to get the support of the populace that was wavering between the social
democrats and the marxists.

You are right absolute power corrupts absolutely<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Book reviews