This isn’t fascism. These people will get a slap on the wrist and be sent home in a day or two. Under fascism these people would never be heard from again.
This is fascism-lite. Just because people aren’t disappeared doesn’t mean it’s not in the same category. And the only way we can hope to stop from getting to “actual” fascism is by resisting shit like this.
I don’t disagree that silencing protest is bad. It’s just not fascism. Fascists kill dissenters.
Treating protestors like this is the norm (though it always must be fought). It’s how they were treated during Occupy Wall Street. It’s how they were treated during Vietnam and the civil rights fight. Authoritarianism can come from both the left and the right. Fascism is always from the right.
Fascism doesn’t come in detended stages, it’s tiny increments where the state seizes more power and restricts rights gradually until suddenly you notice that people are disappearing and everyones primary emotion is fear
They’re literally trespassing… And btw, that’s part of their intention. If it was legal for them to do this, they would probably find something Else to do that was illegal but not excessive(as in, not trying to do felonies not misdemeanors). Why do I say that? Because that’s how you get your message out. If these same people were all sitting out in some random alleyway, or at one of their houses, where the police couldn’t arrest them, the media wouldn’t really care and nobody would hear about their message really.
So no, being arrested for breaking the law isn’t fascism and it’s ridiculous to say that. What they’re doing is great as they’re breaking the law, attracting attention to the Palestine issue, while also not hurting people, nor getting felonies or starting fights with police. This is going well and according to plan.
I’m certainly not defending the silencing of protest. It’s just that all fascism is authoritarian, but not all authoritarianism is fascist. Fascism has a specific definition and it’s a whole other degree of bad.
would you be able to link to a page that helps describe fascism as you say: that relies on severity of consequence?
asking because whilst i agree that fascism is specific - and this doesn’t cover it - im not sure that degree of severity is part of the definition and that could be a dangerous precedent to set because the other parts of fascism about control and quashing dissent enable the severe consequences once they are present
Suppression of protest would fall under #4 “Disagreement is Treason”. Under fascism it is not enough to silence opposition. They must be treated as enemies of the state and be eradicated.
Fair enough. It is being used more colloquially in this case, you’re right. I retract the accusation of fascism and substitute “an unjust authoritarian crackdown on the right to freedom of speech and expression, undermining the very tenets of democratic society. A national embarrassment.”
It was at a private college campus and the dean suspended all the students protesting and requested to have NYPD come remove them. In other words, the property caretaker was being a dick and had them removed from the premises.
This isn’t fascism. These people will get a slap on the wrist and be sent home in a day or two. Under fascism these people would never be heard from again.
This is fascism-lite. Just because people aren’t disappeared doesn’t mean it’s not in the same category. And the only way we can hope to stop from getting to “actual” fascism is by resisting shit like this.
I don’t disagree that silencing protest is bad. It’s just not fascism. Fascists kill dissenters.
Treating protestors like this is the norm (though it always must be fought). It’s how they were treated during Occupy Wall Street. It’s how they were treated during Vietnam and the civil rights fight. Authoritarianism can come from both the left and the right. Fascism is always from the right.
Not in the beginning. In the beginning it’s more about the economic side of fascism. And that has definitely happened in the US. For decades now.
Exactly.
Fascism doesn’t come in detended stages, it’s tiny increments where the state seizes more power and restricts rights gradually until suddenly you notice that people are disappearing and everyones primary emotion is fear
So punishing free speech and protest is not fascist provided that they are “only” in jail for a couple of days? Seriously?
Obviously cracking down on protests doesn’t mean it’s 1930s Germany but it’s part of the same playbook, surely?
They’re literally trespassing… And btw, that’s part of their intention. If it was legal for them to do this, they would probably find something Else to do that was illegal but not excessive(as in, not trying to do felonies not misdemeanors). Why do I say that? Because that’s how you get your message out. If these same people were all sitting out in some random alleyway, or at one of their houses, where the police couldn’t arrest them, the media wouldn’t really care and nobody would hear about their message really.
So no, being arrested for breaking the law isn’t fascism and it’s ridiculous to say that. What they’re doing is great as they’re breaking the law, attracting attention to the Palestine issue, while also not hurting people, nor getting felonies or starting fights with police. This is going well and according to plan.
I’m certainly not defending the silencing of protest. It’s just that all fascism is authoritarian, but not all authoritarianism is fascist. Fascism has a specific definition and it’s a whole other degree of bad.
would you be able to link to a page that helps describe fascism as you say: that relies on severity of consequence?
asking because whilst i agree that fascism is specific - and this doesn’t cover it - im not sure that degree of severity is part of the definition and that could be a dangerous precedent to set because the other parts of fascism about control and quashing dissent enable the severe consequences once they are present
I usually go by Umberto Eco’s Ur-Fascism essay for a definition.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism
Suppression of protest would fall under #4 “Disagreement is Treason”. Under fascism it is not enough to silence opposition. They must be treated as enemies of the state and be eradicated.
really appreciate you taking the effort! i see where you’re coming from with the “enemies of the state” part, and think that id agree there
Fair enough. It is being used more colloquially in this case, you’re right. I retract the accusation of fascism and substitute “an unjust authoritarian crackdown on the right to freedom of speech and expression, undermining the very tenets of democratic society. A national embarrassment.”
100% agree with you then.
It was at a private college campus and the dean suspended all the students protesting and requested to have NYPD come remove them. In other words, the property caretaker was being a dick and had them removed from the premises.
Hmmm… well that almost sounds like capitalism in a Republic democracy. Shit, now what?
Keep doing it until almost the entire student body is suspended, or protest off campus?
Sounds like a plan! Can’t suspend alumni, so I’m game
Boot licker
😝🥾
Y’all need to hear the fable of the boy who cried wolf.
Ratio mate