Fascism is on the Rise in the United States

Thanks for your interesting response, Cody. Sorry about that "wall of text"-won't happen again, I'm not used to debating on here yet. First of all, thanks for concentrating on the issue of whether fascism is on the rise or not, instead of it's justice. Your definitions of fascism do not seem to me specific enough, though certainly they apply to many fascist movements. I had used the definition given because it was more specific, getting at the heart of fascism. Do you disagree with the definition? I cannot think of a fascist definition in any case that would not meet it. I have not compared all Christianity with fascism. Rather, as palingenesis means revival, a synonym of baptism, this specifically links with the revivalism of American Christian fundamentalism. It certainly does not mean all Christianity or Christian fundamentalism is fascist, but that a tradition of Christian revivalism is a well-established tradition preceding revival of the American Christian national identity to an extreme degree. To a large extent much of the American Christian right fits this description. Specifically, the movement known as Dominionism or Christian Reconstructionism, with ideas that are channeled to many other people in the overall conservative, Christian, fundamentalist, evangelical movements, while for many are unaware of their full scope, only the underlying agreement they share. I have not said that all people in the Christian and general American Right are fascists. Rather, that an increasingly extreme world view is being propagated among them. a. Historically speaking, fascist movements, like those of Mussolini and Hitler, were based around the charisma and determination of a central messianic leader, like Italy's Il Duce, or Germany's Fuehrer. In these cases, religion was entirely thrown out the window, in favor of worship of a central political icon. Correct, although I take issue with the assertion that religion was entirely thrown out the window which is ludicrous. Fascist differed according to country. Fascism presupposed a post-Christian, post-religious, secular, and immanent frame of reference. This was certainly more true of Mussolini's vision. Originally, fascism was more anti-Christian, although this was certainly utilized and I should note that it seemingly did not disturb Christians who supported it. This particular fascism, like Islamism, has a more religious character, in keeping with the national character. I should assert here that nationalism encompasses religion for most cases, to greater or lesser degrees and in different ways. In a more Christian or Islamic nation, fascism is religiously inspired. While there is no leader at this point, it would not be unexpected for one to emerge. Additionally, given the religious character of it, the charisma and determination of a central messianic leader is the core of Christianity. Their particular view of Jesus Christ, however perverse and distorted, fits this perfectly. Therefore we might not have a physical leader, rather one the followers are waiting for, with his priests here giving the Word. b. At no point has my logic gone to fascism=conservatism because they are both right-wing. I have specifically said that conservatism has been influenced by a proto-fascism, not that it is identical. I have not done what you accuse. My assertion is that much of the American right shares certain views, not all of them are the same, would use certain methods or advocate the same goals. c. Because fascism is on the rise does not mean it constitutes an electoral majority. Obviously if it did things would already be far worse. On the rise is not the same as in power. I should point out that the Nazi Party was marginal for some time but took power relatively quickly when a crisis emerged, the same with most fascist movements. Again, I have not equated moderate conservatism with fascism. Indeed the moderate conservatives are likely the most opposed to it from the right. I defend my assertions of militarism, racism and authoritarianism at the present time. a. The United States is hardly militaristic. Our army is completely voluntary, first of all, and second of all, my opponent again makes the logical mistake of assuming that having a powerful military equates large-scale militarism. This is among the most ludicrous statement of my opponent so far. To say the United States has a volunteer armed forces and is thus not militaristic, one, is ridiculous and does not by definition prevent that, and two, having a large-scale armed forces does equate to militarism, or at least some of its definitions-having a strong military spirit or policy; the principle of maintaining a large military establishment. True, we have thankfully not yet embraced the other-tendency to regard military efficiency as the supreme ideal of the state and to subordinate all other interests to those of the military, although disturbing tendencies exist, I feel. b. Racism and authoritarianism are hardly words to describe the American way of life. I would refer you to our history, and the race-baiting which has begun this year against Obama. I refer more to projection from even the "mainstream" right about Obama's "racism" and code words that mean things in more extreme contexts. The blatant racism at even supposedly mainstream right-wing protests has been shown this year too. Again, this is not to accuse the right in general, only asserting that extremism is on the rise and spreading within it. Authoritarianism is core on the extreme Christian right. If you add this to our security state apparatus, used less now but established and available for future crises. Again, the idea that undesirable citizens have little or no rights has been growing. 1.The Cult of Tradition: I do not say that believing in traditional values is fascism. However this is rising to an extreme degree in the insistence America is a "Christian nation," theological apologetics for capitalism and its sacred nature, etc. 2. Rejection of Modernism: Nothing is further from the truth? Fascists were obsessed with the glories of the past, hated modern, liberal democratic society, in the Nazis' case obsessed with a primitive "blood and soil" ideal of imperialist nationalism. The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, secular, progressive values were seen as the beginning of corruption. Eminently true with the religious right. The Nazis had factions, with some more against Christianity, others understanding it had to be used and changed slowly. I should note separation of church and state are under constant attack by the right, denied even to have ever existed in law. 3. Irrationalism: You have not mentioned my examples for some reason. Irrationalism and ignorance are not the same thing. I do not assert all right-wings are ignorant, but irrationalism is enshrined. 4. Yes, fascists took gun rights away in other countries. This is a different country and has its unique characteristics. If a fascist movement actually took power, it might rethink these gun rights as well. Regardless, it certainly applied with them, and here too. As for the rest, I don't know what that has to do with anything. I was talking about action for action's sake, not imposing your views by elections. They are hardly the same thing. Well, you believe that I'm tying all of mainstream conservatism with fascism. Again, that is not the case, but they are becoming more extreme, influenced by a dangerous core. You appear to have disregarded real, dangerous examples and then accuse my arguments of being logically fallacious. I have put forth evidence for them, but oh well. Election results do not mean everything, in particular as the vote is decided by around 5% of the electorate. Again, I note that many fascists lost elections to win them rapidly soon after. Change may come quickly, good or bad. The casual voicing of such ideas and growth among mainstream conservatives who may n