His entire argument seems to be not much more sophisticated than hitler wore black shoes.. so everyone who wears black shoes is a nazi.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Liberalism = Fascism?

COME. ON.

Fascism is the collusion of the state with corporations. It is not simply "the individual submitting his will to the state." Fascism means that corporate power becomes state power and there is no democracy, no rule of the people. It is authoritarianism.

Liberalism is, quite frankly, the antidote to authoritarianism and fascism. To accuse American progressives/liberals of supporting Mussolini or Hitler or Saddam Hussein or any other bogeyman of the day is just rhetoric and propaganda. In fact, liberalism stands AGAINST everything that these men stood for.

It is true that the label "fascist" does get thrown about a lot, and especially by people like Goldberg who have no idea what it means. How Goldberg can see authoritarianism and fascism in liberals/progressives but ignores it in his own neoconservative circle is beyond me.

Trust me: we've come closer to fascism over the past eight years than ever before. And no, a Hillary presidency (heaven forbid) would not lead to goosestepping troops in the streets or the like.

Authoritarianism hates liberalism. Maybe that's why Goldberg hates America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I really think it best for all to ignore Doughy Pantload ... we're spending way too much time on this

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...and it's starting to stick to folks like him. So of course they have to sling it back. They're on the defensive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As far as fascism goes, that was an alliance between corporate interests and government officials - for example, fascism in Germany really took off when the German giant chemical combine, I. G. Farben formed an alliance with Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party in 1932.

As part of that deal, the Nazis promised to give massive state support to I. G. Farben's plans to convert coal to liquid fuel (contracts, tax breaks, etc.) in exchange for massive financial support for Nazi Party candidates. Soon after Hitler came to power (1933), dissolved Parliament, outlawed all other political parties, and established a dictatorship. Prior to this, Hitler had actually attacked I. G. Farben as a "Jewish concern," but once the deal was cut Farben dismissed all their ranking Jewish employees and directors and became devoted supporters of Hitler - for which they were richly rewarded.

As soon as Poland was invaded by the Nazis, Farben moved in to set up a massive chemical factory at a place called Buna - right next to the town of Auschwitz - the plan being to make methanol and synthetic rubber for the Nazi war effort. They needed labor, and they wanted cheap labor - and with the aid of the Nazis, they set up a massive slave labor camp at Auschwitz in order to run their methanol factory. It was only later that Auschwitz became a death camp. (It's amazing how many people know about Auschwitz, but not about Farben).

A very murky aspect of German fascism is the large role that sections of Wall Street played via their investments in and relationships with I.G. Farben and other German industries. Walter Teagle and the Rockefellers (Standard Oil, now Exxon) was very worried that coal-based fuel was a threat and so entered into a partnership with Farben via an American subsidiary (headed by Teagle). IBM, Ford Motor Company, and a number of banks (including Prescott Bush's Union Banking Corporation) also did a lot of business with the Nazi regime. See How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power, Guardian UK, 2004.

Fast forward to the recent past, and you have Karl Rove and Rick Santorum arranging for a "permanent Republican majority" by instructing lobbyists for government contracts that their bids will be viewed favorably if they contribute heavily to Republican candidates. This was how a lot of the fraudulent Iraq "reconstruction" contracts were distributed.

Don't believe it? Try Welcome to the Machine: How the GOP disciplined K Street and made Bush supreme.

"If today's GOP leaders put as much energy into shaping K Street as their predecessors did into selecting judges and executive-branch nominees, it's because lobbying jobs have become the foundation of a powerful new force in Washington politics: a Republican political machine. Like the urban Democratic machines of yore, this one is built upon patronage, contracts, and one-party rule. But unlike legendary Chicago mayor Richard J. Daley, who rewarded party functionaries with jobs in the municipal bureaucracy, the GOP is building its machine outside government, among Washington's thousands of trade associations and corporate offices, their tens of thousands of employees, and the hundreds of millions of dollars in political money at their disposal."

Gosh, Mr. Goldberg - where have we seen this strategy before?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PRESCOTT BUSH..!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A 12 year old with a decent background in American history and civics could have done it better than our little codified author.

The new political/ideological lexicon (liberalism, progressivism, conservatism) is a failure and sham, meant to replace thoughtfulness and to compensate for the inability to make cogent points. It seems some are too busy making up their anti-cause du' jour's to argue for what is important:

individual liberty and peace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Goldberg uses this phrase twice, suggesting that this mindset is the link connecting Hitler to Hillary. Obviously, the "we" that Hitler cared about was a lot more exclusive (not to mention aggressive and destructive) than the "we" that liberals care about.

One of the key differences between liberals and conservatives in America, it seems to me, is how we define "we"--does it have to do with the common good, our common humanity, and social justice? Or with protecting what's mine and punishing those who threaten me?

I'm defininitely biased, but I don't think it's the liberals who resemble fascists...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The "Smile face" with the mustache is so 70's. Come to think of it so is Goldberg. Don't "his people" tell him how silly he looks? ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That Goldberg is the one whose advocated for a Pinochet like figure in the "new" Iraq to bring stability to the country, even at the expense of authoritarianism. Pot, kettle--Mr. Goldberg.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's not that comforting to know in this country that writers are more inclined to quote comedians like George Carlin on political freedom than the authors they are paraphrasing. Ironically, in this case, the Social Populist critic and American author, Sinclair Lewis, who said: "When fascism arrives in America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying the bible."

Consider the words of E.E. Cummings, "Progress is a comfortable disease." It would be good for people to remember that this is as much a challenge to honesty as it is a keepsake observation of feel-good agendas.

As a final note, we can all hope that someday liberal will come again to mean something other than exorbitant in this country's political dialogue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i usually find Goldberg's writings pitiful and willfully myopic, and I usually love John Stewart. but I found things flopped this time. mostly. I have a very different definition of fascism, one that i DO think increasingly applies to a lot of liberals, to the extent that it's one of the main things holding back any kind of real progress. If you want to maintain a narrow, specific definition of fascism, fine, but then come up with another word for this, which is the real mechanism by which we permit and come to crave the corporate state: when the public, below the level of awareness (important part), gives away all of its power to some entity or symbol, and then rallies around that entity/symbol for the power it now has.
examples of this abound: rabid fervor over sports teams, following trends, boob implants/stripper style, most religions, homophobia, etc. The current raging overkill hysteria over pedophilia is a great example (six year olds kissing are now sex offenders? oh please. and fourteen year olds should be having loads of oral with each other, just shut up), as well as the war on drugs, which very few "liberals" have shown any spine on, preferring to protect us with jails full of stoners, how retarded.
too many liberals are just as guilty as the kneejerk fundies we love to sneer at; we decide something is "right" (a useless word), and suddenly the whole world is cast into severe black and white with the righteous on one side and evil-monsters-kill-them on the other. the more solidly-socketed someone's deepest beliefs, the further you can bend them to your will. and we on the left spend a hell of a lot of time trying to appease every last damn sputtering fascism in the room, and as a result never get a goddamned thing done.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stewart doesn't say sarcastic things about Ron Paul? He is astute enough to know that Ron Paul being a true Constitutionalist is for the people. IMO, when Jon Stewart doesn't do sarcastic comments about Ron Paul, he is sending a message if Progressives will simply listen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Or rather the whole 18 minutes! I would love to see the whole 18 minute interview. Stewart destroyed this idiot.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This book really has nothing to do with the debate it has engendered. By linking “liberals” and “fascism”, it exists to advance the cause of fascism, itself, using a time-honored propaganda strategy of fascism, itself.

Declare up to be down, place your target on the defensive, and force them into an increasingly dense dialectic about the fine points of water pressure while the kitchen burns down.

It’s a variation of the amazingly successful ‘Holocaust never happened’ experiment. We’ve all seen footage of the camps; we’ve all heard testimony from survivors; we’ve all read primary source government documents. Now – let’s see how far we can manipulate a credulous, passive population into believing the whole thing a myth.

Holocaust-deniers forced historians and others to reexamine and sharpen established, accepted research practices. In that sense, it improved the field as a whole.

But propagandists learned from the experience, as well. Now, they’re taking the assault against reason and discourse (labeled ‘liberalism’) to the more subjective cultural realm.

And it appears liberals will respond exactly as hoped: by disintegrating into a reasoned critique of the book’s content: while in the meantime, the title alone furthers the process of discrediting reasoned politics and advancing authoritarianism. Screeds like this aren’t opinion pieces, they’re propaganda hammers.

And for the 99.9 percent of the population who will never bother to research further on The Google – this will likely be quite successful at strengthening the connection between liberal democratic principles and something bad that’s probably causing our economic problems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When we are discussing utter bullshit like Jonah's book we don't have discussions of truly important issues-like a state of facsism already existing in our goverment; like the "race and sexism dustup between the Dem contenders" and the silly, maudlin apologies that followed having aything to do with the underlying need for an honest and very real dialogue; and if there is anything Americans really do NOT want to talk about and address it is sexuality-how learning to truly RESPECT ones self and truly respect others leads to healthy relationships instead of teaching 14 year olds to view sex as just a contact sport and consequences are just for the weak, the helpless and the little people-which is pretty much where we are and where we will stay because when we are grown up we don't have to grow up. "As long as I have mine, I don't have to care about anything or anyone", sorry, that is a libertarian-which is what Jonah claims to be-He and Tucker "why should I be forced to use energy efficient lightbulbs, I shouldn't have to conserve energy if I don't want too" Carlson.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I want the last six minutes of my life back. Watching Jon Stewart kick this clown's ass was not entertaining. I did not learn anything. Goldberg seems incapable of learning anything.

Spending one second with these hate mongers give them waaay too much legitimacy. It makes it seem that what they have to say has some value.

It doesn't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jon Stewart had successfully tore new a-holes into Jonah and his ridiculous book in one fell swoop. Only die-hard morons could take Golberg seriously after that show (and there are many of 'em, sad to say).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i wonder who the publishers of these pinheads
are, and why they think it's okay to sell this crap??!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

IS JUST A SOFT FORM OF FASCISAM? Who has been attacked on the Face the Nation for saying this?

Ronpaul2008.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Now, when I saw that smiley face on the cover, I thought Walmart.

I hope that The Daily Show puts up the whole interview. What they aired was fun, but I'm sure that there's lots more good stuff they cut (w/ lots of 4 letter words).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whatever the considerable irritations posed by Jon Stewart's comic persona, he does get some good jabs in.

It's always a teeth-grinding, endlessly frustrating exercise to engage with these pedantic defenders of individualism and their 'total certainty' about all things political. Aside from the breathtaking convolutions and rhetorical foreplay they love to utilize, their main goal is to muddy the waters and keep conscious people from having a clearer view of the situation. Perhaps they couldn't cut it in the legal realm of criminal defense (there are only so many crooked CEO's to go around, after all), but to twist the meaning of 'progressive' and 'liberal' to such lengths is proof of an instinct to side with the greedy and powerful rather than with the multitude.

Goldberg's book will be remaindered within the year, I predict. Mumbo jumbo of any stripe or creed should meet with the same end, one hopes...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Congress continues to Suck Bush's cock.

Congress Votes To Intensify Tensions Between The United States and Iran
Kucinich Leads 45 Members In Opposing National Defense Authorization Act

While you were asleep...
Washington, Jan 16 - Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), led the charge today in opposing the National Defense Authorization Act on the floor of the House of Representatives today, released the following statement after voting against more war:

“This is a foreign policy blunder that needs to be remedied quickly,” Kucinich said.


In the bill, goodly meat for Cheney/Bush...
Congress finds that Iran maintains a nuclear program in continued defiance of the international community while developing ballistic missiles of increasing sophistication and range that pose a threat to the forward-deployed forces of the United States.

While we get excited about labels, the assholes in Congress are widening the war. This could easily smash any possible election of a Democratic President or even Ron Paul since "they are soft on security".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If "We're all in this together" is a fascist and liberal statement , then Bush is a fascist liberal. Remember his "You're either for us or against us" at the start of the Iraq war? Nice try Goldberg, you're a true patriot. Which right wing think tank supports your effort to confuse fascists with progressives?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just get a load of the bush "administration".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

which sacrificed so many of it's sons to defeat fascism 60 years ago - it is crucial you render the term meaningless. By calling it's avowed enemies fascists themselves (as Michael Savage and others have been doing for some time) fascist practitioners and sympathizers can muddy the waters enough to confuse the ignorant.

Then when any progressive denounces fascism, the ignoramus will dismiss it as another case of "he said/she said."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jonah Goldberg is an idiot. Anyone sick enough to routinely play cheerleader for Israel, and mendacious enough to characterize Israel as a both progressive and democratic state would OF COURSE want to rewrite what fascism means, would OF COURSE want to characterize mainstream liberalism as fascist - liberals include, after all, many people who criticize Israel. And only a fascist would think ill of Israel, obviously.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]