[ExI] Anons

Samantha Atkins sjatkins at mac.com
Mon Feb 14 19:25:50 UTC 2011

On 02/12/2011 11:59 AM, Darren Greer wrote:
> Damien wrote:
> >The technical name for what you prefer is "corporate fascism". That 
> doesn't have a really compelling history.<
> I agree Damien. When the definition of fascism was entered for the 
> first time in the  Encyclopedia Italiano, Mussolini suggested that 
> corporatism was a more accurate name for that type of arrangement than 
> fascism anyway. Fascism is *by definition* the merging of business and 
> government, most often accompanied by rabid nationalism and sometimes 
> overt racism.
> But not always, which might make modern fascism difficult to recognize 
> because we always assume holocaust-type ethnic cleansing comes with 
> it. It doesn't. Italy followed Germany's Wannsee Conference directives 
> (because it was under political pressure to do so) but not to the 
> letter. For some of the war Mussolini allowed the north west of the 
> country to become a kind of protectorate for Jews who had fled other 
> parts of the state. The ax fell on them only after Italy fell, when 
> the allies invaded the south and Germany took the north to meet them. 
> I got this story from John Keegan's The Second World War, which is an 
> excellent book by the way.

Actually, the Constitution was indented to limit the government to what 
it expressly allows it to do.  Since it does not mention allowing the 
government to meddle in the economy the way it does or to do 
state-corporate minglings it is Constitutional illegal for the 
government to do so.  Also, the government has to have gone far beyond 
its Constitutional charter in the first place to have enough power and 
money to be so attractive a target to merge with.   So it is perfectly 
clear which came first in terms of culpability.

> Spike wrote:
> >In any case it would be far preferable to government takeover of 
> corporations.<
> Is there a difference? When governments and corporations merge, does 
> it matter who made the first move? Given the checkered history of IBM, 
> Ford, Chase Manhattan, etc, not to mention the America First Committee 
> and the role of prominent industrialists like Ford in trying to keep 
> the U.S. out of World War II for business reasons, perhaps it should 
> be illegal. Currently we try to prevent the merging of the two with 
> market regulation and not through legislation, which doesn't seem to 
> be working all that well. The repeal of Glass-Steagall and the housing 
> market crash is a good example of that failure.
> Don't mean to sound testy, or confrontational, Spike. I have a bit of 
> a bee in my bonnet about what seems to be a widespread 
> misunderstanding of exactly what fascism is and how easily it could 
> happen again. The U.S. congress has a fasces engraved on a wall 
> somewhere inside, by the way. Don't know its history, or what genius 
> decided it was a good idea, but it has always made me wonder.
> darren
> I
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Damien Broderick 
> <thespike at satx.rr.com <mailto:thespike at satx.rr.com>> wrote:
>     On 2/12/2011 9:46 AM, spike wrote:
>         Our constitution is set up to maintain separation of church
>         and state.
>         It doesn't say anything about separation of corporation and
>         state.  As far
>         as I can tell the latter would be perfectly legal.  In any
>         case it would be
>         far preferable to government takeover of corporations.
>     The technical name for what you prefer is "corporate fascism".
>     That doesn't have a really compelling history.
>     Here's a random-selected thumbnail:
>     <http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7260.htm>
>     Damien Broderick
>     _______________________________________________
>     extropy-chat mailing list
>     extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org <mailto:extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>     http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
> -- 
> /There is no history, only biography./
> /
> /
> /-Ralph Waldo Emerson
> /
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110214/f2a4577e/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list