Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Anthony Sabatini, who is running for Congress in Florida's 11th district, reportedly made the remarks during June's Florida Teenage Republicans Youth Summit.
Chris Christie, the politician famous for using his office to punish entire cities for not endorsing his re-election campaign? That one? The same one famous for being an advisor to former president Trump? The one who doesn’t support reproductive rights for women, a position famously inspired by Christian morality? Yeah, he’s a Christofascist.
Christofascism is a far right political ideology that seeks to install Christian fascism. They are famous for advocating political violence against minorities, using weasel words to mask their intentions, and more. Whether or not ALL GOP members are christofascist is irrelevant, as the party platform is christofascist. Meaning, regardless of what you claim to believe, by supporting the GOP you are supporting the rise of fascism in America.
Except voting for an individual candidate is not voting for the party- its voting for one candidate! That candidate may or may not vote with the majority of their party. And there are many prominent examples of congress members of all parties not voting with the majority of their party. Also, what is Christian fascism?
Except it is. The party sets the platform, not the individual. Individuals who go against the platform, on both GOP and Democratic sides do not receive funding from the party. 95% of Democratic votes and 99% of GOP votes are cast on party lines.
Christian fascism is well defined, I guess if you’ve had your head under a rock for the last 10 years you might not have heard of it, but it’s not a new term.
Christian fascism is a term which is used to describe a far-right political ideology that denotes an intersection between fascism and Christianity. It is sometimes referred to as “Christofascism”, a neologism which was coined in 1970 by the liberation theologian Dorothee Sölle.
The party sets the platform, not the individual. Individuals who go against the platform, on both GOP and Democratic sides do not receive funding from the party.
That is true and sucks, but there are some congress people who still get away with it, like Rand Paul at least used to- I haven’t checked for a while.
95% of Democratic votes and 99% of GOP votes are cast on party lines.
Is that actually a true statistic or just hyperbole? If its true I’d love to see the source.
Christian fascism is well defined, I guess if you’ve had your head under a rock for the last 10 years you might not have heard of it, but it’s not a new term.
I mean my questioning is just it seems like the definitions are circular- saying Christian fascism is a combination of Christianity and fascism, but I want to understand what that means in practice.
In practice it looks 100% like the modern GOP. Constant advocation for political violence, demonization of minorities, use of office and power to force Christian morality on non-Christian’s, privatization of public infrastructure, direct cooperation with corporations to suppress labor rights…
Christofascism “disposed or allowed Christians, to impose themselves not only upon other religions but other cultures, and political parties which do not march under the banner of the final, normative, victorious Christ” – as Paul F. Knitter describes Sölle’s view.
Sound familiar?
Sölle saw three uniting themes in U.S. Christofascism at the end of the Cold War: 1) U.S. superiority; 2) the veneration of work and, in the inverse, cruelty toward those who depend on welfare or solidarity; and 3) the lionization of the patriarchal nuclear family and, in the inverse, the demonization of sexual and gender minorities.
That should sound extremely familiar to anyone who’s lived I the US at any point since the start of the 80s at the very least.
I don’t have access to the study, so I can’t check for myself- but I just tallied the last 15 congressional votes. There were 273 Republican votes dissenting from the majority of their party, there were 114 Democrat votes dissenting from the majority of their party.
Christofascism “disposed or allowed Christians, to impose themselves not only upon other religions but other cultures, and political parties which do not march under the banner of the final, normative, victorious Christ” – as Paul F. Knitter describes Sölle’s view.
I’d arguing that sounds closer to Christian authoritarianism or a theocracy. Fascism is fundamentally the belief that everything should be devoted to enforcing and strengthening the rule of the state over everyone. Incorporating them into the state while making sure they are subjects to it. It is the opposite of democracy- a fascist believes in people serving the state, not the state serving the people.
Sölle saw three uniting themes in U.S. Christofascism at the end of the Cold War: 1) U.S. superiority; 2) the veneration of work and, in the inverse, cruelty toward those who depend on welfare or solidarity; and 3) the lionization of the patriarchal nuclear family and, in the inverse, the demonization of sexual and gender minorities.
I’d argue this is more chauvinism and conservative nationalism than being inherently tied to Christianity. After all, that sounds like what Ben Shapiro and Dennis Prager believe.
Idk where you heard that is what fascism is…
The 14 tenets of ur-fascism:
The cult of tradition. This is the belief that the truth is already known once and for all. Fascists believe there is no need to advance in learning.
The rejection of modernism. Fascists reject the Enlightenment and its evidence-based rationality.
The cult of action for action’s sake. Fascist leaders act impulsively, without thinking or planning ahead.
No analytical criticism. Fascists ignore nuance and see any disagreement as treasonous.
Fear of difference. Fascists fear diversity. Thus they are racist by definition.
Appeal to a frustrated middle class. An economically frustrated and/or politically marginalized middle class is easy to stir to anger.
Obsession with a plot. Because the followers must be made to feel besieged, an internal “enemy” is provided: 7.
Immigrants, Muslims, Hispanics, Blacks. (Historically the Jews were often made to be “the enemy.”)
Anti-elitism. The followers are made to feel humiliated by the wealth and strength of the educated “elite.” This is used to create resentment.
Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. Fascists believe that life is permanent warfare. Therefore a desire for peace is treasonous.
Contempt for the weak. A fascist leader despises his underlings, who in turn despise those under them. They all either mock or ignore the poor, the sick, and the disabled.
The cult of heroism. The Fascist is eager to die a hero’s death. In his impatience, he frequently sends other people to their deaths.
Machismo. Fascists show disdain for women, disregard for chastity, and condemnation of homosexuality.
Selective populism. Under fascism, the “voice of the people” is not the democratic majority, but only the voices of those who support the leader.
Ur-fascism speaks Newspeak. Just as in Orwell’s 1984, Fascists use an impoverished vocabulary and an elementary syntax to limit complex and critical reasoning.
And yes, of course it sounds like Ben Shapiro and Dennis Prager, becauses they’re fascists. By definition. They are fascists.
Idk where you heard that is what fascism is… 14 tenets of ur-fascism
It is my personal belief that the only possible way to interpret the ideology someone espouses is to look at what they actually say about it. If you want to define Marxism, look at how Marx defined it. If you want to define Monetarism, look at how Milton Friedman defined it. If you want to define Nazism, look at how the Nazis defined it. And, if you want to define Fascism look at how Mussolini defined it. Obviously, the Nazis, nor the Fascists actually followed entirely what they espoused but I’d still say you can only analyze the ideology based on what they actually advocated rather than what they did. If you want to analyze them as people, or as a successful state- look at what they did.
The tenets of ur-fascism were developed by studying the ACTIONS of the fascists. Exactly what you claim you need to do. If you do that, you see the Nazis fit all 14 of these, as do most modern American neo-conservatives.
Turning to the results, we see evidence of the public underestimating the degree to which their own senators toe the party line. Looking only at the control condition, the average actual party unity of the respondents’ senators is 94.7%.
The party Unity was determined by taking data from voteview.org
I don’t doubt their is high unity, I’m just questioning the claim that it’s higher amongst Republicans, who are generally a tiny bit from fractured in voting when I’ve looked at votes- and from my own comparison of 15 recent votes now. Also looking here the Republicans seem to have a slightly wider spread
I’m not saying this to defend Republicans, just questioning the claim that they’re more unitary in voting.
If you read the linked study, you’d see that you’re pretty typical in underestimating party Unity, the majority of people on both sides do. Your link doesn’t work at all though, so I can’t see what you’re trying to show me.
Aside, I wish people wouldn’t downvote you. You’ve not done anything worth downvoting you in my opinion, and I’ve gone through and upvoted all of your comments, but it doesn’t do much good. You’ve been respectful, reasonable, and polite.
It’s not my fault that you failed civics in elementary school but you need to go pick up a civics book and read it, because it’s very clear that you haven’t got a clue how our government works.
How can you look at the GOP in congress voting lockstep with the party line and claim that you just vote for the individual?
Or are you just being deliberately obtuse in order to muddy the water for observers so people will be more receptive to your regressive arguments?
I actually did pretty well in my political related classes, I didn’t take civics but various other US history classes, human geography, etc.
How can you look at the GOP in congress voting lockstep with the party line and claim that you just vote for the individual?
Okay I just checked for the past 15 votes(as of July 14th at 15:34 CEST) here is my source
I tallied every vote dissenting from the majority for each party and I actually threw in a 16th because one was a repeat vote just with more members(even though it had a different result):
Chris Christie, the politician famous for using his office to punish entire cities for not endorsing his re-election campaign? That one? The same one famous for being an advisor to former president Trump? The one who doesn’t support reproductive rights for women, a position famously inspired by Christian morality? Yeah, he’s a Christofascist.
Christofascism is a far right political ideology that seeks to install Christian fascism. They are famous for advocating political violence against minorities, using weasel words to mask their intentions, and more. Whether or not ALL GOP members are christofascist is irrelevant, as the party platform is christofascist. Meaning, regardless of what you claim to believe, by supporting the GOP you are supporting the rise of fascism in America.
Except voting for an individual candidate is not voting for the party- its voting for one candidate! That candidate may or may not vote with the majority of their party. And there are many prominent examples of congress members of all parties not voting with the majority of their party. Also, what is Christian fascism?
Except it is. The party sets the platform, not the individual. Individuals who go against the platform, on both GOP and Democratic sides do not receive funding from the party. 95% of Democratic votes and 99% of GOP votes are cast on party lines.
Christian fascism is well defined, I guess if you’ve had your head under a rock for the last 10 years you might not have heard of it, but it’s not a new term.
That is true and sucks, but there are some congress people who still get away with it, like Rand Paul at least used to- I haven’t checked for a while.
Is that actually a true statistic or just hyperbole? If its true I’d love to see the source.
I mean my questioning is just it seems like the definitions are circular- saying Christian fascism is a combination of Christianity and fascism, but I want to understand what that means in practice.
If you’re genuinely interested in data, here’s a study.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1065912917722233
In practice it looks 100% like the modern GOP. Constant advocation for political violence, demonization of minorities, use of office and power to force Christian morality on non-Christian’s, privatization of public infrastructure, direct cooperation with corporations to suppress labor rights…
Sound familiar?
That should sound extremely familiar to anyone who’s lived I the US at any point since the start of the 80s at the very least.
I don’t have access to the study, so I can’t check for myself- but I just tallied the last 15 congressional votes. There were 273 Republican votes dissenting from the majority of their party, there were 114 Democrat votes dissenting from the majority of their party.
I’d arguing that sounds closer to Christian authoritarianism or a theocracy. Fascism is fundamentally the belief that everything should be devoted to enforcing and strengthening the rule of the state over everyone. Incorporating them into the state while making sure they are subjects to it. It is the opposite of democracy- a fascist believes in people serving the state, not the state serving the people.
I’d argue this is more chauvinism and conservative nationalism than being inherently tied to Christianity. After all, that sounds like what Ben Shapiro and Dennis Prager believe.
Idk where you heard that is what fascism is… The 14 tenets of ur-fascism:
The cult of tradition. This is the belief that the truth is already known once and for all. Fascists believe there is no need to advance in learning.
The rejection of modernism. Fascists reject the Enlightenment and its evidence-based rationality. The cult of action for action’s sake. Fascist leaders act impulsively, without thinking or planning ahead.
No analytical criticism. Fascists ignore nuance and see any disagreement as treasonous.
Fear of difference. Fascists fear diversity. Thus they are racist by definition.
Appeal to a frustrated middle class. An economically frustrated and/or politically marginalized middle class is easy to stir to anger.
Obsession with a plot. Because the followers must be made to feel besieged, an internal “enemy” is provided: 7.
Immigrants, Muslims, Hispanics, Blacks. (Historically the Jews were often made to be “the enemy.”)
Anti-elitism. The followers are made to feel humiliated by the wealth and strength of the educated “elite.” This is used to create resentment.
Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. Fascists believe that life is permanent warfare. Therefore a desire for peace is treasonous.
Contempt for the weak. A fascist leader despises his underlings, who in turn despise those under them. They all either mock or ignore the poor, the sick, and the disabled.
The cult of heroism. The Fascist is eager to die a hero’s death. In his impatience, he frequently sends other people to their deaths.
Machismo. Fascists show disdain for women, disregard for chastity, and condemnation of homosexuality.
Selective populism. Under fascism, the “voice of the people” is not the democratic majority, but only the voices of those who support the leader.
Ur-fascism speaks Newspeak. Just as in Orwell’s 1984, Fascists use an impoverished vocabulary and an elementary syntax to limit complex and critical reasoning.
And yes, of course it sounds like Ben Shapiro and Dennis Prager, becauses they’re fascists. By definition. They are fascists.
Edit: spelling and formatting
It is my personal belief that the only possible way to interpret the ideology someone espouses is to look at what they actually say about it. If you want to define Marxism, look at how Marx defined it. If you want to define Monetarism, look at how Milton Friedman defined it. If you want to define Nazism, look at how the Nazis defined it. And, if you want to define Fascism look at how Mussolini defined it. Obviously, the Nazis, nor the Fascists actually followed entirely what they espoused but I’d still say you can only analyze the ideology based on what they actually advocated rather than what they did. If you want to analyze them as people, or as a successful state- look at what they did.
The tenets of ur-fascism were developed by studying the ACTIONS of the fascists. Exactly what you claim you need to do.
The tenets of ur-fascism were developed by studying the ACTIONS of the fascists. Exactly what you claim you need to do. If you do that, you see the Nazis fit all 14 of these, as do most modern American neo-conservatives.
Here’sa sci hub link to the study.
https://sci.bban.top/pdf/10.1177/1065912917722233.pdf?download=true
The party Unity was determined by taking data from voteview.org
I don’t doubt their is high unity, I’m just questioning the claim that it’s higher amongst Republicans, who are generally a tiny bit from fractured in voting when I’ve looked at votes- and from my own comparison of 15 recent votes now. Also looking here the Republicans seem to have a slightly wider spread
I’m not saying this to defend Republicans, just questioning the claim that they’re more unitary in voting.
If you read the linked study, you’d see that you’re pretty typical in underestimating party Unity, the majority of people on both sides do. Your link doesn’t work at all though, so I can’t see what you’re trying to show me.
Aside, I wish people wouldn’t downvote you. You’ve not done anything worth downvoting you in my opinion, and I’ve gone through and upvoted all of your comments, but it doesn’t do much good. You’ve been respectful, reasonable, and polite.
There’s some salty ignoramuses simply downvoting comments they think are right leaning. They don’t even read the comments.
It’s not my fault that you failed civics in elementary school but you need to go pick up a civics book and read it, because it’s very clear that you haven’t got a clue how our government works.
How can you look at the GOP in congress voting lockstep with the party line and claim that you just vote for the individual?
Or are you just being deliberately obtuse in order to muddy the water for observers so people will be more receptive to your regressive arguments?
I actually did pretty well in my political related classes, I didn’t take civics but various other US history classes, human geography, etc.
Okay I just checked for the past 15 votes(as of July 14th at 15:34 CEST) here is my source
I tallied every vote dissenting from the majority for each party and I actually threw in a 16th because one was a repeat vote just with more members(even though it had a different result):
TOTAL rep dissents 273 dem dissents 114 HR 2670 amendment: 18 rep 0 dem 9 HR 2670 amendment: 19 rep 1 dem 1 HR 2670 amendment: 20(vote 1) rep 4 dem 0 HR 2670 amendment: 20(vote 2) rep 4 dem 0 HR 2670 amendment: 21 rep 3 dem 2 HR 2670 amendment: 22 rep 0 dem 2 HR 2670 amendment: 24 rep 3 dem 17 HR 2670 amendment: 27 rep 41 dem 0 HR 2670 amendment: 28 rep 98 dem 49 HR 2670 amendment: 29 rep 1 dem 0 HR 2670 amendment: 30 rep 74 dem 5 HR 2670 amendment: 31 rep 8 dem 2 HR 2670 amendment: 32 rep 9 dem 0 HR 2670 amendment: 33 rep 25 dem 0 HR 2670 amendment: 34 rep 0 dem 27 HR 2670 amendment: 38 rep 2 dem 0So, I wouldn’t say dissenting from majority votes are particularly one sided.