“Together We Thrive”
Take a look at this picture: .
I see two things.
First, “Together We Thrive” is an implicit or subliminal condemnation of anyone who is “divisive,” which means anyone who opposes the liberal agenda.
Second, this enforced togetherness, this required singleness of mind, is essentially fascist.
The only thing lacking is that the shirts are not brown.
You see this. I see this. But all the establishment conservatives celebrating Obama’s call for “togetherness” do not see it. They are the enablers of liberal fascism.
- end of initial entry -
(Note: I am not referring to Jonah Goldberg’s book Liberal Fascism, which I have not read and know nothing about, but which, based on the general worthlessness of his other writings, I doubt contains anything worthwhile.)
Steve W. writes:
I generally agree with your opinion of Jonah Goldberg, but I must give credit where credit is due. I think his book Liberal Fascism is excellent. Everyone I know who has read it (all right-wingers) agree. It’s main faults, in my view, are that it is too long and repeats its main points too much (he needed a stronger editor) and that it is too apologetic and tries to soften the thrust of his argument—which is that liberalism is a totalitarian ideology. But even with these faults, I would give the book a solid A.
Bob S. writes:
I haven’t read Goldberg’s book either, but I just read the Paxton article Buck O. refers to, Goldberg’s response to it, and several other articles in a History News Network gang-up on the book (a list of all related articles is at the bottom of that link).
Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 13, 2011 09:55 PM | Send
Between the two, I think Goldberg has by far the best of the argument; he really acquits himself well. Paxton gives himself away early when he says:
“Liberal Fascism is an oxymoron, of course. A fascism that means no harm is a contradiction in terms. Authentic fascists intend to harm those whom they define as the nation’s internal and external enemies. Someone who doesn’t intend to harm his or her enemies, and who doesn’t relish doing it violently, isn’t really fascist.”
Thus, Paxton is saying, liberalism can’t be fascist because it doesn’t mean any harm to anyone. Well, from the standpoint of traditional society being eviscerated by liberalism, a great deal of harm is being done. While liberals may be pursuing their vision of the good, they know their vision has enemies, and they do their best to crush them.
For example, didn’t a most prominent liberal recently urge “Latinos [not to] sit out the election instead of saying, we’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us?”