Can a movement similar to fascism emerge in the US?

[HappySqurriel]

Mr Khan said:

HappySqurriel said:

Fascism and socialism/communism takes hold in countries because a charismatic leader comes to power and promises to solve all your social or economic problems; and never once are the jackboots and political oppression these individuals will face mentioned. While I wouldn't say Obama is a fascist, I think his presidency demonstrates how big of a risk there is for Fascism in the United States; and it also offers a glimmer of hope that the United States has some form of inoculation against fascism ...

 

 

To a certain extent conservatives tend to choose their leaders based on what they see as the best of bad choices, and there is rarely any belief that their leaders are smarter or better than can really be demonstrated. In contrast, progressive leaders are often put on a pedestal and elevated to the level of a "rock star" and are rarely questioned on the substance of their plans; and Obama has been elevated to a level far above typical political leaders to where it is more correct to say that people see him as the "messiah". This has created an environment where the media and a large portion of the voting base believes everything he says and follows him without question regardless of what he is doing. While I don't see him doing this, the kind of power this gives a leader could allow him to erode the essential rights away from individuals until the USA was a fascist state.

What I believe may demonstrate the US is inoculated from this fate is how independent voters, libertarians and conservatives are willing to stand up to the media and fight against the growth in power of the state. While it is obvious that a large portion of conservatives are motivated more by partisanship than principle, the fact that independent voters and libertarians are willing to make a stand in the face of unsupported and unfair claims that they’re "racist" is reason to be optimistic.

This i sincerely disagree with. Conservatives are always looking for their messiah too, namely their dead messiah Reagan (who was much more moderate than the Tea Party would be willing to tolerate today), and many conservatives seem to blindly put their faith in "the entrepreneur," or "the rich," people who have greater reasons to be purely self-interested yet have no true proof of actually being smarter or better able than the rest of us

 

Fascism and Communism are not bad ideas (well, fascism also has a dim, darwinian view of human nature), it's just that no-one has resolved the problems that human nature poses against them (namely that a self-interested elite without any sort of tilt against them will inevitably emerge, diluting the ideology that got them in their position in the first place, like the incredibly bureaucratic Soviet Union of the Brezhnev years). For now democracy is the best bet we have to hedge against our pessimistic view of human nature, but it's not necessarily the best overall

On the topic of Charasmatic leaders portrayed as a Mesiah ... Since I was old enough to start paying attention to politics (about 20 years ago) there hasn't really been any charasmatic conservative leaders who were portrayed as a rock star or messiah like figure in any western country I can think of, and yet in every country I can think of there have been several instances of political figures on the left being portrayed in this way. It doesn't matter though, my core point was the elevation of a political figure to this level is the problem not which party does it more.

 

Beyond that, communal living is a very efficient way to live in very small communities but it simply doesn't scale well. There are still cultures and communities around the world that are thriving based on a communal lifestyle but these communities never grow larger than about 100 people; religious sects like the Amish, Mennonites and Hutterites have rules in place to prevent the community from getting too large and the communes split when they reach a size of (about) 100 people.

Communism is effectively trying to take the same system that starts to become corrupt and inefficient for 100 or more people and scaling it to try to meet the needs of millions of people. It is one of the most corrupt and abusive government types and it ensures the greatest disparity in standard of living because those in control of the system get to live in luxury while those without power don't have their basic needs met.

Even if you assume that the flaws inherent to communism could be addressed it is still based on the assumption that the government knows and can meet your needs, wants and dreams far better than you can; which is a flawed premise.

Communism is a very bad idea that has been implemented as best as it ever could be, and the abuse of power and failing to meet the needs of the citizens of a country will exist in any communist state regardless of who implements it.