neoconservatism, variant of the political ideology of conservatism that combines features of traditional conservatism with political individualism and a qualified endorsement of free markets. Neoconservatism arose in the United States in the 1970s among intellectuals who shared a dislike of communism and a disdain for the counterculture of the 1960s, especially its political radicalism and its animus against authority, custom, and tradition.

..Neoconservatives, however, tend to pay more attention than traditional conservatives to cultural matters and the mass media—to music, art, literature, theatre, film, and, more recently, television and the Internet—because they believe that a society defines itself and expresses its values through these means. Western (and particularly American) society, they charge, has become amoral, adrift, and degenerate....

Such degenerate behaviour, say neoconservatives, indicates a broader and deeper cultural crisis afflicting Western civilization. The American political scientist James Q. Wilson, for example, traced the crisis to the 18th-century European Enlightenment, which encouraged people to question established authority, to criticize religion, and to reject traditional beliefs. Other neoconservatives blame the “adversarial” counterculture of the 1960s, which dismissed traditional values and religion as old-fashioned, irrelevant, or even reactionary. Whatever its source, neoconservatives maintain that this degeneration represents a real and present danger to Western civilization.

How is Brian Gerrish a neo-conservative?

What would you say is a better term WUB?
Paleo Conservative?

Mike wrote: "Bloke who is concerned about the nefarious influence of Common Purpose"? I don't go in for 'isms', and I don't go in for labels.

youtube.com/watch?v=Kq3wFw-zqPA#t=1m38s

"God, is he left, is he right? No! I'm shockingly unbelievable...I'm me. So remove all your little preconceived notions, please".

3. Fascism deceptively calls for the national unity of social classes, class-collaboration, but actually promotes the division of people by race, sex, culture, nation, or religion. Fascism was, under Mussolini and, later, Hitler, conceived as the "corporate state", that is, all the resources of the society were directed toward the support of corporate profits in the name of national unity and economic development. In order to motivate warriors and bolster profits, fascism conceals the real and insoluble tensions between those who own and those who work.
4. Fascism frequently is employed as a strategic base for war. Fascist shifts in government and official ideology grow with war preparations.
5. Violence and terror, made tolerable by racism and sexism (ideas which view people as sub-human) become public policy.
6. Fascism relies on mysticism, organized irrationalism, a culture which turns to superstition, irrationality (extreme religious dogmatism, the fear of sexuality, celebrations of misogyny, death, and hopelessness--serving to explain apparent systematic despair), and retards science and social production in order to mask its own decay. Indeed, fascism is organized decay.

Absolute Fascist nonsense:
www.cpexposed.com/video/common-purpose-update

Mike wrote: There is no point in this discussion. You don't listen.

I've already explained to you once why I've never watched any of Brian Gerrish's material, I'm not explaining again. Evidently you think this is a worthwhile usage of your time. I don't.

w/e no0b, how can you know whether he is a NeoCon or not if you've never watched any of his videos?

Prime Minister Says "Drop The Labels"

Acting on the advice of dead standup comedian, David Cameron declared today that accusations his current policies represented a drive to enforce neo-liberal ideology were false because "labels are, like, meaningless man. I'm just doing my thing, y'know? Don't pigeonhole me baby.. "Isms" are bullshit. You don't need to know what people stand for. Just vote for the guy with the best haircut and populist speeches and everything will be fine."

These sentiments were greeted with approval on the David Icke forum where a Mr Positive Forward said "People have for years been accusing me of being a Nazi because I spend all my time saying how great Hitler was, how he was right about the Jews and how it's all lies he murdered people. Don't label me people. I'm just some guy who isn't a Nazi because calling people a Nazi is meaningless."

Responding to the new groove, a Mr Wakeupbomb on Sanctumzone forum issued an earnest apology; "I've spent a lot of time talking about corporate fascists. I now realise this is bogus not just because fascism is by definition inherently nationalistic but because fascism is an ism and therefore meaningless. I promise never to use the term again. I vow from now on to take each multinational at their merit and not pre-judge them for being rapacious, amoral money making machines."

I will never apologise for stating that we live in a state of corporate fascism, which is patently obvious. This has nothing to do with nationalism, nor with labeling people, it is simply a way of explaining a concept. Ergo, there is no similarity between this and labeling a person in order to deride their views simply because they are unpalatable to you. I will make sure I use the expression 'corporate fascism' more often from now on, as we live in a far worse state of corporate fascism than when the term was first coined, as is abundantly obvious to anyone with any intelligence. Thank you for your input, though.

How come it's "explaining a concept" when you do it, but "labelling" when Mike does it? Does the thought occur it might seem as obvious to Mike what Gerrish is to him?

This after you admit you don't know what he stands for, yet declare Mike is wrong anyway. Couldn't you just say "maybe he is, maybe he isn't, I don't know."? I disagreed with Mike about it too, but since he's explained what he meant I have to say I can see where he's coming from.

I don't think "corporate fascism" is at all obvious because in many ways fascism is actually incompatible with the global capitalist vision of the large corporations. This is why actual fascists tend to dislike big corporations and can often sound like left wing anti-globalism campaigners when it comes to that issue.

dogsmilk wrote: I could explain, but I can't be arsed.

If the notion of nations were gotten rid of would fascist tendencies not be able to exist then?

oioioi wrote:
Interesting question. I don't think "fascism" could exist because it's bound up with notions of ultra-nationalism. But it would depend on what "fascist tendencies" are. I think "fascist" gets bandied around a lot as a hangover from world war II and invokes lots of generally authoritarian notions that are compatible with fascism - which is also authoritarian in nature - but don't define fascism.

I'd also argue that in a way fascism is more honest - apart from the likes of the gutless wonders on the DIF who dodge around what they stand for, fascism as an ideology is unashamedly authoritarian. Just modern fascists have to duck around this as that sort of thinking is no longer fashionable. These days we get something more devious and subtle that sells itself on notions of liberty, choice and freedom.

dogsmilk wrote:
It is just ridiculously authoritarian.
The divide and conquer technique is just proportionately stronger in its use as a result hence the racism etc that usually gets bundled with it.
The corporate/state merger thing is just syndicalism which I've talked about loads of times before. The authoritarian syndicalism however does not partake in distributism on anything like the kind of % scale that happens in anarcho-syndicalism where everyone gets a much fairer slice of the pie AND control over the functions and directive of the group, authoritarian systems ofc reserve the control to an elite few, the more authoritarian the less the democratic involvement.

If the notion of nations were gotten rid of would fascist tendencies not be able to exist then?

In contrast to the liberal understanding of “uselessly free” atomized and autonomous individuals living under a “bookkeeping state” designed above all for assuring the peaceful functioning of the marketplace, Mussolini described man as a creature that thrives best under strict conditions of duty, sacrifice, and discipline

oioioi wrote: With people like Brian Gerrish forming any kind of coherent mass the removal of nations, specifically the British nation will remain nothing but a hypothetical proposition.

In this video he uses the rhetoric of Mussolini describing the effects of Liberalism, on Health,, "Obesity is a problem.. The enfeebled masses just a feeling I get about society, it's got limp it's got tired", if you watch the full talk you get more of it, the bit at the start about Mice is worrying, "a few little mice is ok but when they start to multiply you have a problem"

Mussolini's new fascist