You may only read this site if you've purchased Our Kampf from Amazon or Powell's or me
• • •
"Mike and Jon, Jon and Mike—I've known them both for years, and, clearly, one of them is very funny. As for the other: truly one of the great hangers-on of our time."—Steve Bodow, head writer, The Daily Show

"Who can really judge what's funny? If humor is a subjective medium, then can there be something that is really and truly hilarious? Me. This book."—Daniel Handler, author, Adverbs, and personal representative of Lemony Snicket

"The good news: I thought Our Kampf was consistently hilarious. The bad news: I’m the guy who wrote Monkeybone."—Sam Hamm, screenwriter, Batman, Batman Returns, and Homecoming

July 06, 2006

A Handy Guide To Understanding Fascism

Many young people come to me and ask: what is fascism? It's a question that political philosophers have studied for decades.

In the end, though, the answer is really quite simple. Here's a handy guide to understanding what fascism is, and just as importantly, what fascism is not.

IS NOT FASCISM

• Using an attack on a large, prominent building as an excuse to clamp down on civil liberties

• Calling for the execution of the editor of a large newspaper

• Threatening a Jewish family until they flee their city

• Imprisoning citizens for years without charges

• Government lawyers claiming a country's leader has the authority to "crush the testicles" of a child if necessary

IS FASCISM

• Sending mean emails to Lee Siegel

• • •

You see? As I said, simple. I hope this clears things up.

Posted at July 6, 2006 01:06 PM | TrackBack
Comments

Geez. He's a sissy.

Posted by: Elayne at July 6, 2006 02:31 PM

He's a sissy

You mean the guy who thinks the president *doesn't* have the authority to crush a six year-old's testicles, right? I couldn't agree more.

We cannot be safe until we get over our prissy, sissified unwillingness to crush the testicles of children.

Posted by: Jonathan Schwarz at July 6, 2006 03:13 PM

Compliments on the use of ambiguous syntactical structure in the bold headings.

Posted by: Saheli at July 6, 2006 04:41 PM

Uh oh!

Many young people come to me...

You're on their list now. You child molester you. Seems like you'd like to keep this little fact secret.

Take care and we'll read you in 5-10.

Posted by: SPIIDERWEBâ„¢ at July 6, 2006 07:32 PM

The pity is: TNR used to be a good magazine. Now it's National Review *Lite*.

Posted by: Lloyd at July 6, 2006 10:16 PM

Jonathon S.,

I dropped out of college in '72 because the war was de-escalating and I didn't need the deferment anymore. Maybe I better go back and take a Poli-Sci refresher course because I still don't understand.

Steven Colbert ("don't call me Coal-Burt!") and Jon Stewart are now considered fascist pigs, eh? Does this mean that fascism is the same as beauty and only to be found in the eye of the beholder?

In the words of that infamous American philosopher Vinnie Barbarino: "I'm so confused!!!"

Posted by: americanintifada at July 7, 2006 12:47 AM

Thanks for the link to that new Master Race, sk! Fascism truly IS in the eye of the beholder. Heil, Kitler!!!

Posted by: americanintifada at July 7, 2006 01:11 AM

Recent weeks have convinced me that The New Republic is really the training ground for a reality show called The Next Andy Rooney.

Posted by: Dan Coyle at July 7, 2006 09:26 AM

I'm beginning to learn about fascism now, but don't know where this fits into the rubric:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/07/washington/07recruit.html?ex=1152936000&en=7cb9f2ec28785f8a&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY

Posted by: Seen and Heard at July 7, 2006 09:30 AM

I wish you people would stop your fascist double- and triple-posting. "Never again" is not just a slogan, you know.

Also, I'd like to take this opportunity to complain about Jonathan's choice of link color again. That's fascism, right there.

Finally, in seriousness, Siegel may be overblown in labeling bloggers fascist, and I realize there's this whole context of war-between-TNR-and-Kos, but he's right that certain parties tend to respond with heaps of invective rather than argument to positions they don't like. There's simply no good reason to tell someone to lick your scrotum (unless you like to be licked there and they're participating willingly in a sexual encounter, obviously). This phenomenon used to be restricted to LGF and Free Republic types, but it seems to be plenty common amongst liberal blog commenters these days.

Posted by: saurabh at July 7, 2006 09:40 AM

I wish you people would stop your fascist double- and triple-posting. "Never again" is not just a slogan, you know.

Also, I'd like to take this opportunity to complain about Jonathan's choice of link color again. That's fascism, right there.

Finally, in seriousness, Siegel may be overblown in labeling bloggers fascist, and I realize there's this whole context of war-between-TNR-and-Kos, but he's right that certain parties tend to respond with heaps of invective rather than argument to positions they don't like. There's simply no good reason to tell someone to lick your scrotum (unless you like to be licked there and they're participating willingly in a sexual encounter, obviously). This phenomenon used to be restricted to LGF and Free Republic types, but it seems to be plenty common amongst liberal blog commenters these days.

Posted by: saurabh at July 7, 2006 09:42 AM

Johnathan or anyone else,

What's with the left pissing match over Chomsky? I like Berube I like Dennis Perrin, I like Delong, they agree on a lot of things. But suddenly bring up Chomsky and the long knives come out- particulary on the Delong/Berube side. Is it that if one is academed a Phd one can not comfortably maintain tenure and endorse Chomsky? These guys demonstrate a visceral hatred of Chomsky in their writing that I would expect from somebody on the right, while Chomsky defenders like John and Dennis sort of just calmly assert their points.

Its not like John and Dennis agree with every detail of every statement Chomsky has written but they seem to accept his larger premise, that the US plays dirty at the expense of other nations. Which of course implies that other nations play dirty at the expense of us. Which is kind of a realistic way of viewing the world.

Whereas on the other side we have a kind of shrill "CHOMSKY IS A BIG FAT LIAR! DON'T EVERY MENTION HIM AGAIN!". Why is this? Particularly when we have Anne Cultour who is a big fat liar who everyone is treating with kid gloves. I mean take what the Chomsky detractors and I'm not talking Delong and Berube here, but the hardcore frothing I hate chomsky people- take what they say and then take a gander at the depth of deceit in any of Anne's books and you see a living breathing example of what these people would claim to hate.

Anne makes a profitable career from her lies, while Chomsky does not really make the same kind of money. Sure he makes money but not Anne level money.

Seems like when anyone is attacking Chomsy one must bring up Anne, not for equivalence, but for contrast. It's just the irony here is really killing me.

Anne committing real literary and philosphical crime while posing in party dresses, and Chomsky hunted like a dog in media circles.

I think we need some home made youtube videos or something, because just writing this is making me dizzy; but then maybe that's the point.

Posted by: patience at July 8, 2006 01:49 AM

Hey patience!

I'm losing MY patience with having to defend my live-in lover Annie Coulter on just about every blog in the world who dares to attack my little Islamofascist-loving sweetheart. Lighten up on her. Nowadays the big bucks are in right-wing fascism and stealing other peoples material so she has to follow the money, oh don't ya know!

Besides, she's great in the sack! Right now, she's sitting on the bed dressed up like Milton Berle, flashing those cute little bedroom eyes and looking much too irresistable, so much so that I can't help but think with my penis.....sorry, but I gotta go!

I'm cumming, Annie!!!!!!!

Posted by: americanintifada at July 8, 2006 10:10 AM

Chomsky's sold a ton of books over the years. Probably several tons. I'm quite sure he's more than comfortable. But that's not the issue; I think people evince such visceral hate for him (in some cases) to demonstrate that they are reasonable moderates, not like that whacko anarchist Chomsky. Others (like Dershowitz) are just crazy.

Posted by: saurabh at July 8, 2006 11:32 PM