2) yep, I did. Johnstone doesn’t get to decide what definition suits her according to the audience she caters to.

Point is that this remains an vague term; as long as people like Ben Shapiro and Heather McDonald are grouped WITH the alt-right, when they are in fact diametrically opposed to racism, in some venues illustrates that point.

I believe it was Matt Yglsias, perhaps a year or so ago, who tried to call “enough” to this mess, and begged his progressive fellow travelers to stop applying to term to everyone who disagreed with them. I personally use the term the way it was originally defined, by Richard Spencer, to refer to that thankfully-small part of the conservative coalition which embraces white nationalism (which is broader than white supremacy, it should be said.)

But, confusion over the use of the term continues. And just because you can trot out some people which you consider “authorities” on the topic does not mean that there are not other public voices in the media sullying the definition for political advantage.

3) being “directionally correct” is a ridiculous statement to make about CJ, as she’s obviously in the red-brown direction, which you don’t seem familiar with.

No, I’m not. Let’s have a look.

(reads)

Laughs. Let’s just say that you and I don’t agree on what a “fascist” is, and leave it at that. True fascists compose such a small part of the US population that they’re not worth agonizing about; and they seem to be popping up, just like they did in Italy in the 40’s, in approximately equal numbers amongst ideological liberals and ideological conservatives.

4) “fact is a fact”, again, Johnstone has promoted completely bogus and debunked conspiracies time and again. Credibility is key with reporters, she has none.

As I said, spit out the seeds.

5) you clearly don’t know what fascism is. Your definition is very shallow and fits an expression of fascism, not the ideology itself.

Well, I would counter that by saying that I refuse to allow the progressive left to expand the definition to anyone-they-disagree-with. There is no single definition of fascism, but what I use is fairly close to the textbook definition. Per Wikipedia:

Fascism is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and control of industry and commerce, which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.

Fascists believe that liberal democracy is obsolete and they regard the complete mobilization of society under a totalitarian one-party state as necessary to prepare a nation for armed conflict and to respond effectively to economic difficulties. Such a state is led by a strong leader — such as a dictator and a martial government composed of the members of the governing fascist party — to forge national unity and maintain a stable and orderly society. Fascism rejects assertions that violence is automatically negative in nature and views political violence, war and imperialism as means that can achieve national rejuvenation. Fascists advocate a mixed economy, with the principal goal of achieving autarky through protectionist and interventionist economic policies.

Evidently you prefer a more expansive and novel definition which is broad enough to attack more people, I suspect.

Written by

Data Driven Econophile. Muslim, USA born. Been “woke” 2x: 1st, when I realized the world isn’t fair; 2nd, when I realized the “woke” people are full of shit.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store