In Three Minutes: Fascism (As opposed to conservative/conservatism)

Hoodie City, Wales

Via British philosophy texts, I provide academic definitions for fascism.

To be clear, I am a moderate conservative, Reformed, biblical Christian. I do not intellectually hold to or support any forms of fascism or communism. I never have and never will.

Fascism

Blackburn explains that from the Latin, this is fasces the bundle of rods carried before the Roman consuls as an insignia of authority. (136). This served as loose inspiration for the early 20th century political, military and government movements of Mussolini in Italy and Hitler in Nazi Germany. (136).

Elements of fascism include nationalism, hostility to ideals of equality, hatred of minorities and hatred of degenerates, deviants, elitism, liberalism and freedom of expression. (136).

Fascism focuses on a cult-like leader and the destiny of race. It embraces political symbolism, uniforms, emblems. (136). Fascism is idealized that it must take place through political energy and struggle. (136).

Cambridge explains that in National Socialism, this form of fascism featured anti-antisemitism and was militarist. (629).

STERBA, JAMES P (1996) 'Political Philosophy" in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

In Three Minutes (A little over)

This audio/video took several takes, how much worse it would be if I had to be concerned with how I looked! However, yes, I can acknowledge there are many American conservatives, and American Christian conservatives that are opposed to aspects of illegal immigration and legal immigration. Many of these favour a southern wall. But, I do not reason that being opposed to legal immigration is a distinct conservative premise that can be connected to fascism. Remember there are many conservatives and conservative Christians that also live in Canada, Europe and elsewhere that hold to more moderate views and many American conservatives and American Christian conservatives do as well. Hatred of immigrants and minorities, for the most part, is not a conservative premise.

Audio/Video: New Logitech h340

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

The end of this text review.

Why wasn't it done already?

There has to be a first time for everything. It is a fallacy to claim that anything worthwhile has already been done. (214). It should not should be assumed that new ideas are always wacky (214) or just always wrong.

My example:

Person X: One day medical science will be able to repair amputated limbs.

Person Y:  I am against it. It is a bad idea, let God's will stand!

It could also be God's will for a certain person to have a repaired amputated limb (s).

Wishful thinking

This is when premises are accepted because one would like them to be true, rather than because reasonable premises and arguments have been presented in support of premises. (215). This fallacy is not concerned with whether premises and conclusions are true or false. (215).

Pirie mentions philosopher David Hume and his views on the subject of the afterlife. It is opined that it is wishful thinking to believe in the afterlife for deceased relatives and friends. (216). Pirie mentions that some philosophers, such as Hume view (viewed) the afterlife as an absurd notion. (216).

Connected to wishful thinking, I view sentimental theology as often absurd in regard to death and the afterlife. (See sentimental theology in archives).

The biblical, historically revealed, Christian theology in support of the afterlife idea is based on the promise of everlasting life in Jesus Christ. This through his atoning and resurrection work applied to believers via the triune God.

This everlasting life as in heaven, takes place in two stages. For those in Jesus Christ and the Hebrew Bible covenant, prior to the atonement and resurrection work of Jesus Christ.

Paradise (2 Corinthians 12, Philippians 1) for disembodied spirits. Then upon the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15) within the culminated of Kingdom of God, the new heaven and new earth (Revelation 20-22).

This same biblical revelation reveals two stages of hell, also in an everlasting context. For those outside of Jesus Christ and the Hebrew Bible covenant, prior to the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ.

Hades for disembodied spirits (Luke 16) and then ultimately the lake of fire (Revelation 20) for those outside of Jesus Christ. Those in the lake of fire are presumed to be resurrected by many within scholarship.

As secondary support, within philosophy of religion, it can be reasoned there exists the necessary. Within theism, the necessary equates to first cause, which parallels the biblical and theological concept of God, that existed prior to any matter, or anything else for that matter (Genesis and Revelation). The first cause and as well the infinite, eternal author of the initial earthly life can offer everlasting life, if God so chooses and to whom he chooses.

This is not an absurd notion, when not left to wishful thinking and speculation alone.
---

It looks like my face is further thinning out with my fruit, vegetable, fish and natural peanut butter diet. If you do not mind me stating, my friends Darren and Kelly are correct, my arms do look muscular (Those 30 and 50 pound dumbbell curls and lifts.).

We must do something

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

'This fallacy consists in supposing that doing something ineffective is better than doing nothing at all' (213).

Based on the author's example:

Person A: I am getting a 'Love, Don't Hate' tat.

Person B: What difference will that make in the world?

Person A: I have to do something.

Person C:  Every little bit helps!

Random actions can be fallaciously justified by being connected to worthwhile causes. (213).

Actual human actions of love might make a difference in the world, where as a tattoo is not likely to.

Action is usually more useful and effective than symbolism.

This is unobtainable

Durham, 1997

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

Any argument has its limitations.

When accessing premises, any other option for premises comes from the 'available alternatives'. (208).

Therefore, when premises are criticized as imperfect and the alternatives are imperfect as well; those presenting alternatives as perfect, risk the fallacy of 'Unobtainable perfection'.

I am reasoning here that those presenting alternatives may not reason his/her premises are perfect, but rather are not applying a reasonable critique to these alternative views.

Based on the author's example (2008):

Nuclear power and energy should be made illegal as it is dangerous.

(Coal and hydro-electric, and oil are all dangerous too. A key question is which forms of energy production are more dangerous than others.)

In other words, it would be fallacious to rule out nuclear power and energy because it is imperfectly dangerous when this applies to all major energy sources. (2008). The status quo is imperfect and so will be alternatives. It is fallacious to claim there is a perfect solution to the status quo, at least in this present fallen realm.

I caution my politicized friends on the further left and further right that claim their side should rule and could create any type of utopia. Sinful human nature taints all political movements in this fallen realm.

Pirie points out two variants:

Claiming status quo premises do not go far enough. (209). The more drastic change may be (maybe not) better, but it too will be imperfect.

Seeking premises that are beyond a human ability to provide by those making the decisions. (210). So the impossible is suggested over the possible. The impossible but supposedly perfect suggestion (argument) is fallaciously preferred over imperfect, possible premises.