Churchill was against fascism because it threatened to invade the UK, pure and simple. The antisemitism thing did bother him a bit but considering South Africa and India it couldn’t have been that much.
Colonial powers as such were not fascist (and I say this as a Dutch person…) but admittedly you need a precise and exact definition and close observation to see the difference 
I’ve found myself getting more epistemological in my arguments these days, with okay results, people do seemto be tiring of pure defensive posturing…
“Is there anything I could say that, if it were true, would make you change your mind about socialism, antifa, BLM, Biden, etc?”
“If I asked you to play devil’s advocate in a debate about x, what arguments would you use? Where would you go to find evidence?”
“Crime is going down but people feel more unsafe than ever, police brutality is down but people trust cops less than ever, how do you engage with people who value feelings over facts?”
I agree.
It seems like, when the Berlin Wall came down, and Soviet Union dissolved in the early 1990’s, America sort of shrugged and said, “Okay, war’s over. Time to pivot to something else.” And we put all of our attention on Iraq and muslims, as the new “boogeymen”.
But I don’t think Russia ever thought the war was over. They kept fighting. They kept the Cold War going. And Russia was always brilliant with psyops and long-range planning.
EDIT: fixed typo
I feel like all of these tactics would only work if your opponent is arguing in good faith, something I do not believe is generally the case in discussions like that.
That said, it’s a great approach
I think that’s just it, trying to subtly say, “You’re not closed-minded, are you?”
“Surely you’re not arguing in bad faith, and can prove it by saying something to that effect?”
It’s actually a tactic they use successfully (as in, it inoculates them from argumentation) : “Do your research”, etc.
Although this article is about health care, it’s a really instructive way to understand how it is that Republican politicians can get away with saying the things they do, and why voters continue to support them:
Trump supporter learns something.
somehow i really doubt that
They want healthcare and living wages and all that, but when it comes time to vote, they’re more concerned about whether Jebus’ will is done and making sure that certain types don’t get all uppity.
Agreed. It works somewhat with my neighbor and his son.
I recently had a conversation with someone who complained that the left calls anyone they don’t like a fascist, and they don’t even know what fascism means. I countered that in my experience, conservatives call anyone they don’t like a socialist, and they don’t know what socialism means. It was absolutely no surprise when they responded with confidence that socialism meant “free stuff”. Or that when I referred them to Umberto Eco’s definition of fascism, they complained that I was just pulling stuff off the internet. You can’t win.
I remember when I was talking to a shop owner about the ACA when it was still in the works, and she was vigorously against it, and socialized medicine…and then just casually dropped “but I’m covered by my husband’s Tri-care…”
Oy.
Yeah, sorry. That’s probly my fault…
It has nothing to do with actual positions or facts in any way. It’s just “Yay for our side.” Witness how the party of “are you now or have you ever been” is now the party that thinks Putin is the Great White Hope. No facts, just factions.
I mean…it does exactly what it says on the tin.
I just saw something about how the anti-trans legislation (e.g. the school athletics stuff) the Republican party has been taking in a majority of US states is only supported by something like a third of Republicans. I figured the culture war bullshit was how they got Republicans to go along with economic and social policies that harmed them, but even that’s not entirely true. It may just be specifically the racism that’s motivating R voters…
When your dog dies: socialism
Healthcare bemefits cut: socialism
Required by a private business to wear a mask: stalinist tyrrany
Having to get background checked for a gun purchase: worser and more communistic than Mao.
I have an ongoing dialogue with a friend who is both a very good, community minded person and a staunch social conservative. I can’t fix them all, but I can engage with this one.
Occasionally one of his relatives chime in with some bugnut crazy Q anon stuff and that’s when I walk away (figuratively).
I get the impression Russia was willing to work with its role as a key part of the UN, next to the US in the security council. Until when they vetoed being involved in Serbia, Clinton brought up the old anti-Russian alliance NATO to invade instead, and Bush unilaterally declared that keeping the country together the way Russia wanted was simply not going to be considered.
I mean, they have mentioned that in just about every justification for invading surrounding countries since. And a cold war is not great, but it is probably better for Russian interests than a world with America acting as sole superpower without consulting anyone.
Haha - for sure. Feels like either experimental jazz or hardcore punk right?
