5 reasons why Trump will win according to Mr. Moore

[Ahmed]

It is a good remark and which has destabilized many others before you: that a "barbarous" nation (the adjective is quickly awarded!) Produces horrors confirms the judgment, on the other hand that the most advanced nation of Western world (which already did not take itself for nothing!) indulges in such misdeeds that have led many people to doubt the possibility of the progress of reason *.
It is undoubtedly that they, like you, made the previous error of believing in the truth of the deployment of reason as progress, that they had not questioned the content of it precisely; in fact, to me, Hitler's Germany represents a high degree of rationality, in the sense given by the German philosopher ofAuklarung, E.Kant; an erasure of feeling, of emotion before the abstraction of duty. It is therefore no coincidence that this blindness in duty has been combined with the highest manifestation of machinery. The disastrous work of Hitler unfortunately ended up triumphing among those who fought it with an increased outburst of technology, because it was not limited to the annihilation of the despot, but this determining part of his obsessions was then spread everywhere.

* I have long had this doubt before I understood.

[sen-no-sen]

the fact remains that it always keeps a certain advance in technological and cultural matters, the conditions for fascism to appear in such a country are therefore not met.

I think it was a mistake: when fascism settled in Germany, this country was one of the most cultivated, with the best researchers in many fields, a level of education without equivalent in Europe, and a cultural activity among the most advanced (cinema, theater, literature, philosophy) ... It was one of the most technologically advanced (in front of the USA at the time, let's not talk about Japan or Korea, nonexistent).

It has always troubled and frozen me! I never understood men ...

The intellectual, technological and military level hardly comes into play in the advent of the fascism, these are above all the conditions socioeconomic which determines the influences of society.
Excluding what I wanted to mean is that in the case of the current USA, the techno-economic power at its disposal ensures it a significant rent, in particular via its advance in the NBICs, guaranteeing it in fact relative economic and social stability *.
Germany in the 30s was in a very different situation since it had experienced humiliation following the defeat of the First World War, in particular through the demands for excessive reparations demanded by the allies, the crisis of 1929. did the rest ...

The south-korean D.Trump,V.Putin or Mr Le Pen are actually economic programs of the 70s / 80s, so it's a bit of an exaggeration to want to compare its outdated policies to the authoritarian regimes of the 40s ...

* This will not last ... however the forms of totalitarianism to come should reach heights of subtlety, the enemy of tomorrow will not have a mustache but rather algorithms ...

[izentrop]

* A large number of anti-trump movements are funded by anarcho-capitalist-type pharmacies and do not have much spontaneity ...

The big words! He does everything to get fired it's no more complicated. A US president does not have a free hand to do anything. If in addition it is ruined as Did said, it is cooked facho!

[Did67]

The intellectual, technological and military level hardly comes into play in the advent of the fascism, these are above all the conditions socioeconomic which determines the influences of society.

I reacted to what was written. I put it back: "The fact remains that it always keeps a certain advance in technological and cultural matters, the conditions for fascism to appear in such a country are therefore not met"

And so we could understand that a technological and cultural advance "guarded" against fascism.

What I don't think. You don't either. Your two sentences are quite contradictory.

I also reacted because it is a widely shared conviction, not in relation to fascism sensu stricto, but to the excesses of extreme rights. I heard it again recently in a debate. Education, culture, level of knowledge, etc. would be ramparts ...

I think this is a mistake.

For the rest, okay. And in particular as regards a "digital dictatorship" ...

[sen-no-sen]

The intellectual, technological and military level hardly comes into play in the advent of the fascism, these are above all the conditions socioeconomic which determines the influences of society.

I reacted to what was written. I put it back: "The fact remains that it always keeps a certain advance in technological and cultural matters, the conditions for fascism to appear in such a country are therefore not met"

And so we could understand that a technological and cultural advance "guarded" against fascism.

What I don't think. You don't either. Your two sentences are quite contradictory.

Yes mea culpa, but I think you skipped the sentence above ...Fascism has as its main component the notion romantic anticapitalism, it is a current which opposes the power of money (in discourse) in a phase of withdrawal, generally following a large-scale conflict (the case of Italy and Germany).

I also reacted because it is a widely shared conviction, not in relation to fascism sensu stricto, but to the excesses of extreme rights. I heard it again recently in a debate. Education, culture, level of knowledge, etc. would be ramparts ...

Quite simply because people do not know the precise definition of fascism, not to be confused with totalitarianism, a much more generic term ... which can arise whatever the intellectual level ...

[Did67]

Quite simply because people do not know the precise definition of fascism, not to be confused with totalitarianism, a much more generic term ... which can arise whatever the intellectual level ...

I think, but I could be wrong, that there is a very republican conviction among many that knowledge, culture, education, etc. would be shields against "extremism", totalitarianism, fascism, whatever ... This is often reflected in debates.

And Nazi Germany is calling out to me on this. She was, well trained, culturally active and powerful, very well educated, we could add powerful churches, etc ... Faced with entrenched fears, faced with vexations as you have expressed, faced with loss of reference, faced with the rise of other competing powers which sometimes are "more efficient", at least perceived as such, in our reptilian brains, the varnish of the cortex that is education, culture, etc ... does not seem to be enough . At least if we stick to the German experience.

This is my conviction. And that's what made me react - not badly, I hope! - in relation to your sentence.

[Ahmed]

The idea that culture would ultimately be a rather superficial veneer which would quickly let "primitive" instincts show through is an interpretation often advanced, even rather banal, but a little light from a methodological point of view. This indeed postulates that the culture to which reference is made is not in itself problematic, that is to say that it is not the culture of a moment in history and that the idea of ​​a continuous progress of human history is not, also, an illusory projection of a particular reference on an inventive genealogy.
If we admit on the contrary that the instrumental reason of the Enlightenment participates in a split between, on the one hand what is its domain, the domination of nature and what it excludes and represses by attributing to it the label d 'irrational (although not its opposite, but only what this reason is improper to grasp), then we understand better the native inability of this reason to pacify the world.
A reason which could look directly at the monstrosity deployed every day in his name would put an end to it by this fact, just as the expression of anger is incompatible with the spectacle of his own anger.
It is necessary to wonder about the multiple explanations of the instincts appropriately baptized "primitive" in the theories of Laborit ou Freud: are not the determinisms which they advance simply suggested to them by a determinism which they have not perceived and which escapes them? In any case, it is my feeling.

[sen-no-sen]

Quite simply because people do not know the precise definition of fascism, not to be confused with totalitarianism, a much more generic term ... which can arise whatever the intellectual level ...

I think, but I could be wrong, that there is a very republican conviction among many that knowledge, culture, education, etc. would be shields against "extremism", totalitarianism, fascism, whatever ... This is often reflected in debates.

Absolutely.
This is probably a shortcut, because it is true that low intellectual level and misery are very favorable grounds for extremism.
Globally thought systems need minions, so crusades to Daech, while passing by the conquest of the west, the dissipation of the ideologies it is often carried out by the means of ignorant and violent individuals, recruited to do the "dirty work".
Fascism has obviously not escaped this, but what certain forget, as you rightly note, is that there are at the head of its currents particularly intelligent individuals ... and this last trend is not very rhyme well with violence.

It is also important to reconsider the ideologies. Indeed, the most widespread tendency is to consider the human being as the engine of the world, it is an anthropocentric and logical conception at first sight.
However, on closer inspection, it appears that the dominant entity is not man, but ideas, or more broadly information.
Out of the idea complexes resembles large-scale individuals.
Thus, not only do the latter evolve, but they erect strategies, compete with each other and use hosts (us ...) to maximize their chances of dissipation.
Seen thus, it is then quite understandable that ideologies come to lodge in the brains most able to dissipate them (generally intelligent people, charismatic etc ...).
It is for this reason that A.Hitler was "selected" by memetic evolution to contaminate a maximum of hosts and those whatever their cultural or intellectual level.

[Christophe]

It is not false

[Remundo]

* A large number of anti-trump movements are funded by anarcho-capitalist-type pharmacies and do not have much spontaneity ...

The big words! He does everything to get fired it's no more complicated. A US president does not have a free hand to do anything. If in addition it is ruined as Did said, it is cooked facho!

the anarcho-capitalist pharmacies, in summary are called George SOROS, the Grand Papa des Femens, in particular.