FOX NEWS Is an Enemy of the State

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Isn’t branding the opposition an enemy of the state right out of the fascist handbook? You can say it if you want, but in my book that makes you just another authoritarian, Veritas.

I'm not sure about this, Res. Fox News is doing real damage to the Republic. I don't know what the motive is, and I've though a lot about that. Money doesn't explain it. There has to be a point where profit is trumped by principles if one has them.

So why has Fox News, especially their opinion evening programing that is the most popular, made hyper-partisanship king to the point of they would rather see Western Liberal Democracy in flames than acknowledge real threats if they are from the supposed right? Is it tolerable still after an insurrection and what we are seeing with Trump post-office?

You make solid points. Can one call a duck a duck in the political arena?

- Doc

[Vēritās]

So it is a lie that Biden or his spokeswoman called people semi-fascist, or the truth?

Trump and virtually Every Republican since Reagan has been demonizing Democrats as Socialists while equating that with Communism. Not just some Democrats, but all Democrats. FOX News has been propagating this idiocy for decades now. But please, tell us more about how Biden is "dividing" an already divided country by merely pointing out facts that the far right is showing signs of fascism.

[Res Ipsa]

Isn’t branding the opposition an enemy of the state right out of the fascist handbook? You can say it if you want, but in my book that makes you just another authoritarian, Veritas.

I'm not sure about this, Res. Fox News is doing real damage to the Republic. I don't know what the motive is, and I've though a lot about that. Money doesn't explain it. There has to be a point where profit is trumped by principles if one has them.

So why has Fox News, especially their opinion evening programing that is the most popular, made hyper-partisanship king to the point of they would rather see Western Liberal Democracy in flames than acknowledge real threats if they are from the supposed right? Is it tolerable still after an insurrection and what we are seeing with Trump post-office?

Well, I can’t claim to be sure, either. But doesn’t every fascist make exactly the same kinds of arguments you just made to justify repression of opponents? Is the only difference that, unlike past dictators and authoritarian, we’re right that there is an actual threat?

Am I wrong to associate “enemy of the state” with Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Pol Pot, etc? Using “enemy of the state” to clamp down on press outlets puts all of us at the mercy of whoever controls the state. And nobody has a good crystal ball when it comes to that.

I’m loathe to return to the early years of the Republic when newspaper editors could be and were imprisoned for criticizing the government. Thank heavens Oliver Wendell Holmes had an epiphany on free speech. Reading early Supreme Court opinions on free speech would shock most Modern Americans when it comes to free speech. Freedom of the press was a hard won battle that went on long after we had the First Amendment.

I’ll fight to save the village from burning. But I’m not willing to burn the village in order to save it.

[Vēritās]

Well, I can’t claim to be sure, either. But doesn’t every fascist make exactly the same kinds of arguments you just made to justify repression of opponents?

"Repression of opponents"? No, I made it clear FOX News has the right to air, but it should not be allowed to false advertise itself as a legitimate News outlet. It should be treated as a political outfit because that's exactly what it is. Is that "repression"? Not by any stretch of the definition. The freedom of speech isn't unlimited, and it shouldn't be. When you pose a clear and present danger to the security of the country by creating civil wars and giving aid and comfort to authoritarian states like Russia during war time, and hosting politicians who are calling for riots in the streets, it is the job of the government to protect itself and the people from that kind of tyranny.

The rest of your post was just missing the point mixed with hyperbole.

[Binger]

So it is a lie that Biden or his spokeswoman called people semi-fascist, or the truth?

Trump and virtually Every Republican since Reagan has been demonizing Democrats as Socialists while equating that with Communism. Not just some Democrats, but all Democrats. FOX News has been propagating this idiocy for decades now. But please, tell us more about how Biden is "dividing" an already divided country by merely pointing out facts that the far right is showing signs of fascism.

So he did say Republicans are fascist? FOX was not lying?

[honorentheos]

I'm not sure about this, Res. Fox News is doing real damage to the Republic. I don't know what the motive is, and I've though a lot about that. Money doesn't explain it. There has to be a point where profit is trumped by principles if one has them.

So why has Fox News, especially their opinion evening programing that is the most popular, made hyper-partisanship king to the point of they would rather see Western Liberal Democracy in flames than acknowledge real threats if they are from the supposed right? Is it tolerable still after an insurrection and what we are seeing with Trump post-office?

Well, I can’t claim to be sure, either. But doesn’t every fascist make exactly the same kinds of arguments you just made to justify repression of opponents? Is the only difference that, unlike past dictators and authoritarian, we’re right that there is an actual threat?

Am I wrong to associate “enemy of the state” with Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Pol Pot, etc? Using “enemy of the state” to clamp down on press outlets puts all of us at the mercy of whoever controls the state. And nobody has a good crystal ball when it comes to that.

I’m loathe to return to the early years of the Republic when newspaper editors could be and were imprisoned for criticizing the government. Thank heavens Oliver Wendell Holmes had an epiphany on free speech. Reading early Supreme Court opinions on free speech would shock most Modern Americans when it comes to free speech. Freedom of the press was a hard won battle that went on long after we had the First Amendment.

I’ll fight to save the village from burning. But I’m not willing to burn the village in order to save it.

I share your concerns about the fragility of the rights we take for granted and what undergirds them. But set aside the OP title and focus on the content as we know we ought to. What is it in Veritas' OP that is problematic beyond the problem he is calling attention to with the behavior of Fox News? I'd be interested in that discussion and if we value speech that is the discussion to be had, in my opinion.

Now, I do agree the OP title is something I'd say to Culty and probably no one else. I was pretty outspoken over the "Defund the Police" slogan for it's inelegance and felt it did real damage to the issues it rightly sought to address. So is saying Fox News is an enemy of the State just problematic because it incites rather than warns? I don't know. Pre-insurrection, maybe. Now, as the big lie is alive and well, as Trump pursues escape from justice as the very issues around his acts corrode faith in democratic institutions essential to the very things you defend above? I might be inclined to say I can tolerate the headline because maybe they in fact are enemies of something I sincerely believe in based on their actions and the results of their words.

Anyway, is there anything in the post you take issue with as far as the evidence against Fox being a friend to the democratic order?

[Vēritās]

The year is 2046.

Congress has been controlled by the Religious Right since 2034, when a Republican controlled Congress gave a wink and a nod as President Donald Trump Jr. seized all voting machines and appointed winners as he saw fit. As a result, there are no more Democrats in office.

The three Liberal supreme court judges died of suspicious circumstances years earlier, and were quickly replaced with Church ministers with no law degrees.

Abortion has long since been outlawed, and every attempt by academics to monitor or catalog the thousands of dead pregnant women, has been quickly shut down by military personnel. Many of these academics have gone missing.

Homosexuals are still allowed to live, but they're being monitored because of the new sodomy laws that carry a penalty of life in prison.

The all Republican Senate proposed a bill to make the Bible equal to the Constitution, but it is being delayed because the House wants to add amendments making sure all other religions are outlawed.

Somewhere, there is a Liberal at heart looking back on how this all started.

With FOX News.

But he also remembers how no one did anything about it....

Because who wants to be called an authoritarian?

[Res Ipsa]

Isn’t branding the opposition an enemy of the state right out of the fascist handbook? You can say it if you want, but in my book that makes you just another authoritarian, Veritas.

That doesn't logically follow. So you're saying there can be no such thing as actual enemies of the state, right? If they exist, we're supposed to just ignore them or at least not mention them?


"“I, ________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and of the State of ______ against all enemies, foreign and domestic;"

Sound familiar? It wasn't written by Hitler.

Nothing you said here follows from what I said. I said “branding your political opponents” with special emphasis on the press. Treason is an actual crime, that the state has to prove within the requirements of the constitution. That’s entirely different than declaring opposition press an “enemy of the state,” as you propose. That’s absolutely the fascist playbook — look at what fascist or other authoritarians do with the press. They seize opposition press, imprison opposition press and, for bonus points in Russia, defenestrate the press. And their rationale is “enemy of the state.”

The essence of fascism is putting loyalty to the state ahead of the freedom of the citizens. When you start throwing around the concept of enemy of the state, that’s what you’re feeding into.

I’m not saying don’t criticize Fox. If there are legal grounds to take action against Fox, have at it. Boycott advertisers. Hit the streets. Whatever. But when you start throwing around “enemy of the state,” you’re playing with dynamite.

[Gadianton]

So why has Fox News, especially their opinion evening programing that is the most popular, made hyper-partisanship king to the point of they would rather see Western Liberal Democracy in flames than acknowledge real threats if they are from the supposed right? Is it tolerable still after an insurrection and what we are seeing with Trump post-office?

For those a notch or two down from Alex, it's just not real enough. Not sure how much feedback would be required to make it real.

[Vēritās]

That doesn't logically follow. So you're saying there can be no such thing as actual enemies of the state, right? If they exist, we're supposed to just ignore them or at least not mention them?


"“I, ________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and of the State of ______ against all enemies, foreign and domestic;"

Sound familiar? It wasn't written by Hitler.

Nothing you said here follows from what I said. I said “branding your political opponents” with special emphasis on the press. Treason is an actual crime, that the state has to prove within the requirements of the constitution. That’s entirely different than declaring opposition press an “enemy of the state,” as you propose. That’s absolutely the fascist playbook — look at what fascist or other authoritarians do with the press. They seize opposition press, imprison opposition press and, for bonus points in Russia, defenestrate the press. And their rationale is “enemy of the state.”

The essence of fascism is putting loyalty to the state ahead of the freedom of the citizens. When you start throwing around the concept of enemy of the state, that’s what you’re feeding into.

I’m not saying don’t criticize Fox. If there are legal grounds to take action against Fox, have at it. Boycott advertisers. Hit the streets. Whatever. But when you start throwing around “enemy of the state,” you’re playing with dynamite.

There is no such "essence" in my post, as my concern is exactly that. The freedoms we have now, which are gradually being stripped away because of the power of FOX News propaganda efforts. As such, they are effectively the ENEMY OF AMERICA. The ENEMY of Democracy. Yes, I stand by it. FOX is undermining it all in an effort to turn America into a one party system and an autocratic state. Just look at the way they fawned over Trump in everything he did, no matter how obviously autocratic his actions were. Any attempt to question or criticize him was immediately and fiercely defended by FOX News army of lying zealots who care nothing about American Democracy, they only care about retaining power for their preferred political party so it can dictate to Americans what they can read in school, what they can claim to be in terms of gender, who they can marry, whether they can adopt, whether they can have control of their own bodies, etc. Please, don't tell me you don't see the many ways FOX News has been an enemy of Democracy.

"Enemy of the state" was just a phrase I chose probably because I had just watched that Gene Hackman movie a few hours earlier and it seemed apt.