>right. but chip says that they clerical fascists hell bent on taking
>over the world. this policy would mean their inevitable rise to
>power once we stop protecting monarchies and other nasty regimes,
>no? and, accordingly, yoshie says that the left must rise up against
>fascist states. so... why pursue a policy sure to yield a fascist
>state with control of a major amount of oil and, thus, a major
>amount of power in the world and, clearly, an ability to take over
>the world or at least try, if they so choose.
>
>now, i don't necess. buy this scenario, but if you take chip and
>yoshie seriously, then i'm left scratching my head as to how such
>policies are going to foster, in the short-term, governments that
>won't be taken over by fascistic forces who are really just
>interested in their own kind of capitalist regime.
I think it's kind of reckless to call people fascists who don't have a modern state and a giant industrial machine behind them. The word should mean something more than icky and repressive.
Doug