>Second, I'm not saying the terms you use have no meaning. I'm questioning
>whether or not your use of them has anything but taxonomic function at
>conferences about clerical fascism--sure, that's rather ungenerous, but
>look at what you yourself have just written. Classify o.k. But then use
>them in sufficient context and use them to explain the phenomena they
>describe (more on this at another time).
i would like to reiterate what charles has said here. that's what i have a problem with. the term clerical fascism is descriptive. what's lacking from what i've seen is an attempt to explain fascism. i started to write something a bout this when perelman brought up the economic angle but figured it would be like arguing with a vegetarian about how to grill a steak.