As an Argentinian, you should be well familiar that your country took in scores of actual fascists...
Perhaps he's arguing from a position of greater experience recognizing fascism as opposed to superiority of non-fascism, as you indicate. He admires America, and now he does less so. Exactly what the historical dictatorships in Argentina have to do with his admiration of America is unclear to me.
Calling America "borderline fascistic" because private companies aren't allowed to harbor illegally obtained diplomatic documents is less an accurate characterization of the United States than it is a display that you have little or no understanding of what fascism is.
And yet, this is not a situation where private companies are being prohibited from harboring illegally obtained diplomatic documents. Both because Amazon wasn't prohibited, they voluntarily (though perhaps with unknown or unspoken and inappropriate pressure) stopped their service from hosting documents and because there is ample historical data to indicate the documents were not illegally obtained by Wikileaks. So who is presenting the less accurate characterization, exactly?
Comments
As an Argentinian, you should be well familiar that your country took in scores of actual fascists...
Perhaps he's arguing from a position of greater experience recognizing fascism as opposed to superiority of non-fascism, as you indicate. He admires America, and now he does less so. Exactly what the historical dictatorships in Argentina have to do with his admiration of America is unclear to me.
Calling America "borderline fascistic" because private companies aren't allowed to harbor illegally obtained diplomatic documents is less an accurate characterization of the United States than it is a display that you have little or no understanding of what fascism is.
And yet, this is not a situation where private companies are being prohibited from harboring illegally obtained diplomatic documents. Both because Amazon wasn't prohibited, they voluntarily (though perhaps with unknown or unspoken and inappropriate pressure) stopped their service from hosting documents and because there is ample historical data to indicate the documents were not illegally obtained by Wikileaks. So who is presenting the less accurate characterization, exactly?