08-20-2017, 12:37 PM
(08-19-2017, 03:03 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(08-18-2017, 01:57 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:(08-18-2017, 06:55 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: Not only that any Reich formation would have to take place in Germany rather than the US or Russia. Otherwise using the "reich" label even for propaganda purposes becomes absurd.
As "noway" reminds us, "Reich" simply means "realm". As a remarkable coincidence, the German name for the country to the south and west is "Frankreich", even though France has largely been a Republic since 1792. The official name for Austria is Republik Österreich, even if Austria has not been a monarchy since 1918. The Weimar Republic heavily used the word "Reich" to describe itself.
I occasional bump into descriptions of eras in France following the naming convention. If one talks of the Third Republic or Second Empire, one is defining an era pretty well. In the United States one can talk of the colonial era, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution breaking things up, but we've been under the Constitution for so much of our modern history that it isn't as convenient or pertinent.
If you understand the numbered reich convention that way, labeling alliances well away from Germany as reichs becomes way questionable.
"Fourth Reich" references have usually been in reference to any possibility of a dictatorial, right-wing, and probably expansionist Germany. Germans have learned their lesson well. America is clearly in more danger of a fascistic government (indeed, the current President has many characteristics of a fascist and acts more like a dictator than any prior President). Reich does not refer to any country other than Germany now.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.