Sorry for not engaging with the content, but please add paragraph breaks. kthx

Tick populations explode because tick hunting animals like porcupines and voles need tall grass to avoid being hunted themselves. And because cars run them over and cats murder them.

Nice, saves money on rat poison.

Click the “paywall” link in the post body.

Okay. Let’s go through Umberto Eco’s checklist for recognizing fascism.

The cult of tradition", characterized by cultural syncretism, even at the risk of internal contradiction. When all truth has already been revealed by tradition, no new learning can occur, only further interpretation and refinement.

True for lawn maintenance. Home Owner Associations often rigorously pin down the expected state of lawns and do not allow changes to procedure. Lawns derive from English manor houses and colonial homesteading. NIMBY-ism, grandfathered-in rights, always looking back to what people have earned because of how things used to be.

“The rejection of modernism”, which views the rationalistic development of Western culture since the Enlightenment as a descent into depravity. Eco distinguishes this from a rejection of superficial technological advancement, as many fascist regimes cite their industrial potency as proof of the vitality of their system.

True for lawn maintenance. Modern concepts like biodiversity, mulching, avoiding soil pollution, etc. are woke disruptions to the right to have an English manor-style grassy desert. Superficial technological advancement in the form of lawn robots and high-tech mowers is allowed.

“The cult of action for action’s sake”, which dictates that action is of value in itself and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science.

True for lawn maintenance. Mowing the lawn is treated like an inherent virtue and privilege. Hiring people to spend their entire lives making lawns boring environmental catastrophes is considered a reasonable way to spend time. And again, scientific concepts like biodiversity, water shortages, and avoiding soil pollution are hated because it interferes with the right to have a pointless symbol of pointless labor.

“Disagreement is treason” – fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith.

True for lawn maintenance. Whether through HOAs or through simple social pressure from neighbors, it is considered treason against the neighborhood not to make your lawn look dead. With regards to the lawn itself, people are willing to spend a lot of money to hammer their soil into submission.

“Fear of difference”, which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate, often in the form of racism or an appeal against foreigners and immigrants.

True for lawn maintenance. On top of viewing it as social treason, those with lawns will typically be terrified that an unkempt plot of land will harbor all manner of dangerous pests that could spread across the neighborhood. Every infestation will be blamed on the non-lawn, regardless of justification. With regards to the lawn itself, it is always made homogeneous both internally and with respect to the neighborhood.

“Appeal to a frustrated middle class”, fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups.

True for lawn maintenance. Unkempt lawns will be seen as a blight on the neighborhood, lowering property values, and being a signal of incoming undesirables. With regards to the lawn itself, weeds and most animals are treated like a dangerous infectant to be removed out of fear.

“Obsession with a plot” and the hyping-up of an enemy threat. This often combines an appeal to xenophobia with a fear of disloyalty and sabotage from marginalized groups living within the society. Eco also cites Pat Robertson’s book The New World Order as a prominent example of a plot obsession.

True for lawn maintenance. Unkempt lawns are often tied to ideological threats - hippies, commies, woke liberals, etc. - and folded into general conservative xenophobia. With regards to the lawn itself, obsession with weeds that are hard to root out.

Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as “at the same time too strong and too weak”. On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.

True for lawn maintenance. Those with unkempt lawns are simultaneously lazy and attempting to destroy the fiber of the neighborhood. Weeds are simultaneously unfit for keeping the lawn healthy and so suited for the environment that they’re a constant threat.

“Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy” because “life is permanent warfare” – there must always be an enemy to fight. Both fascist Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini worked first to organize and clean up their respective countries and then build the war machines that they later intended to and did use, despite Germany being under restrictions of the Versailles treaty to not build a military force. This principle leads to a fundamental contradiction within fascism: the incompatibility of ultimate triumph with perpetual war.

True for lawn maintenance. Lawns as a concept exist for the sake of fighting weeds forever. Giving gardens any shape that doesn’t involve constant maintenance is frowned upon.

“Contempt for the weak”, which is uncomfortably married to a chauvinistic popular elitism, in which every member of society is superior to outsiders by virtue of belonging to the in-group. Eco sees in these attitudes the root of a deep tension in the fundamentally hierarchical structure of fascist polities, as they encourage leaders to despise their underlings, up to the ultimate leader, who holds the whole country in contempt for having allowed him to overtake it by force.

True for lawn maintenance. Those who can’t maintain their lawns are treated with contempt, regardless of why. They should hire a gardener if they can’t do it themselves, and if they can’t afford it then they are gross and lower class. With regard to the lawn itself, nature is subjugated even as that subjugation causes ecocide and tremendous long-term damage to society. Anything that could live on the lawn is beneath notice even if it costs us.

“Everybody is educated to become a hero”, which leads to the embrace of a cult of death. As Eco observes, “[t]he Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.”

I honestly think Eco is being a bit sexist here with his use of “everybody”. In fascism, women are not educated to become heroes and die, they are trained to be heroes by producing many sons, metaphorically ‘dying’ by subjugating themselves to their husband, their culture, and their state. Likewise, in lawn maintenance, people aren’t trained to die per se, but to treat their unpaid pointless labor as a necessary submission to the public good. Thus, gardeners also “die” metaphorically for the sake of their neighborhood, their culture, and their state.

“Machismo”, which sublimates the difficult work of permanent war and heroism into the sexual sphere. Fascists thus hold “both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality”.

This is a specific expression of fascism in the field of sexuality, just like lawns are a specific expression of fascism in the field of gardening. Sometimes a hoe is just a hoe.

“Selective populism” – the people, conceived monolithically, have a common will, distinct from and superior to the viewpoint of any individual. As no mass of people can ever be truly unanimous, the leader holds himself out as the interpreter of the popular will (though truly he alone dictates it). Fascists use this concept to delegitimize democratic institutions they accuse of “no longer represent[ing] the voice of the people”.

True for lawn maintenance. Lawns are treated as inherently American, regardless of the individual opinions of those who would rather have unkempt lawns. With regards to lawn maintenance, someone who mows the lawn will typically conceive of a lawn as “healthy” if it meets the predefined standard, regardless of the actual health of the plants or the environment.

“Newspeak” – fascism employs and promotes an impoverished vocabulary in order to limit critical reasoning.

A fait accompli in lawn maintenance. Before the industrial revolution, home gardens used to be a lot better understood and a lot better kept by the general population. Gardeners had tons of knowledge - almanacs, oral traditions, hands-on experience, etc. Over the course of the 20th century, the rise of lawns and the commodification of nutrition lead to garden maintenance simplifying to “eliminate everything that isn’t grass”.

So yeah, the cultural concept of lawn maintenance is fascist, both with regards to society and with regards to nature.

It’s strictly less work to let empty land become wild and have a diversity of flora and fauna. Why would someone spend dozens of hours per month keeping a lawn pristine just because they bought a house with empty land around it?

A) They actively prefer a lawn that nothing can live in over a space where unknown and unvetted species dwell. Your argument is invalid.

B) They would get fined or ostracized if they do not keep the lawn dead. Their HOA/neighborhood is fascist, and they choose to submit themselves to fascism rather than look for a house that isn’t located in a fascist neighborhood. Your argument may be valid if they didn’t have a reachable alternative, but OP still has a point that the lawn is dead because of fascistic demands.

Ah yes, the C bugs in the kernel libraries. We’ve all seen them.

If the EU won’t consider themselves to be at war when the part of the EU defensive pact zone that is called Greenland is invaded, they’re losing all credibility both internally and externally. Why would the EU defend Finland or the Baltics or Cyprus? Why would the EU organize against foreign powers funding violent rebellions inside EU territory (similar to how Russia funded Transnistria or the US funded the contras in Nicaragua)?

There is no better red line for France to launch their nukes than the invasion of Greenland. As seen with Russia, any grace given to cult of personality dictators only emboldens them and their worshipers. The only fair response to madman theory is to call the ‘insane’ administration’s bluff and let the people who don’t want them and their families to become radioactive piles of ash take the responsibility of defying insane orders.