What is fascism?
- Thread starter Charlie Marlow_rivals363743
- Start date
- Status
By the book it is any combination of state and industry (as an example it would be obama's collusion with banks, the clinton's historical collusion with big donors, or the right wing conjoinment with the military industrial complex).
I think this is correct to a point. But fascism includes as well an authoritarianism (usually centered in one leader), a hyper nationalism, a far-right concept of tradition and culture, and a hatred of modernity
No, that is the book definition. In modern culture, the democrats are every bit as fascist by definition as the republicans.
In some ways more so because they are in denial.
You are only correct if the "Right wing" does not include the people who want actual smaller government and not the parody that exists in the modern "right wing"
In some ways more so because they are in denial.
You are only correct if the "Right wing" does not include the people who want actual smaller government and not the parody that exists in the modern "right wing"
Fascism is a nationalist authoritarian flavor of socialism.
Fascism is a repressive left wing collectivist ideology.
Fascism allows limited private ownership of property that is highly regulated by the state.
Fascists along with their close cousins the communist are the most proficient mass murderers in human history.
Fascism is incompatible with individual dignity or liberty.
Go Blue!
Fascism is a repressive left wing collectivist ideology.
Fascism allows limited private ownership of property that is highly regulated by the state.
Fascists along with their close cousins the communist are the most proficient mass murderers in human history.
Fascism is incompatible with individual dignity or liberty.
Go Blue!
Fascism is nothing like anything we have seen in this country's history, regardless of whatever baloney you have heard from a politician or talking head.
We enjoy a remarkable level of freedom in this country, and the only real threat to it is the guy calling everybody fascist.
We enjoy a remarkable level of freedom in this country, and the only real threat to it is the guy calling everybody fascist.
You don't know what you are talking about. At all. Fascism was/is directly opposed to communism.
From Wikipedia:
Fascism is a form of radical authoritarianism nationalism that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe, influenced by national syndicalism. Fascism originated in Italy during World War I and spread to other European countries. Fascism opposes liberalism, Marxism and anarchism and is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left-right sprectrum.
If I have it correctly, fascism is a relative of fascist.
And many of us are aware that fascists are special breed of pig.
Some fascist pigs get slaughtered because bacon is good.
So it is only rational that fascism is the practice and principles behind making bacon.
And many of us are aware that fascists are special breed of pig.
Some fascist pigs get slaughtered because bacon is good.
So it is only rational that fascism is the practice and principles behind making bacon.
And this is incorrect and doesn't make sense at all despite the attempt to make comservatives fascists today. Fascism is government control, and has nothing to do with limited government which is the true right side of the spectrum.
The original and correct spectrum is a yardstick of government power, not partisan politics. On the far left is tyranny, or total government power, and on the far right is anarchy, or zero government power. America needs to lie in the balanced center. Fascism, along with communism and socialism, dictators etc. finds itself on the left half of the spectrum, further left than socialism but close to communism since it is a system which requires a lot of government power and control.
By definition, fascism is a form of socialism, with the state owning or controlling the major means of production. It is more nationalist than communism and this has led liberal scholars to equate it with conservatives, which is false. Liberals want conservatives to be psycho fascists although it's incorrect to label them as such as their values are in such strong disagreement with the centralized power and limitation of liberties that fascism necessitates. It's too cute and easy to say "well communism is the liberal crazy, so fascism is then the conservative crazy". It just doesn't make sense when you consider what fascism entails. It also must be considered that some communist leaders are idolized by some on the "left" while still considering their flaws, while no fascist leader has ever been idolized by conservatives (or liberals).
I'm not saying that liberals are fascists, nor should anybody. But to put them on the right end of the spectrum or align them with conservatives is simply false, partisan name calling and plain ignorant. It's nothing more than dirty name calling to try to demean a political opponent or idea.
From Webster: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
The Wikipedia opinion "is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left-right spectrum" is just Wikipedia being Wikipedia. Last time I checked, people on the right do not advocate a centralized, autocratic government - far from it.
Can it please be gameday soon?
It's important to note that fascism and communism are actually related philosophies. Mussolini had been the editor of a communist newspaper prior to embracing fascism and the national syndicalism mentioned in the Wikipedia entry was one of the many philosophies, along with communism, that existed under the umbrella of 19th century socialism. It would be accurate to consider communism and fascism the way we would have looked at Catholicism and Protestantism in early modern Europe or Sunni and Shia Islam. Economically fascism is vehemently opposed to capitalism, it creates cartels of state aligned industries. It strives for autarky. New Deal America resembled a textbook fascist economy in a number of ways.
Politically and culturally Fascism is based on ideas of regeneration through strength, the state existing as the embodiment of nation, that the nation and its vitality are the ultimate purpose of the individual and the the people owe unquestioning obedience to political authority. Fascism is considered a right wing philosophy because it explicitly rejects liberal notions of equality and individual rights. It is certainly true that Communism creates a totalitarianism every bit as brutal as Fascism if not more so, but Communist theory holds that ultimately the state serves the individual. Obviously this is BS, Communism is evil at its core, but its theoretical ends make it a left wing ideology per traditional classifications.
Conservatism is not limited government. The word you are looking for is libertarian.
And before you all get your panties in a bunch... communism and fascism are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. What we traditionally consider liberal/conservative are very close together in the center of this political spectrum. It's all all about the role of government. Modern Democratic/Republican versions of this are not that different other than the outward politics.
Nope. That is what you'd like it to be. That is not what it is.
Nope. That is what you'd like it to be. That is not what it is.
That sounds good - but at the end of the day, all fascists, dictators, communists, socialists - anyone who has watched over massive killings of their own citizens - believe in one simple concept; big government and government control. So we can call it all the nice little names we want, but corrupt leaders need government control to force their unpopular ideas upon the citizens.
Did they believe in more or less government control?Think about these 2 birds.
More vs. less government is not a left/right thing, it's an authoritarian/anti-authoritarian thing. It is possible to be an authoritarian or anti-authoritarian and be on either side of the left/right divide. Furthermore, it's important not to impose a modern American understandings of left and right on a pre WWII European phenomenon. Per traditional European classifications Fascism is accurately held to be a right wing movement (with common ancestors with left wing movements.)
Authoritarianism and socialism don't go hand in hand no matter how you wish it was so. Socialism and massive killings? C'mon... tell me you went to school and not just regurgitated what you thought was the truth.
Looks like we are going to have to agree to disagree. Way to throw the adult panty line out there. And you're right, it is all about the role of government. In both communism and fascism, the government plays a very very large role, much larger than any conservative would want.
P.s. Your last sentence confirms what I said about confusing conservatism with today's gop rinos.
Fascism is an authoritarian form of government. Unlike communism it allows for private property and private ownership of business, but the state exerts unchecked power over the people. I think including racial and other ideologies into the definition distorts the basic characteristics of fascism and begins to blend in Nazism.
It depends how you define socialism. Modern social democracies like those in Northern Europe hardly resemble traditional socialist states. While there are socialized sectors of the economy, it is not the case that all of the "commanding heights" of the economy are state owned. Their economies are, on the whole, less regulated than the economy of the United States. They have high taxes, low regulations and generous welfare states. I don't think the USA should pursue the Northern European model (though I would like a less intrusive regulatory state) but Sweden is a far cry from Venezuela which more closely resembles a traditional socialist model. So, if you go through the socialist spectrum you get a more or less workable model like Northern Europe, an economically dysfunctional model that isn't authoritarian, like 1970s Sweden or the UK or contemporary Greece, or a totalitarian nightmare state like the USSR, Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia or what is probably going to manifest itself in Venezuela soon. The more a model rejects private property and voluntary commerce and contract the more it will tend to authoritarianism and totalitarianism.
The traditional left-right spectrum has generally been replaced with a 2x2 grid with social freedoms on one axis and economic freedoms on the other. The resulting boxes are frequently labeled libertarian (high social and economic freedom), conservative capitalism (low social freedom, high economic freedom, socialism (high social freedom, low economic freedom) and communism (low social and economic freedom). Both Nazi Germany and the USSR often fall in the communist square, with Germany closer the the center economic line.
He was an Italian guy commanding a group called the Blackshirts.
I should have used the word death instead of killing. Check out Venezuela. Research what Castro started as before he adopted Communism.
Facism would be Obama building a national army with aims that match his, whether they are truly nationalist doesn't matter. He would then destroy opposition through murder and imprisonment, and pick a minority group to blame national problems on, and continue to persecute that group, using its poverty and weakness, and disease as a scapegoat for the predictable problems that arise from centralized power. Nearly every country has a fascist element, with a militant arm. Nationalism is in the eye of the beholder, but generally the group wants to see power consolidated into one person, and that person then represents the nation. Our democracy is apathetic, and lazy, obese, and uneducated but the people still choose leaders, and their is plenty of freedom to learn all one needs to know about the nations leaders. The repubs have thrown 20-30 candidates at the democrats over the last decade, the poor quality of candidates speaks about the party not to a facist reality in america, the stagnancy, uninspired leadership, and collusion between money and votes is a standard of democracy.
Not really. There's a lot of different paradigms. The problem I have is individuals using X to advance their cause de jour.
You forgot sexist. And bully.
On an unrelated note, in my limited interweb experience, the person getting a foot broke off in them in an argument can be easily identified as they are typically the first to invoke the name "hitler" or call the person they are arguing with a fascist.
Last edited:
... in the simplest terms, in the most convenient definitions... fascism is the antithesis of 1980's teen movies.
"Not that I condone fascism; or any ism for that matter. Isms, in my opinion, are not good. A person should not believe in an ism, he should believe in himself. I quote John Lennon, “I don’t believe in ‘Beatles’, I just believe in me.” Good point there. After all, he was the Walrus. I could be the Walrus, I’d still have to bum rides off of people." - Ferris Bueller
"Not that I condone fascism; or any ism for that matter. Isms, in my opinion, are not good. A person should not believe in an ism, he should believe in himself. I quote John Lennon, “I don’t believe in ‘Beatles’, I just believe in me.” Good point there. After all, he was the Walrus. I could be the Walrus, I’d still have to bum rides off of people." - Ferris Bueller
Political scientists have a difficult time defining fascism. Thus, the definition is fluid. Kind of like in my field, trying to define the word "religion". Not as easy as you think.
The common denominator does seem to be some form of authoritarian government with very oppressive practices, a strong control over industry, an elevation of nation and ethnicity/race over others, and a conservative approach to culture.
Do not confuse this right wing element with modern "limited government" conservatives. Historically, especially in Europe, right wing movements have favored authoritarian government. Think of the czars and Kaiser, and Franco, and the "sovereignty" of the monarch. Revolutionary movements that opposed such governments tended to be left wing.
And yes, left wing movements can also be authoritarian. But for whatever reason, historians and political science types have tended to use the term "totalitarian" for these movements. Think Stalin and Mao.
The common denominator does seem to be some form of authoritarian government with very oppressive practices, a strong control over industry, an elevation of nation and ethnicity/race over others, and a conservative approach to culture.
Do not confuse this right wing element with modern "limited government" conservatives. Historically, especially in Europe, right wing movements have favored authoritarian government. Think of the czars and Kaiser, and Franco, and the "sovereignty" of the monarch. Revolutionary movements that opposed such governments tended to be left wing.
And yes, left wing movements can also be authoritarian. But for whatever reason, historians and political science types have tended to use the term "totalitarian" for these movements. Think Stalin and Mao.
In my opinion, this is worth your time to watch.
The authoritarian power here, is the US Federal Reserve.
America: Freedom to Fascism
The authoritarian power here, is the US Federal Reserve.
America: Freedom to Fascism
Last edited:
- Status