Fascism: Good or Bad?

[Grenartia]

Good. Certainly not as good as National Socialism, but still good.

How's it feel to be the ideological equivalent of a meth addict?

[Distruzio]

The edge. It cuts so good.

Coming from a "Libertarian Monarchist."

Oooo tu qoque. Nice.

[Grenartia]

Coming from a "Libertarian Monarchist."

Oooo tu qoque. Nice.

Then again, fascists aren't generally known for their debating prowess. Maybe because the ones that bother to be intellectually honest learn how shitty it is and switch to something less stupid.

[Volnotova]

...
Jews tend to be a majority/high in number with the Plutocratic system and Comunist cells, which means they more ften then not oppose Nationalist Causes.

The Only Fascist state where antisemitism would be bad, would be if Israel became a Fascist state.

...

Wow, just wow.

Are you somehow implying it would be better to just kick us all out (whatever country it might be) and deport us all to Israel or something?

Together with your whole "You mean the crushing of dissent, all revolutions do this but interesting that you place it as a virtue." in reference to somebody pointing out Fascism's genocidal nature really makes me wonder what you are hinting at.

[Yankeesse]

Good. Certainly not as good as National Socialism, but still good.

How's it feel to be the ideological equivalent of a meth addict?

I don't know you tell me.

Egoism is the believe that each person has but one ultimate aim: their own welfare. This allows for action that fails to maximize perceived self-interest, but rules out the sort of behavior psychological egoists like to target — such as altruistic behavior or motivation by thoughts of duty alone. It allows for weakness of will, since in weakness of will cases I am still aiming at my own welfare; I am weak in that I do not act as I aim. And it allows for aiming at things other than one's welfare, such as helping others, where these things are a means to one's welfare.

No altruism? Yep. Exactly as I said, shitty ideology.

Egoism is anti-Fascist.

I can see how this is interpreted as that particular fallacy. But I don't think it is. Romania, as you said, was a Nazi puppet state, and the Nazis were National Socialists. National Socialists aren't Fascists; that's why they call themselves National Socialists.

We aren't going to get very far in this discussion, as I can only state that putting down industrial workers and uplifting peasants doesn't seem very Fascist to me.

First off How was Romania a puppet state?

Also National Socialism is Fascism but Fascism isn't equitable to National Socialism. Nation Socialism is a branch of Fascism.

Being a former socialist, this sounds hella familiar

It really isn't that different. Hence "National Socialism." It's called that because it originally was intended to be a form of socialism. But then the racial crap kind of took over.

"Racial Crap"?
The desire to achieve racial purity and health is a central Tenant of National Socialism, it's the main thing that makes it distinct from Fascism.

God the only thing worse than an antifa is an "anti-Racist" National Socialist.

[Yankeesse]

...
Jews tend to be a majority/high in number with the Plutocratic system and Comunist cells, which means they more ften then not oppose Nationalist Causes.

The Only Fascist state where antisemitism would be bad, would be if Israel became a Fascist state.

...

Wow, just wow.

Are you somehow implying it would be better to just kick us all out (whatever country it might be) and deport us all to Israel or something?

Why wouldn't it be? Isn't that the whole justification for Israels existance? That the Jews should have their own homeland?

Together with your whole "You mean the crushing of dissent, all revolutions do this but interesting that you place it as a virtue." in reference to somebody pointing out Fascism's genocidal nature really makes me wonder what you are hinting at.

Oh jeez I can't imagine what you are hinting at.

"Oy vey What a holocaust, look guys i am being holocausted."

Im talking about the violence and reppression that occurs after any revolution whether it be Liberal, Reactionary, Socialist or Fascist.

Not some Fearmongering nonsense.

[Grenartia]

How's it feel to be the ideological equivalent of a meth addict?

1. I don't know you tell me.

No altruism? Yep. Exactly as I said, shitty ideology.

2. Egoism is anti-Fascist.

I can see how this is interpreted as that particular fallacy. But I don't think it is. Romania, as you said, was a Nazi puppet state, and the Nazis were National Socialists. National Socialists aren't Fascists; that's why they call themselves National Socialists.

We aren't going to get very far in this discussion, as I can only state that putting down industrial workers and uplifting peasants doesn't seem very Fascist to me.

First off How was Romania a puppet state?

Also National Socialism is Fascism but Fascism isn't equitable to National Socialism. Nation Socialism is a branch of Fascism.

It really isn't that different. Hence "National Socialism." It's called that because it originally was intended to be a form of socialism. But then the racial crap kind of took over.

"Racial Crap"?
The desire to achieve racial purity and health is a central Tenant of National Socialism, it's the main thing that makes it distinct from Fascism.

God the only thing worse than an antifa is an "anti-Racist" National Socialist.

1. Well, my ideology doesn't hold an iron grip over me and prevent me from critically thinking. So its not like being addicted to meth.

2. I realize that. And yet its still a shitty ideology. Not quite as shitty as Fascism/Stalinism/Nazism (and the differences between the three are cosmetic only), but still pretty shitty.

[The Grey Wolf]

How's it feel to be the ideological equivalent of a meth addict?

I don't know you tell me.

No altruism? Yep. Exactly as I said, shitty ideology.

Egoism is anti-Fascist.

I can see how this is interpreted as that particular fallacy. But I don't think it is. Romania, as you said, was a Nazi puppet state, and the Nazis were National Socialists. National Socialists aren't Fascists; that's why they call themselves National Socialists.

We aren't going to get very far in this discussion, as I can only state that putting down industrial workers and uplifting peasants doesn't seem very Fascist to me.

First off How was Romania a puppet state?

Also National Socialism is Fascism but Fascism isn't equitable to National Socialism. Nation Socialism is a branch of Fascism.

It really isn't that different. Hence "National Socialism." It's called that because it originally was intended to be a form of socialism. But then the racial crap kind of took over.

"Racial Crap"?
The desire to achieve racial purity and health is a central Tenant of National Socialism, it's the main thing that makes it distinct from Fascism.

God the only thing worse than an antifa is an "anti-Racist" National Socialist.

^ This.

[Yankeesse]

1. I don't know you tell me.


2. Egoism is anti-Fascist.



First off How was Romania a puppet state?

Also National Socialism is Fascism but Fascism isn't equitable to National Socialism. Nation Socialism is a branch of Fascism.



"Racial Crap"?
The desire to achieve racial purity and health is a central Tenant of National Socialism, it's the main thing that makes it distinct from Fascism.

God the only thing worse than an antifa is an "anti-Racist" National Socialist.

1. Well, my ideology doesn't hold an iron grip over me and prevent me from critically thinking. So its not like being addicted to meth.

2. I realize that. And yet its still a shitty ideology. Not quite as shitty as Fascism/Stalinism/Nazism (and the differences between the three are cosmetic only), but still pretty shitty.

1. >Implying mine does, Crtitical thinking and intellectuall honesty is what led me to fascism, I didn't just look at some prussian marches , Roman salutes and go "Gee wiz that looks cool I am so a Fascist!"

2. The differance between National Socialism/Fascism and Stalinism are significant, the only things they share are Nationalism , Authoritarianism and Militarism but countless societies have held these traits that weren't Fascism.

[The Grey Wolf]

1. I don't know you tell me.


2. Egoism is anti-Fascist.



First off How was Romania a puppet state?

Also National Socialism is Fascism but Fascism isn't equitable to National Socialism. Nation Socialism is a branch of Fascism.



"Racial Crap"?
The desire to achieve racial purity and health is a central Tenant of National Socialism, it's the main thing that makes it distinct from Fascism.

God the only thing worse than an antifa is an "anti-Racist" National Socialist.

1. Well, my ideology doesn't hold an iron grip over me and prevent me from critically thinking. So its not like being addicted to meth.

2. I realize that. And yet its still a shitty ideology. Not quite as shitty as Fascism/Stalinism/Nazism (and the differences between the three are cosmetic only), but still pretty shitty.

1. You just love stereotypes, eh? No Fascist government has been against critical thinking. They've been against the Communist, who want to stop critical thinking. Stop bullshitting.

2. And this is how we know that you know nothing about what you're talking about. There are HUGE differences between Nazism and Stalinism, primarily that the Nazis were okay with free enterprise. Same with Fascism. Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were way more freer for the businessman than in Soviet Russia.

[Grenartia]

1. Well, my ideology doesn't hold an iron grip over me and prevent me from critically thinking. So its not like being addicted to meth.

2. I realize that. And yet its still a shitty ideology. Not quite as shitty as Fascism/Stalinism/Nazism (and the differences between the three are cosmetic only), but still pretty shitty.

1. >Implying mine does, Crtitical thinking and intellectuall honesty is what led me to fascism, I didn't just look at some prussian marches , Roman salutes and go "Gee wiz that looks cool I am so a Fascist!"

2. The differance between National Socialism/Fascism and Stalinism are significant, the only things they share are Nationalism , Authoritarianism and Militarism but countless societies have held these traits that weren't Fascism.

1. I've never met a fascist that didn't fail to think critically on some level. After all, any thinking person can reason out that fascism is an inherently self-destructive ideology (I've analyzed how it happens earlier in the thread), and history has proven that it cannot succeed.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism

[Grenartia]

1. Well, my ideology doesn't hold an iron grip over me and prevent me from critically thinking. So its not like being addicted to meth.

2. I realize that. And yet its still a shitty ideology. Not quite as shitty as Fascism/Stalinism/Nazism (and the differences between the three are cosmetic only), but still pretty shitty.

1. You just love stereotypes, eh? No Fascist government has been against critical thinking. They've been against the Communist, who want to stop critical thinking. Stop bullshitting.

2. And this is how we know that you know nothing about what you're talking about. There are HUGE differences between Nazism and Stalinism, primarily that the Nazis were okay with free enterprise. Same with Fascism. Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were way more freer for the businessman than in Soviet Russia.

1. Yes, they have. Or else they wouldn't have suppressed criticism of the government and other forms of free speech. They realized that critical thinking was a threat to their hold on power, and instead of allowing and encouraging it, and giving the people a voice in their government, like all the democratic governments, they became paranoid, much like somebody who's taken too much LSD, and suppressed all criticism and input, thus providing the very justification for the anti-government actions they were so paranoid about (self-fulfilling prophecy). To say nothing of the blatant lies in most of the propoganda. Of course, the Soviet-backed states and USSR itself did the same thing.

2. See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism And this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison ... and_Nazism

[Prussia-Steinbach]

1. I've never met a fascist that didn't fail to think critically on some level.

Out of curiosity, at what point do I cease thinking critically?

(I'm not going to get mad at anything you say and act as if it's flaming. I'm asking for your input, no matter how critical.)

[Grenartia]

1. I've never met a fascist that didn't fail to think critically on some level.

Out of curiosity, at what point do I cease thinking critically?

(I'm not going to get mad at anything you say and act as if it's flaming. I'm asking for your input, no matter how critical.)

When you thought that an ideology that glorifies the worst aspects of humanity, and seeks to dehumanize everybody under its control was a good thing.

[Yankeesse]

1. >Implying mine does, Crtitical thinking and intellectuall honesty is what led me to fascism, I didn't just look at some prussian marches , Roman salutes and go "Gee wiz that looks cool I am so a Fascist!"

2. The differance between National Socialism/Fascism and Stalinism are significant, the only things they share are Nationalism , Authoritarianism and Militarism but countless societies have held these traits that weren't Fascism.

1. I've never met a fascist that didn't fail to think critically on some level. After all, any thinking person can reason out that fascism is an inherently self-destructive ideology (I've analyzed how it happens earlier in the thread), and history has proven that it cannot succeed.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism

1. Huh? "Fascism is wrong because anyone with critical thinking proves it's wrong therefore if your a fascist you lack critical thinking"

Well gee what a a rock solid Circular argument.

2. I don't care what some weak willed commies want to make an excuse for things that come about in communists regimes that they don't like.

So they can seperate themselves from criticism by saying " Well he wasn't a "true Comunist".

Stalin was an Authoritarian Socialist and pragmatist and because of this he managed to empower Russia from it's slump since the Revolution.

He didn't allow unworkable ideals in Communism to drive Russia into the Ground.

But these things don't make a Fascist.

1. You just love stereotypes, eh? No Fascist government has been against critical thinking. They've been against the Communist, who want to stop critical thinking. Stop bullshitting.

2. And this is how we know that you know nothing about what you're talking about. There are HUGE differences between Nazism and Stalinism, primarily that the Nazis were okay with free enterprise. Same with Fascism. Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were way more freer for the businessman than in Soviet Russia.

1. Yes, they have. Or else they wouldn't have suppressed criticism of the government and other forms of free speech. They realized that critical thinking was a threat to their hold on power, and instead of allowing and encouraging it, and giving the people a voice in their government, like all the democratic governments, they became paranoid, much like somebody who's taken too much LSD, and suppressed all criticism and input, thus providing the very justification for the anti-government actions they were so paranoid about (self-fulfilling prophecy). To say nothing of the blatant lies in most of the propoganda. Of course, the Soviet-backed states and USSR itself did the same thing.

1. From The Fascist Government of Italy authored byHerbert W. Schneider.

"The fascist motto, "We welcome criticism but not opposition,' is not a mere sophism but an important distinction. General opposition to the regime continues to be crushed whenever it shows its head, but detailed criticism goes on daily to an extent little appreciated by those naive foreigners who imagine Mussolini literally dictating all day long to everyone. Mussolini listens more than he dictates. His decrees are rarely initiated by himself but represent decisions, usually compromises, made after a period of active discussion among those concerned. Nor does this discussion always terminate when the decision is announced. Decrees do not have the finality in fact that they do in form. Some of the debate, to be sure, is conducted behind closed doors, but enough of it is published in scientific and professional journals, reports and books to enable the technically competent to participate in the expression of conflicting points of view and to influence the decisions of the government."

[Yankeesse]

Out of curiosity, at what point do I cease thinking critically?

(I'm not going to get mad at anything you say and act as if it's flaming. I'm asking for your input, no matter how critical.)

When you thought that an ideology that glorifies the worst aspects of humanity,

Such as?

and seeks to dehumanize everybody under its control was a good thing.

Explain.

Also this is your "Fascism is wrong therefore anyone who argues for Fascism is wrong, because Fascism is wrong" Circular argument again.

[Blasveck]

1. I've never met a fascist that didn't fail to think critically on some level. After all, any thinking person can reason out that fascism is an inherently self-destructive ideology (I've analyzed how it happens earlier in the thread), and history has proven that it cannot succeed.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism

1. Huh? "Fascism is wrong because anyone with critical thinking proves it's wrong therefore if your a fascist you lack critical thinking"

Well gee what a a rock solid Circular argument.

2. I don't care what some weak willed commies want to make an excuse for things that come about in communists regimes that they don't like.

So they can seperate themselves from criticism by saying " Well he wasn't a "true Comunist".

Stalin was an Authoritarian Socialist and pragmatist and because of this he managed to empower Russia from it's slump since the Revolution.

He didn't allow unworkable ideals in Communism to drive Russia into the Ground.

But these things don't make a Fascist.

1. Yes, they have. Or else they wouldn't have suppressed criticism of the government and other forms of free speech. They realized that critical thinking was a threat to their hold on power, and instead of allowing and encouraging it, and giving the people a voice in their government, like all the democratic governments, they became paranoid, much like somebody who's taken too much LSD, and suppressed all criticism and input, thus providing the very justification for the anti-government actions they were so paranoid about (self-fulfilling prophecy). To say nothing of the blatant lies in most of the propoganda. Of course, the Soviet-backed states and USSR itself did the same thing.

1. From The Fascist Government of Italy authored byHerbert W. Schneider.

"The fascist motto, "We welcome criticism but not opposition,' is not a mere sophism but an important distinction. General opposition to the regime continues to be crushed whenever it shows its head, but detailed criticism goes on daily to an extent little appreciated by those naive foreigners who imagine Mussolini literally dictating all day long to everyone. Mussolini listens more than he dictates. His decrees are rarely initiated by himself but represent decisions, usually compromises, made after a period of active discussion among those concerned. Nor does this discussion always terminate when the decision is announced. Decrees do not have the finality in fact that they do in form. Some of the debate, to be sure, is conducted behind closed doors, but enough of it is published in scientific and professional journals, reports and books to enable the technically competent to participate in the expression of conflicting points of view and to influence the decisions of the government."

Why do you not welcome opposition?

What is wrong with opposition, exactly
(I know I ignored the rest of your post. I just wanted to address that specific part.)

[Grenartia]

1. I've never met a fascist that didn't fail to think critically on some level. After all, any thinking person can reason out that fascism is an inherently self-destructive ideology (I've analyzed how it happens earlier in the thread), and history has proven that it cannot succeed.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism

1. Huh? "Fascism is wrong because anyone with critical thinking proves it's wrong therefore if your a fascist you lack critical thinking"

Well gee what a a rock solid Circular argument.

2. I don't care what some weak willed commies want to make an excuse for things that come about in communists regimes that they don't like.

So they can seperate themselves from criticism by saying " Well he wasn't a "true Comunist".

Stalin was an Authoritarian Socialist and pragmatist and because of this he managed to empower Russia from it's slump since the Revolution.

He didn't allow unworkable ideals in Communism to drive Russia into the Ground.

But these things don't make a Fascist.

1. Yes, they have. Or else they wouldn't have suppressed criticism of the government and other forms of free speech. They realized that critical thinking was a threat to their hold on power, and instead of allowing and encouraging it, and giving the people a voice in their government, like all the democratic governments, they became paranoid, much like somebody who's taken too much LSD, and suppressed all criticism and input, thus providing the very justification for the anti-government actions they were so paranoid about (self-fulfilling prophecy). To say nothing of the blatant lies in most of the propoganda. Of course, the Soviet-backed states and USSR itself did the same thing.

3. From The Fascist Government of Italy authored byHerbert W. Schneider.

"The fascist motto, "We welcome criticism but not opposition,' is not a mere sophism but an important distinction. General opposition to the regime continues to be crushed whenever it shows its head, but detailed criticism goes on daily to an extent little appreciated by those naive foreigners who imagine Mussolini literally dictating all day long to everyone. Mussolini listens more than he dictates. His decrees are rarely initiated by himself but represent decisions, usually compromises, made after a period of active discussion among those concerned. Nor does this discussion always terminate when the decision is announced. Decrees do not have the finality in fact that they do in form. Some of the debate, to be sure, is conducted behind closed doors, but enough of it is published in scientific and professional journals, reports and books to enable the technically competent to participate in the expression of conflicting points of view and to influence the decisions of the government."

1. Actually, the argument was, fascism is a shitty ideology because it is inherently self-destructive and has been proven to not be successful, and that people who support it must lack critical thinking skills, because such skills would show that it is shitty.

2. Not excuse making. Stalin almost literally followed the book on fascist SOP. Also, true communism has no state, just a point of order.

If it looks fascist, acts fascist, and sounds fascist, then *GASP* its probably fascist.

3. Obviously, they're using a different definition of "criticism". After all, if you have to ban every party but yours, you can't really be open to criticism.

[Grenartia]

When you thought that an ideology that glorifies the worst aspects of humanity,

1. Such as?

and seeks to dehumanize everybody under its control was a good thing.

2. Explain.

3. Also this is your "Fascism is wrong therefore anyone who argues for Fascism is wrong, because Fascism is wrong" Circular argument again.

1. Violence, hatred, xenophobia, repression, etc., and shitty justifications of such things based on irrelevancies like race, national origin, different religious beliefs, appeals to tradition, etc.

2. Suppression of individuality, and forced subservience to the state is inherently dehumanization.

3. No, its more "Fascism is wrong, and self-evidently so, and its adherents are severely misguided".

[The USOT]

1. I've never met a fascist that didn't fail to think critically on some level.

Out of curiosity, at what point do I cease thinking critically?

(I'm not going to get mad at anything you say and act as if it's flaming. I'm asking for your input, no matter how critical.)

Somewhere at the point when you advocated a demonstably inefficient government that harms national interests and culture with no accountability.

See every fascist regime ever.

[The Nuclear Fist]

First off How was Romania a puppet state?

The Romanian government under Antonescu did exactly what the Nazis asked of them to do, subordinated the Romanian state to the Nazi regime, and worked under orders from the Hitlerites to facilitate the expansion of the Holocaust onto Romanian soil.

[Yankeesse]

Why do you not welcome opposition?

What is wrong with opposition, exactly
(I know I ignored the rest of your post. I just wanted to address that specific part.)

Criticism is saying you have an issue/differant opinion to certain policies.

Opposition is saying your going to actively work against the State and seek it's dissolution.

[The Nuclear Fist]

1. You just love stereotypes, eh? No Fascist government has been against critical thinking. They've been against the Communist, who want to stop critical thinking. Stop bullshitting.

Except when they allowed ideological claptrap to get in the way of effective leadership, such as in Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany.

[Grenartia]

Why do you not welcome opposition?

What is wrong with opposition, exactly
(I know I ignored the rest of your post. I just wanted to address that specific part.)

Criticism is saying you have an issue/differant opinion to certain policies.

Opposition is saying your going to actively work against the State and seek it's dissolution.

Which doesn't at all justify the suppression of other parties.

[Souseiseki]

Criticism is saying you have an issue/differant opinion to certain policies.

Opposition is saying your going to actively work against the State and seek it's dissolution.

Which doesn't at all justify the suppression of other parties.

i need to wonder

will he have a one party state but with several huge differing wings in the party, ironically becoming much like the chinese communist party?