Fascist Discussion Thread

[Grenartia]

1. No, it was fascist because it fit the calling cards of the other fascist states that weren't ethnocentrist.

1.You keep claiming that, but you have yet to illustrate it at all.

2. Then what, praytell, is the proper term for a fascist state that isn't ethnocentrist?

2. Take your pick, but when you choose make sure you explain yourself since to my knowledge there is no such thing as mind reading.

3. Its as good a definition as any other, seeing as how there's no universal definition of fascism.

4. Only for lack of knowledge of a better term.

3. On your part, yes, clearly.

5. And you'd be wrong, because they weren't even socialist.

4. Hence "Failed" Socialist.

Claiming the Eastern bloc was socialist is like claiming that the US is a monarchy. Its nonsensical, because it doesn't fit the definition of the term you're trying to claim describes it. Words have meaning.

5. Yes words do have meanings, you seem to be very good at ignoring them.

1. They were severely authoritarian.

2. Don't need mindreading when you can figure its meaning out through context and use of prefixes and whatnot.

3. If you've got a better term, then why not share it with the rest of the class?

4. Except, if it really wanted to be socialist, it would've had a more libertarian form of government. Not the fascist states we saw in reality. They didn't even attempt to be socialist.

5. Point out where I've ignored the meaning of a word. Also, pot, meet kettle.

[Estormo]

There is a fine line between Fascists and Godless Communists.

Fascism and communism are in direct opposition to each other.

Evidently. That is what I just said.

[Conscentia]

Hence "Failed" Socialist.

Failure implies an attempt was made. No attempt was made. There was no attempt to apply democratic business models. In-fact, fascism is opposed to democracy.

[Vorkova]

Fascism and communism are in direct opposition to each other.

Evidently. That is what I just said.

A "fine line" suggests they are close to each other. This could not be farther from the truth.

[Seaxeland]

No, not this. The Eastern Bloc was far from Fascist, it was pure Socialist. Especially in Yugoslavia.

Yugoslavia was half-red half-nationalist.......but still red.

It was Slavic Nationalist, or Pan-Slavist. But it was still Socialist.

No, not this. The Eastern Bloc was far from Fascist, it was pure Socialist. Especially in Yugoslavia.

Bullshit. It was fascism in socialism's clothing. IF it were truly socialism, then where was the worker ownership of the means of production? And don't say "the state", because the state is not the workers. The simple fact is, the Eastern bloc was fascist.

It wasn't anything like Fascism, it's not a fact. Just because the workers didn't own the means of production doesn't mean it wasn't Socialist. That's one aspect of an entire ideology.

Bullshit. It was fascism in socialism's clothing. IF it were truly socialism, then where was the worker ownership of the means of production? And don't say "the state", because the state is not the workers. The simple fact is, the Eastern bloc was fascist.

So if a dog barks like dog, eats a cat, and hates a cat, then it is a cat?

Apparently so.

Bullshit. It was fascism in socialism's clothing. IF it were truly socialism, then where was the worker ownership of the means of production? And don't say "the state", because the state is not the workers. The simple fact is, the Eastern bloc was fascist.

There is nothing Fascist about State Atheism.

Fascism =/= Theocracy

I assume you hate the system? All right then. One great quality of Fascism is a strong military.

The US has the strongest military on the planet and it's not fascist.

I think he meant Militarism.

Sometimes, yes, but a fascist system would rely mostly on the military as its basis.

Besides, I can't name a single fascist nation with a respectable military, save for Germany in the past.

They were one of the only Fascist states...so, okay. Yes.

Fascism =/= Nazism

No, not this. The Eastern Bloc was far from Fascist, it was pure Socialist. Especially in Yugoslavia.

The workers in the eastern block had no control over the economy. The USSR and the Warsaw Pact were nationalistic, militaristic, oppressive states with command economies. Fascist, in other words.

Bullshit, they weren't Nationalistic or Militaristic. Nationalism is the idea that your country is the best and that it should reject foreign influences, the Warsaw Pact was a puppet group of the USSR, and was totally under the control of foreign influences. They had strong military's but that doesn't make them Militaristic, please learn what Militarism is. And command economies are a part of Socialist ideology. They weren't Fascist in the slightest.

You and every other Leftist need to stop with that "Oh, they weren't Communist/Socialist" crap and face the fact that they were what they said they were.

Religion doesn't mean jack for fascism.

So yes, you're right. There's just as much Fascism about State Atheism as there is about State-enforced church visits every sunday.

Fascism was about the State, not about the Faith.

True, but Fascism is Secular. Not Atheist.

Secularism is an Atheistic and Scientific bias. Fascism has no defined opinion on religion.

Oh yes, Spain was at one point.

Spain was never a Fascist state.

Not at all, there is nothing Fascist about State Atheism.

While no Fascist state has ever been explicitly State Atheist, State Atheism is entirely compatible with Fascism, and indeed many Fascist movements have been virulently anti-clerical.

You seem to be forgetting Generalissimo Franco, sir, the longest ruling Fascist in history.

Hence "Failed" Socialist.

Failure implies an attempt was made. No attempt was made. There was no attempt to apply democratic business models. In-fact, fascism is opposed to democracy.

Actually, that's not true. While most Fascists detest Democracy, a Fascist Democracy could be possible.

[Divair]

What redeeming qualities does fascism even have?

I assume you hate the system? All right then. One great quality of Fascism is a strong military.

I don't see what's so great about that.

[Vorkova]

The workers in the eastern block had no control over the economy. The USSR and the Warsaw Pact were nationalistic, militaristic, oppressive states with command economies. Fascist, in other words.

Bullshit, they weren't Nationalistic or Militaristic. Nationalism is the idea that your country is the best and that it should reject foreign influences, the Warsaw Pact was a puppet group of the USSR, and was totally under the control of foreign influences. They had strong military's but that doesn't make them Militaristic, please learn what Militarism is. And command economies are a part of Socialist ideology. They weren't Fascist in the slightest.

You and every other Leftist need to stop with that "Oh, they weren't Communist/Socialist" crap and face the fact that they were what they said they were.

No communist state has ever ascribed to it's own ideology, except perhaps Russia before the dissolution of the Congress of Soviets. The USSR glorified the military and devoted a stupid amount of it's GDP to it's armed forces (So much in fact that it impacted living standards and ruined the economy). It that's not militarism then I have no idea what is. The USSR honestly thought it was the greatest country on Earth and should reject "foreign, bourgeoisie, imperialistic" influences. The USSR was a Slavic nationalist state too, which is evident in it's reluctance to appoint non-Slavs to important government and view that they were "uncivilised". The Warsaw Pact states watches foreigners as well, considering them "agents of imperialism".

[Temujinn]

...

Lets try this again.

You and I are going to have to agree to disagree, we have been going in circles to no avail with neither budging and that is pointless, I would like to think at points I have demonstrated a respect for your opinion, because I note at points you have the done the same for me. So rather than continue this devolution into the mudslinging match it is most surely headed for-- we both cease fire.

[Old Tyrannia]

Spain was never a Fascist state.

While no Fascist state has ever been explicitly State Atheist, State Atheism is entirely compatible with Fascism, and indeed many Fascist movements have been virulently anti-clerical.

You seem to be forgetting Generalissimo Franco, sir, the longest ruling Fascist in history.

Francisco Franco wasn't a Fascist. He was a right-wing authoritarian conservative, who led a wide coalition of right-wing factions ranging from the Falangists, to moderate conservatives, to die-hard royal legitimists such as the Carlists.

[Agritum]

You seem to be forgetting Generalissimo Franco, sir, the longest ruling Fascist in history.

Francisco Franco wasn't a Fascist. He was a right-wing authoritarian conservative, who led a wide coalition of right-wing factions ranging from the Falangists, to moderate conservatives, to die-hard royal legitimists such as the Carlists.

He also actually made Hitler upset when they actually met for the first (and last, IIRC) time.

[Seaxeland]

Bullshit, they weren't Nationalistic or Militaristic. Nationalism is the idea that your country is the best and that it should reject foreign influences, the Warsaw Pact was a puppet group of the USSR, and was totally under the control of foreign influences. They had strong military's but that doesn't make them Militaristic, please learn what Militarism is. And command economies are a part of Socialist ideology. They weren't Fascist in the slightest.

You and every other Leftist need to stop with that "Oh, they weren't Communist/Socialist" crap and face the fact that they were what they said they were.

No communist state has ever ascribed to it's own ideology, except perhaps Russia before the dissolution of the Congress of Soviets. The USSR glorified the military and devoted a stupid amount of it's GDP to it's armed forces (So much in fact that it impacted living standards and ruined the economy). It that's not militarism then I have no idea what is. The USSR honestly thought it was the greatest country on Earth and should reject "foreign, bourgeoisie, imperialistic" influences. The USSR was a Slavic nationalist state too, which is evident in it's reluctance to appoint non-Slavs to important government and view that they were "uncivilised". The Warsaw Pact states watches foreigners as well, considering them "agents of imperialism".

The Paris Commune of 1871 did. Militarism isn't high funding or glorification of the military, it's integrating the military into society, making them one in the same. The USSR was just a bunch of Army Brats. Source for it thinking it was the greatest country on Earth other than during the Stalinist Era? The USSR was Russian Supremacist, not Slavic Nationalist, there's a difference. The Warsaw Pacts were paranoid of spies and coups, that's not Nationalism.

You seem to be forgetting Generalissimo Franco, sir, the longest ruling Fascist in history.

Francisco Franco wasn't a Fascist. He was a right-wing authoritarian conservative, who led a wide coalition of right-wing factions ranging from the Falangists, to moderate conservatives, to die-hard royal legitimists such as the Carlists.

Falangism is Fascism, open a book for once and you'd know that.

[Vorkova]

The Paris Commune of 1871 did. Militarism isn't high funding or glorification of the military, it's integrating the military into society, making them one in the same. The USSR was just a bunch of Army Brats. Source for it thinking it was the greatest country on Earth other than during the Stalinist Era? The USSR was Russian Supremacist, not Slavic Nationalist, there's a difference. The Warsaw Pacts were paranoid of spies and coups, that's not Nationalism.

I honestly forgot about the Paris Commune. Lenin and Marx held it up as a good example. Soviet citizens where conscripted for two-three years. That's integrating the military into society.

Soviet propaganda is enough of a source. Just look at the shit they put out and you'll see what I mean. You may be right about the Warsaw Pact, but they still didn't like foreigners very much.

[Old Tyrannia]

Falangism is Fascism, open a book for once and you'd know that.

Yes, Falangists are Fascists. But Franco was not a Falangist.

[Seaxeland]

The Paris Commune of 1871 did. Militarism isn't high funding or glorification of the military, it's integrating the military into society, making them one in the same. The USSR was just a bunch of Army Brats. Source for it thinking it was the greatest country on Earth other than during the Stalinist Era? The USSR was Russian Supremacist, not Slavic Nationalist, there's a difference. The Warsaw Pacts were paranoid of spies and coups, that's not Nationalism.

I honestly forgot about the Paris Commune. Lenin and Marx held it up as a good example. Soviet citizens where conscripted for two-three years. That's integrating the military into society.

Soviet propaganda is enough of a source. Just look at the shit they put out and you'll see what I mean. You may be right about the Warsaw Pact, but they still didn't like foreigners very much.

No, it's not, it's called conscription. Conscription doesn't necessarily mean Militarism, AND that was during WARTIME when the USSR was being INVADED, so... yeah, no. Not Fascism.

Falangism is Fascism, open a book for once and you'd know that.

Yes, Falangists are Fascists. But Franco was not a Falangist.

Please tell me you're not serious, and that this is some poorly made attempt at trolling or making a joke.

[Vorkova]

I honestly forgot about the Paris Commune. Lenin and Marx held it up as a good example. Soviet citizens where conscripted for two-three years. That's integrating the military into society.

Soviet propaganda is enough of a source. Just look at the shit they put out and you'll see what I mean. You may be right about the Warsaw Pact, but they still didn't like foreigners very much.

No, it's not, it's called conscription. Conscription doesn't necessarily mean Militarism, AND that was during WARTIME when the USSR was being INVADED, so... yeah, no. Not Fascism.

The USSR conscripted men for three (And then two) years during peacetime.

[Temujinn]

No, it's not, it's called conscription. Conscription doesn't necessarily mean Militarism, AND that was during WARTIME when the USSR was being INVADED, so... yeah, no. Not Fascism.

The USSR conscripted men for three (And then two) years during peacetime.

Switzerland has mandatory Conscription. Hail Fascist Switzerland.
Venezuela has Mandatory Military Service. Hail Fascist Venezuela.
Austria
Finland
Greece
Israel
South Korea
Norway

All Hail glorious Global Fascist movement.

[Temujinn]

I honestly forgot about the Paris Commune. Lenin and Marx held it up as a good example. Soviet citizens where conscripted for two-three years. That's integrating the military into society.

Soviet propaganda is enough of a source. Just look at the shit they put out and you'll see what I mean. You may be right about the Warsaw Pact, but they still didn't like foreigners very much.

No, it's not, it's called conscription. Conscription doesn't necessarily mean Militarism, AND that was during WARTIME when the USSR was being INVADED, so... yeah, no. Not Fascism.

Yes, Falangists are Fascists. But Franco was not a Falangist.

Please tell me you're not serious, and that this is some poorly made attempt at trolling or making a joke.

It has been argued that Franco was his own brand. While fascist ideology was integral, that was beyond that frame work. Im not sure I disagree. That being said, Fascism was his core frame work, and so it was the core framework of Franco Spain.

[Old Tyrannia]

Yes, Falangists are Fascists. But Franco was not a Falangist.

Please tell me you're not serious, and that this is some poorly made attempt at trolling or making a joke.

... No, it's historical fact. Franco took control of the Falange following the death of its leader, José Antonio Primo de Rivera, after which it was forcibly merged with the Carlist party- with which the Falangists shared virtually no common ground beyond their pro-Catholicism and opposition to the Second Republic, to form the Falange Española Tradicionalista y de las Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional-Sindicalista- the "Spanish Traditionalist Phalanx of the Assemblies of National-Syndicalist Offensive." In practice he abandoned most of the Falangists' (and Carlists') key tenets while retaining the external trappings of fascism, but his regime was more ultra-conservative than fascist. It's telling that he left instructions for the monarchy to be restored under King Juan Carlos following his death, while the original Falange was avowedly anti-monarchist despite its opposition to the socialist Second Republic.

I don't appreciate your tone. Show more respect when speaking to other people and perhaps they'll return the courtesy, rather than assuming you're just another rude and ill-informed teenager who just stumbled onto fascist ideology and decided it was cool and rebellious.

[Vorkova]

The USSR conscripted men for three (And then two) years during peacetime.

snip

None of those spend 15% of their GDP on defence. The military was firmly entrenched in Soviet society.

I recognise that not all militaristic states are fascist. You seem to think I do but I never once said that.

[Untaroicht]

I figured this would be the best place to ask it, so can anyone explain what the main differences between fascism and absolute monarchism is?

[Unio de Sovetaj Socialismaj Respublikoj]

I figured this would be the best place to ask it, so can anyone explain what the main differences between fascism and absolute monarchism is?

I have wondered the same thing. From what I know without any research is fascism is basically a dictatorship with state worship while an absolute monarchy is also autocratic but is hereditary and generally the nobility (the monarch most of all) are worshipped as god's representative (Divine Right). I shall have to do more research upon this topic.

[Old Tyrannia]

I figured this would be the best place to ask it, so can anyone explain what the main differences between fascism and absolute monarchism is?

Absolute monarchy is a system of government in which ultimate power is invested in a single individual, the monarch. Fascism is a complete political ideology with views on government, social issues and economics. An absolute monarchy may be fascist, but it could equally be tolerant and liberal (see enlightened absolutism). I suppose a socialist absolute monarchy where the ruler is a hereditary despot but the means of production are in the hands of the workers is also theoretically possible. Just as one can have a socialist democracy or a capitalist democracy.

Fascists and monarchists don't usually get along, though, because "monarchy" is generally a term used for the traditional rulers of nations who are tied to the status quo (or status quo ante) and generally are conservative institutions while fascists are populist revolutionaries who believe in "national rejuvenation" and have fairly little time for tradition or the establishment unless it benefits them.

[Serocia]

I figured this would be the best place to ask it, so can anyone explain what the main differences between fascism and absolute monarchism is?

I have wondered the same thing. From what I know without any research is fascism is basically a dictatorship with state worship while an absolute monarchy is also autocratic but is hereditary and generally the nobility (the monarch most of all) are worshipped as god's representative (Divine Right). I shall have to do more research upon this topic.

You're wrong.

Fascism is a political ideology, while absolute monarchy is a political system. Therefore, an absolute monarch can be communist, socialist, capitalist, Fascist, conservative, liberal or whatever he wants to be. An absolute monarch does not necessarily restrict the rights of his people; he simply has the power to do so.

Fascism, however, has specific tenets it follows. Absolute monarchy does not.

Also, absolute monarchy is not necessarily hereditary. It is autocratic. ("Autocratic" does not mean "totalitarian" or "authoritarian." It means the ruling authority has absolute power.) Absolute monarchy does not necessarily have nobility or aristocracy either. Nor are they ("they" being the monarch and the nobility if applicable) worshipped. Absolute monarchs do not necessarily claim divine right either.

[Seaxeland]

Please tell me you're not serious, and that this is some poorly made attempt at trolling or making a joke.

... No, it's historical fact. Franco took control of the Falange following the death of its leader, José Antonio Primo de Rivera, after which it was forcibly merged with the Carlist party- with which the Falangists shared virtually no common ground beyond their pro-Catholicism and opposition to the Second Republic, to form the Falange Española Tradicionalista y de las Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional-Sindicalista- the "Spanish Traditionalist Phalanx of the Assemblies of National-Syndicalist Offensive." In practice he abandoned most of the Falangists' (and Carlists') key tenets while retaining the external trappings of fascism, but his regime was more ultra-conservative than fascist. It's telling that he left instructions for the monarchy to be restored under King Juan Carlos following his death, while the original Falange was avowedly anti-monarchist despite its opposition to the socialist Second Republic.

I don't appreciate your tone. Show more respect when speaking to other people and perhaps they'll return the courtesy, rather than assuming you're just another rude and ill-informed teenager who just stumbled onto fascist ideology and decided it was cool and rebellious.

I'm not a teenager, nor am I rebellious or ill-informed.

Falangist or not, he was a Fascist, and unlike Hitler's Jewish heritage that's not up for debate.

[Conscentia]

I figured this would be the best place to ask it, so can anyone explain what the main differences between fascism and absolute monarchism is?

Short answer: In fascism the State is central. In absolute monarchism the monarch is central. Thus where monarchy's only prerequisite is autocracy, fascism has many prerequisites in addition to autocracy.

"All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."
- Benito Mussolini