Communism and Socialism megathread

[Arkolon]

The very origins and principles of fascism and Nazism are rooted in political syncretism. It is not right-wing, nor is it left-wing. It is a 1920s-fragment of cultural and political syncretism.

You are mistaken.
The left-wing ideas it absorbed were the left's rejection and criticisms of the liberal laissez-faire right, and rejection of the traditionalist right.

And very close to all the economic policies Communism stood for, bar the 'for the people' rhetoric. The very purpose of fascism was to have a third, syncretic position in the traditional left-right division. To come here 80 years later and say 'it was right-wing'; 'it was left-wing' is absurdly wrong because it was, by definition, neither. That's what made it what it is.

[Conscentia]

You are mistaken.
The left-wing ideas it absorbed were the left's rejection and criticisms of the liberal laissez-faire right, and rejection of the traditionalist right.

And very close to all the economic policies Communism stood for, bar the 'for the people' rhetoric. The very purpose of fascism was to have a third, syncretic position in the traditional left-right division. To come here 80 years later and say 'it was right-wing'; 'it was left-wing' is absurdly wrong because it was, by definition, neither. That's what made it what it is.

You've left out a massive chunk of my post there.

1. The Italian Fascists, the creators of fascism, described it in no such way. It's neo-Nazis that spread the falsehood that fascism is neither right nor left. Fascism's vehement opposition to egalitarianism makes it, by definition, right-wing.

"We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the 'right,' a fascist century." - La dottrina del fascismo

2. Fascism does not advocate common ownership of the means of production, nor the abolition of classes, nor the abolition abolition of wage labour. Fascism bears no economic similarities to communism. Fascisms desires a corporatist economy that serves the totalitarian State - an institution that communism abolishes.

[Jinwoy]

Nazi Germany was neither left or right, but don't be confused, because Neo-Nazism and their parties are almost universally far-right.

[Confederate Ramenia]

Nazi Germany was neither left or right, but don't be confused, because Neo-Nazism and their parties are almost universally far-right.

Neo-Nazism is usually based off of what people, who are anti-Nazi, say about Nazism and making it your ideology.

The very origins and principles of fascism and Nazism are rooted in political syncretism. It is not right-wing, nor is it left-wing. It is a 1920s-fragment of cultural and political syncretism.

You are mistaken.
The left-wing ideas it absorbed were the left's rejection and criticisms of the liberal laissez-faire right, and rejection of the traditionalist right. They did not however take on the defining trait of the left: egalitarianism. In-fact, they reject it vehemently.
The fascists created a new progressive right-wing - one which sought to subsume all into the State. This is the foundation and most important defining characteristic of fascism - totalitarianism.

They appealed to the working classes for reasons of populism (the working classes would have to be made loyal to the State, just like everything else), and the fear and hatred of communism, which was fascism's main idealogical rival as they fought to win over the working classes. In the end, neither won out.

If I'm to believe what Wikipedia and Mussolini say about fascism, it's supposed to be based on a statist version of syndicalism, called corporatism, mixed with a few other ideas. It's based on the "rebellious-revolutionary" foundation of socialism, anarchism AND capitalism, which tries to help "the people" through rebellion and revolution against an authority portrayed as old and "external/other".

The left-right scale is very flawed. Everyone who espouses it uses it to make their ideas sound better. "Left is equality and right is inequality," says the self-proclaimed leftist. "Left is tyranny and right is individual rights" says the self-proclaimed rightist.

[Phallician]

guys i have a question. why are you communist or socialist, please explain what communism and socialism and fascism are.

[Proletarian Anarchists]

guys i have a question. why are you communist or socialist, please explain what communism and socialism and fascism are.

I am a socialist because I believe that all individuals should be free from oppression and believe the only way to do that is through the emancipation of society, so I guess it comes from my individualism. And Communism is a stateless, classless and moneyless society. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. Fascism is radical nationalism believing that all should be within the state and nothing outside the state.

[Conscentia]

If I'm to believe what Wikipedia and Mussolini say about fascism, it's supposed to be based on a statist version of syndicalism, called corporatism, mixed with a few other ideas. It's based on the "rebellious-revolutionary" foundation of socialism, anarchism AND capitalism, which tries to help "the people" through rebellion and revolution against an authority portrayed as old and "external/other".

None of that disputes what I've said.

The left-right scale is very flawed. Everyone who espouses it uses it to make their ideas sound better. "Left is equality and right is inequality," says the self-proclaimed leftist. "Left is tyranny and right is individual rights" says the self-proclaimed rightist.

You seem to lack a complete understanding of it's history, just like everyone else who criticises it.

[Conscentia]

Nazi Germany was neither left or right, but don't be confused, because Neo-Nazism and their parties are almost universally far-right.

That's not even true.

[Distruzio]

Would you guys categorize distributism as a part of socialist thought or, as the distributists themselves categorize it, a third-way?

[Arkolon]

And very close to all the economic policies Communism stood for, bar the 'for the people' rhetoric. The very purpose of fascism was to have a third, syncretic position in the traditional left-right division. To come here 80 years later and say 'it was right-wing'; 'it was left-wing' is absurdly wrong because it was, by definition, neither. That's what made it what it is.

You've left out a massive chunk of my post there.

1. The Italian Fascists, the creators of fascism, described it in no such way. It's neo-Nazis that spread the falsehood that fascism is neither right nor left. Fascism's vehement opposition to egalitarianism makes it, by definition, right-wing.

"We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the 'right,' a fascist century." - La dottrina del fascismo

Hitler's Mein Kampf spent a lot of time talking about how fascism and Nazism were syncretic and neither left nor right, and Italian fascism was closer to national syndicalism than it was anything else. Italian fascism is quite peculiar.

2. Fascism does not advocate common ownership of the means of production, nor the abolition of classes, nor the abolition abolition of wage labour. Fascism bears no economic similarities to communism. Fascisms desires a corporatist economy that serves the totalitarian State - an institution that communism abolishes.

Yeah, notice the capital-C Communism. I refer to the state socialism of Communist states, not communism in itself.

[United Marxist Nations]

Would you guys categorize distributism as a part of socialist thought or, as the distributists themselves categorize it, a third-way?

It's third way.

[Alsheb]

Nazism is right-wing. It's like the furthest right you can go.
Why would you think otherwise?

The very origins and principles of fascism and Nazism are rooted in political syncretism. It is not right-wing, nor is it left-wing. It is a 1920s-fragment of cultural and political syncretism.

Newsflash: just because Hitler said that, it doesn't mean it's true.

[Distruzio]

The very origins and principles of fascism and Nazism are rooted in political syncretism. It is not right-wing, nor is it left-wing. It is a 1920s-fragment of cultural and political syncretism.

Newsflash: just because Hitler said that, it doesn't mean it's true.

...um... every prominent fascist since time immemorial has made it clear that fascism (of which Nazism is a derivative) is third-way syncretic.

[Arkolon]

The very origins and principles of fascism and Nazism are rooted in political syncretism. It is not right-wing, nor is it left-wing. It is a 1920s-fragment of cultural and political syncretism.

Newsflash: just because Hitler said that, it doesn't mean it's true.

Fascism's history was literally "both sides suck, I'll make my own" yet here you are, eighty years later, saying that these guys actually belonged to one of the two sides. If fascism had a side, it wouldn't be fascism anymore. I am also using the left-right scale to mean that left is closer to socialism and right closer to capitalism.

[Alsheb]

You are mistaken.
The left-wing ideas it absorbed were the left's rejection and criticisms of the liberal laissez-faire right, and rejection of the traditionalist right.

And very close to all the economic policies Communism stood for, bar the 'for the people' rhetoric. The very purpose of fascism was to have a third, syncretic position in the traditional left-right division. To come here 80 years later and say 'it was right-wing'; 'it was left-wing' is absurdly wrong because it was, by definition, neither. That's what made it what it is.

There was nothing even remotely similar to Communism about facscism's economic policies. There were no legal ways to guarantee work safety or working conditions at all, trade unions were banned, unemployed could be forced to work wherever they were most economically useful. The nazis strangled small enterprises with punitive taxes, but almost entirely exempted the biggest German corporations from any form of tax on profits. If anything, the Nazis enacted the most far-reaching and extreme capitalist economic system in history.

[Alsheb]

Newsflash: just because Hitler said that, it doesn't mean it's true.

...um... every prominent fascist since time immemorial has made it clear that fascism (of which Nazism is a derivative) is third-way syncretic.

Excuse me for not really believing fascists on their word...
Just because they propagate themselves as something new and different, doesn't mean that they are.

[Distruzio]

...um... every prominent fascist since time immemorial has made it clear that fascism (of which Nazism is a derivative) is third-way syncretic.

Excuse me for not really believing fascists on their word...
Just because they propagate themselves as something new and different, doesn't mean that they are.

... could we not make a similar critique of any political ideologue?

[Bandwagon]

Red till I'm dead.
I'm a hardcore Libertarian Socialist.

[Southern Hampshire]

guys i have a question. why are you communist or socialist, please explain what communism and socialism and fascism are.

Why are you asking what fascism is in a communist&socialist thread?

To answer your question, it is effectively an ethnic corporatocracy.

The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone. The government is supreme and all within must submit. All outside must remain outside.

It is effectively a technocracy and in most cases an autarky.

[Old Tyrannia]

Would you guys categorize distributism as a part of socialist thought or, as the distributists themselves categorize it, a third-way?

Distributism is distinguished from socialism by distributists' belief in private property, and the fact that distributism in general is comfortable with social hierarchy and inequality whereas socialism is, at least in theory, inherently egalitarian. At least, as a fellow distributist that's how I tend to draw the distinction.

[Distruzio]

Would you guys categorize distributism as a part of socialist thought or, as the distributists themselves categorize it, a third-way?

Distributism is distinguished from socialism by distributists' belief in private property, and the fact that distributism in general is comfortable with social hierarchy and inequality whereas socialism is, at least in theory, inherently egalitarian. At least, as a fellow distributist that's how I tend to draw the distinction.

Indeed. I ask because a fellow of mine on another message board made the claim. I disagreed, obviously. Thought it fit in nicely with the progression of the discussion thus far (meaning other third-way economic philosophies).

[Conscentia]

You've left out a massive chunk of my post there.

1. The Italian Fascists, the creators of fascism, described it in no such way. It's neo-Nazis that spread the falsehood that fascism is neither right nor left. Fascism's vehement opposition to egalitarianism makes it, by definition, right-wing.

"We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the 'right,' a fascist century." - La dottrina del fascismo

Hitler's Mein Kampf spent a lot of time talking about how fascism and Nazism were syncretic and neither left nor right, and Italian fascism was closer to national syndicalism than it was anything else. Italian fascism is quite peculiar.

Hitler had no idea what he was talking about.
Italian fascism isn't peculiar. Nazism is peculiar.

2. Fascism does not advocate common ownership of the means of production, nor the abolition of classes, nor the abolition abolition of wage labour. Fascism bears no economic similarities to communism. Fascisms desires a corporatist economy that serves the totalitarian State - an institution that communism abolishes.

Yeah, notice the capital-C Communism. I refer to the state socialism of Communist states, not communism in itself.

Those similarities would be because both were totalitarian.

[Shigiel]

guys i have a question. why are you communist or socialist, please explain what communism and socialism and fascism are.

In a nutshell, I'm a communist because I think that capitalism is unsustainable. It was a necessary stage of social history, but has now outlived its usefulness and created a class - the wage-labourers, or proletariat - whose class interests are in direct conflict with those of the current ruling class and have both the ability to overthrow them and would benefit from doing so. I hope that made sense.

Fascism is a system of government with a strong leader and military and a huge emphasis on tradition and pride in one's nation and race. It is often accompanied by centrist economic systems which benefit small business owners.

Defining socialism and communism is tricky. In terms of ideology, "socialism" is an umbrella term for the many different tendencies whose end goal is social ownership of the means of production, while "communist" usually refers in particular to Marxists and Kropotkin-influenced anarcho-communists. But "socialist society" and "communist society" refer to the same thing: a system in which the means of production are owned by the whole of society and therefore there are no classes and no organs of class rule (states).

[Conscentia]

Newsflash: just because Hitler said that, it doesn't mean it's true.

Fascism's history was literally "both sides suck, I'll make my own" yet here you are, eighty years later, saying that these guys actually belonged to one of the two sides. If fascism had a side, it wouldn't be fascism anymore. I am also using the left-right scale to mean that left is closer to socialism and right closer to capitalism.

You're using the left-right scale wrong.

[Arkolon]

Fascism's history was literally "both sides suck, I'll make my own" yet here you are, eighty years later, saying that these guys actually belonged to one of the two sides. If fascism had a side, it wouldn't be fascism anymore. I am also using the left-right scale to mean that left is closer to socialism and right closer to capitalism.

You're using the left-right scale wrong.

Left being "me" and everything else being "right" isn't how to use it, either.