Is fascism a negative thing?

[Conscentia]

If that is your notion of the 'greater good', then I will gladly side with evil.

So be it. The Liberals amaze with being able to equate Natural Selection with Evil.

- I'm not a liberal.
- I doubt you're using "liberal" as a proper noun, so don't capitalise it mid-sentence.
- "Natural selection" isn't a proper noun.
- The word "evil" is also not a proper noun.
- I didn't equate natural selection with evil.
- What you propose isn't natural selection. It's artificial selection.

[Atelia]

Yes Reactionary at the time may not have been the word but it's very definition it can effectively be applied to refer to any previous point in history, something a traditionalist like me would do rather then call it Revolutionary which it also is.

True Fascism is for the people, I merely use democracy to refer to the current political system in practice.

It's not so simple. A thug is a degenerate, a true upstanding citizen should be honorable and courageous like a knight. But this is something that is ultimately to be determined on a local level according to a nations culture.

Now you're sounding more like the anti-materialistic militarists I used to listen to get into knock-down drag-out philosophical fights all the time.

Indeed anti-materialistic militarist would be a fine way to partially describe my beliefs.

[The Grey Wolf]

While the meaning of the term is damaged by its usage as a pejorative, it's certainly not great.

You may think so, but it is a reactionary front against the growing devastation of the Liberal hordes. It is an ideology of Might makes Right and Violence that does not temper itself with Democracy or Empathy. It teaches and applauds the true virtues of discipline to make the people the best that they can be, culling the weak for the greater good.

Which is why Fascism often found itself competing against the conservative and monarchists in Italy, Germany, Spain, and Romania.

If that is your notion of the 'greater good', then I will gladly side with evil.

So be it. The Liberals amaze with being able to equate Natural Selection with Evil.

What you're proposing isn't "natural selection," it's murdering the disabled and infirmed in the name of a bad grasp of evolution.

[Ifreann]

If that is your notion of the 'greater good', then I will gladly side with evil.

So be it. The Liberals amaze with being able to equate Natural Selection with Evil.

That's literally the opposite of what Conscentia said.

---

So be it. The Liberals amaze with being able to equate Natural Selection with Evil.

Natural selection hella inefficient. As my friend, a Bio major, always says, "Evolution is not goal-oriented"

Usually he says this after talking about birds eating one another.

Can you blame them, though? Bird is tasty.

[Conscentia]

Natural selection hella inefficient. As my friend, a Bio major, always says, "Evolution is not goal-oriented"
Usually he says this after talking about birds eating one another.

Can you blame them, though? Bird is tasty.

Relevant-ish:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG0MxhkQ67w

[Atelia]

You may think so, but it is a reactionary front against the growing devastation of the Liberal hordes. It is an ideology of Might makes Right and Violence that does not temper itself with Democracy or Empathy. It teaches and applauds the true virtues of discipline to make the people the best that they can be, culling the weak for the greater good.

Which is why Fascism often found itself competing against the conservative and monarchists in Italy, Germany, Spain, and Romania.

So be it. The Liberals amaze with being able to equate Natural Selection with Evil.

What you're proposing isn't "natural selection," it's murdering the disabled and infirmed in the name of a bad grasp of evolution.

I can very much see why, though I believe Fascist can be conservative the point of Monarchy is tough battle though clearly the Monarchists have lost.

So you say. But the cull is still saving money and removing the dredges from the public environment.

[Eol Sha]

Most of the others, especially left wingers, use the word "fascist" as an insult for whatever reason.
But, let us see from various sources, what is fascism?

fas·cism
/ˈfaSHˌizəm/
noun
an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
synonyms: authoritarianism, totalitarianism, dictatorship, despotism, autocracy; More
(in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

So, what is negative about that? It is simply extreme authoritarianism, which isn't bad at all. The Leader is just simply providing for the People, and the People and the culture of the People are put first and foremost.

Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism[1][2] that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. Influenced by national syndicalism, fascism originated in Italy during World War I, in opposition to liberalism, Marxism, and anarchism. Fascism is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left–right spectrum.[3][4]

Fascism is a Political reactionary authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists seek to unify their nation based on commitment to an organic national community where its individuals are united together as one people through national identity. The unity of the nation is to be based upon suprapersonal connections of ancestry and culture through a totalitarian state that seeks the mass mobilization of the national community through discipline, [narrowing of the permitted limit of social discourse], physical training, and eugenics. The limiting of the spectrum of acceptable opinion includes the aggressive suppression of dissent. Frequently, fascism seeks to eradicate perceived foreign influences that are deemed to be causing degeneration of the nation or of not fitting into the national culture.

I more or less despise every synonym you provided. The subsequent descriptions of fascism that you provide are anathema to not only my politics, but also my core beliefs and values. In short, that is why I am not a fascist.

[Shiistan]

Is the concept of authoritarian statism in of itself negative?

Not really. I subscribe to such ideologies myself.

Is authoritarian statism, propped up by nationalist rhetoric aimed against those who are different or perceived to be a 'drag' on society, negative, especially when essentially all of the known examples ended up participating in some form of mass killing of civilians as a result of their ideology?

Yes, it pretty much is.
Now, in a modern context, note the first definition you posted:

(in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.


This is what 'left-wingers' as you call them mean when they call people fascists. All factors that tended to make up former fascist regimes.

That is factually inaccurate, as the fascist ideology does not necessarily have to be aimed at cultural superiority and steeped in racism. The ideology you're mistaking it for is Nazism, which is not fascism, though they share a number of commonalities.

For example, in the Middle East, Arab Ba'athism is a form of fascism but does not inherently involve racism (though under Saddam Hussein it became that way). Spanish Fascism did not result in the purging of any cultures, neither did Italian Fascism. In South America, where many nations were Fascist, none of them involved genocidal tendencies against any particular ethnic group. I am not denying that they can be particularly brutal against groups opposed to the government, but that does not equate racist rhetoric aimed at a particular minority subgroup.

Now, the South African National Party during the apartheid era did use racist rhetoric to bolster their fascist regime, and so did Rhodesia, though they did not engage in genocidal activities. One of the main problems with identifying fascism is that there is no single set definition among political scientists for the way a fascist government behaves. Many different groups identify as, or are collectively understood to be, fascist, yet these all vary wildly in their behavior and structure.

*I am not a fascist nor do I share any fascist sympathies, I am simply delineating the difference between fascism and Nazism for intellectual purposes.

[The State of Islam]

Anything that still gives a toss about your racial background rather than you as an individual is negative

[The Grey Wolf]

Which is why Fascism often found itself competing against the conservative and monarchists in Italy, Germany, Spain, and Romania.

What you're proposing isn't "natural selection," it's murdering the disabled and infirmed in the name of a bad grasp of evolution.

I can very much see why, though I believe Fascist can be conservative the point of Monarchy is tough battle though clearly the Monarchists have lost.

So you say. But the cull is still saving money and removing the dredges from the public environment.

Fascism got into a fight with just about every conservative institute in Italy (the monarchy and the Church being two examples). It's main philosophy was denounced by the Church as "humanistic pantheism," and by 1943, it was at war with the monarchists and the Church had severed ties to it. Conservatives in Germany were the instigators of the July 20 plot.

Who do you mean by "dredges?"

[Ifreann]

Which is why Fascism often found itself competing against the conservative and monarchists in Italy, Germany, Spain, and Romania.

What you're proposing isn't "natural selection," it's murdering the disabled and infirmed in the name of a bad grasp of evolution.

I can very much see why, though I believe Fascist can be conservative the point of Monarchy is tough battle though clearly the Monarchists have lost.

So you say. But the cull is still saving money and removing the dredges from the public environment.

No, the cull is about making yourself feel better by surviving it. It's about there being an untermensch for you to be uber. It's about hiding that need to feel superior under a tattered cloak of out-dated, false ideas about how biology works. You can't actually make a population strong by culling the weak.

[The Grey Wolf]

Spanish Fascism did not result in the purging of any cultures, neither did Italian Fascism.

The Yugoslavians and Ethiopians would like to have a word with you.

[Atelia]

I can very much see why, though I believe Fascist can be conservative the point of Monarchy is tough battle though clearly the Monarchists have lost.

So you say. But the cull is still saving money and removing the dredges from the public environment.

No, the cull is about making yourself feel better by surviving it. It's about there being an untermensch for you to be uber. It's about hiding that need to feel superior under a tattered cloak of out-dated, false ideas about how biology works. You can't actually make a population strong by culling the weak.

Nice German words you got there. But while getting rid of them does cut down on costs what exactly does keeping them gain? How do they serve the sate and greater collective?

I can very much see why, though I believe Fascist can be conservative the point of Monarchy is tough battle though clearly the Monarchists have lost.

So you say. But the cull is still saving money and removing the dredges from the public environment.

Fascism got into a fight with just about every conservative institute in Italy (the monarchy and the Church being two examples). It's main philosophy was denounced by the Church as "humanistic pantheism," and by 1943, it was at war with the monarchists and the Church had severed ties to it. Conservatives in Germany were the instigators of the July 20 plot.

Who do you mean by "dredges?"

I don't deny this, this is why I am not an Itallian Fascist or National Socialist.
Those who drag down the rest of society.

[Transoxthraxia]

Amount of wars it causes.

Francoist Spain, Argentina's fascist regime, Metaxas' Greece are all well-known for their massive wars.

I'm not sure there are any positives.

Well, do you like state-sponsored industry, price controls [ceilings and floors] and general economic control within a country? If so, then Fascism has some positive traits for you.

When a sentence reads thus:

"It's simply a form of extreme X, which isn't bad at all"

That sentence is most likely wrong.

It's not a form of extreme anything. Fascism was created as a reactionary movement by right-wingers in response to the growing fear of socialism and communism in the early twentieth century and promotes the one-ness of the state, government control of the economy [theoretically in the model by right-wingers], a high rate of militarism [to combat socialism and communism outside the country], and a police state that promotes unity and destroys individualism [to protect the state from socialism and communism inside the country]. It wasn't until later unintelligent schmucks tacked on nationalism to that list as well. Not to mention Stalin's SU was every part nationalist as Mussolini's Italy was.

It's all good till you have to wear a badge.

Sigged.

Not sure this was necessary to post.

Ideologies are not inherently positive or negative, it's the people who inherent them that decide the fate and structure of an ideology (i.e. Making it positive or negative)

This is an incredibly accurate statement. Why is Stalin remembered as exicitly a non-communist by leftists because "he didn't really follow communism" when Mussolini is remembered as a fascist even when in his later years of rule abandoned or twisted the fascist ideology into somethig completely different?

Yes, it's a very, very negative thing.

Thanks, Mike.

Socialism by another name...

[incoming socialists]

Authoritarian socialism, certainly.

Socialism by another name...

[incoming socialists]

[Incoming centrist]

No, stop that.

"Centrist"

---

At the end of the day, fascism isn't a fundamentally "bad" ideology as it is simply an outdated one. It was created to combat radical socialism and since that completed destroying itself in the early nineties,there's no real use for the ideology anymore, except to accuse myself or those that are likeminded of being fascists because we aren't extroadinarily biased towards the left side of the political spectrum.

[Conserative Morality]

Nice German words you got there. But while getting rid of them does cut down on costs what exactly does keeping them gain? How do they serve the sate and greater collective?

That's such a materialistic outlook. He who strengthens others strengthens himself.

[Monyarvia]

if it's used in moderation.

[Atelia]

Nice German words you got there. But while getting rid of them does cut down on costs what exactly does keeping them gain? How do they serve the sate and greater collective?

That's such a materialistic outlook. He who strengthens others strengthens himself.

Nonsense. Everyone should in a perfect world work as hard as possible for the betterment of the whole. Eugenics is humane in putting those people out of their misery and allows for the work of the whole to be concentrated on those able themselves to provide for others.

[Conserative Morality]

Nonsense. Everyone should in a perfect world work as hard as possible for the betterment of the whole. Eugenics is humane in putting those people out of their misery and allows for the work of the whole to be concentrated on those able themselves to provide for others.

Goddamn, I thought you said you were anti-materialistic.

[Atelia]

Nonsense. Everyone should in a perfect world work as hard as possible for the betterment of the whole. Eugenics is humane in putting those people out of their misery and allows for the work of the whole to be concentrated on those able themselves to provide for others.

Goddamn, I thought you said you were anti-materialistic.

I think we have come to a misunderstanding.
1. Everyone should work to benefit others through strengthening the state.
2. People should be willing to sacrifice all they have for a stable nation and state.
3. The lame should be put to rest as a mercy killing with a note of their inability to benefit personally from aiding society.

[Eol Sha]

Goddamn, I thought you said you were anti-materialistic.

I think we have come to a misunderstanding.
...
3. The lame should be put to rest as a mercy killing with a note of their inability to benefit personally from aiding society.

That's nuts.

[Risottia]

So, what is negative about that? It is simply extreme authoritarianism, which isn't bad at all.

Sure, unless you happen to
a) be disliked by whatever member of the Milizia Volontaria per la Sicurezza Nazionale
b) be a member of the Parliament who dares to be outspoken about the electoral frauds, the violence of the squadristi
c) be a member of a disliked ethnicity, which leads to your citizenship being revoked and your property being seized, and eventually being handed over to the Nazis for slave labour and extermination
d) be less than enthusiastic in your approval for Il Duce
e) be old enough to be conscripted for a senseless aggression war against the three most powerful countries around
f) be living in any part of the country, especially during the bombings caused by the above
g) be living in any part of the colonies, especially if you're a colonial subject
h) be living in any neighbouring country, unless it's a country ruled or invaded by the Nazis or a tax haven (like San Marino or Switzerland)

The Leader is just simply providing for the People, and the People and the culture of the People are put first and foremost.

Yeah. Il Douche provided quite a lot for Italy. He only wanted the best for Italy and for all Italians. That's why he enacted a coup against the Statute and the Parliament, jailed and killed MPs and oppositors, removed the investigator he had sent to fight the Mafia when links between Mafia and the National Fascist Party were found, allied with the worst criminals ever to wage multiple aggression wars, then started a civil war by creating puppet country for his Nazi masters, authorised mass killings against the Italian population, and finally tried to run leaving even his most fanatical followers alone and at the mercy of the partisans, while Italy was turned into scorched land and its cities into rubble.

[The Grey Wolf]

Goddamn, I thought you said you were anti-materialistic.

I think we have come to a misunderstanding.
1. Everyone should work to benefit others through strengthening the state.
2. People should be willing to sacrifice all they have for a stable nation and state.
3. The lame should be put to rest as a mercy killing with a note of their inability to benefit personally from aiding society.

Would Stephen Hawking be among those given a mercy killing?

[Conserative Morality]

I think we have come to a misunderstanding.
1. Everyone should work to benefit others through strengthening the state.

Disagreeable, but so far so good.

2. People should be willing to sacrifice all they have for a stable nation and state.

Stability is just another word for peace, which is a liberal illusion.

3. The lame should be put to rest as a mercy killing with a note of their inability to benefit personally from aiding society.

They don't benefit from aiding society? The disabled benefit more than anyone from strengthening society.

[The Qeiiam Star Cluster]

It's all good till you have to wear a badge.

But OP will be one of the Übermenschen.

[Risottia]

Amount of wars it causes.

Francoist Spain, Argentina's fascist regime, Metaxas' Greece are all well-known for their massive wars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Civil_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War