Advertisement
by Arachno-Satinism » Sat Sep 24, 2016 7:00 am
by PaNTuXIa » Sat Sep 24, 2016 7:07 am
by Conscentia » Sat Sep 24, 2016 7:16 am
Pantuxia wrote:Corporatism is cool, some aspects of fascism are fine,
Pantuxia wrote:but jingoistic and nationalistic fascism can be a bit extreme.
Misc. Test Results And Assorted Other | The NSG Soviet Last Updated: Test Results (2018/02/02) | ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ |
by Dagashi Shojo » Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:47 am
Arachno-Satinism wrote:Clerical fascism is awful. It basically pulls away all things remotely decent about fascist philosophy. Although I've never been that big a fan of fascism to begin with, Gentile was fine but historically the actual Fascists themselves were highly opportunistic bastards, Fascist movement in general was a shameless ploy of reactionaries, and fascists nowadays are merely shameless, complacent racist democrats who joined the movement to antagonize minorities.
by Arachno-Satinism » Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:58 am
Dagashi Shojo wrote:Arachno-Satinism wrote:Clerical fascism is awful. It basically pulls away all things remotely decent about fascist philosophy. Although I've never been that big a fan of fascism to begin with, Gentile was fine but historically the actual Fascists themselves were highly opportunistic bastards, Fascist movement in general was a shameless ploy of reactionaries, and fascists nowadays are merely shameless, complacent racist democrats who joined the movement to antagonize minorities.
How is Gentile not an actual Fascist? It would be hard to make a case that Mussolini, Marinetti, Mosley, and De Rivera were reactionaries plotting to keep the old order.
by Kravanica » Sat Sep 24, 2016 9:16 am
by Dagashi Shojo » Sat Sep 24, 2016 9:25 am
Kravanica wrote:The Fascist Manifesto was actually pretty democratic. It even called for women to be able to vote.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_Manifesto
Arachno-Satinism wrote:Dagashi Shojo wrote:
How is Gentile not an actual Fascist? It would be hard to make a case that Mussolini, Marinetti, Mosley, and De Rivera were reactionaries plotting to keep the old order.
I worded it poorly, I didn't mean to imply that Gentile was not an actual fascist (and how, he was the very intellectual founder himself), I'm saying that of all fascists Gentile was one I liked the most, and perhaps to some extent Marinetti (I romanticize Futurists too much on occasion, maybe). Mussolini appeared to me as too thuglike and opportunistic in his attempt to gain support from the property class, devout Catholics, and later played under the strings of Nazis. There's also the totalitarianism, which I found hard to support.
by Zaurell » Sat Sep 24, 2016 11:29 am
Mattopilos wrote:Zaurell wrote:I know you're denouncing debate but I'm really enjoying ours.
Anyways, we both agree that a change in society's attitude is necessary. The only difference is how we propose this come about. What you are advocating is that we wait for it to come about naturally. My argument would be that the authority figure could bring it about more quickly, thus avoiding some time in which ignorance would still be a strong presence. Your counter to this is the proposal of direct democracy to avoid the authority figure being a member of one of the fringe groups. Now, I see where you are coming from but ideally there would be safeguards in place in choosing the authority figure that would prevent one of the crazies from taking power. Furthermore, I must dispute direct democracy. I dispute this on the grounds that the vast majority of the populace isn't familiar with every nuance of politics nor are they necessarily willing to take the time to become familiar. This could cause quite a few problems when decisions are being made. For example, many people support the government doing all sorts of helpful things. Problem is, these helpful things cost money and nobody likes taxes. Therefore, the programs might not be paid for unless the national debt is increased and that is never a good thing.
EDIT: Off to bed, talk more tomorrow.
Actually, I am suggesting more of a revolution of some sort, ideally one like in Iceland - that would be the most peaceful possible revolution one could have. The other possibility is insurrection until that is possible, and a society with direct democracy and a different attitude towards what society is is reached.
Safeguarding who gets in still has its problems. One cannot tell what an authority figure will be like at face value. If that were the case, all politicians would be amazing and do what we wanted them to. That hasn't happened, ever.
Direct democracy doesn't require everyone to vote, so that shouldn't be a huge problem. Also, if one is educated in what the decision will mean is voting yes or no, then the decision is at least informed. This is compared to what many decisions are like in politics, where they just expect you to know what the outcome actually means.
That issue to explain is the problem with income inequality and the issue of how wage is distributed.
Greater Nazi Germanic Reich wrote:I have trouble determining if Panama is a fascist state. The president of Panama is a member of the Panamenista Party. The Panamenista Party has been categorized as far-right and fascist by some. The Wikipedia article about the party states that they are conservative and populist. It does not say they are fascist. What do you people think?
by The New Sea Territory » Sat Sep 24, 2016 12:29 pm
Zaurell wrote:Revolution is rarely peaceful and in today's age,
people are a bit too complacent for revolution and insurrection in democratic western nations if you ask me.
It seems far more plausible to work through the political system and seize power that way.
| Ⓐ ☭ | Anarchist Communist | Heideggerian Marxist | Vegetarian | Bisexual | Stirnerite | Slavic/Germanic Pagan | ᚨ ᛟ |
Solntsa Roshcha --- Postmodern Poyltheist
"Christianity had brutally planted the poisoned blade in the healthy, quivering flesh of all humanity; it had goaded a cold wave
of darkness with mystically brutal fury to dim the serene and festive exultation of the dionysian spirit of our pagan ancestors."
-Renzo Novatore, Verso il Nulla Creatore
by Kravanica » Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:06 pm
by Hesse Darmstadt » Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:13 pm
Greater Nazi Germanic Reich wrote:One of the most interesting figures of fascism was Augusto Pinochet. He was a far-right dictator that based his regime on Nazi Germany, but some libertarians like him. They appear to like him because of his free-market policies. It is quite contradictory for a libertarian to like a fascist regime though.
by New confederate ramenia » Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:15 pm
by Hesse Darmstadt » Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:29 pm
by Jumalariik » Sat Sep 24, 2016 7:14 pm
by Jumalariik » Sat Sep 24, 2016 7:16 pm
by Mattopilos » Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:28 pm
Jumalariik wrote:Bakery Hill wrote:Many wouldn't call that person an anarchist though. As racism and homophobia go against what some consider the core tents of anarchism.
Anarchism=opposition to government
racism, capitalism, homophobia ≠ government
You can therefore be a racist, capitalist, homophobic anarchist.
by Germanic Templars » Mon Sep 26, 2016 6:55 am
by Agrarian Ubermensch » Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:01 am
New confederate ramenia wrote:Can someone explain Actual Idealism to me? I'm a philosophy pleb so I don't understand.
by Pranovia » Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:01 am
Greater Nazi Germanic Reich wrote:One of the most interesting figures of fascism was Augusto Pinochet. He was a far-right dictator that based his regime on Nazi Germany, but some libertarians like him. They appear to like him because of his free-market policies. It is quite contradictory for a libertarian to like a fascist regime though.
The permissiveness of society must be balanced with authoritativeness. - Ferdinand MarcosPranovia is based on 1970s era Philippines, with some personal twists.
Read more at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/autho ... arcos.html
by Agrarian Ubermensch » Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:12 am
Greater Nazi Germanic Reich wrote:One of the most interesting figures of fascism was Augusto Pinochet. He was a far-right dictator that based his regime on Nazi Germany, but some libertarians like him. They appear to like him because of his free-market policies. It is quite contradictory for a libertarian to like a fascist regime though.
by Augusta Pinochet » Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:03 am
Pranovia wrote:Greater Nazi Germanic Reich wrote:One of the most interesting figures of fascism was Augusto Pinochet. He was a far-right dictator that based his regime on Nazi Germany, but some libertarians like him. They appear to like him because of his free-market policies. It is quite contradictory for a libertarian to like a fascist regime though.
I actually like him because he is brave af.
We might possibly need a Pinochet here in the PH, really.
by Yorkers » Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:15 am
by Brr (Ancient) » Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:25 am
by Dagashi Shojo » Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:38 am
New confederate ramenia wrote:Can someone explain Actual Idealism to me? I'm a philosophy pleb so I don't understand.
by Germanic Templars » Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:13 am
Yorkers wrote:Not a fascist. Just a nativist and a bit of a white nationalist.
Hopefully this thread isn't as garbage as the RWDT.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aadhirisian Puppet Nation, Aprinia, Bienenhalde, Daphomir, Herador, Hidrandia, Keltionialang, Libertarian Negev, Likhinia, Mushroom Gorge, Perchan, Port Carverton, Reantreet, Southland, Squirreltopia, Tesseris, Tungstan, Vorkat
Advertisement