What's wrong with Fascism?

[Distruzio]

As an aside, it's worth noting that while clearly nationalistic and imperialistic, Italian Fascism wasn't particularly racist. Indeed, it was remarkable at the time for its lack of anti-semitism- there was a Fascist faction within the Zionist movement, and many members of the National Fascist Party were Jewish. Likewise with Dolfuss' 'Austrofascism', not least because the Fatherland Front was more or less all that stood between Austria and the Nazis- who were, of course, anti-semitic in the extreme. The Italian Fascists only really became racist due to the influence of Hitler and pressure from Nazi Germany.

I'm quoting this b/c folks look to have passed it by confusing Nazi crimes for Fascist crimes as they are.

[Distruzio]

That's corporatism. Close, but not the same. Corporatism is the state benefiting business. Fascism is business benefiting the state. Both come at the detriment of the people, still.

Your definition of Fascism is wrong.

So is his definition of corporatism.

[Distruzio]

Because implementations of fascist theory tend to be more autocratic and authoritarian than most are comfortable with.

We lost a war.

Other than that, nothing, though the "vanilla" form of Fascism had a few flaws, but that's what you get when you don't have a precedent.

Finally! Where have you two been?

[Conserative Morality]

Finally! Where have you two been?

Sleeping.

[Conserative Morality]

Yes during times of war states do tend to restrict their citizens freedoms more. However they are usually relaxed afterwards. Thus to say the US at the hight of war was about as free as Italy before the war misses the point. The fascist states do restrict the freedoms of the citizens more then the non-fascist states. Morover fascist states on the whole have tended to glorify war which leads me to wonder how stable they would be in peacetime.

See: Fascist Italy 1922-1936

It did alright for itself.

Fascist Italy also was quite relaxed for a single-party state until it's later years. I blame it on Mussolini getting a little... Egocentric.

I still do not see the benifit of fascism. Why would it be a desirable form of government for a nation to adopt or one that one would want to live under?

Under Fascist theory? Because Fascist States do not merely observe the masses and record them, it directs them and utilizes mankind's potential to it's fullest, because it gives reason beyond the base materialism of decaying modern life in liberal states, because it is the ultimate expression of power and hierarchy for a greater good than that of any man or small group.

[Distruzio]

in a word: nothing. Fascism is the other side of the Socialist Coin with Communism. Where Communism is Internationalist Socialism, Fascism is Nationalist Socialism. Both result in a Totalitarian, Dictatorial State that controls everything. Capatialism isn't much better but at least it gives people the illusion they have a choice...

Fascism is not national socialism - nazism is. Fascism, at the core of the economic organization it emphasizes, is national syndicalism. A very different beast from socialism. Fascism is, however, the flip side of Leninism in that both require a vanguard party to perpetuate the revolution - that revolution being integrally syndicalist (for Fascism) and democratically socialist (for Leninism). Both were nationalist and both were revolutionary, but neither were the other.

[Distruzio]

Finally! Where have you two been?

Sleeping.

Well sleep when you're 30 or something b/c I've been battling the ignorance alone. How strange is that? An anarcho-monarchist defending and defining fascism from the confused masses?

[Conserative Morality]

Well sleep when you're 30 or something b/c I've been battling the ignorance alone. How strange is that? An anarcho-monarchist defending and defining fascism from the confused masses?

I felt the same way the first time I defended Fascism.

"I'm a goddamn liberal democrat, left-leaning, and an AMERICAN, and I'm sitting here defending fascism! What am I doing here?"

"Lol well fascism is like hitler only racist."

"Oh, right."

[DizKneeLandRand]

If it was like Singapore, then yeah I could go with it. It's a multicultural nation that has a strong leader and is pro business but also helps the people with housing, education etc.There a lot of things that are needed to be done here in the US that no one seems to be trying to do: fix roads/improve transportation, improve the education system/healthcare, help build industry and small businesses. Spain economically boomed after WW2- Spanish miracle

Would you label Juan Peron a fascist?

[Distruzio]

Well sleep when you're 30 or something b/c I've been battling the ignorance alone. How strange is that? An anarcho-monarchist defending and defining fascism from the confused masses?

I felt the same way the first time I defended Fascism.

"I'm a goddamn liberal democrat, left-leaning, and an AMERICAN, and I'm sitting here defending fascism! What am I doing here?"

"Lol well fascism is like hitler only racist."

"Oh, right."

Lol!

Well, being a Southron, I'd say that being an American makes one fascist by definition. But that is from the outside looking in.

[Distruzio]

If it was like Singapore, then yeah I could go with it. It's a multicultural nation that has a strong leader and is pro business, but also helps the people with housing, education etc.There a lot of things that are needed to be done here in the US that no one seems to be trying to do: fix roads/improve transportation, improve the education system/healthcare, help build industry and small businesses. Spain economically boomed after WW2- Spanish miracle

Would you label Juan Peron a fascist?

No. I'd label him a Keynsian.

[Norstal]

Sleeping.

Well sleep when you're 30 or something b/c I've been battling the ignorance alone. How strange is that? An anarcho-monarchist defending and defining fascism from the confused masses?

The ignorance of fascism drives me to fascism.

[Conserative Morality]

The ignorance of fascism drives me to fascism.

I might have to sig that,.

[Grandon Prime]

Because they're economically catastrophic and unnecessarily authoritarian.

Also, Hitler.

The Nazi's weren't Fascist, the Nazi party was it's own political group. Do some research.

[Norstal]

All States put the State above the individual. The Fascist State simply accepts this, and embraces it to use the precious hierarchy to it's fullest effect rather than getting bogged down in the lip-service and PR of the sacrosanctity of the individual that liberal states fight with.

In many nations their are limits to what powers the state can have over citizens through concepts such as rights. Thus while individuals do have to obay the laws and have certain obligations such as paying taxes citizens do have a degree of indivdual freedom that is not present in fascism (and similar type systems). Such freedoms seem a positive thing and are benificial both for the individual and for society as a whole.

What, like the WBC? You see groups like WBC and KKK positive? Such institutions exist when too much rights are given by the state. Under the right conditions (such as a rational government), institutions like these can be crushed and removed. Freedom is both positive and negative. There's always a positive and a negative to every idea that has ever existed. You already thought of the negative. Now think of the positive.

Well this is where we disagree. I see a lot positive and of genuine worth outside the sate. The state is a necessity (I am not an anarchist) and has certain functions that have to be fulfilled but it is not all important. The state exists to serve the individual not the other way around.

Except that in fascism, you can also argue that serving the state serves the people.

[Norstal]

The ignorance of fascism drives me to fascism.

I might have to sig that,.

Do it ya crypto-fascist.

[DizKneeLandRand]

If it was like Singapore, then yeah I could go with it. It's a multicultural nation that has a strong leader and is pro business, but also helps the people with housing, education etc.There a lot of things that are needed to be done here in the US that no one seems to be trying to do: fix roads/improve transportation, improve the education system/healthcare, help build industry and small businesses. Spain economically boomed after WW2- Spanish miracle

Would you label Juan Peron a fascist?

No. I'd label him a Keynsian.

Ok- wasn't really sure.

Like I said I admire how Singapore has developed into a powerful economic nation. Government does have a role in developing transport/education and roads and should play a part in developing industry and small biz. Problem with the US is that most of the money goes to big biz who have no economic interest in the country they live in. Plus the political system is so corrupt and marred with partisanship that nothing gets done.

[Yorick]

If it was like Singapore, then yeah I could go with it. It's a multicultural nation that has a strong leader and is pro business but also helps the people with housing, education etc.There a lot of things that are needed to be done here in the US that no one seems to be trying to do: fix roads/improve transportation, improve the education system/healthcare, help build industry and small businesses. Spain economically boomed after WW2- Spanish miracle

Would you label Juan Peron a fascist?

I wouldn't call Singapore multicultural. Multiracial and tolerant of different religions yes, but there's an understanding of english being the official language and a certain nationalism that is lacking in the west's multicultural model. That said I agree with you in large part, I have some ideological differences with the PAP but still greatly respect them.

[Flaxxony-Setram]

Because they're economically catastrophic and unnecessarily authoritarian.

Also, Hitler.

While I completely dissagree with corporatism, it is perhaps one of the single most efficient economic systems ever devised. Calling it an "economic catastrophy" is not an appropriate criticism in this case. However, efficiency aside, it is a disgustingly authoritarian ideology that should never even be considered for even a moment.

Only a true free market is more efficient. Except in arms industries.

Corporatism's weak point is that it detaches ownership from leadership. For example, Facebook will degenerate over time simply because the reason it got so successful in the first place is because Mark Zuckerberg had incredible foresight. The less influence he has in the company, the more mediocre the company becomes and can eventually only be sustained by having government prop it up (bailouts). That is why corporatism still has inefficiencies.\

Usually the success of the company is indicated by the brilliance of the founder.

[Indira]

Because like all totallarian systems, it places too much power in the hands of a tiny minority who are unaccountable to the people they lead.

[Neo Arcad]

Because they're economically catastrophic and unnecessarily authoritarian.

Also, Hitler.

What's wrong with Socialism?

It's economically catastophic and unnecessarily authoritarian.

Also, Stalin, Lenin, and Mao.

See how that works? I can generalize too.

[Erendi]

In many nations their are limits to what powers the state can have over citizens through concepts such as rights. Thus while individuals do have to obay the laws and have certain obligations such as paying taxes citizens do have a degree of indivdual freedom that is not present in fascism (and similar type systems). Such freedoms seem a positive thing and are benificial both for the individual and for society as a whole.

What, like the WBC? You see groups like WBC and KKK positive? Such institutions exist when too much rights are given by the state. Under the right conditions (such as a rational government), institutions like these can be crushed and removed. Freedom is both positive and negative. There's always a positive and a negative to every idea that has ever existed. You already thought of the negative. Now think of the positive.

Well I really have not heard of the WBC before now so I won't comment but where did I ever say the KKK was positive? It seems to be based on fascist principles as far as I can see. I am not arguing for anarchy here but I think groups which violate others rights can easily be controlled under current laws without an all-powerful state.

And yes I see the negatives but what really are the positives. What makes fascism a good form of government to advocate and what makes it one I want to live under?

Well this is where we disagree. I see a lot positive and of genuine worth outside the sate. The state is a necessity (I am not an anarchist) and has certain functions that have to be fulfilled but it is not all important. The state exists to serve the individual not the other way around.

Except that in fascism, you can also argue that serving the state serves the people.[/quote]

Assuming the state is acting the the interests of the individual yes but oftentimes that is not true and indeed it is quite common they go against the interests of individuals and often the nation as a whole.

[IshCong]

Nazism is the elevation of the racially supreme State. Fascism is the elevation of the integral State. Nazism is a perversion of fascism in a similar way Stalinism is a perversion of communism. Nazism was national socialist while fascism was national syndicalist. They were similar, but not synonymous.

I'm no expert either. I always defer to Greater Tezdrian, GWO, and Conserative Morality.

So..If I understand correctly...Nazism is Raichu and Fascism is Pikachu? Just an evolved state of it?

Yes, exactly. An evolved state that also sucks harder than the original.[/raichubashing]

[Norstal]

Well I really have not heard of the WBC before now so I won't comment but where did I ever say the KKK was positive?

That's the bloody point. Jesus.

It seems to be based on fascist principles as far as I can see. I am not arguing for anarchy here but I think groups which violate others rights can easily be controlled under current laws without an all-powerful state.

1. Westboro Baptist Church and the KKK are not violating others rights. Not at the moment. They are what you would call in the internet, "trolling".
2. The KKK is not based on fascist principle seeing as how the KKK was founded before fascism was even heard of.
3. You can't remove such institutions without violating THEIR right.

And yes I see the negatives but what really are the positives. What makes fascism a good form of government to advocate and what makes it one I want to live under?

I just told you. The state is all-powerful which means it can do anything it wants. What it does with its powers is up to them. It depends on what ideas that they have. If their idea is that everyone has to have candies, be well-fed, have proper healthcare, then everyone will get it. If their idea is to kill all the Jews, start a war with everyone, then they can do that too.

You do realize there's different kinds of fascism, right? Like there are different kinds of democracy, monarchy, etc.

Assuming the state is acting the the interests of the individual yes but oftentimes that is not true and indeed it is quite common they go against the interests of individuals and often the nation as a whole.

Every system of governance has this problem (arguably even in anarchy). It's just that the damage control for fascism is harder.

[DizKneeLandRand]

If it was like Singapore, then yeah I could go with it. It's a multicultural nation that has a strong leader and is pro business but also helps the people with housing, education etc.There a lot of things that are needed to be done here in the US that no one seems to be trying to do: fix roads/improve transportation, improve the education system/healthcare, help build industry and small businesses. Spain economically boomed after WW2- Spanish miracle

Would you label Juan Peron a fascist?

I wouldn't call Singapore multicultural. Multiracial and tolerant of different religions yes, but there's an understanding of english being the official language and a certain nationalism that is lacking in the west's multicultural model. That said I agree with you in large part, I have some ideological differences with the PAP but still greatly respect them.

Would you explain the differences?
Mine would be that i'd have a minimum wage and a small limited system (1yr) for people who were out of work or needed assistance.

Edit: Also Tariffs.