Fascism

[Fahran]

The confusion over what is and isn't Fascism largely comes down to historical regimes being labelled fascist that neither were nor ever claimed to be.

Like Franco. He's the main one.

[Canadensia]

The confusion over what is and isn't Fascism largely comes down to historical regimes being labelled fascist that neither were nor ever claimed to be.

Like Franco. He's the main one.

Yeah, he was really just a traditional conservative. Admittedly, he did ally with his country's fascists, but that was an alliance of convenience which he largely neutered the moment he had the opportunity to do so.

Salazar too, as he sometimes gets labelled a fascist.

[Lux Pulchrae]

I think people just view Franco, Salazar, Hitler, etc. as fascist because they all share ideas with fascist Italy but these similarities are only surface deep. They're all unity based, ultra-nationalistic, anti-democracy, anti-communism, mono-cultural dictatorships. Their real difference was economically. Hitler was obviously a national socialist, Franco geared more towards capitalism than the others, and Mussolini was a corporatist.

Franco is especially confusing to pin down because the civil war in Spain had essentially two sides, but then both of these sides were themselves split into their own pocket groups with vague unifying ideals. Franco's side were the nationalist, falangists, monarchists, the JONS, but they all believed in the idea of a unified Spain free from communism, republicans and others

[Internationalist Bastard]

I think people just view Franco, Salazar, Hitler, etc. as fascist because they all share ideas with fascist Italy but these similarities are only surface deep. They're all unity based, ultra-nationalistic, anti-democracy, anti-communism, mono-cultural dictatorships. Their real difference was economically. Hitler was obviously a national socialist, Franco geared more towards capitalism than the others, and Mussolini was a corporatist.

Franco is especially confusing to pin down because the civil war in Spain had essentially two sides, but then both of these sides were themselves split into their own pocket groups with vague unifying ideals. Franco's side were the nationalist, falangists, monarchists, the JONS, but they all believed in the idea of a unified Spain free from communism, republicans and others

That actually makes sense
Not knowing much about economics I label governments mainly on organization of rule, social policies and ideology/propaganda. So to me they all look similar but from an economic standpoint they could be vastly different

[Kash Island]

I think people just view Franco, Salazar, Hitler, etc. as fascist because they all share ideas with fascist Italy but these similarities are only surface deep. They're all unity based, ultra-nationalistic, anti-democracy, anti-communism, mono-cultural dictatorships. Their real difference was economically. Hitler was obviously a national socialist, Franco geared more towards capitalism than the others, and Mussolini was a corporatist.

Franco is especially confusing to pin down because the civil war in Spain had essentially two sides, but then both of these sides were themselves split into their own pocket groups with vague unifying ideals. Franco's side were the nationalist, falangists, monarchists, the JONS, but they all believed in the idea of a unified Spain free from communism, republicans and others

Good point but does that mean Moaism and Stalinism are not communist?

[Cekoviu]

I think people just view Franco, Salazar, Hitler, etc. as fascist because they all share ideas with fascist Italy but these similarities are only surface deep. They're all unity based, ultra-nationalistic, anti-democracy, anti-communism, mono-cultural dictatorships. Their real difference was economically. Hitler was obviously a national socialist, Franco geared more towards capitalism than the others, and Mussolini was a corporatist.

Franco is especially confusing to pin down because the civil war in Spain had essentially two sides, but then both of these sides were themselves split into their own pocket groups with vague unifying ideals. Franco's side were the nationalist, falangists, monarchists, the JONS, but they all believed in the idea of a unified Spain free from communism, republicans and others

Good point but does that mean Moaism and Stalinism are not communist?

What's Moaism?

[Crysuko]

Good point but does that mean Moaism and Stalinism are not communist?

What's Moaism?

*Maoism

[New Emeline]

I think people just view Franco, Salazar, Hitler, etc. as fascist because they all share ideas with fascist Italy but these similarities are only surface deep. They're all unity based, ultra-nationalistic, anti-democracy, anti-communism, mono-cultural dictatorships. Their real difference was economically. Hitler was obviously a national socialist, Franco geared more towards capitalism than the others, and Mussolini was a corporatist.

Franco is especially confusing to pin down because the civil war in Spain had essentially two sides, but then both of these sides were themselves split into their own pocket groups with vague unifying ideals. Franco's side were the nationalist, falangists, monarchists, the JONS, but they all believed in the idea of a unified Spain free from communism, republicans and others

Good point but does that mean Moaism and Stalinism are not communist?

Moaism?

[The Parkus Empire]

I think people just view Franco, Salazar, Hitler, etc. as fascist because they all share ideas with fascist Italy but these similarities are only surface deep. They're all unity based, ultra-nationalistic, anti-democracy, anti-communism, mono-cultural dictatorships. Their real difference was economically. Hitler was obviously a national socialist, Franco geared more towards capitalism than the others, and Mussolini was a corporatist.

Franco is especially confusing to pin down because the civil war in Spain had essentially two sides, but then both of these sides were themselves split into their own pocket groups with vague unifying ideals. Franco's side were the nationalist, falangists, monarchists, the JONS, but they all believed in the idea of a unified Spain free from communism, republicans and others

Good point but does that mean Moaism and Stalinism are not communist?

According to the Communist Manifesto they are

[Kubra]

I think people just view Franco, Salazar, Hitler, etc. as fascist because they all share ideas with fascist Italy but these similarities are only surface deep. They're all unity based, ultra-nationalistic, anti-democracy, anti-communism, mono-cultural dictatorships. Their real difference was economically. Hitler was obviously a national socialist, Franco geared more towards capitalism than the others, and Mussolini was a corporatist.

Franco is especially confusing to pin down because the civil war in Spain had essentially two sides, but then both of these sides were themselves split into their own pocket groups with vague unifying ideals. Franco's side were the nationalist, falangists, monarchists, the JONS, but they all believed in the idea of a unified Spain free from communism, republicans and others

Good point but does that mean Moaism and Stalinism are not communist?

They most certainly were. A lutheran does not say a pentacostal is not a protestant simply because he dislikes them.

[Auze]

Good point but does that mean Moaism and Stalinism are not communist?

Moaism?

Better than that horrible Emuism.

[Dogmeat]

Moaism?

Better than that horrible Emuism.

Stop making bird jokes. By order of the Ostreich!

[Auze]

Better than that horrible Emuism.

Stop making bird jokes. By order of the Ostreich!

I'm a dirty Kiwimunist, we will slaughter you like the Moaists slaughtered Democratites in Tinamou square.

[Phoenicaea]

.. I find the criteria of main post (the first) to be quite fine.. I d also have a shorter definition of them bound toghether and to be less strict..

fascism stands in a government where there is not autonomy nor different role between government and state branches, and the main said purpose of this is to drain resources form outside (other prople) to feed it, rather than "develop" them.

as it professes the unity of lives and souls as a sole property of a leader-guided commonhood and a difference between this commonhood and the outside.

[Ashlak]

My criteria:

1. Authoritarian/Totalitarian

2. Extremely nationalistic

3. Protectionist mixed economy, autarky being ideal

4. Right wing social views, though not "traditionalist"

5. Militaristic, general glorification of violence

6. Populist, makes appeals more towards middle class than upper class