CDZ True or false, government dictating to private organizations is fascist.

[diver52]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

That would make restrictions on abortion fascist.

 

[flacaltenn]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

There are actual limits to when the FEDS in particular can indeed dictate to private orgs.. That would be on interstate commerce issues first and foremost.. And apparently on equity in hiring, minimum wages, taxation, and the REQUIREMENT to follow company registration, SEC rules, ect...

Some of those "powers" that have been taken largely thru the commerce clause, are really questionable.. Like the usefulness of having a nation-wide min wage in a country where the cost of living can vary by as much as 3 to 1... Same with a lot of enviro regs where a state can OVER-RIDE the Fed standards and de facto BAN certain sectors of industry and product...

BUT -- when I hear the crazed comments of the Insane Clown Posse that are Dem Prez candidates, I DO tend to think ultra authoritarian and extra-constitutional -- if not "fascist".. There have been MANY of these. The latest was (Warren or Harris IIRC) calling for FEDERAL rent control.. Or the Dem party which once SHUNNED states rights NOW blatantly ignoring Federal immigration law, election law and the Bill of Rights.

So the "fascism" can originate in D.C. or it can and actually has been more apparent in the various states as the left foolishly tries to stop the bleeding by making "one party" states out of their strongholds...

 

[Bush92]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

It’s communism, but communist and fascist from same side of political spectrum. THE LEFT.

 

[2aguy]

Depends on what is being dictated. There are certain rules that are the responsibility of the government to dictate to all . Just because it is a private organization doesn't mean their building doesn't have to meet fire code. What specifically are you referring to?

Fire codes are not fascism....telling a business how to run their business day to day is fascism/socialism.

 

[BULLDOG]

Depends on what is being dictated. There are certain rules that are the responsibility of the government to dictate to all . Just because it is a private organization doesn't mean their building doesn't have to meet fire code. What specifically are you referring to?

Fire codes are not fascism....telling a business how to run their business day to day is fascism/socialism.

Be specific when you say telling a business how to run their business. What exactly does that entail?

 

[Preacher]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

False. If those things are open to the public like facebook then government should force them to allow free speech and expression.

 

[2aguy]

Depends on what is being dictated. There are certain rules that are the responsibility of the government to dictate to all . Just because it is a private organization doesn't mean their building doesn't have to meet fire code. What specifically are you referring to?

Fire codes are not fascism....telling a business how to run their business day to day is fascism/socialism.

Be specific when you say telling a business how to run their business. What exactly does that entail?

The Myth of "Nazi Capitalism" | Chris Calton

German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

“In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living.



The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”


Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie.
Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.
Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.

Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.)
Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically.

In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace.Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.

 

[K9Buck]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

There are actual limits to when the FEDS in particular can indeed dictate to private orgs.. That would be on interstate commerce issues first and foremost.. And apparently on equity in hiring, minimum wages, taxation, and the REQUIREMENT to follow company registration, SEC rules, ect...

Some of those "powers" that have been taken largely thru the commerce clause, are really questionable.. Like the usefulness of having a nation-wide min wage in a country where the cost of living can vary by as much as 3 to 1... Same with a lot of enviro regs where a state can OVER-RIDE the Fed standards and de facto BAN certain sectors of industry and product...

BUT -- when I hear the crazed comments of the Insane Clown Posse that are Dem Prez candidates, I DO tend to think ultra authoritarian and extra-constitutional -- if not "fascist".. There have been MANY of these. The latest was (Warren or Harris IIRC) calling for FEDERAL rent control.. Or the Dem party which once SHUNNED states rights NOW blatantly ignoring Federal immigration law, election law and the Bill of Rights.

So the "fascism" can originate in D.C. or it can and actually has been more apparent in the various states as the left foolishly tries to stop the bleeding by making "one party" states out of their strongholds...

Speaking of fascism, AOC is proposing national rent control.

AOC pushes national rent control, welfare for illegal immigrants in latest massive proposal
AOC pushes national rent control, welfare for illegal immigrants in latest massive proposal

 

[BULLDOG]

Depends on what is being dictated. There are certain rules that are the responsibility of the government to dictate to all . Just because it is a private organization doesn't mean their building doesn't have to meet fire code. What specifically are you referring to?

Fire codes are not fascism....telling a business how to run their business day to day is fascism/socialism.

Be specific when you say telling a business how to run their business. What exactly does that entail?

The Myth of "Nazi Capitalism" | Chris Calton

German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

“In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living.



The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”


Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie.
Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.
Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.

Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.)
Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically.

In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace.Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.

Interesting that you mention taking property under the auspices of "national interest". Isn't that how they took all that property for Keystone Pipeline? Oil companies, with the help of the right wing used "imminent domain" to steal those land owners property.

 

[2aguy]

Depends on what is being dictated. There are certain rules that are the responsibility of the government to dictate to all . Just because it is a private organization doesn't mean their building doesn't have to meet fire code. What specifically are you referring to?

Fire codes are not fascism....telling a business how to run their business day to day is fascism/socialism.

Be specific when you say telling a business how to run their business. What exactly does that entail?

The Myth of "Nazi Capitalism" | Chris Calton

German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

“In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living.



The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”


Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie.
Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.
Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.

Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.)
Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically.

In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace.Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.

Interesting that you mention taking property under the auspices of "national interest". Isn't that how they took all that property for Keystone Pipeline? Oil companies, with the help of the right wing used "imminent domain" to steal those land owners property.

And if that is true, it was wrong....so links.........

So, I guess you, like me, oppose the Kelo decision ....right?

 

[BULLDOG]

Depends on what is being dictated. There are certain rules that are the responsibility of the government to dictate to all . Just because it is a private organization doesn't mean their building doesn't have to meet fire code. What specifically are you referring to?

Fire codes are not fascism....telling a business how to run their business day to day is fascism/socialism.

Be specific when you say telling a business how to run their business. What exactly does that entail?

The Myth of "Nazi Capitalism" | Chris Calton

German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

“In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living.



The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”


Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie.
Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.
Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.

Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.)
Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically.

In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace.Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.

Interesting that you mention taking property under the auspices of "national interest". Isn't that how they took all that property for Keystone Pipeline? Oil companies, with the help of the right wing used "imminent domain" to steal those land owners property.

And if that is true, it was wrong....so links.........

So, I guess you, like me, oppose the Kelo decision ....right?

Keystone XL Eminent Domain Map

 

[Pellinore]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

It’s communism, but communist and fascist from same side of political spectrum. THE LEFT.

Fascism is by definition an extreme right-wing reaction to (perceived or real) failures of leftist policies. It is not itself from the left.

 

[K9Buck]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

It’s communism, but communist and fascist from same side of political spectrum. THE LEFT.

Fascism is by definition an extreme right-wing reaction to (perceived or real) failures of leftist policies. It is not itself from the left.

Never heard that one.

 

[The European with joy]

I totally believe the arch rival to Italy in World War 2 that nazism is the best nationalism but nazism no better than communism if it became in a northern European land order with communism it should draw a debate by the debate nazism vs communism.

 

[Skylar]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

False. Fascism has many characteristics; a dictatorship, complete power in the state, state sanctioned racism, violently suppression of criticism and opposition, strict regimintation of all industry and commerce and belligerant nationalism.

You're fixating on one attribute and vague similarities (fallaciously equating regulation with strict regimination of all industry and commerce), and then insisting that this one vaguely similar attribute establishes your conclusion.

Its an obvious fallacy of logic, like insisting that a tricycle and a fighter jet both use wheels. Thus, a tricycle is a fighter jet.

It doesn't work.

 

[K9Buck]

False.

So a fascist system of government permits owners of industry the freedom to do as they please?

 

[flacaltenn]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

There are actual limits to when the FEDS in particular can indeed dictate to private orgs.. That would be on interstate commerce issues first and foremost.. And apparently on equity in hiring, minimum wages, taxation, and the REQUIREMENT to follow company registration, SEC rules, ect...

Some of those "powers" that have been taken largely thru the commerce clause, are really questionable.. Like the usefulness of having a nation-wide min wage in a country where the cost of living can vary by as much as 3 to 1... Same with a lot of enviro regs where a state can OVER-RIDE the Fed standards and de facto BAN certain sectors of industry and product...

BUT -- when I hear the crazed comments of the Insane Clown Posse that are Dem Prez candidates, I DO tend to think ultra authoritarian and extra-constitutional -- if not "fascist".. There have been MANY of these. The latest was (Warren or Harris IIRC) calling for FEDERAL rent control.. Or the Dem party which once SHUNNED states rights NOW blatantly ignoring Federal immigration law, election law and the Bill of Rights.

So the "fascism" can originate in D.C. or it can and actually has been more apparent in the various states as the left foolishly tries to stop the bleeding by making "one party" states out of their strongholds...

Speaking of fascism, AOC is proposing national rent control.

AOC pushes national rent control, welfare for illegal immigrants in latest massive proposal
AOC pushes national rent control, welfare for illegal immigrants in latest massive proposal

I saw that.. I'm not surprised that a "Boston economics degree" doesn't include ANYTHING about basic govt structure or power.. If this was a "normal job" her ass would have been fired the first week for not knowing what business her employer was in....

 

[impuretrash]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

There are actual limits to when the FEDS in particular can indeed dictate to private orgs.. That would be on interstate commerce issues first and foremost.. And apparently on equity in hiring, minimum wages, taxation, and the REQUIREMENT to follow company registration, SEC rules, ect...

Some of those "powers" that have been taken largely thru the commerce clause, are really questionable.. Like the usefulness of having a nation-wide min wage in a country where the cost of living can vary by as much as 3 to 1... Same with a lot of enviro regs where a state can OVER-RIDE the Fed standards and de facto BAN certain sectors of industry and product...

BUT -- when I hear the crazed comments of the Insane Clown Posse that are Dem Prez candidates, I DO tend to think ultra authoritarian and extra-constitutional -- if not "fascist".. There have been MANY of these. The latest was (Warren or Harris IIRC) calling for FEDERAL rent control.. Or the Dem party which once SHUNNED states rights NOW blatantly ignoring Federal immigration law, election law and the Bill of Rights.

So the "fascism" can originate in D.C. or it can and actually has been more apparent in the various states as the left foolishly tries to stop the bleeding by making "one party" states out of their strongholds...

Speaking of fascism, AOC is proposing national rent control.

AOC pushes national rent control, welfare for illegal immigrants in latest massive proposal
AOC pushes national rent control, welfare for illegal immigrants in latest massive proposal

I saw that.. I'm not surprised that a "Boston economics degree" doesn't include ANYTHING about basic govt structure or power.. If this was a "normal job" her ass would have been fired the first week for not knowing what business her employer was in....

The ruling class has almost zero real-world work experience and that's why we're all fucked.

 

[flacaltenn]

Reminder, this is the "Clean Debate Zone".

True. Fascism permits private ownership, but not necessarily private management.

There are actual limits to when the FEDS in particular can indeed dictate to private orgs.. That would be on interstate commerce issues first and foremost.. And apparently on equity in hiring, minimum wages, taxation, and the REQUIREMENT to follow company registration, SEC rules, ect...

Some of those "powers" that have been taken largely thru the commerce clause, are really questionable.. Like the usefulness of having a nation-wide min wage in a country where the cost of living can vary by as much as 3 to 1... Same with a lot of enviro regs where a state can OVER-RIDE the Fed standards and de facto BAN certain sectors of industry and product...

BUT -- when I hear the crazed comments of the Insane Clown Posse that are Dem Prez candidates, I DO tend to think ultra authoritarian and extra-constitutional -- if not "fascist".. There have been MANY of these. The latest was (Warren or Harris IIRC) calling for FEDERAL rent control.. Or the Dem party which once SHUNNED states rights NOW blatantly ignoring Federal immigration law, election law and the Bill of Rights.

So the "fascism" can originate in D.C. or it can and actually has been more apparent in the various states as the left foolishly tries to stop the bleeding by making "one party" states out of their strongholds...

Speaking of fascism, AOC is proposing national rent control.

AOC pushes national rent control, welfare for illegal immigrants in latest massive proposal
AOC pushes national rent control, welfare for illegal immigrants in latest massive proposal

I saw that.. I'm not surprised that a "Boston economics degree" doesn't include ANYTHING about basic govt structure or power.. If this was a "normal job" her ass would have been fired the first week for not knowing what business her employer was in....

The ruling class has almost zero real-world work experience and that's why we're all fucked.

That's actually fixable.. Vote only for folks who have a TRACK RECORD of accomplishments OUTSIDE the realm of govt... It's insane to vote for a waitress with a fake biz/economics degree who's never accomplished a THING in her life except defrauding her parents for college money and SOMEHOW stealing a degree from Boston University...

 

[K9Buck]

Vote only for folks who have a TRACK RECORD of accomplishments OUTSIDE the realm of govt...

The view of leftists is that government isn't about running it like a business. They don't believe in electing people into office based on their extraordinary success in the business world. They prefer community organizers, career-politicians and academic ideologues.