Condemning Fascism

[Rigby5]

Dems are not communist. Repubs are not facists. Just stop with this shit.

Most dems and repubs are fascist because they work mostly for the wealthy elite.
The War on Drugs, the lack of public health care, etc., are evidence of that.
Nobody is communists because they are way too selfish for that kind of idealism.

 

[2aguy]

Wrong.
Everyone support socialism because it is always more efficient to do common projects, like roads, schools, etc.

But National Socialism is a declaration of being intensely "anti-socialist".
National Socialism was fascist, which was an adoption of the symbolism of the wealthy elite of ancient Rome.
It is a coalition of the aristocracy, military, and originally priesthood that got replaced by the technology priests, the corporates.
Ancient Rome was an Oligarchy, not democratic.

Socialism implies common equality, of democracy.
Fascism implies the totalitarianism of the wealthy elite.

Socialism and fascism are polar opposites.
Socialism is decentralized majority.
Fascism is centralized minority.

Roads and schools are not socialism.....socialism is the government controlling and running the means of production.......

Socialism is never equal, or common...you have two classes in socialism....the government, and it's allies, and everyone else......

 

[Rigby5]

Roads and schools are not socialism.....socialism is the government controlling and running the means of production.......

Socialism is never equal, or common...you have two classes in socialism....the government, and it's allies, and everyone else......

Roads used to be done privately and a toll charged.
Private roads are very inconvenient, so public makes a lot more sense.
Same with schools.
They used to be private.
Now they are public because we learned that if you do not want high crime and poor productivity, it is better to educate everyone.

Socialism does not require the public to own the means of production, as long as there are regulating laws to prevent things like child labor, monopolies, etc.

With socialism, the whole people are supposed to be the government.
If not, then it can't really be socialism.

 

[Correll]

Fascism is not subjective.
It was defined by ancient Rome as an oligarchy of the aristocracy, military, and priesthood (now corporations), to deliberately suppress the majority.

Hitler and Mussolini did not change the definition at all, in anyway.

Irrelevant crap. The point is, that right leaning people, have no problem condemning fascism, while you leftards do have a problem condemning communism.


Would you like to address that, or talk some more shit?

 

[Rigby5]

Irrelevant crap. The point is, that right leaning people, have no problem condemning fascism, while you leftards do have a problem condemning communism.


Would you like to address that, or talk some more shit?

Fascism is intended to maintain privilege.
It is not supposed to be fair.

Socialism on the other hand, is intended as a means of preventing the wealthy elite from making economic slaves out of everyone, by the fact the wealthy elite have a monopoly on the expensive factories required to produce.
The whole point of socialism was to offset the inherent corruption of the wealthy elite.
This became really important with the industrial revolution, because expensive factories ruined cottage industries, but socialism was significant even before that, in that there were socialist revolts against feudalist control over farm lands.

There is no way anyone can argue against socialism.
Without socialism, we would be back to feudalism again, which essentially was slavery.

As to communism, it is not really clear what communism could even be?
Marx does not count because he never tried to actually implement anything, so we really can't tell what he would have come up with.
But we do know that Marx claimed that communism would require no force or coercion.
Communism appears to be some theoretical ideal.
What everyone has done instead is either capitalism or socialism.
And the countries claiming to be communist actually were the most capitalist, like the USSR and Mao's China.

 

[task0778]

It is hard for me to see how anyone can compare today's conservatives as fascists, which is typically a person that wants a totalitarian state where a citizen's rights are subservient to the state that requires a large central gov't. Nobody on the right is for that; if anything, it is those on the Left that better fit that description. Some Righties are somewhat nationalistic, MAGA and all that but that does not make them a fascist until and unless they are intent on using gov't force to accomplish nationalistic goals.

As a right-leaning person I have no problem denouncing fascism.

 

[Rigby5]

It is hard for me to see how anyone can compare today's conservatives as fascists, which is typically a person that wants a totalitarian state where a citizen's rights are subservient to the state that requires a large central gov't. Nobody on the right is for that; if anything, it is those on the Left that better fit that description. Some Righties are somewhat nationalistic, MAGA and all that but that does not make them a fascist until and unless they are intent on using gov't force to accomplish nationalistic goals.

As a right-leaning person I have no problem denouncing fascism.

Totally wrong.
The state is irrelevant to fascism.
The control, power, and wealth is concentrated in the hands of the wealthy elite with fascism.
Ancient Rome was fascist and coined the phrase.
All monarchies essentially are fascist.
Feudalism was fascist.
Fascism is an oligarchy of the wealthy elite.
Fascism does not have to be a totalitarian state, as the wealthy elite can run perfunctory elections where all candidates are wealthy elite.
That is how ancient Rome did it.
There were elected members of the senate, but they were all patricians instead of plebeians, so it was pretty much fake.
Nationalistic goals are not the point of fascism.
Nationalism is a fake way of getting public sentiment behind the fascist government.
Fascism often appeals to nationalism, patriotism, racism, xenophobia, etc.
But the goal of fascism is just profits for the wealthy elite.
Southern plantation owners were fascists.
Slum landlords are fascists.

 

[Oddball]

Wrong.
Fascism has always meant an authoritarian government, but one controlled by the wealthy elite.
Since the wealthy elite also tend to be industrialists and corporate owners, with fascism the gov't almost never controls the economy at all, in any way.
In fact, the hallmark of fascism is a total lack of any control over the economy or industry in any way.
Which quickly leads to monopolies, slave labor, etc.

Riiiiight...Hitler, Mussolini, and their bureaucratic minions had no control over anything to do with their economies.

 

[Oddball]

Not really.
Communism has nothing to do with a ubiquitous state really.
Communism is where people collectively pool resource in order to create the means of production they need.
That does not preclude any individual creating any means of production they want.
It is just that when individuals start to impact others, they have to follow the rules that prevent abuses.

 

[Rigby5]

Riiiiight...Hitler, Mussolini, and their bureaucratic minions had no control over anything to do with their economies.

View attachment 579122

Absolutely!
Hitler and Mussolini were hired speech readers.
They had nothing before, and did only exactly what they were told.
They actually made no decisions and had no power.

It is obvious because they made Hitler have all his buddies in the SA killed before they would give him the big job.
It is also obvious with Mussolini because they dropped him like a hot potato when it looked like he was a liability.

The wealthy elite were always the ones in control, and they maintained that control through their partnership with the military.
Hitler and Mussolini had no control over anything, at all, ever.

 

[Oddball]

Absolutely!
Hitler and Mussolini were hired speech readers.
They had nothing before, and did only exactly what they were told.
They actually made no decisions and had no power.

It is obvious because they made Hitler have all his buddies in the SA killed before they would give him the big job.
It is also obvious with Mussolini because they dropped him like a hot potato when it looked like he was a liability.

The wealthy elite were always the ones in control, and they maintained that control through their partnership with the military.
Hitler and Mussolini had no control over anything, at all, ever.

You're full of shit.

 

[Rigby5]

View attachment 579125

Amtrak is an example of communism.
It is communally owned.
It is where private enterprise was inadequate, but the public service was needed enough so that we had to do it publicly.

The confusion people have is they think communism implies a central dictatorship, and that is silly.
Obviously if there is a central dictatorship, then nothing it does could possibly be communal or communist.

 

[Rigby5]

You're full of shit.

How could Hitler or Mussolini ever have any power of their own?
They did not control the loyalty of any massive armed forces, they had no money to pay mercenaries.
They were picked by the wealthy elite, who just wanted front men, who could also serve as fall guys when things went bad.

 

[task0778]

How could Hitler or Mussolini ever have any power of their own?
They did not control the loyalty of any massive armed forces, they had no money to pay mercenaries.
They were picked by the wealthy elite, who just wanted front men, who could also serve as fall guys when things went bad.

Your perspective is so divorced from reality as to be incomprehensible. Either you are a world class bullshit artist or you are the most whacked out, brainwashed ideologue that I've ever come into contact with.

 

[Rigby5]

Your perspective is so divorced from reality as to be incomprehensible. Either you are a world class bullshit artist or you are the most whacked out, brainwashed ideologue that I've ever come into contact with.

You need to read some history.
Why did Hitler have all his old buddies in the SA killed off in 1933, the "Night of the Long Knives"?
It is not that Hitler did not like them.
It was that he wanted to be appointed chancellor by Hindenburg, and Hindenburg gave him an ultimatum.
He told Hitler that the powers that be were willing to make him chancellor, but only if he got rid of the SA.
So clearly he did what he was told to do.
Hitler never failed to do what he was told to do, as that is the reason he was put into any position of power and prestige at all.

Night of the Long Knives - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

{...
The Night of the Long Knives (German: Nacht der langen Messer (help·info)), or the Röhm Purge, also called Operation Hummingbird (German: Unternehmen Kolibri), was a purge that took place in Nazi Germany from June 30 to July 2, 1934. Chancellor Adolf Hitler, urged on by Hermann Göring and Heinrich Himmler, ordered a series of political extrajudicial executions intended to consolidate his power and alleviate the concerns of the German military about the role of Ernst Röhm and the Sturmabteilung (SA), the Nazis' paramilitary organization, known colloquially as "Brownshirts." Nazi propaganda presented the murders as a preventive measure against an alleged imminent coup by the SA under Röhm – the so-called Röhm Putsch.

The primary instruments of Hitler's action, which carried out most of the killings, were the Schutzstaffel (SS) paramilitary force under Himmler and its Security Service (SD), and Gestapo (secret police) under Reinhard Heydrich. Göring's personal police battalion also took part in the killings. Many of those killed in the purge were leaders of the SA, the best-known being Röhm himself, the SA's chief of staff and one of Hitler's longtime supporters and allies. Leading members of the leftist-leaning Strasserist faction of the Nazi Party, including its figurehead, Gregor Strasser, were also killed, as were establishment conservatives and anti-Nazis, such as former Chancellor Kurt von Schleicher and Bavarian politician Gustav Ritter von Kahr, who had suppressed Hitler's Munich Beer Hall Putsch in 1923. The murders of SA leaders were also intended to improve the image of the Hitler government with a German public that was increasingly critical of thuggish SA tactics.

Hitler saw the independence of the SA and the penchant of its members for street violence as a direct threat to his newly gained political power. He also wanted to appease leaders of the Reichswehr, the German military, who feared and despised the SA as a potential rival, in particular because of Röhm's ambition to merge the army and the SA under his own leadership. Additionally, Hitler was uncomfortable with Röhm's outspoken support for a "second revolution" to redistribute wealth. In Röhm's view, President Hindenburg's appointment of Hitler as Chancellor on January 30, 1933, had brought the Nazi Party to power, but had left unfulfilled the party's larger goals. Finally, Hitler used the purge to attack or eliminate German critics of his new regime, especially those loyal to Vice-Chancellor Franz von Papen, as well as to settle scores with old enemies.[a]

At least 85 people died during the purge, although the final death toll may have been in the hundreds,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives#cite_note-Evans_p39-3[c][d] with high estimates running from 700 to 1,000.[1] More than a thousand perceived opponents were arrested.[2] The purge strengthened and consolidated the support of the military for Hitler. It also provided a legal grounding for the Nazis, as the German courts and cabinet quickly swept aside centuries of legal prohibition against extrajudicial killings to demonstrate their loyalty to the regime. The Night of the Long Knives was a turning point for the German government.[3] It established Hitler as the supreme administrator of justice of the German people, as he put it in his July 13 speech to the Reichstag.

Before its execution, its planners sometimes referred to the purge as Hummingbird (German: Kolibri), the codeword used to send the execution squads into action on the day of the purge.[4] The codename for the operation appears to have been chosen arbitrarily. The phrase "Night of the Long Knives" in the German language predates the killings and refers generally to acts of vengeance.
...}

 

[struth]

This is sister thread to one started a bit ago, asking liberals to condemn communism. HEre I will take that thread's op, and just replace "liberals"

with the word "conservatives" and "communism" with "fascism". I am not specifying "nazism" because the other thread was a general question

and I want to give conservatives, just as much chance to get into the details of definitions as liberals have.


Here is the other op, adjusted.





Naturally, on a political discussion site, there is a lot of discussion about fascism. The pattern that I see over and over is condemnation of fascism

from lefties, and support and defense of fascism from righties. Why don't we see lefties condemning fascism? Even in this very thread, we will

see fascism trying to protect fascism with attempts to derail the thread instead of condemning fascism. Why don't fascism condemn it?

i don’t know a single Conservative that doesn’t hate National Socialism and their Fascist ideological views. The modern DNC embrace of it is troubling

 

[Rigby5]

i don’t know a single Conservative that doesn’t hate National Socialism and their Fascist ideological views. The modern DNC embrace of it is troubling

I disagree.
National Socialism was a coalition of the wealthy elite, the aristocracy, military, and corporations, in order to maximize profits.
That pretty much is exactly what the Republicans have turned into, if not all conservatives.

Germany invading Poland is far more justified than the US invading Iraq in order to steal their oil.
Poland tradition was part of Germany.

And in now way has the DNC ever embraced anything remotely like National Socialism.

Those republicans who claim to have Fascist ideology likely just do not know what Fascist ideology is.
It is high military spending, low taxes for corporations and the wealthy, and no deregulating industry.
The one regulation Fascist did put in place was a prohibition on offshoring resource, jobs, or wealth.
That is the one thing the Fascists were right about, and neither the Republicans or Democrats have faced up to that one yet.

 

[Dragonlady]

This is sister thread to one started a bit ago, asking liberals to condemn communism. HEre I will take that thread's op, and just replace "liberals"

with the word "conservatives" and "communism" with "fascism". I am not specifying "nazism" because the other thread was a general question

and I want to give conservatives, just as much chance to get into the details of definitions as liberals have.


Here is the other op, adjusted.





Naturally, on a political discussion site, there is a lot of discussion about fascism. The pattern that I see over and over is condemnation of fascism

from lefties, and support and defense of fascism from righties. Why don't we see lefties condemning fascism? Even in this very thread, we will

see fascism trying to protect fascism with attempts to derail the thread instead of condemning fascism. Why don't fascism condemn it?

Are you fucking BLIND or just STUPID. ANTI-FA is short for "anti-fascism". That's about as "leftist" as groups get and their sole purpose in life is to fight fascists/Republicans/Nazi's.

Republicans are the ones promoting NAZI symbolism and iconography at every turn. Nazi flags at the rallies. Nazi symbols on stage at the Republican convention. Nazi iconography in print ads.

Democrats have condemned the fascism of the Republican Party at every turn - the white supremacist agenda, the suppression of the rights of minorities and women. Republicans still oppose the Equal Rights Amendment for women, just as they try to strip women of the freedom of choice over their own bodies. That's about as fascist as it gets, and yet Republicans enthusiastically embrace bans on abortion, all of which are based on misogny.

Republicans will go to any length to protect the fetus, just don't ask them to put an end to school shootings. The one good thing about the lockdowns and remote learning is that there were no school shootings for over a year. 24 so far this year. If only you cared as much about children after they're born as you do before they exist.

 

[Dragonlady]

i don’t know a single Conservative that doesn’t hate National Socialism and their Fascist ideological views. The modern DNC embrace of it is troubling

You're lying because you whole heartedly embrace the fascist agenda of white male supremacy and white male rule. You oppose rights for women and minorities, but you claim to base that opposition on your inherent intellectual and moral superiority, not based on any patriarchal thoughts on your part.

 

[dudmuck]

i don’t know a single Conservative that doesn’t hate National Socialism and their Fascist ideological views. The modern DNC embrace of it is troubling