# The 14 characteristics of Fascism



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html


*Powerful and Continuing Nationalism*
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.


*Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights*
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.


*Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause*
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.


*Supremacy of the Military*
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.


*Rampant Sexism*
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.


*Controlled Mass Media*
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.


*Obsession with National Security*
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.


*Religion and Government are Intertwined*
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.


*Corporate Power is Protected*
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.


*Labor Power is Suppressed*
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .


*Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts*
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.


*Obsession with Crime and Punishment*
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.


*Rampant Cronyism and Corruption*
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.


*Fraudulent Elections*
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 14, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> *Powerful and Continuing Nationalism*
> Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.


No, this is universal to any regime that engages in warfare or defense (any healthy system really). As Machiavelli said, mercs rob you in peace times and leave you in war times.

 By this definition The USA of the 30s was facist, complete nonsense.


Nothereed said:


> *Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights*
> Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.


This also applies any system. Any system that holds power will do whatever it needs to do to stay in power. What this Dr. dos is just a competition of pointing fingers. Any government unable or unwilling to act against the enemy of their populus will eventually loose power. Human rights is an abstraction that has been used to justify the most horrific acts ever. As a government it is not your obligation to rule over the world, your populus is your concern.


Nothereed said:


> *Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause*
> The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.


This has inherently nothing to do with facism. Any healthy government will act against a preceived common thread.


Nothereed said:


> *Supremacy of the Military*
> Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.


Has nothing to do with facism.


Nothereed said:


> *Rampant Sexism*
> The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.


This is also universal thoughout history. Even the outwardly presented political figures of todays western world are increasingly percived as actors rather than decision makers.


Nothereed said:


> *Controlled Mass Media*
> Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.


Has nothing to do with facism. A facist government officially declares to take control of institutions.


Nothereed said:


> *Obsession with National Security*
> Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.


Has nothing to do with facism.


Nothereed said:


> *Religion and Government are Intertwined*
> Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions


Has nothing to do with facism in particular. There are some systems that try to force their doctrin on the people, but any intelligent leadership will work with what is popular.


Nothereed said:


> *Corporate Power is Protected*
> The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.


This is acurate.


Nothereed said:


> *Labor Power is Suppressed*
> Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .


Has nothing to do with facism.


Nothereed said:


> *Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts*
> Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.


Has nothing to do with facism.


Nothereed said:


> *Obsession with Crime and Punishment*
> Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.


This has nothing to do with facism


Nothereed said:


> *Rampant Cronyism and Corruption*
> Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.


Has nothing to do with facism. In fact Mussolini kicked out the mafia in Italy that was in power before.


Nothereed said:


> *Fraudulent Elections*
> Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.


Has nothing to do with facism.

We need to raise the standards of academic contributions.


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Aug 14, 2022)

@Creamu it bothered you, didn't it? It doesn't surprise me, given how your participation is right-wing fanaticism disguised as ignorant neutrality.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 14, 2022)

@Dark_Phoras
If you don't care engaging with the substance, there is nothing to discuss.


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Aug 14, 2022)

Dark_Phoras said:


> @Creamu it bothered you, didn't it? It doesn't surprise me, given how your participation is right-wing fanaticism disguised as ignorant neutrality.



Daddy Bolsonaro needs to be defended.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 14, 2022)

Creamu said:


> Snip


You could've just said "nuh-uh" and left it at that, as that's the extent of your argument here.  This is a list created by highly-educated historians and scholars, and it's been around for decades.  You'd need to write a whole Masters Dissertation in an attempt to refute it, and odds are you'd fail in that goal anyway.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 14, 2022)

Xzi said:


> This is a list created by highly-educated historians and scholars, and it's been around for decades.


He may pass as an intellectual authority these days, but that doesnt mean much. His words speak for themselves.


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Aug 14, 2022)

stanleyopar2000 said:


> Daddy Bolsonaro needs to be defended.



So he's brazilian, that might explain it. Public education is massively defunded in Brazil, because of elites that accumulated wealth for themselves and engaged in massive cronyism and nepotism. This gave rise to a vicious cycle of confusion about basic meanings, groupthink, and debates in the public sphere being won by whoever is louder.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 14, 2022)

Creamu said:


> He may pass as an intellectual authority these days, but that doesnt mean much. His words speak for themselves.


They do, and rather authoritatively.  Every single one of these was a factor in the lead up to the Nazis' takeover of Germany.  If you recognize any of them as being prevalent in your country, reflexively denying reality is not gonna help matters, only make them worse.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 14, 2022)

These elements are shared amongst many ideologies, including communism. 

The Bolshevicks, Stalin, Mao, Castro were all nationalists, they disregarded human rights for the "greater good", they created enemies (rich people) as a unifying cause, and communists dictators do enjoy a military parade. 

I can't really name a female or trans communist leader in all of history.

Communists have to control the media. Pravda anyone? Xinhua?

Every single leader of a country needs to worry about national security. What do you think the Cold War was all about?

Communists' religion is government, so you can't get anymore intertwined than that.

Communists tend to destroy private enterprise and therefore innovation.

The common laborer has no upward mobility in a communist country unless he is favored by the party.

Look at communist art and architecture. It's horrible and drab.

A national police force, like say the FBI?

Any totalitarian government will be filled with cronyism and corruption. That's universal.

Communists only have one election to vote them in. Afterwards, they just do away with them and rule.

So all in all, this "14 steps to being a fascist" is really a generic list that can describe any totalitarian government, but I get what the op is trying to. It just comes across as weak and ineffective.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 14, 2022)

I love how someone pointing out that we are going down an obvious Fascist path always ends up with post containing the ol’ reliable 


Because trying to control the conversation with the same talking points is all Conservatives and Fascists have


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 14, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> I love how someone pointing out that we are going down an obvious Fascist path always ends up with post containing the ol’ reliable
> View attachment 322515
> Because trying to control the conversation with the same talking points is all Conservatives and Fascists have


I agree we are on an obvious path to fascism. Look at who is in charge right now.

Try refuting the "talking points". You can't. You know the communist death count dwarfs any other group. You want to excuse it somehow, but you know you can't. Instead you seethe and rage against anybody who points out facts about the over 100 million communists have murdered in just the 20th century alone.


----------



## 1NOOB (Aug 14, 2022)

too much time trying to accuse and find a reason than actually doing something about it .


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Aug 14, 2022)

1NOOB said:


> too much time trying to accuse and find a reason than actually doing something about it .



Please, elaborate.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

Creamu said:


> Extreme amount of cope


You realize this was written in 2003 studying all previous facist regimes by a well accepted political scientist. This isn't some random hit piece. I'm not going to even attempt to counter ever "nuh uh" statement since it's cope.  And a lot of it. I don't think some random person on the internet is magically going to know more than someone who specializes in their own field, and was accepted in that field.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

I bet for many of you, you've been deeply bothered. Why? Because a figure in recent memory perfectly matches it. all 14.


Nothereed said:


> They are the following
> 
> *Powerful and Continuing Nationalism*_
> Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays._
> ...


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

Creamu said:


> By this definition The USA of the 30s was facist, complete nonsense.


funny that you mention that
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-1930s-america-and-might-spread-again-today/
Because it indeed was. The only reason it didn't fall into complete fascism then, was when I believe it was Texas was being threatened to be reclaimed. Caught via enemy communications. Which pissed the United States government off (besides also pearl harbor)
otherwise we were closely buddy buddy. Don't believe me?
Ford, General Motors, Coca-Cola.
Coca-Cola created Fanta in support of Germany. Ford was open about him being a Anti Semite and struck a deal with Germany. General Motors didn't stop production in Germany, and instead created a deal with the Nazi government.
Still don't believe me?
What is the core underpinning belief under Hitler?
That the "Aryan" race was superior. But not just that, those that were Jewish were inferior. Not by religion. But by genetics.

The United States had the same dogma coursing through it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

there's a lot more Comparisons I can make.

However this underpins a point.
Capitalism thus Corporations have no moral compass, they only abide to money. There is nothing to stop that corporation from supporting a truly morally disgusting group or government. The people who work for them cannot stop the gears, either at risk because of the Fascist government dictating what should be done, and as such direct bullet to the head for not complying. Or at the hand of the capitalist arms through starvation and lack of housing.
We need to switch away from capitalism, strength democracy entirely, away from what is essentially become a mix of a theocracy(religion) and plutocracy (wealthy) and what's left of a dried out democratic system.
back onto the track of a actual democracy. The electoral collage system needs to be removed. We need to support a ranked choice system, and remove money out of politics entirely. As Capitalism by nature is not democratic, it's tilted to fascism before, and it WILL do it again.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

@Creamu
Further more if these 14 characteristics don't do it for you. There's another alive political scientist who is alive. And he identifies the same thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Paxton



> in his 1998 paper "The Five Stages of Fascism," he suggests that fascism cannot be defined solely by its ideology, since fascism is a complex political phenomenon rather than a relatively coherent body of doctrine like communism or socialism. Instead, he focuses on fascism's political context and functional development. The article identifies five paradigmatic stages of a fascist movement, although he notes that only Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy progressed through all five:
> 
> Intellectual exploration, where disillusionment with popular democracy manifests itself in discussions of lost national vigor
> Rooting, where a fascist movement, aided by political deadlock and polarization, becomes a player on the national stage
> ...


It's not by happen chance that two models fit, let alone the creator of the second model saying the exact same thing.
I'm looking for his refined version and will put it down.
I found the book in question https://files.libcom.org/files/Robert O. Paxton-The Anatomy of Fascism  -Knopf (2004).pdf
I recommend giving it a read.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 14, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> You realize this was written in 2003 studying all previous facist regimes by a well accepted political scientist.


I guess science is about appeals to authority rather than engaging with arguments. Oh well...


Nothereed said:


> This isn't some random hit piece.


It is a mouthpiece. The amount of a**kissing that gets you into high positions of academia for quite a while now is of the charts.


Nothereed said:


> I'm not going to even attempt to counter ever "nuh uh" statement since it's cope.


Write that as the first sentence the next time, it makes it easy to dismiss you.


Nothereed said:


> And a lot of it. I don't think some random person on the internet is magically going to know more than someone who specializes in their own field, and was accepted in that field.


These instutions are their for your service, they want to inform you about what is going on in the world and then... profit.


Nothereed said:


> funny that you mention that
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-1930s-america-and-might-spread-again-today/
> Because it indeed was.


Ah, so name me the figure heads of 1930s american facism then.


Nothereed said:


> The only reason it didn't fall into complete fascism then,


So not fascist okay.


Nothereed said:


> was when I believe it was Texas was being threatened to be reclaimed. Caught via enemy communications. Which pissed the United States government off (besides also pearl harbor)


The United States government was quite happy pearl harbor happened.


Nothereed said:


> otherwise we were closely buddy buddy. Don't believe me?
> Ford, General Motors, Coca-Cola.
> Coca-Cola created Fanta in support of Germany. Ford was open about him being a Anti Semite and struck a deal with Germany.


Germany was national socialist not fascist,. Anti semitism is not a form of government. Ford did help the bolsheviks (about 85% jewish government while under 2% of the population) get their economy going. Those poor guys couldn't even manage to build a tractor on their own.


Nothereed said:


> General Motors didn't stop production in Germany, and instead created a deal with the Nazi government.
> Still don't believe me?
> What is the core underpinning belief under Hitler?
> That the "Aryan" race was superior.
> But not just that, those that were Jewish were inferior. Not by religion. But by genetics.


There were alot of Jews in high positions in national socialist germany.


Nothereed said:


> The United States had the same dogma coursing through it.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States


The united states had far more developed eugenics programs than anyone. Where did they all go after the war? Japan. Eugenics is not fascism.


Nothereed said:


> there's a lot more Comparisons I can make.
> 
> However this underpins a point.
> Capitalism thus Corporations have no moral compass, they only abide to money.


No, money is only one of their mechanisms it is always about power.


Nothereed said:


> There is nothing to stop that corporation from supporting a truly morally disgusting group or government.


It is the other way around, morally disgusting use every tool in ther toolbox corporate structures are one of them.


Nothereed said:


> The people who work for them cannot stop the gears, either at risk because of the Fascist government dictating what should be done, and as such direct bullet to the head for not complying.


What exactly are you talking about here?


Nothereed said:


> Or at the hand of the capitalist arms through starvation and lack of housing.
> We need to switch away from capitalism, strength democracy entirely, away from what is essentially become a mix of a theocracy(religion) and plutocracy (wealthy) and what's left of a dried out democratic system.
> back onto the track of a actual democracy.


What if people come to an agreement and want one leader, because they are fed up with devisions (parties)?


Nothereed said:


> The electoral collage system needs to be removed. We need to support a ranked choice system, and remove money out of politics entirely. As Capitalism by nature is not democratic, it's tilted to fascism before, and it WILL do it again.


The problem with that is that this plutocratic government will have a hard time going fascist, because that would imply that they would openly take charge, and most people will not accept them as legitimate.


Nothereed said:


> @Creamu
> Further more if these 14 characteristics don't do it for you. There's another alive political scientist who is alive. And he identifies the same thing.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Paxton


I don't care, make a good argument or leave the academic institutions. You proprose alot of changes, and to be honest with you I would like you as a leading figure far more than what we have now, even without knowing you. Let's just say the academic institutions are not filled with people curious for knowledge but curious for kissing a**es. Would you kick them out?


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

Creamu said:


> I guess science is about appeals to authority rather than* engaging with arguments. *Oh well...


That's not how science works. It works by consensus, so when I said "Well accepted" that meant that the census also agreed.


Creamu said:


> It is a mouthpiece. The amount of a**kissing that gets you into high positions of academia for quite a while now is of the charts.


Your spouting a anti education stance. That's a trait of fascism.


Nothereed said:


> *Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts*
> Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.





Creamu said:


> Germany was national socialist not fascist


How about you do the required reading before saying that sentence again after I have corrected you now 3 times with 3 different sources and evidence.

From the book of the anatomy of fascism page 10.


> Another supposed essential character of fascism is its anticapitalist,
> antibourgeois animus. Early fascist movements flaunted their contempt
> for bourgeois values and for those who wanted only “to earn money,
> money, filthy money.”36 They attacked “international finance capitalism”
> ...




IF it was again, supposedly true it was socialist, why on earth would they do capitalistic polices. The core part of socialism defanging and transitioning away from capitalism. Not doubling down, not going after unions.


Creamu said:


> I don't care, make a good argument


I have been making good arguments, I've been giving you all the resources I possibly can on the subject and basing my arguments around them with utt most honestly to the subject. I cannot change YOUR mind if your unwilling to change it. I do not have to uphold to YOUR standards, which seems to be  based on how you feel about the subject, and not any facts towards it. instead of listening to the people who's core field of study is this thing, you choosing to close your ears and say "nuh uh"
I cannot fix that for you, nor is it possible for me to reason with you. How am I supposed to reason with someone who's argument essentially is "Education is just kissing ass, it's all fake"


Creamu said:


> Let's just say the academic institutions are not filled with people curious for knowledge but curious for kissing a**es. Would you kick them out?


How I'm I supposed to respond to that? There's no evidence, nothing, that would change your mind.



Creamu said:


> The problem with that is that this plutocratic government will have a hard time going fascist, because that would imply that they would openly take charge, and most people will not accept them as legitimate.





Creamu said:


> It is the other way around, morally disgusting use every tool in ther toolbox corparte structures are one of them.


Which one is it Creamu?
Because you just made a statements that contradicted themselves.

If money is power, or a "tool" in your own words. What's stopping a Plutocratic government from going fascist. Because openly taking charge, and people not accepting them as legitimate doesn't matter. Fascist take power by force, and are more than willing to use arms to kill.
Look at the Republican party, and their constant defense and praise of the 2nd amendment, look at the proudboys for fuck sakes, who were armed in January 6th.

This going to be my second last response to you. Since I'm getting the strong feeling that logic and facts is no longer of importance to you.


----------



## HalfScoper (Aug 14, 2022)

Take off your tinfoil hat mate, nobody likes conspiracy theorists,


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

HalfScoper said:


> Take off your tinfoil hat mate, nobody likes conspiracy theorists,


eloberate on how I'm being a conspiracy theorist.  or is it because you don't like my rhetoric, which is based in both facts and logic. Something that should be your supposed strong suit.


----------



## HalfScoper (Aug 14, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> my rhetoric, which is based in both facts and logic


It's not, you are not worth more of my time you creep.


----------



## 1NOOB (Aug 14, 2022)

Dark_Phoras said:


> Please, elaborate.


well . every time something happen , instead of trying to find solutions , the first reflex of most people is to try to find and accuse someone or something and focus more on what or who did the bad thing or move than actually trying to find solutions and testing ideas to help with them .  

how many people got caught for small amount of weed , and had to pay a heavy price , for us to after way too many years , start to do something about it . 

im not even gonna start a debate about all the school shooting happening and how its more talk than actions . 

 i see campaigns for mental health , i suffer from a couple , and honestly getting help concretely is impossible , stop talking about it and do something , we have in Canada one of our biggest company that got a day where they get money and pay for people to talk about it , but concretely they don't do much , i even worked for them . 

or just going to throw money at a problems hoping itll fix itself .


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

HalfScoper said:


> It's not, you are not worth more of my time you creep.


then your going to make an argument, and not back it up? at best that's cowardly. 
At worst I don't even want to think about it.

How many times have I gone on at lengths to back up my arguments?


----------



## HalfScoper (Aug 14, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> my rhetoric, which is based in both facts and logic





Nothereed said:


> How many times have I gone on at lengths to back up my arguments?



Once more for the very deluded: you backing it up with your opinion doesn't necessarily equal logic and especially not facts.





To you and the common culprits goodbye and good luck surviving in this oh so evil world.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 14, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> That's not how science works. It works by consensus,


Wrong


Nothereed said:


> so when I said "Well accepted" that meant that the census also agreed.


Doesn't make them right.


Nothereed said:


> Your spouting a anti education stance. That's a trait of fascism.


It's not. The education system in the USA is designed to make complient fools.


Nothereed said:


> How about you do the required reading before saying that sentence again after I have corrected you now 3 times with 3 different sources and evidence.


Fascism was the system of Italy at the time, and preceded the fall of the Weimar system. The successors took into consideration taking Italys model, but chose to go for their own system. The two are quite distinct.


Nothereed said:


> IF it was again, supposedly true it was socialist, why on earth would they do capitalistic polices. The core part of socialism defanging and transitioning away from capitalism. Not doubling down, not going after unions.


The quote you've provided doesn't even adress national socialism.


Nothereed said:


> I have been making good arguments, I've been giving you all the resources I possibly can on the subject and basing my arguments around them with utt most honestly to the subject. I cannot change YOUR mind if your unwilling to change it. I do not have to uphold to YOUR standards, which seems to be  based on how you feel about the subject, and not any facts towards it.


This is quite an interesting sequence of rationalisations.


Nothereed said:


> instead of listening to the people who's core field of study is this thing, you choosing to close your ears and say "nuh uh"


And you choose to believe them because they agree with eachother....


Nothereed said:


> I cannot fix that for you, nor is it possible for me to reason with you.


Appealing to authority is not reasoning.


Nothereed said:


> How am I supposed to reason with someone who's argument essentially is "Education is just kissing ass, it's all fake"


So capitalist want to f you over but the education system is your friend?


Nothereed said:


> How I'm I supposed to respond to that? There's no evidence, nothing, that would change your mind.


Well it might one day happen to you that you come across people who have worked in academic institutions and can tell you from experience that it is all about major a**kissing.


Nothereed said:


> Which one is it Creamu?
> Because you just made a statements that contradicted themselves.


Demonstrate the contradiction.


Nothereed said:


> If money is power,


Money is not power.


Nothereed said:


> or a "tool" in your own words.


Yes


Nothereed said:


> What's stopping a Plutocratic government from going fascist.


Fascism per definition is that the rulers present themselves as legitimate. This doesn't work if people don't accept you as such.


Nothereed said:


> Because openly taking charge, and people not accepting them as legitimate doesn't matter. Fascist take power by force, and are more than willing to use arms to kill.


Doesn't mean that they are not popular. Taking power by force is not exclusive to any system I am aware of (just as a sidenote)


Nothereed said:


> Look at the Republican party, and their constant defense and praise of the 2nd amendment, look at the proudboys for fuck sakes, who were armed in January 6th.


Your point being?


Nothereed said:


> This going to be my second last response to you. Since I'm getting the strong feeling that logic and facts is no longer of importance to you.


For f sake, make a decision and let me know at the very top of your post.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

HalfScoper said:


> Once more for the very deluded: you backing it up with your opinion doesn't necessarily equal logic and especially not facts.
> Goodbye and good luck surviving in this oh so evil world.


Really?
https://files.libcom.org/files/Robert O. Paxton-The Anatomy of Fascism  -Knopf (2004).pdf
https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Brit
Robert Paxton
are my sources.
They identified the core tendencies of fascism, and are widely accepted in consensus.
Again your not backing ANY of your statements.


HalfScoper said:


> Take off your tinfoil hat mate, nobody likes conspiracy theorists,


I asked you to prove that I was conspiracy theorist.


HalfScoper said:


> It's not, you are not worth more of my time you creep.


You gave me this in response.

Point out the conspiracy. Detail it. Again, if your a facts and logics person. You should be able to disprove me easily. Unless neither of your arguments are based in that.


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Aug 14, 2022)

1NOOB said:


> well . every time something happen , instead of trying to find solutions , the first reflex of most people is to try to find and accuse someone or something and focus more on what or who did the bad thing or move than actually trying to find solutions and testing ideas to help with them .
> 
> how many people got caught for small amount of weed , and had to pay a heavy price , for us to after way too many years , start to do something about it .
> 
> ...



Well, the governments can't just arrest people for having fascist ideas. I'm not sure I'd want to live somewhere like that.


----------



## 1NOOB (Aug 14, 2022)

Dark_Phoras said:


> Well, the governments can't just arrest people for having fascist ideas. I'm not sure I'd want to live somewhere like that.


lol if you knew the things going on in my mind , fascist wouldn't be close to a problem vs what i could do if it was without consequences . a human cant really be free in a "society" , we are too different and complex .

 it'll will always end in a whole lots of segregation . 

am all for letting everyone do whatever they wants , but there is no official moral code lol , id like a palce where you could go and just beat up aweful people , but again , that would be my version of aweful people . not everyone will have the same definitions , a pedo would probably wont beat a pedo , me , id like to just remove each tooth one by one with pliers  with a nice kick in the face in between each teeth .


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Aug 14, 2022)

1NOOB said:


> lol if you knew the things going on in my mind , fascist wouldn't be close to a problem vs what i could do if it was without consequences . a human cant really be free in a "society" , we are too different and complex .
> 
> it'll will always end in a whole lots of segregation .
> 
> am all for letting everyone do whatever they wants , but there is no official moral code lol , id like a palce where you could go and just beat up aweful people , but again , that would be my version of aweful people . not everyone will have the same definitions , a pedo would probably wont beat a pedo , me , id like to just remove each tooth one by one with pliers  with a nice kick in the face in between each teeth .



The lines become less blurred with philosophy. I'm not sure I'd be much different if I were to live without consequences, I'm a pacifist but owe 1k+ in speeding fines.


----------



## Risingdawn (Aug 14, 2022)

Fascism grew exponentially in Italy and Europe during the inter-war period. Appealing to embittered populations of the greatest nationalistic states, Fascism offered an alternative to a failing democracy, a defence against the threat of Socialism, and a solution to the economic and cultural crises of a weak and failing state.

The 1920s saw strong anti-democratic movements develop across much of Europe, attracting support from both left and right in opposition to Liberal politics; democracy was young, and not yet established, with Parliamentary politics regarded with suspicion from many as an upper-class ‘front’.  ‘National’ forms of Socialism began to spring up in response to economic crises and mass unemployment; a reactionary form of defence against the left-wing trade unions and the fear that Bolshevik socialism would spread across Europe destroying the traditions and customs of the nation.

Furthermore, the fledgling democratic systems across Europe saw a huge rise in narrowly-minded, inexperienced, and singularly focussed political parties, which fragmented the political systems and failed to adequately represent the interests of much of the population; the result was an increasingly falling confidence in parliamentary politics and democracy, and a pursuit of an ideological alternative.  

Fascism thrived in those areas where a failing political system was aligned with a foreign ethnic group, that could be identified in a dominant economic or cultural position; fostering feelings of hatred from social groups who laid the blame of the nations social and political ills at the feet of a cultural scapegoat.  

Marxist historians see the appeal of fascism as a capitalist structure. As socialism begun to represent a very real threat towards capitalism, many turned towards the rising fascist movements in defence of property.  The strength of the Marxist interpretation lies in placing the rise of fascism within the context of the social struggles of the twentieth century.  

However, the ‘Weberian’ interpretation looks towards a reactionary element within the pre-industrial ruling class; as an anti-modern movement, fascism attracted the traditionalists, nationalists and landowning elite in a last ditch defence against modern ideologies of democracy and liberalism.  

The difficulty in ascribing to any one interpretation lies in the nature of the ideology itself; Fascism was in nearly every respect a reactionary solution to a perceived weakness of the state, be it economic, social, cultural or political. It is argued that modernization led to a cultural and religious vacuum within societies, resulting in a cultural despair and anomie; the essence of fascism, Hannah Arendt argued, lay in its ability to play off these fears to make real an abstract ideological understanding of the world. 

Despite political reforms following the First World War the propertied classes of Italy had retained much power in the Liberal Italian Governments executive branches and bureaucracy; local authorities retained a vested interest in property and land, and had long remained staunchly opposed to the rise of Socialism. Severe food and coal shortages, rising inflation and unemployment, and increasingly common food riots and industry strikes during the early 1920s revealed an Italian state in crisis.  There was an increasingly popularised view that Italy was being treated as a lesser power by much of Western Europe and rapidly acquired the psychology of a defeated nation.  

Early Fascist movements attracted the young, demobilized officers of the war, but also revolutionary Syndicalists and demoralised elements of the Socialist Party; united under a banner of intense patriotism and nationalism and a hatred of liberalism, Socialism, Catholicism, and a failing bureaucratic parliamentary system, they were fashioned into armed groups of the local fasci.  

A growing militancy and increasingly radicalised Italian Socialist Party calling for collectivisation seemed to echo the Bolshevik revolutions in Russia.  In response to the alarming rise of Socialist radicalism, Italy’s Liberal Governments sought to gain the support of the recently enfranchised worker and peasantry populations; yet liberal social reforms alienated the propertied classes who saw the reformed state as “conniving with the Bolshevicks”.  Increasing numbers of the petty-bourgeois, land owners and employers turned to the militant Fascist Squads, promising political support in exchange for defence against the perceived Socialist threat.  

The Liberal Party was initially passive in dealings with the Fascists, choosing to stand by as they clashed with their rivals in the Socialist Party, and then latterly in an active role as they sought to leverage the Fascist Squad violence in a parliamentary coalition.  

Early Fascist violence was generally well organised and systematic, almost exclusively an anti-Socialist reaction and rarely targeted against any Liberal Party constituencies and provinces.  The Fiume incident caught the imagination of the nation as a new ‘politics of action’, backed by a military coup, furthered a resentment against the weakness of the Liberal governments.  Combined with a modest military career, Mussolini was in an influential position that allowed him to claim representation of much of the Italian citizenry and soldiery, and the knowledge to speak influentially on matters of politics and foreign affairs.   

Fascist movements remained largely insignificant in much of Eastern Europe; the Romanian Iron Guard and the Hungarian Arrow Cross being notable for their relatively more popular support and longevity.  In Hungary, the early-Fascist movement gained popularity as a counter-revolutionary reaction to the communist regime of 1919, attracting extreme nationalists, the far-right and increasingly racist sections of the population.  In Spain, while never reaching the same levels of popularity as Italian and German Fascism, feelings of fear and resentment against an increasingly vocal working-class and a perceived inefficient political class, led to Fascist movements which claimed to defend conservatism against both Communism and liberalism.  Economic recession in France and financial scandals of the republican politicians allowed the French nationalists to discredit both the ruling elite and Jewish capital interests; anti-Semitism and fierce nationalistic sentiment led to the quasi-Fascist movements such as Le Faisceau.  Britain saw hostile reactions to parliamentary rule in the form of Black-shirt demonstrations and rallies; the ideologies of the totalitarian state were an attractive proposition to those elements of society who felt most victimised by a weak state and Liberal capitalism. 

In Germany, the democracy of the Weimar Republic had suffered from considerable economic constraints, both domestic and international, which greatly limited the possibilities of positive political action.  Democratic politics broke down quickly, leaving little but the politics of propaganda.  In Germany, hyperinflation and six million unemployed caused a depression that lasted through much of the inter war period.  Germany was burdened with considerable handicaps, not least the economic, social, and political cost of a lost world war: reparations had to be paid; obligations to the war victims, both financial and social, continued and the Weimar Republic lacked the widespread public support that a strong government needed to push through the unpleasant policies needed to recover.  

Hyper-inflation was one of the most devastating events in German history, the net result was a political disaster for Germany’s two Liberal parties.  Proletarian riots and working-class strike action were answered by the forming of numerous ‘Home Guards’ throughout German towns and villages; a fresh political force that fostered self-reliance and rallied patriots under a struggle for national liberation from the perceived socialist menace.  

Fighting against socialism became increasingly intertwined with nationalist sentiment.  German nationalism increasingly became a rhetoric of racial divides, as non-German elements of society were blamed for the collapse of the nation; Socialists, Poles and Jews became enemies of a national renewal.  

The ‘politics of action’ became a populist reaction to the perceived failings of the State; economic collapse and soaring inflation in countries wracked by the devastation of the First World War pushed political populations towards the ever increasingly radicalised left and right.  Fascism brought a rhetoric of activist, heroic and militaristic resolution to economic problems: where the economy could be stabilised through an ‘iron will’, while presenting few actual solutions to the problems; private property was never seriously challenged, yet no longer reigned supreme; unions were smashed but employers’ associations permitted to remain: workers and employers were appeased, at a time when memories of mass unemployment were all too fresh.   The Keynesian economics that led a consumer-based rebuilding of the economy and high employment in Britain were incompatible with the Italian and German states; were while employment grew, wages were kept low.  Four years of war had destroyed the monetary foundations of nineteenth century capitalist Europe; while the apparent rapid progress of the Soviet Union and its Five Year Plan shook the status quo of the pre-war period.  The war had bred a desire to return to the established stability for Europe’s bourgeoisie, while at the same time fostering promises of higher standards of living and respect to the working-class recruits returning home from war.  Wounded nationalist feelings, fierce patriotism and a recent history of extreme human misery and economic collapse became a fertile ground for Fascist recruitment. 

Fascism grew in popularity by leveraging the fear and misery of the most patriotic elements of a nation, and offered militant solutions to a weak, failing, democratic state. Unlike Socialism, it promised to destroy neither the bourgeois nor the politicised working-class and it fostered feelings of victimisation and retribution within a nation that affirmed a cultural divide that could be blamed for all of a nations’ failing. 

Bibliography.

Bosworth, R., Mussolini, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002)
Cheles,L., et al., The Far Right in Western & Eastern Europe, (Harlow: Longman Group UK Limited, 1995)
Davies, p., & Lynch, D., The Routledge Companion to Fascism and the Far Right, (London: Routledge, 2002)
Elazar, D,S., The Making of Fascism: Class, State, and Counter-Revolution, Italy 1919-1922, (Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2001)
Fritzche, P., Germans into Nazis, (London: Harvard University Press, 1998)
Kershaw, I., ed, Weimar: Why did German Democracy Fail?, (London: The Bath Press, 1990)
Laqueur, W., Fascism: A Reader’s Guide, (Aldershot: Scolar Press, 1991)
Mazower, M., Dark Continent: Europe’s Twentieth Century, (London: Penguin Books, 1998)
Overy, R. J.., The Inter-War Crisis 1919-1939, (Harlow: Longman Group Ltd, 1994)
Passmore, K., Fascism, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002)
Williamson, D.G., The Age of the Dictators: A Study of the European Dictatorships, 1918-53, (Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2007)


----------



## Risingdawn (Aug 14, 2022)

Just in case anyone is actually interested lol, sorry its not referenced but originally it was footnoted, which doesn't translate well in a forum


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

Creamu said:


> Wrong


Okay you know what?
Why do you think it's wrong? Is it based in anecdotal evidence?


Creamu said:


> Doesn't make them right.


Do you not know how the scientific process works? Like... seriously? Because tl;dr
the scientific process has built in error checking. You can't just spit out a study. *it has to be repeatable*


Creamu said:


> Fascism was


Okay ignore the 365 pages I sent you to read. I've read all your articles and bs before and combed through them. You just read my sentences and go "that's wrong"


Creamu said:


> The quote you've provided doesn't even address national socialism.


*holy fuck*

Okay. so you've been essentially just ignoring me. got it. you didn't bother to read ANY of the information I sent to you.
*"Another supposed essential character of fascism is its anticapitalist,*
antibourgeois animus. Early fascist movements flaunted their contempt
for bourgeois values and for those who wanted only “to earn money,
money, filthy money.”36 They attacked “international finance capitalism”
almost as loudly as they attacked socialists. They even promised to expro-
priate department-store owners in favor of patriotic artisans, and large
landowners in favor of peasants.37
*Whenever fascist parties acquired power, however, they did nothing
to carry out these anticapitalist threats. By contrast, they enforced with the
utmost violence and thoroughness their threats against socialism*. Street
fights over turf with young communists were among their most powerful
propaganda images.38* Once in power, fascist regimes banned strikes, dis-
solved independent labor unions, lowered wage earners’ purchasing power,
and showered money on armaments industries, to the immense satisfac-
tion of employers. *Faced with these conflicts between words and actions
concerning capitalism, scholars have drawn opposite conclusions. Some,
taking the words literally, consider fascism a form of radical anticapital-
ism. 39 Others, and not only Marxists, take the diametrically opposite posi-
tion that fascists came to the aid of capitalism in trouble, and propped up
by emergency means the existing system of property distribution and
social hierarchy."



This part right here. in bold. *does this not counter your claim that it's national socialism*

Socialism is a threat to capitalism, and capitalism is a threat to socialism. Your claim that it was national socialist, despite the fact we are talking the exact same fucking country, and the same country WENT after socialist, DID NOT DO ANY Socialist polices. It cannot possibly be national socialism. Because national socialism, wouldn't go after it's own peers.
That is fascism.

If this is somehow too difficult for you to understand. Let's simplfy it.

If socialism is a counter to capitalism.
Then capitalism must be a counter to socialism.
If it was national socialist.
Then it would support socialist policies
Evidence points that it did not support socialist polices
evidence points that it support capitalist polices
conclusion: this cannot be socialism. as the nationalist part, is a modifier of it.
It killed socialists first the moment to power.
ergo, it must mean that socialism countered that idealogy
It supported captalism not for "the free market" but because it was "weak"

Conclusion:
 it must be an authoritarian version of captalism.

If the people were ultra nationalist
If we also know that Ultra nationalism is linked to Nazi's
if we know that it's authoritarian.
If we know the political opponents were killed
if we know that the media was controlled
(there's more if's. but I'm not going to list them all since this is already long enough)
conclusion:
it must be fascism.



Creamu said:


> Money is not power.


Disproven by your own rhetoric by peers. buying *power

vote with your wallet*

If money didn't have power, then none of these would apply. This would not be the rhetoric spoken.



Creamu said:


> And you choose to believe them because they agree with eachother....


I choose to believe them because they are the professionals on this field. I would trust my doctor more than I would trust a politician.  I choose to trust them even more because many of them have agreed on what it is. And what they agreed upon, is science. Science isn't directly facts. It's the methodology behind finding them. With consensus happening only because it's repeatable, which means it may likely be factual.


Creamu said:


> So capitalist want to f you over but the education system is your friend?


I've been pulling from every source I possibly can on the matter. This isn't even shit taught in schools.  These people aren't brought up in k-12. I had to look and find and learn these things on my own. This isn't a gotcha as you'd hope. because this specific part, this specific "what makes up fascism" wasn't taught in schools.


Creamu said:


> Fascism per definition is that the rulers present themselves as legitimate. This doesn't work if people don't accept you as such.


Fascist doesn't care if they are legitimate or not. They care about power.


Creamu said:


> Well it might one day happen to you that you come across people


"Well it might come one day that a black person beats me up. And then they're all assholes right?"

Anecdotal evidence doesn't work.


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Aug 14, 2022)

Risingdawn said:


> Marxist historians see the appeal of fascism as a capitalist structure. As socialism begun to represent a very real threat towards capitalism, many turned towards the rising fascist movements in defence of property.  The strength of the Marxist interpretation lies in placing the rise of fascism within the context of the social struggles of the twentieth century.
> 
> However, the ‘Weberian’ interpretation looks towards a reactionary element within the pre-industrial ruling class; as an anti-modern movement, fascism attracted the traditionalists, nationalists and landowning elite in a last ditch defence against modern ideologies of democracy and liberalism.
> 
> The difficulty in ascribing to any one interpretation lies in the nature of the ideology itself; Fascism was in nearly every respect a reactionary solution to a perceived weakness of the state, be it economic, social, cultural or political. It is argued that modernization led to a cultural and religious vacuum within societies, resulting in a cultural despair and anomie; the essence of fascism, Hannah Arendt argued, lay in its ability to play off these fears to make real an abstract ideological understanding of the world.



I think of fascism as a social disease, a reaction to fears of a cultural or systematic revolution, linked to fears of personal death or oblivion. It's obviously sustained in a racist or xenophobic view of the world that exists within its supporters, in which there's a war between races or peoples. To answer the fear of change, fascist leaders may arrive and claim: look at all this they want to do to us / they have done to us, we need to stand together against our common enemy. In the case of Germany, I haven't read about it, but I can't shake the feeling that it is also a late reaction to the transformation of the country from rural to urban and industrial, where massive numbers of diverse people were brought together into cities and naturally had to deal with certain cultural differences. Also the kulturkampf, to reduce the role of the church in the state - which might have displeased traditionalists and some conservatives. This beyond the acknowledged reaction to communism and to foreign economic oppression.


----------



## Risingdawn (Aug 14, 2022)

Dark_Phoras said:


> I think of fascism as a social disease, a reaction to fears of a cultural or systematic revolution, linked to fears of personal death or oblivion. It's obviously sustained in a racist or xenophobic view of the world that exists within its supporters, in which there's a war between races or peoples. To answer the fear of change, fascist leaders may arrive and claim: look at all this they want to do to us / they have done to us, we need to stand together against our common enemy. In the case of Germany, I haven't read about it, but I can't shake the feeling that it is also a late reaction to the kultur kampf, beyond the acknowledged reaction to communism and to foreign economic oppression.


That's a fairly accurate assessment.It definitely helps to understand the cultural and economic situation of Germany and Italy at the end of the 19th Century. Both were deeply nationalistic, and both had been largely oppressed, by Prussia and Austria-Hungary respectively. 

Possibly the most striking aspect of Fascism, for me anyway, is the lack of a centralised ideological foundation. There was no 'Communist Manefesto', for Fascism, and as it is so often driven by a demagogue it can be very hard to pin down what the ideological pillars actually are.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

Risingdawn said:


> That's a fairly accurate assessment.It definitely helps to understand the cultural and economic situation of Germany and Italy at the end of the 19th Century. Both were deeply nationalistic, and both had been largely oppressed, by Prussia and Austria-Hungary respectively.
> 
> Possibly the most striking aspect of Fascism, for me anyway, is the lack of a centralised ideological foundation. There was no 'Communist Manefesto', for Fascism, and as it is so often driven by a demagogue it can be very hard to pin down what the ideological pillars actually are.


the closed thing is mein kampf. but that's still an extreme stretch. Since it's basically just hitler screaming over and over what he hates. Not a exploration of thought, not a critical look. Just angry rage.


----------



## Risingdawn (Aug 14, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> the closed thing is mein kampf. but that's still an extreme stretch. Since it's basically just hitler screaming over and over what he hates. Not a exploration of thought, not a critical look. Just angry rage.


Absolutely. The difference is that Marx wrote the _Communist Manefesto_ before Lenin then adopted, and adapted, that ideology for the Bolsheviks. _Mein Kampf_ was written after Mussolini was already developing Fascism as a form of governing


----------



## Creamu (Aug 14, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Okay you know what?
> Why do you think it's wrong? Is it based in anecdotal evidence?


That might be the start of it. There are different scientific specialisations and they don't all work exactly the same, but it is not uncommon that you state your reasoning why you are exploring a certain subject matter. Often it is to continue works from others, but it can be in relation to your own work and might very well be just an anecdote.

Then you design a working theory around falsifiable claims. Following that you might be expected to demonstrate the current state of research of that particular matter, if there is any. In relation to this it might be expected of you to work within the frame of preceding works and demonstrate this frame. You state your approach, the data you have produced, the analysis, conclusion and suggestion for further research.

Now your conclusion must be falsifiable. In principle it does not matter who falsifies this, it can be your neighbours dog. Making science to an institutional affirmation contest is the perversion of science. Also check out this movie where a scientist is payed by the tobacco to produce data. Crazy right?



Nothereed said:


> Do you not know how the scientific process works? Like... seriously? Because tl;dr
> the scientific process has built in error checking. You can't just spit out a study. *it has to be repeatable*


Depends on the field.


Nothereed said:


> Okay ignore the 365 pages I sent you to read. I've read all your articles and bs before and combed through them. You just read my sentences and go "that's wrong"


Because it is


Nothereed said:


> Okay. so you've been essentially just ignoring me. got it. you didn't bother to read ANY of the information I sent to you.


I've read the quote in that post and it doesn't talk about national socialism. You understand that there are different words because they mean different things. Also this:


> Fascism was the system of Italy at the time, and preceded the fall of the Weimar system. The successors took into consideration taking Italys model, but chose to go for their own system. The two are quite distinct.





Nothereed said:


> *"Another supposed essential character of fascism is its anticapitalist,*
> antibourgeois animus. Early fascist movements flaunted their contempt
> for bourgeois values and for those who wanted only “to earn money,
> money, filthy money.”36 They attacked “international finance capitalism”
> ...


Control+F 'national socialism'... no nothing.


Nothereed said:


> This part right here. in bold. *does this not counter your claim that it's national socialism*
> Socialism is a threat to capitalism, and capitalism is a threat to socialism. Your claim that it was national socialist, despite the fact we are talking the exact same fucking country, and the same country WENT after socialist, DID NOT DO ANY Socialist polices.


That is wrong, the national socialist parties did make travel to exotic countries possible for normal working class people, and that was a historic first. The confusion might be because the KPD (communist) was forced out by the NSDAP who won the election. The KPD was for global socialism while the NSDAP was for socialism on a national level. This doesn't rule out the use of capital/currency, as well as wages and such.


Nothereed said:


> It cannot possibly be national socialism. Because national socialism, wouldn't go after it's own peers.
> That is fascism.


Maybe this will help you:


> *Fasces* (English: /ˈfæsiːz/ _FASS-eez_; Latin: [ˈfaskeːs]; a _plurale tantum_, from the Latin word _fascis_, meaning "bundle";[1] Italian: _fascio littorio_) is a bound bundle of wooden rods, sometimes including an axe (occasionally two axes) with its blade emerging. The fasces is an Italian symbol that had its origin in the Etruscan civilization and was passed on to ancient Rome, where it symbolized a magistrate's power and jurisdiction. The axe originally associated with the symbol, the Labrys (Greek: λάβρυς, _lábrys_) the double-bitted axe, originally from Crete, is one of the oldest symbols of Greek civilization. To the Romans, it was known as a _bipennis_



_https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasces_

It is about unity.


Nothereed said:


> buying *power*


Money can be a tool of power.


Nothereed said:


> *vote with your wallet*


That is bullshit anyways.


Nothereed said:


> If money didn't have power, then none of these would apply. This would not be the rhetoric spoken.


So what?


Nothereed said:


> I choose to believe them because they are the professionals on this field.


And couldn't be possibly be paid by capitalists who want to F you over.


Nothereed said:


> I would trust my doctor more than I would trust a politician.


Your doctor is forced to say everything what comes from his authorities, deviating can ruin his financial life.


Nothereed said:


> I choose to trust them even more because many of them have agreed on what it is.


Well then you are easily defeated by an army of agreeing liars.


Nothereed said:


> That is science. Science isn't directly facts. It's the methodology behind finding them. With consensus happening only because it's repeatable, which means it may likely be factual.


For science it is not important what method was applied as long as it demonstrates the truth. Consensus in institutions is dictated by those who finance it/force it.


Nothereed said:


> I've been pulling from every source I possibly can on the matter. This isn't even shit taught in schools.


So it must be right. Bless your heart.


Nothereed said:


> These people aren't brought up in k-12. I had to look and find and learn these things on my own. This isn't a gotcha as you'd hope.


Ah, and the things you can find they aren't influenced by capitalists who want to f you over. Well they can't think of everything I guess, thats just over their heads.


Nothereed said:


> Fascist doesn't care if they are legitimate or not. They care about power.


They care about openly taking power in contrast to some other actors that care about this being obscure.


Nothereed said:


> "Well it might come one day that a black person beats me up. And then they're all assholes right?"


Your point being?


Nothereed said:


> Anecdotal evidence doesn't work.


It works better than getting fooled by actors that care for your demise.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 14, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
> 
> 
> *Powerful and Continuing Nationalism*
> ...




this might be, by definition, irony.


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 14, 2022)

I would just like to chime in saying that the 14 signs of fascism are meant to describe the big, common traits of fascism to help identify it, not to provide a list of any one thing that is fascist. Only when all 14 traits are present at once is there a high probability that a system is fascist, if one or more are absent chances are very high the system is not fascist but instead is something else, like Stalin's laughable implementation of communism.

Also, the Nazis were national socialists in name only. The only socialist policies the Nazi party implemented was to provide a short maternal leave, a few days paid rest for injured workers, and a small loan for every born child. The big caveat here that only members of the Nazi party qualified for those policies which meant that a large chunk of the population was unable to benefit from those. If you didn't fit the definition of an Aryan or were suspected to be Jewish you did not qualify for it. Jews in particular were denied German citizenship and thus were exempt by default.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 14, 2022)

@Creamu
This my last reply



Creamu said:


> Control+F 'national socialism'... no nothing.


How about you read peoples arguments before trying to press control f and skim them.

The "national" part is a modifier. we can separate the national part from the "ism" to identify if the rest of it matches.
Just because it's "nationalist" shouldn't mean the core ideology behind it is destroyed, unless it's NOT the idealogy you imply.
You claimed that Nazi germany was national socialist.
Their actions, killing socialists first, supporting capitalist industries, stopping unions. Is a indication that they are not socialists. Therefore, not nationalist socialist.
IF you also did the reading, you would of learned they they say they are behind the idea of supporting socialism/being anticaptalist. But *in action* they are not.

This is my final response since it's beyond a unreasonable doubt that you will not argue in good faith and your now going into essentially unprovable or falsifiable claims. I'm not going to argue another 8 paragraphs with you if your unwilling to do the basic thing and *read*


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 15, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> Also, the Nazis were national socialists in name only. The only socialist policies the Nazi party implemented was to provide a short maternal leave, a few days paid rest for injured workers, and a small loan for every born child.


Afterwords however, they then cracked down on unionization, reduced wages and so on, they were pro corporation.


----------



## Acid_Snake (Aug 15, 2022)

Interesting how OP never mentioned what Mussolini himself defined Fascism as.

He wasn't a good writer nor an intellectual, he made it pretty damn simple to understand:

Fascism means, as Mussolini himself defined it:
Everything for the Government, nothing outside the Government, nothing against the Government.

This can apply to a number of different ideologies from pretty much any any political spectrum, but Mussolini's Fascism has some very distinct traits, mainly:

- Imperialism: the term Fascism comes form the Roman Fascio, a symbol of the Roman empire, similar to how the Nazis appropriated the Swastika and called themselves the Third Reich (Third Empire). Mussolini wanted to bring back the Roman empire.

- Nationalized Industries: governmental control in a Fascist regime means that the means of production, even if declared "private", are really all under control of the one political party. There is also a huge hatred of foreign companies. Basically, there's no free market. You could say that the economic practices of Fascism are categorized under Mercantilism.

- Usage of religion for control of the masses: this is actually a very hard-to-spot characteristic of Fascism. The Fascists love using religion to advance their control over society, however they don't actually give religion itself any power, power is still in the government's hands. Basically it's like the middle ages but in reverse (government controls religion rather than religion controlling the government).

- Worshiping the Government and the supreme leader: this one is a no brainer. Even if there's religion all over the place for control, the government and the leader are still worshipped above everything and everyone, including God.

There's more, but I recommend you just read The Fascist Manifesto to have a really good idea of how this ideology behaves.

Now most of these traits are also very common in other regimes such as the USSR and the CCP, but that's really not a strange thing. Mussolini was a socialist for most of his political career, until he was kicked out of the Italian Socialist Party for being too radical, so he went ahead and made his own political ideology, with blackjack and hookers. In his book, The Fascist Manifesto, he explains the similarities and differences between Fascism and the Socialism. He also used Lenin's 1927 "revolution" as an example of a Fascist Takeover, and the secret soviet police (the Cheka) was an inspiration for the SS.
(tldr: Fascism recognizes all the issues that socialism diagnoses, but considers socialism unable or not good enough to actually fix those issues).


----------



## Creamu (Aug 15, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> This is my final response since it's beyond a unreasonable doubt that you will not argue in good faith and your now going into essentially unprovable or falsifiable claims. I'm not going to argue another 8 paragraphs with you if your unwilling to do the basic thing and *read*


Okay, in this case it would be unreasonable for you to start arguing with me again in the future, because you characterize me as a bad faith actor. I'm saying this to avoid having to go through something like this again. Fair enough?


----------



## kekkius (Aug 15, 2022)

ok i didn't read all the tread, but this is pretty much it.....but you need the undestanding of italian culture to really get what government was standing for

the religion thing was for promoting family (who can procreate) politics like giving moms who stayed at home an insurace for injuries, giving children the possybility to study ecc.......and to take power out of the vatican and this was a good thing considering that they don't pay taxes a lot of taxes considering that 20% of italy is propriety of cardinal priest and other church associated
the worshipping is kind of bullshit because in fascism, truth is that the ruler have absolute power, but giving it socialist nature the ruler is for the people, the goverment is the nation, than kicks in nationalism, the nation is the people....so it became sometingh like: do for the govenment because government will do for you
the manifest are never full explained because you have to know the way of thinking of the person who wrote it and Benito was a pretty solid man for the era



Acid_Snake said:


> Interesting how OP never mentioned what Mussolini himself defined Fascism as.
> 
> He wasn't a good writer nor an intellectual, he made it pretty damn simple to understand:
> 
> ...


let me quickly explain something to you as an italian with gramps and uncle who lived trought fascism

fascism and socialism are the same thing, but fascism let "armed corp"(military,police,carabinieri,ecc) have more power to punish criminal who are *caught in* the act...giving people the possibility of nigth patrol. beating before the court, this resulted in less crime.
fascism unlike socialism don't "give" to people that don't contibute to society.....if you don't work you will not eat.....but when you where jobless government provided you, the patrol went to jobless people and make them clean the street or other type of things that cotributed too society and you got payed for that...now you are not jobless, you got payed, you can eat.
social security, healt care, ecc., all for the people......comunist, democrats should learn instead of making the rules for dad capitalism
food shortage? no prob.....the government will buy all the food and sell it at lowered price and sell it per quota, everybody have same thing at same price
industries you trying to get more that you deserve.....magic you are now nationalaized and work as you are supposed to do....also instead of importing it prioritized the local production......good for economy
istruction became obbligatory for children......you are welcome
infracstruture where made quickly you don't need 20 years for a sevage or a street.... read point 2
I can go on all day giving you exaple of how fascism really worked, the real problem was that you could not go agaist it you could improve it, but not oppose it.....it was national socialism with force involved, from the people to the people.....fascism is just a quick way to make socialism work, is not a bad thing (if you take "force" out) like you all comunist belive, like any political party some people always try to destroy it, but fascist responded with force and censor (totaly like the comunist, you should learn italian political hystory).
Now fascism worked well until people, coruption and world war 2 came out:

people in the "armed force" became superb and abused power (Police on a certain group in america? oh my god is the same)
power and money corupt people so the political party inevitabily became corrupt
and then war, italy where not ready for a war so mussolini decided to ally with hitler (adolf's national socialism was inspired by benito's fascism). Adolf was a "lovely" man, he just hated jews for economic reason, masking it with racism, until he met eva braun (partecipated in war coucils) then he was war here war there...... fast forward to the war the severe food shortage made fascism the "bad" because corrupt people in power (include military and patrol) began to steal food from the poor, abusing power and taking advantage of people...true story example: my gramps alone walked 140 km round trip for 5kg of fava beans needed for planting and eating (8 people family + side family (we help each other we are italians)) he was stopped and beans were stolen from him by the POLICE because they didn't belive he would sow them and the quota that week was 400 grams per family he was alone and they didn't belive it was for more than 1 family, but still he said fascism made good things for italy, because he lived trough hunger and know what people become when they are hungry. this was happenig while american, russian, french people where terrorizing normal people, stealing raping (marocchinate....is not just in the ciociara movie(i think english title is two women) and destroing.....in that years people discontent *insert meme* stonks, and the political party in power got the bad end
so basicaly i'm sayng fascism in not as bad as you think or some idiots tell you, is just a political ideology, sometimes it may be good, sometimes it may be shit, the problem is always the people.....
now you can understand this and stop saying fascism to everything because fascist and comunist have done the exact same things and stop being an idiot(squadrismo=fascist patrol who terrorized people with force.....Ronde armate proletarie=comunist patrol who terrorized people with force)
or
you can can say this is fascist propaganda.

my political ideology is an utopic world socialism, but only for those who cotribute to society, i am pro resposability of any kind "you reap what you sow", tax relief only to who can give a future to the nation( create jobs, births, big problems solutions,ecc), i am not anti lgbtqaip+-*:%# just don't tell me i don't need to know your sex life, and i'm not racist because i hate everybody at the same level.

sorry for the confusion, the english and the hinted(hoping is not to italian like minded) i hope i explained something to you all, if you got offended is your problem i didn't intend to offend anyone.

pretty much op incorrect with knwoledge from comunist party propaganda.


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Aug 15, 2022)

I think this last post is an interesting perspective on fascism and it deconstructs itself, for those with critical thinking.


----------



## kekkius (Aug 15, 2022)

oohohohoohohohohoho i forgot the funniest thing

in italy there is a law voted by the democrats in the first republic after the war:
*APOLOGIA DI FASCISMO*
basicaly if you are fascist or defend fascism, make roman salute in public, ecc., you get *arrested.*
i'm asking you, is this not fascism? (ironically)
i'm trully sad for the roman salute it rapresented history of the entire world!


----------



## Acid_Snake (Aug 15, 2022)

kekkius said:


> ok i didn't read all the tread, but this is pretty much it.....but you need the undestanding of italian culture to really get what government was standing for
> 
> the religion thing was for promoting family (who can procreate) politics like giving moms who stayed at home an insurace for injuries, giving children the possybility to study ecc.......and to take power out of the vatican and this was a good thing considering that they don't pay taxes a lot of taxes considering that 20% of italy is propriety of cardinal priest and other church associated
> the worshipping is kind of bullshit because in fascism, truth is that the ruler have absolute power, but giving it socialist nature the ruler is for the people, the goverment is the nation, than kicks in nationalism, the nation is the people....so it became sometingh like: do for the govenment because government will do for you
> ...


Most of those points can easily be found on other authoritarian regimes like communism, a bit different but more or less the same end result.

I think the main problem here is that people want to use Fascism as a synonim of authoritarianism, and that's the same as saying that "all flowers are roses", which they aren't (all fascists are totalitarian, but not all totalitarian are fascists).
Basically there's other totalitarian ideologies still alive today and still killing and oppressing people, but dumbass wokers nowadays are too cowards to fight them so they prefer to fight some ideology that's been dead for over 80 years.

Fascismo can only really be applied to Mussolini's Italy, it can't even be applied to Hitler's Germany or Spain's Franco. They are very similar, but they also have many differences (as many as the differences between Nazi Germany and the USSR).


----------

