Fascism Debate

There's a communist thread already, so let's start one for its opposite!

I used to be a Fascist because I wanted to rule over people with an Iron Fist. Fascism is not good for the people who want freedom. Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy are the two prime examples of why it is bad. Also I am so tired so I'm barely typing.

Fascism sucks for the individual who enjoys liberties and free speech. Period. Fascism only benefits those in the government, and even then usually only the very top few people in the end. It's why they rely on propaganda so much. They need the common people to be satisfied and happy with no liberties and little comfort.

Well, as Mussolini said (paraphrasing it): Fascism is the combination of corporations and the gouvernment.
So, those who benefit from it are industrialists (big ones) and high-ranking politicians and military staff. (as fascism is highly militaristic by default)

They often co-opt left-winged rethoric to appeal to the common man and make him more likely to join the ideology. Best example is Nazi-Germany. As you probably know, Nazi means Nationalsozialismus (National Socialism), even though it had barely anything to do with socialism. Hitler only used the "aryan working man" to obtain power.

Fascism is the complete opposite of communism.
Whereas communism (in its original form) wants everyone to lay down their arms and co-exist in peace and harmony.
fascism wnats to do the exact opposite. It's militaristic and wants to exterminate veryone else. Altough communism wants that to to some extent

I am actually a fascist and I admit that fascist governments are flawed. However I find that individual freedoms are less important then collective strength and patriotism.

Theirs no denying fascism is much more effective then a democracy, but it is definitely out of touch with everyone who isn't in the government.

I agree with Brusilov: Theoretical, fascism and communism (especially libertarian types) are opposed to one another and are on the opposite endings of ideologies.
But in reality, at least tactics that fascist use can be used by left-wingers and the other way around. (Autonome Nationalisten [autonomist nationalists] in germany are one example: Organized the same way autonomists are. )

Just like other Authoritarian Ideology's, Fascism fails to give the individual much liberty over the collective like communism.

Communism gives people more individual freedom than liberalism ever could. But this is the wrong thread. Come over to the other channel.

Facism is inherently evil. Nationalism can be good, like in the USA, but Facism tells you Nation is greater than all others and that you should be great, even at the other nationality expense

Talking about Fascism is too hard at our point in time. It has been twisted thourughly by many political movements and nations.

Most people point to Italy as a prime example of Fascism, because the term itself is Italian. But each person who called themselves "fascist" seems to have somewhat different ideas from one another.

The only uniting factor is their love for totalitarian government and discrimination of minorities. Even the element of corporations is absent in some of its forms (Some Russian "Fascists" didn't write about it for example). And the first 2 factors aren't really unique to fascism.

Last but not least, each country practically had their own far right, totalitarian ideology. Some people refer to all of them as fascism, but in reality they sometimes contest each other quite a bit and their only matching elements are the ones mentioned above.

Holmskiy wrote:Talking about Fascism is too hard at our point in time. It has been twisted thourughly by many political movements and nations.

Most people point to Italy as a prime example of Fascism, because the term itself is Italian. But each person who called themselves "fascist" seems to have somewhat different ideas from one another.

The only uniting factor is their love for totalitarian government and discrimination of minorities. Even the element of corporations is absent in some of its forms (Some Russian "Fascists" didn't write about it for example). And the first 2 factors aren't really unique to fascism.

Last but not least, each country practically had their own far right, totalitarian ideology. Some people refer to all of them as fascism, but in reality they sometimes contest each other quite a bit and their only matching elements are the ones mentioned above.

This.

I believe that fascism would work wonderfully if all the leaders in power not only knew about the concerns and liberties of the people, but genuinely cared about them. Additionally, a benevolent fascist state would have to try to maintain nationalism at a level where it is high, but not so high that you end up creating a populace filled with Hitlers and warmongers. Totalitarian societies could hold up freedoms like free speech, religion, bearing arms, ect. You just need kind, morally sound leaders. (Of course, too many politicians in our day and age would not qualify. )

A benevolent fascist state wouldn't be fascist.

Cold War Communist wrote:A benevolent fascist state wouldn't be fascist.

What I meant by fascist was not necessarily unchecked militarism, nationalism, etc, but rather the governmental system of a totalitarian state that listened to it's people. That may not be true fascism, and probably hasn't existed because it would be difficult to maintain. Perhaps I was thinking more on the benevolent dictatorship side of things.

It is a good system as long as there are some restrictions on the actions of government, similar to how the USA has its bill of rights. With these restrictions alongside an independent court system, the people can be reasonably protected from undue persecution, while benefiting from the unified state and quick action of a centralized government.

Regardless, we have only to look at historical examples to see the effect of such systems on the average citizen. National Socialist Germany vastly increased the life quality of its ethnic German citizens (up until the end of the war of course). Communism preaches class warfare, and in virtually all historical examples, communist states result in famine and poverty. Fascism, on the other hand, teaches class cooperation, and so as an economic doctrine, it has proven very successful.

Regarding militarism, Fascism, especially National Socialism, only involves aggressiveness as it relates directly to nationalism. What I mean by this is that a nationalist state will try to realize its ultimate potential or restore its lost territories. This is one reason why Italy invaded Greece: it is culturally connected to Italy and was an invaluable part of the Roman empire. And why Germany invaded Poland: they refused to cede the city of Danzig, which was ethnically German, and a former Prussian territory. Obviously the ideological conceptions of "Greater Germany" and "Greater Italy" (as examples) had geographical overlap, such as parts of Austria, which is where conflicts can arise.

It is also necessary to prohibit some socially damaging or degenerate behaviors, which Fascism does generally accomplish, such as drug use, alcohol overconsumption, lewdness, homosexuality, bestiality, and pedophilia. Fascism attempts to create a healthy, safe society, and has generally done a good job of doing so.

I'll say it here that I lean somewhat towards Fascism, but mostly toward militaristic conservative nationalism. As much as day to day life may be affected negatively, the patriotism and loyalty that comes with Fascism, along with the harsher laws and punishments create a secure and united societies.

The pitfalls of Fascism is the power vested in one absolute leader. No one should be able to control a country for longer than 15 years, nor should they have unlimited power, especially if it is someone like Hitler.

It is for these reasons that I would sooner support a full Constitutional Monarchy that has Constitutionalist Nationalist, Militaristic , and Conservative ideas over fascism.

However I see both systems as being better than democracy as both are more efficient and easier to enforce.

There's only a couple ideologies I hate more or equally as much as fascism, and that's the authoritarian kind of communism (Like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, etc.), Nazism, and that's really it. Unless you count something like INGSOC as its own ideology. But I'd rather have a society that values freedom and representation than one that values order and authority above everything else. That;s generally why I, being a social democrat, really have no hate or anything but disagreement for people like libertarians. I respect Ron Paul, I just don't agree with his economic policies. However with people like Mussolini, Hitler, actual fascists, etc. I don't like them one bit. However I wouldn't go so far to actually harm them for having political beliefs separate from mine.

I do not consider myself a Fascist but I do believe that it has its place. Allow me to explain.

I believe that a nation should treat its people with capitalism, its allies with pragmatism and self interest, and its enemies with Fascism.

A military built on Fascism is a strong military. Individual rights are set aside for operational security which saves lives.

Fascism is acceptable only to defend a democratic ideal. Every person in the military is a Fascist, they just don't know it. Even George Washington enforced Fascism in his army.

DavidlVofGeorgia wrote:I do not consider myself a Fascist but I do believe that it has its place. Allow me to explain.

I believe that a nation should treat its people with capitalism, its allies with pragmatism and self interest, and its enemies with Fascism.

A military built on Fascism is a strong military. Individual rights are set aside for operational security which saves lives.

Fascism is acceptable only to defend a democratic ideal. Every person in the military is a Fascist, they just don't know it. Even George Washington enforced Fascism in his army.

Fascism is more than just having a strong military, it`s also about ultra-nationalism and the preservation of whichever peoples tradition and culture. Your'e just thinking of militarism.

[quote="_Dewey"]

DavidlVofGeorgia wrote:Your'e just thinking of militarism.

Militarism is weaponized Fascism.

The problem is that you cannot separate Fascism from hyper-militarism. They are interdependent on one another. That emphasis is enough to make it one of the worst ideologies in existence, bar none.

Darkstar399x wrote: I am actually a fascist and I admit that fascist governments are flawed. However I find that individual freedoms are less important then collective strength and patriotism.

I don't understand how you could possibly see fascism as a positive influence. If you value collective strength and patriotism, that's fine. But there are ways to enforce those values besides fascism.

I like the nationalistic aspect of fascism, but thats about it. Communism is still worse in my opinion. I think America got it right for the most part- a capitalistic republic, this economic/political system is part of the reason it is greatest country in history.