[Fasces]

For the purposes of this question, there is no other option. Violators of this will be shot. The first person to claim to revolt instead of voting, or to not vote, or to otherwise defeat the purpose of this question will be shot. Those who question this paragraph will be shot.

Thank you.

This poll has nothing to do with actual policies, historical circumstances, or the like. It has, rather, to do with the idea the individual represents. This poll will occur in a vacuum. There are no wars, no recessions, etc. It is a simple poll of gut preference, out of sheer curiosity.

Communists/Anarchists: Choose the lesser of two evils.

[Zyx]

Mussolini,
At least he made the trains run on time.

[ingliz]

Benito Mussolini

[Quantum]

Benito Mussolini - I'd prefer him over Ron Paul a thousand times. At least fascists have a fashion sense and are known for being weapon connoisseurs. I don't worship toilet paper and base my world view on it or use it as a bible to live my life by.

[FallenRaptor]

Other: I choose death

[The Clockwork Rat]

Mussolini's in the lead!

[Dave]

Ron Paul, at least in the United States. For most other countries Benito Mussolini would be the superior choice. Paul is closer to America's original ideals (though not nearly as close to them as his supporters claim) than Mussolini and is therefore the more palingenetic choice, and his wholesale dismantling of the welfare state would have a strongly positive effect on society by weeding out the weak, strengthening moral resolve, and driving out many foreigners.

[Kman]

Pretty disturbing that so many people vote for Mussolini.

On one hand we have a follower of the ideals of Thomas Jefferson, on the the other we have a follower of the ideals of Adolf Hitler...... really tough choice.... :/

[Dave]

Mussolini came before Hitler and retained a somewhat distinct ideology.

[Parvus]

Definitely Ron Paul without any moment of hesitation. He's not a fascist, after all.

I didn't know anything about him actually when I voted, other than him being a Republican. Republicans suck, but they're not fascists. And now I read a few things about Ron Paul and actually I think he said pretty cool things like ending the war in Iraq, leaving global institutions such as WTO, UN, and even NATO. Wait, what? Really? Man, this guy totally rocks! There must be something really wrong with him somewhere to make him say such things. Tell me, what is it? Is he a fascist?

[Kman]

Tell me, what is it? Is he a fascist?

No he is a libertarian like me.

[Dave]

I knew Parvus could not be a Turk.

[The Immortal Goon]

Hard to say.

An ineffective fascist-lite leader like RON PAUL is probably better than an effective fascist. If either of them was president, I don't see either as anything more than a lame duck as I can only imagine the senate and supreme court laughing at the absurd choices. If this was the United States, I'd be less concerned that Mussolini would have a ready made cult of personality and shock troops ready to enforce his will. On the other hand, Mussolini would probably be more prone to go to war; RON PAUL would probably be less prone to go to war and become one of the most hated figures in American history in the unlikely event he was able to sneak ending social programs past congress.

Since I'm convinced that domestically RON PAUL would put a nail in the coffin for his own petite-bourgeois revolt, he makes a tempting choice as any success he has in creating some crude form of modern feudalism would immediately be followed by a strong leftist counterweight that would hopefully end that sillyness forever.

Mussolini would be more likely to not change anything domestically but be raising the flags and putting the right on his side by attacking Muslims and shit - which would probably make him a two-termer and rally the Republicans to his side with potentially nightmarish results. Apparently several of the leftists would also go for him as fascism is preferable to some kind of RON PAULian bourgeois controlled feudalism. Maybe it is, but I don't see the latter getting started let along sustaining.

So RON PAUL.

No he is a libertarian like me.

Though not the same, fascists and libertarians are all petite-bourgeois fanboys that are dead-ends to history.

[Lensky1917]

An ineffective fascist-lite leader like RON PAUL is probably better than an effective fascist.

How was Mussolini an 'effective' fascist?

Wasn't he like, Hitler's little sidekick?

Didn't Hitler always have to help him out?

[Parvus]

I knew Parvus could not be a Turk.

Huh, why is that? Because I chose Ron Paul?

[Nets]

Benito Mussolini

Without a second thought.

[Codename]

Ron Paul 2012!
Seriously, he may be an idealistic nut, but I'd take him over ol' Benny.

Of course, if we're taking this thing literally, wouldn't it be very significant who Mussolini's VP is? I mean, I don't think Ron Paul would last long in office, but I'd put money on Mussolini not even making it to the inauguration.

[Dr House]

Mussolini. A libertarian in power in a semi-developed nation would destroy it.

[William_H_Dougherty]

Before I respond, I would like someone to tell me something about Ron Paul (I've heard of him, but know nothing about him as I am not an American, he's some guy that wanted to run as the republican candidate in the last election).

I guess the major quesiton being: is Ron Paul a democrat? Not a Democrat, a democrat. Does he believe in the supremacy of democracy. It would also help to know what his policies would be in regards to:

Government: Shrink, Enlarge, Status Quo
Taxes: Reduce, Englarge, Status Quo
Social Issues: Progressive, Regressive, Status Quo
Foreign Policy: Isolationism, Engagement (not necessarily war!), Status Quo
Economy: Does he lean towards free markets (minimal gov't intervention) or State Capitalism (a free market kept strong by strategic gov't investment (I'm assuming he's a fan of capitalism because he is a republican)

I'm leaning towards Ron Paul simply because I'm not a fan the Authoritarianism, the loss of liberties and B.M.'s economic record (avoided the lows of the depression, but was completely inadequate to serve the needs of his citizens [comparing Italy with the US, Canada, England] by 1941.

- WHD

[Zyx]

Ron Paul 2012!

He can't win don't jizz yourself.