What is Fascism - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

What is Fascism?

Anti-Socialist Bulwork to protect capitalism
22
30%
Institutional totalitarian
24
32%
Fanaticism
2
3%
Mercantilism
No votes
0%
Socialism
7
9%
Other (please elaborate)
19
26%
User avatar
By Wellsy
#15121482
The fundamental feature of these approchements and similitudes lies in their completely ignoring the material foundation of the various currents, that is, their class nature and by that token their objective historical role. Instead they evaluate and classify different currents according to some external and secondary manifestation, most often according to their relation to one or another abstract principle which for the given classifier has a special professional value. Thus to the Roman pope Freemasons and Darwinists, Marxists and anarchists are twins because all of them sacrilegiously deny the immaculate conception. To Hitler, liberalism and Marxism are twins because they ignore “blood and honor”. To a democrat, fascism and Bolshevism are twins because they do not bow before universal suffrage. And so forth.

Undoubtedly the currents grouped above have certain common features. But the gist of the matter lies in the fact that the evolution of mankind exhausts itself neither by universal suffrage, not by “blood and honor,” nor by the dogma of the immaculate conception. The historical process signifies primarily the class struggle; moreover, different classes in the name of different aims may in certain instances utilize similar means. Essentially it cannot be otherwise. Armies in combat are always more or less symmetrical; were there nothing in common in their methods of struggle they could not inflict blows upon each other.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15121493
Pants-of-dog wrote:Your lack of historical knowledge is not an argument.



Lol. Your lack of knowledge about how authoritarians get themselves elected is noted.



This is your usual boring crap, which I am ignoring because it is irrelevant.

More on topic, this kind of thinking you display is why fascists get into power: you see yourself as a victim of the minorities and you think a strong traditional government will protect you from the brown people and queers.

What in the world is brown pride? Pride is colorless!
What is queer? I find the term to be disrespectful.
By Istanbuller
#15121526
B0ycey wrote:Spoken by someone who is clueless. One is an economic model and the other is a political institution. Why does national ownership mean the government has to be a dictatorship and suppression of the people? :?:

People do not want to give up their private properties. You need a brutal force to accomplish that kind of task. A dictator with absolute power can steal them. National ownership can be possible only in a dictatorship.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15121537
Pants-of-dog wrote:@Julian658

I see that you have no rebuttal for the claim that the USA is moving towards fascism.

Capitalism is not fascism POD. Furthermore, America has massive welfare state.
Trump is a populist that uses nationalism as a tool to get elected. He does this because many on the left are anti-American and hate their country. They basically concede the I love America to Trump. IN the USA many think that the USA flag is racist. Can you imagine Canadians saying that the Canadian flag is racist?

Image
Two sides of the same coin.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15121538
Istanbuller wrote:People do not want to give up their private properties. You need a brutal force to accomplish that kind of task. A dictator with absolute power can steal them. National ownership can be possible only in a dictatorship.

Exactly!
Socialism is coercive, there is no other mechanism.
By Pants-of-dog
#15121543
Julian658 wrote:Capitalism is not fascism POD.


That is true, but capitalism and the corporatist economic model of fascism are quite similar, and the USA is currently erasing those few differences.

Furthermore, America has massive welfare state.


That does not necessarily contradict anything about the claim that the USA is moving towards fascism.

Trump is a populist that uses nationalism as a tool to get elected.


Yes, the nationalism does push the USA towards fascism.

The rest of your post is your usual tirade of insults directed at your ideological opponents. Ignored.
#15121546
Pants-of-dog wrote:That does not necessarily contradict anything about the claim that the USA is moving towards fascism.

Yes, the nationalism does push the USA towards fascism.

That's like saying the US when they put in social security is moving towards communism.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15121556
Istanbuller wrote:National ownership can be possible only in a dictatorship.
Or say, in the case of Oil industry in Norway, where they nationalized it and are a Democracy. :|

At least do a tiny amount of research before saying such dumb things.


Social security is not the same thing as nationalism, @Unthinking Majority. One is a social program to help people, and the other is an ideology.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15121561
Rancid wrote:Who in the US say's this? CAn't say I've seen anyone say that.





In BLM/Antifa riots the flags burn.
By Pants-of-dog
#15121563
Unthinking Majority wrote:That's like saying the US when they put in social security is moving towards communism.


In some ways, yes.

But the fact that western societies (in general) are moving left because of technology and the inherent contradictions of capitalism does not change the fact that the USA is moving towards fascism in very real ways right now.
User avatar
By Wellsy
#15121567
This seems to be an interesting point on the anchored point of any fascist ideology.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palingenetic_ultranationalism

https://www.libraryofsocialscience.com/ideologies/resources/griffin-the-palingenetic-core/
The broad area of scholarly consensus9 which now exists, admittedly one with highly fuzzy boundaries, is that: fascism is best approached as a genuinely revolutionary, trans-class form of anti-liberal, and in the last analysis, anticonservative nationalism. As such it is an ideology deeply bound up with modernization and modernity, one which has assumed a considerable variety of external forms to adapt itself to the particular historical and national context in which it appears, and has drawn on a wide range of cultural and intellectual currents, both left and right, anti-modern and pro-modern, to articulate itself as a body of ideas, slogans, and doctrine. In the inter-war period it manifested itself primarily in the form of an elite-led ‘armed party’ which attempted, mostly unsuccessfully, to generate a populist mass movement through a liturgical style of politics and a programme of radical policies which promised to overcome the threat posed by international socialism, to end the degeneration affecting the nation under liberalism, and to bring about a radical renewal of its social, political and cultural life as part of what was widely imagined to be the new era being inaugurated in Western civilization. The core mobilizing myth of fascism which conditions its ideology, propaganda, style of politics, and actions is the vision of the nation’s imminent rebirth from decadence.

And in regards to neo-fascism in Europe at least.
[url]sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/50230/1/CSSGJ_Working_Paper_Series.pdf[/url]
This paper has sought to draw up an explanatory framework for current non-emancipatory or even neo-fascist opposition to capitalist crises linked to neoliberal globalisation. This framework centres on the straddling of the political divide between what is left and what is right. It situates its focus on a tradition of radical and revolutionary movements whose criticisms nonetheless do not query the fundamental underpinnings of capitalist social relations. Rather such criticisms pick certain points of attack – often points associated with the concretising of abstract social and economic processes. This manifests itself in the personalisation of what is inherent to capitalist accumulation practices and in tactics that blame particular individuals or social groups for societal transformations.

I’m not familiar with analysis of fascisms more particular variants in different places such as those applied to the US and its potential.
#15121571
Godstud wrote:Social security is not the same thing as nationalism, @Unthinking Majority. One is a social program to help people, and the other is an ideology.

Some nationalism is good and healthy for any country. Extreme nationalism that turns into neo-nazi BS is not.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15121572
Yes. A certain level of nationalism can be healthy. As in most things: Everything in moderation.
#15121574
Right now, in the USA, there are people who justified locking children in cages because the kids were not from the USA. Is this sort of nationalism “extreme” enough to qualify as “neo-nazi BS”?
#15121575
Pants-of-dog wrote:Right now, in the USA, there are people who justified locking children in cages because the kids were not from the USA. Is this sort of nationalism “extreme” enough to qualify as “neo-nazi BS”?


I'm surprise people didn't riot for that in 018, but I guess there was no lockdown and people had jobs.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15121580
Black Consequense wrote:I'm surprise people didn't riot for that in 018, but I guess there was no lockdown and people had jobs.

The outrage by the elite white left about detained children at the border was to pander to the Hispanics. They were looking for votes. The Hispanics themselves were to busy going to work.

The outrage about George Floyd is emotional and driven by the amygdala.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15121581
Godstud wrote:Yes. A certain level of nationalism can be healthy. As in most things: Everything in moderation.

Successful nations have national pride and a common culture. This fosters unity and cooperation. Trying to blend different cultures into a single unit that works together is more difficult.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 15

I think you're missing the forest for the trees: […]

@skinster 62k is kinda nothing for a country a[…]

@Politics_Observer We all know you are emotion[…]

Why are we as a whole wealthier than before? W[…]