What is Fascism - Page 9 - 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 Godstud
#15123570
You want to see a model for education? Check out Finland, not Japan. It's not even up for debate.


Why Finland's Higher Education System Is the Best in the World
Finland’s education system is regarded as one of the best in the world, and other nations are striving to emulate its structure of well-paid teachers, plenty of recess time, and less emphasis on homework and tests. The country’s higher education system also sets an example, especially since Finland is one of the few nations left in the world where its own citizens receive higher education completely free (foreign students still have to pay tuition fees, but they are significantly less than those paid in other countries).

Lack of classism
Classism is also far less prominent in Finland, which again extends to education. For many centuries Finland was a primarily arable country and education wasn’t a priority for those who worked on farms in remote communities. University was viewed as something only for the upper classes or intellectuals.

https://theculturetrip.com/europe/finla ... the-world/

I guess free education doesn't create Nihilism, eh? :D
User avatar
By Julian658
#15123575
Godstud wrote:You want to see a model for education? Check out Finland, not Japan. It's not even up for debate.


Why Finland's Higher Education System Is the Best in the World
Finland’s education system is regarded as one of the best in the world, and other nations are striving to emulate its structure of well-paid teachers, plenty of recess time, and less emphasis on homework and tests. The country’s higher education system also sets an example, especially since Finland is one of the few nations left in the world where its own citizens receive higher education completely free (foreign students still have to pay tuition fees, but they are significantly less than those paid in other countries).

Lack of classism
Classism is also far less prominent in Finland, which again extends to education. For many centuries Finland was a primarily arable country and education wasn’t a priority for those who worked on farms in remote communities. University was viewed as something only for the upper classes or intellectuals.

https://theculturetrip.com/europe/finla ... the-world/

I guess free education doesn't create Nihilism, eh? :D

One of your better posts even if it is a paste and copy.
We should copy Finland schools, but we should also copy their cultural values.

Here is a student from Finland that came to America as an exchange student. She says tests in Finland are way harder than in America.


Nevertheless some websites say the kids in Finland are evaluated differently and not always by a test. Lack of any "ism" is easy as they are a tiny monocultural nation.

I am all in for copying Finland.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15123602
Pants-of-dog wrote:@Julian658

What is fascism?

Use your own words.


An authoritarian socialist nationalist government = fascism
An authoritarian socialist workers government = communism.

The difference is that one system on class and the other on nationality.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15123604
Fascism isn't socialist you fool.

Fascism
Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy. The Nazis were fascist and not socialist. Only people who ignore history say as such, because Nazism didn't incorporate any socialist policies, and was the antithesis of Communism.
#15123611
Julian658 wrote:An authoritarian socialist nationalist government = fascism


No. It is an authoritarian right wing corporatist nationalist government.

Still, 2 out of 3 is not bad.

An authoritarian socialist workers government = communism.

The difference is that one system on class and the other on nationality.


No, but since I did not ask you this and this is off topic, you will not lose marks for this.

Next question: who were the bad guys in WWII?
User avatar
By Julian658
#15123619
Pants-of-dog wrote:No. It is an authoritarian right wing corporatist nationalist government.

Still, 2 out of 3 is not bad.



No, but since I did not ask you this and this is off topic, you will not lose marks for this.

Next question: who were the bad guys in WWII?


Don't try so hard. There is little difference between communism and fascism.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15123620
Godstud wrote:Fascism isn't socialist you fool.

Fascism
Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy. The Nazis were fascist and not socialist. Only people who ignore history say as such, because Nazism didn't incorporate any socialist policies, and was the antithesis of Communism.

POS
You need to learn better manners.
Using insulting remarks is low class.

Mussolini was a socialist.
#15123623
Godstud wrote:Fascism isn't socialist you fool.

Fascism
Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy. The Nazis were fascist and not socialist. Only people who ignore history say as such, because Nazism didn't incorporate any socialist policies, and was the antithesis of Communism.

Nazi's were national socialists, the party was called the"National Socialist German Workers' Party". "Nazi" is literally shortform for "National Socialist".

Obviously there's a very different meaning of the concept of "socialism" used by Nazis vs Marxists. Nazi's put the good of the nation ahead of individual ambitions. Marxists put the good of all workers (or people) ahead of individual ambitions. They are both collectivist ideologies, in contrast to the individualism inherent in liberalism/capitalism.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15123624
Unthinking Majority wrote:Nazi's were national socialists, the party was called the"National Socialist German Workers' Party". "Nazi" is literally shortform for "National Socialist".
:roll: No. This is a false premise, as the Nazi party never used any socialist parties later on, and Hitler all but abandened any type of socialism. I can understand why some would think that way, but you know that's false. You and Rich really are a bit clueless when it comes to facts regarding the Nazi party, and in turn, Socialism.

Were the Nazis socialists?No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934.But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party.

In 1919 a Munich locksmith named Anton Drexler founded the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (DAP; German Workers’ Party). Political parties were still a relatively new phenomenon in Germany, and the DAP—renamed the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP; National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazi Party) in 1920—was one of several fringe players vying for influence in the early years of the Weimar Republic. It is entirely possible that the Nazis would have remained a regional party, struggling to gain recognition outside Bavaria, had it not been for the efforts of Adolf Hitler. Hitler joined the party shortly after its creation, and by July 1921 he had achieved nearly total control of the Nazi political and paramilitary apparatus.

To say that Hitler understood the value of language would be an enormous understatement. Propaganda played a significant role in his rise to power. To that end, he paid lip service to the tenets suggested by a name like National Socialist German Workers’ Party, but his primary—indeed, sole—focus was on achieving power whatever the cost and advancing his racist, anti-Semitic agenda. After the failure of the Beer Hall Putsch, in November 1923, Hitler became convinced that he needed to utilize the teetering democratic structures of the Weimar government to attain his goals.

Over the following years the brothers Otto and Gregor Strasser did much to grow the party by tying Hitler’s racist nationalism to socialist rhetoric that appealed to the suffering lower middle classes. In doing so, the Strassers also succeeded in expanding the Nazi reach beyond its traditional Bavarian base. By the late 1920s, however, with the German economy in free fall, Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies. Otto Strasser soon recognized that the Nazis were neither a party of socialists nor a party of workers, and in 1930 he broke away to form the anti-capitalist Schwarze Front (Black Front). Gregor remained the head of the left wing of the Nazi Party, but the lot for the ideological soul of the party had been cast.

Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements, and in January 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character. Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month. That July Hitler banned all political parties other than his own, and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps.Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished.

https://www.britannica.com/story/were-t ... socialists
By Rich
#15123638
The (intellectual) problem we face is that not just the United States of the world is caught up in US identity politics. So snowflakes from the both the left and right tend to get very upset when history doesn't fit neatly into the Manichean dualism of the modern American political identity divide. So for starters its important to grasp.

1 The European colonies in the Americas were founded on small government ethnic cleansing, small government genocide and small government slavery. In particular The British colonies in the Americas, the Thirteen Colonies and the United States were founded on small government ethnic cleansing, small government genocide and small government slavery.

2 West Africans and the last nations (the last Amerindian nations / tribes to steal the land before the European arrived) were morphologically distinct. The international Cultural Marxist lie machine goes to great lengths to conflate morphological racism with racism in general, where as prior to the fifteenth century morphological racism was rare, as mostly human bands, tribes, chiefdoms and polities were not competing with other human bands, tribes, chiefdoms and polities that had significantly distinct morphology.

3 Adolph Hitler was a provincial Cultural racist German bigot, who might not have even seen a racial African or a racial East Asian prior to WWI. Even if he did it was irrelevant, his racist concerns were the Cultural Racist concerns of Austro-Hungary's Germans. Jews, Czechs, Slovakians, Ruthernians, Poles etc were not morphologically distinct. Adenauer captured it beautifully:
Germans: They're just Belgians with megalomania. The Prussians are the worst. They're just Slavs who have forgotten who there Grand Father was.

4 Hitler was however inspired by the Wild West stories and the American dream. The Drang Nach Osten very much came out of envy for America's manifest destiny. But when German nationalists tried to put this into practice it inevitably involved big government ethnic cleansing and big government genocide.

5 Heinrich Himmler's Gulag Archipelago was of course inspired by the original Soviet Gulag Archipelago. Alert readers will have noticed that in the Lord of the Rings Saruman represents Hitler, while Sauron represents Lenin Trotsky and Stalin. The key point being that this was very definitely big government slavery.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15123639
Godstud wrote::roll: No. This is a false premise, as the Nazi party never used any socialist parties later on, and Hitler all but abandened any type of socialism. I can understand why some would think that way, but you know that's false. You and Rich really are a bit clueless when it comes to facts regarding the Nazi party, and in turn, Socialism.

Were the Nazis socialists?No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934.But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party.

In 1919 a Munich locksmith named Anton Drexler founded the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (DAP; German Workers’ Party). Political parties were still a relatively new phenomenon in Germany, and the DAP—renamed the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP; National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazi Party) in 1920—was one of several fringe players vying for influence in the early years of the Weimar Republic. It is entirely possible that the Nazis would have remained a regional party, struggling to gain recognition outside Bavaria, had it not been for the efforts of Adolf Hitler. Hitler joined the party shortly after its creation, and by July 1921 he had achieved nearly total control of the Nazi political and paramilitary apparatus.

To say that Hitler understood the value of language would be an enormous understatement. Propaganda played a significant role in his rise to power. To that end, he paid lip service to the tenets suggested by a name like National Socialist German Workers’ Party, but his primary—indeed, sole—focus was on achieving power whatever the cost and advancing his racist, anti-Semitic agenda. After the failure of the Beer Hall Putsch, in November 1923, Hitler became convinced that he needed to utilize the teetering democratic structures of the Weimar government to attain his goals.

Over the following years the brothers Otto and Gregor Strasser did much to grow the party by tying Hitler’s racist nationalism to socialist rhetoric that appealed to the suffering lower middle classes. In doing so, the Strassers also succeeded in expanding the Nazi reach beyond its traditional Bavarian base. By the late 1920s, however, with the German economy in free fall, Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies. Otto Strasser soon recognized that the Nazis were neither a party of socialists nor a party of workers, and in 1930 he broke away to form the anti-capitalist Schwarze Front (Black Front). Gregor remained the head of the left wing of the Nazi Party, but the lot for the ideological soul of the party had been cast.

Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements, and in January 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character. Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month. That July Hitler banned all political parties other than his own, and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps.Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished.

https://www.britannica.com/story/were-t ... socialists


There are some subtle differences between communists and fascists. However, they are identical when it comes to totalitarianism, lack of freedom, and oppression. Mussolini was a socialist.
#15123660
Julian658 wrote:Don't try so hard. There is little difference between communism and fascism.


Nope.

Try again.

Who were the bad guys in WWII? It starts with an “A”.
By Rich
#15123667
Pants-of-dog wrote:Who were the bad guys in WWII? It starts with an “A”.

An 'A', what on earth does the 'A' stand for? I would have thought the obvious answer would be J for Japanese. Most decent people start WWII in 1937, obviously there are going to be people who say only racial European lives matter so the invasion of China doesn't count.

The other obvious alternative is I for Italians. It could well be argued that Italians started both world wars. That both times it was Italy that broke the stable world order and opened up the pit of chaos, with their invasion of Libya in 1911 and Ethiopia in 1935. It was the Italians that broke the taboo and internationally convention against bombing from the Air setting humanity on the Road to Hamburg, Dresden, Hiroshima and Mutually Assured Destruction. Its funny but of often seems to be forgotten that Mussolini was a good democratic war monger who sought to bring in Italy on the side of Britain, France and later the US. It was only later that he became a bad fascist war monger. As Italy itself went from a good empire deserving to expand and rule over non Italians to a bad empire that fought against Britain and America.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15123672
Pants-of-dog wrote:Nope.

Try again.

Who were the bad guys in WWII? It starts with an “A”.

I guess you mean A for Alemania. :lol: :lol:
Who killed more people? Hitler or Stalin?
#15123676
Julian658 wrote:I guess you mean A for Alemania. :lol: :lol:
Who killed more people? Hitler or Stalin?


No. Your knowledge of US and world history is oddly deficient.

The bad guys were the Axis powers: Germany, Japan, and Italy.

All had authoritarian right wing nationalist governments.

Now, who were the good guys?

Also, who killed more fascists? The communists or the capitalists?
By Rugoz
#15123677
Mussolini wrote:But now, today, the Liberal faith must shut the doors of its deserted temples, deserted because the peoples of the world realize that its worship-agnostic in the field of economics and indifferent in the field of politics and morals-will lead, as it has already led, to certain ruin. In addition to this, let it be pointed out that all the political hopes of the present day are anti-Liberal, and it is therefore supremely ridiculous to try to classify this sole creed as outside the judgment of history, as though history were a hunting ground reserved for the professors of Liberalism alone-as though Liberalism were the final unalterable verdict of civilization.


Right-wingers never change :roll:.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15123694
Pants-of-dog wrote:No. Your knowledge of US and world history is oddly deficient.

The bad guys were the Axis powers: Germany, Japan, and Italy.

All had authoritarian right wing nationalist governments.

Now, who were the good guys?

Also, who killed more fascists? The communists or the capitalists?


POD
No one denies fascist were evil. After all they are a lot like the communists.
Pointing out how evil the fascist were does not change the fact that communists are also evil.

BTW, what is the goal of communism? World domination!!!!
#15123699
Julian658 wrote:POD
...some irrelevant rant about “communism”....


The point that you seem to not understand is that the communists fought and killed fascists. In fact, it was arguably the communists that saved the world from fascism.

And now we see the rise of fascism in developed capitalist countries.

So we see that fascism and communism were not only opposed to each other in history, but modern variants of fascism would also target leftists.
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 15
Election 2020

80 % of Republicans and 30% of Democrats believe […]

Even Barr seems to have finally had enough of The […]

Tyson vs Roy Jones Jr

Tyson won it handily. The 5th round was the only r[…]

Rethinking the Electoral College

You did read the title of this thread, right? […]