In Defence of Fascism (attacking representative democracy)

[Wired]

Fascism seems to have a particularly bad name around here. And even though I agree that its a disgusting ideology that should be eliminated, I think that modern representative democracy, in many ways, is worse.

The liberal democracies of the world keep their citizens enslaved, not with open violence like most modern fascists do, but with violence which is hidden. How many citizens, under the rule of Mubarak (for example), believed that they were free? And, in contrast, how many people, for example, in the USA believe that they are free?

Liberal democracies are so successful because their limited electoral processes, limited political and civil freedoms are used as buffers in order to absorb the anger and frustration of the masses. It doesnt matter that these things dont make any practical difference to the destiny of the nation or its people, the citizens are still fooled by this charade of participation created by the bourgeoisie.

As long as people believe that they are free, they can not even begin to think about breaking away from their chains. People who live under fascism tend to know that they are oppressed, while people who live under liberal democracy tend to believe that they are free. Why is fascism singled out as the most terrible ideology when liberal democracy poses a threat which is, at the very least, on a par with fascism?

[Dr Mindbender]

In b4 ban and trash.

Reasons why fascism is more terrible than capitalism-

-All democratic processes removed.

-All political opposition banned

-All trade unions banned.

-Blood n soil nationalist values.

-Political isolationism from rest of world

etc...

Holy fuck do i even need to go on?

[Wired]

In b4 ban and trash.

Did you even read what I wrote?

[gendoikari]

Stalininsm, and totally free market capitalism, both devolve rapidly into something that really is indistinguishable from fascism. So they're all pretty much the same thing in the end.

[Dr Mindbender]

Did you even read what I wrote?

Well read my update then!

[AnonymousOne]

Fascism seems to have a particularly bad name around here. And even though I agree that its a disgusting ideology that should be eliminated, I think that modern representative democracy, in many ways, is worse.

The liberal democracies of the world keep their citizens enslaved, not with open violence like most modern fascists do, but with violence which is hidden. How many citizens, under the rule of Mubarak (for example), believed that they were free? And, in contrast, how many people, for example, in the USA believe that they are free?

Liberal democracies are so successful because their limited electoral processes, limited political and civil freedoms are used as buffers in order to absorb the anger and frustration of the masses. It doesnt matter that these things dont make any practical difference to the destiny of the nation or its people, the citizens are still fooled by this charade of participation created by the bourgeoisie.

As long as people believe that they are free, they can not even begin to think about breaking away from their chains. People who live under fascism tend to know that they are oppressed, while people who live under liberal democracy tend to believe that they are free. Why is fascism singled out as the most terrible ideology when liberal democracy poses a threat which is, at the very least, on a par with fascism?

Fascism is much more vile compared to a liberal democracy for the same reason that Feudalism is worse than Capitalism.

[Nox]

Fascism is infinitely worse than anything else you can think of.

[Pretty Flaco]

If you think that liberal democracy is as bad as fascism you have to be kidding yourself.

[Wired]

-All democratic processes removed.

-All political opposition banned

-All trade unions banned.

As I already explained. The fact that these things are allowed, in a limited fashion, in representative democracies, is not necessarily a good thing when it comes to trying to have a revolution. There are obviously upsides but the downsides should not be ignored.

A dog may lash out, in desperation, at its owner if it is starved of food but if the owner gives the dog a few scraps here and there, the dog will happily sit and roll over when told to.


-Political isolationism from rest of world

Political isolationism is already, admittedly to a lesser extent, practiced in representative democracies. It is no coincidence that different news agencies in different countries report stories in different ways with different political slants and different facts.

But as I have already explained, a few bits of dissent here and there act as a buffer to absorb the anger of the masses. So, instead of exploding on to the streets, would-be revolutionaries vent in, perhaps, less effective ways.

[Nox]

This is this thread:

http://assets2.corrections.com/system/article/image/17051/timebomb.jpg?1206223302

[Dr Mindbender]

Fascism is infinitely worse than anything else you can think of.

i dont know, the idea of babies chewing razor blades is pretty bad.

[Dr Mindbender]

As I already explained. The fact that these things are allowed, in a limited fashion, in representative democracies, is not necessarily a good thing when it comes to trying to have a revolution. There are obviously upsides but the downsides should not be ignored.

A dog may lash out, in desperation, at its owner if it is starved of food but if the owner gives the dog a few scraps here and there, the dog will happily sit and roll over when told to.



Political isolationism is already, admittedly to a lesser extent, practiced in representative democracies. It is no coincidence that different news agencies in different countries report stories in different ways with different political slants and different facts.

But as I have already explained, a few bits of dissent here and there act as a buffer to absorb the anger of the masses. So, instead of exploding on to the streets, would-be revolutionaries vent in, perhaps, less effective ways.

The thing is fascists are masters of manipulation, thought and language control.

They convince the people that the very people trying to liberate them- the communists, trade unionists etc are the agents of their oppression because they are anti-nationalist or race traitors or [insert choice pejoritive].

They convince the people of the need for nationalism and class collaboration. There is not such an aggressive and ardent propaganda campaign under capitalism.

[Tommy4ever]

:blink:

This is either incredibly stupid or incredibly disgusting. Perhaps both.

[Wired]

There is not such an aggressive and ardent propaganda campaign under capitalism.

I agree. It is definitely true that many fascist states were much better at tricking their citizens in to servitude but many of these states no longer exist.

The subtle and invisible propaganda of representative democracies, today, is surely on a par with the greatest propaganda machines of the fascist 20th century?

Many people in representative democracies may criticize and hate the government but how many of them really wish for the destruction of the institutions of the capitalist representative democratic state?

This is not something that should be merely brushed under the carpet.
Food for thought: Perhaps your view of this has been distorted by the propaganda you have received since birth?

[Dr Mindbender]

This is not something that should be merely brushed under the carpet.
Food for thought: Perhaps your view of this has been distorted by the propaganda you have received since birth?

In spite of the propaganda i have received since birth, i have maintained a rational, materialist world view.

Had i lived under a fascist dictatorship it's likely I'd have an irrational hatred and or fear of jews, communists and other races.

[Wired]

In spite of the propaganda i have received since birth, i have maintained a rational, materialist world view.

Had i lived under a fascist dictatorship it's likely I'd have an irrational hatred and or fear of jews, communists and other races.

Lets not forget about the Red Scare and the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans in the United States, for example.

What about more modern fascist states? Like, the example I gave in the OP, Egypt?

[Nox]

Lets not forget about the Red Scare and the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans in the United States, for example.

What about more modern fascist states? Like, the example I gave in the OP, Egypt?

I wouldn't really consider Egypt a fascist state

[The Douche]

In a fascist state you'd be dead.


Thread closed?

[∞]

In b4 ban and trash.

Reasons why fascism is more terrible than capitalism-

-All democratic processes removed.

-All political opposition banned

-All trade unions banned.

-Blood n soil nationalist values.

-Political isolationism from rest of world

etc...

Holy fuck do i even need to go on?

I thought third-positionist economies had unions, state-power and corporations.
With that said, the only trade unions would be the ones a fascist government allows and historians suggest that the state and enterprise overpower the union. Makes a pretty good argument ancaps and right wing "libertarians".

[eric922]

The OP mentioned modern Fascist states,but I don't think any Fascist state exists today. The last one I can think of was Franco's Spain or possibly Pinochet's Chile, but that is kind of a stretch. I really can't think of a single country that fits either Mussolini's or Hitler's definitions of Fascism.

[Nox]

i dont know, the idea of babies chewing razor blades is pretty bad.


Oooh not sure, that's a close one.

[Tenka]

Did not vote.

OP makes false association of Fascism with any ol' bourgeois overt dictatorship (the latter of which I would agree, leaves matters rather demystified compared to bourgeois "democracies" which are just Fascism-in-waiting). Doesn't mean it's not all shit, but just that one should be wary of their "allies" when working with "democracy" as a principle.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

"Which is worse: fascism or represnetitive democracy?"

A lot like picking your poison and having it too.lol

[∞]

An equivalent question would be

"Would you rather get choked to death with a puppy's small intestine while watching Sex and the City or get shot in the head straight up?"

With Liberal democracy being the latter.

[Aazadi]

Fascism is really not that different, as an ideology, to communism. You cannot say the ideology of fascism is bad because of implementations of it, aka Italy and Germany, unless you accept that communism is bad because of the USSR and other authoritarian and oppressive communists regimes.

I think a lot of you are hypocrites.

[Nox]

Fascism is really not that different, as an ideology, to communism. You cannot say the ideology of fascism is bad because of implementations of it, aka Italy and Germany, unless you accept that communism is bad because of the USSR and other authoritarian and oppressive communists regimes.

I think a lot of you are hypocrites.

You serious? You're comparing Fascism to Communism?

[Aazadi]

You serious? You're comparing Fascism to Communism?

Yes.

[Tenka]

Fascism is really not that different, as an ideology, to communism. You cannot say the ideology of fascism is bad because of implementations of it, aka Italy and Germany, unless you accept that communism is bad because of the USSR and other authoritarian and oppressive communists regimes.

I think a lot of you are hypocrites.
You don't seem to have any idea of what Communism is beyond general collectivist sentiments, which are really the only thing it has in common with Fascism, if even that. Are you an Objectivist?

[Nox]

Yes.

Well, firstly, Communism has never existed before. Fascism has, and has always failed. So your argument is invalid.

[Aazadi]

You don't seem to have any idea of what Communism is beyond general collectivist sentiments, which are really the only thing it has in common with Fascism, if even that. Are you an Objectivist?

I said it "isn't too different." I didn't say It was the same. My point is that fascism doesn't have to be authoritarian, just like communism doesn't have to. My main point is that you cannot judge an ideology on implementations unless you judge all ideology and belief systems on implementations.


Well, firstly, Communism has never existed before. Fascism has, and has always failed. So your argument is invalid.

You're a hypocrite.

[#FF0000]

Fascism is really not that different, as an ideology, to communism. You cannot say the ideology of fascism is bad because of implementations of it, aka Italy and Germany, unless you accept that communism is bad because of the USSR and other authoritarian and oppressive communists regimes.

I think a lot of you are hypocrites.

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


My point is that fascism doesn't have to be authoritarian

How can an ideology that promotes rigid, hierarchical rule and traditionalism be anything but?

[Nox]

You're a hypocrite.

Care to explain why?

[Aazadi]

Care to explain why?

Well because you just proved my point.

I am not a fascist, I am probably more an anarcho-syndaclist right now although I don't like to categorise my beliefs. The problem is, I am sick of people seeing the word 'fascism' and immediately start shouting 'OMG HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE DIE DIE BAD BAD BAD' without thinking. It helps nothing. The thread creator has made a legitimate point and you people are simply shouting him down because he dared use the word 'fascist' without using it as target practice.

[Susurrus]

It really depends which version of fascism one is talking about, Nazism, Mussolini's fascism, Franco's Falange, the pre-Mussolini Italian Fascism(some forms of which were democratic), Peronism, etc etc etc. They all have their own specific characteristics. Just saying "fascism" is like saying "communism," it could refer to many things.

[#FF0000]

Care to explain why?

Because he thinks that the USSR was 1) Communist and 2) in any way comparable to the Italian or German fascist states. Because he has never opened a history book.

He also doesn't understand that Fascism and Communism have an entirely different basis, with Fascism being based on an idealistic worldview, while Communism is based in materialism.

[Nox]

Well because you just proved my point.

I am not a fascist, I am probably more an anarcho-syndaclist right now although I don't like to categorise my beliefs. The problem is, I am sick of people seeing the word 'fascism' and immediately start shouting 'OMG HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE DIE DIE BAD BAD BAD' without thinking. It helps nothing. The thread creator has made a legitimate point and you people are simply shouting him down because he dared use the word 'fascist' without using it as target practice.

I didn't call you a fascist. And I didn't just prove your point. I thought about the question and came to the conclusion I did, I didn't just instantly shout "HATE HATE HATE" as you believe.

[∞]

Enjoy you ban Aazadi.

[#FF0000]

The thread creator has made a legitimate point and you people are simply shouting him down because he dared use the word 'fascist' without using it as target practice.

Yeah it's kind of a shock that a bunch of anti-capitalists are opposed to Fascism. Huge surprise there.

But yeah actually if the OP just stopped at "Hey guys I know Fascism's bad but so is Liberal Democracy" I don't think there'd be any controversy. It's a poorly written post, I think.

[Aazadi]

Because he thinks that the USSR was 1) Communist and 2) in any way comparable to the Italian or German fascist states. Because he has never opened a history book.

You may not think the USSR was communist but it is believed to be so. Some people would argue that Nazi Germany wasn't fascist either. Authoritarian =/= fascist. The fact is, you have to keep this in mind. You judge an ideology on both its 'implementations' and its 'theory.' you cannot pick and choose.

[Aazadi]

Enjoy you ban Aazadi.

Banning someone for having a slightly different view? That would be classy.

[∞]

You may not think the USSR was communist but it is believed to be so. Some people would argue that Nazi Germany wasn't fascist either. Authoritarian =/= fascist. The fact is, you have to keep this in mind. You judge an ideology on both its 'implementations' and its 'theory.' you cannot pick and choose.



Wikipedia
Fascism (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Loudspeaker.svg/11px-Loudspeaker.svg.png / (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English)ˈ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)f (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)æ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)ʃ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)ɪ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)z (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)əm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English)) is a radical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_radicalism), authoritarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism) nationalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism) political ideology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facsism#cite_note-0)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facsism#cite_note-1) Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism) single-party state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-party_state) that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoctrination), physical education (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_education) and family policy including eugenics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics).[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facsism#cite_note-2)


Yes it is. Did you even bother looking up what fascism is?

[Wired]

I think we can all agree that Aazadi makes a good point about implementation and theory.

Is there a thread in this forum where this has already been discussed?

[Le Socialiste]

Fascism is really not that different, as an ideology, to communism. You cannot say the ideology of fascism is bad because of implementations of it, aka Italy and Germany, unless you accept that communism is bad because of the USSR and other authoritarian and oppressive communists regimes.

I think a lot of you are hypocrites.

Obvious troll is obvious.

As for the OP, while representative "liberal" democracy and Fascism are both systems of class exploitation, one must really take a look at how the working class functions under either ideology. Fascism essentially revolves around what some have pointed out as being class collaboration, which is essentially mediated by the state. Despite the rhetoric some fascists have used, the working class will always be oppressed by the combined interests of business and the state (which are basically one and the same if I read Mussolini right). Liberal democracy certainly exploits the working population as well, but maintains a system of checks and balances to ensure the working peoples are adequately content with their lot. By allowing just enough freedoms and "rights" the ruling elites of these countries exploit the people while maintaining some semblance of "democracy". You contend that this system is worse than Fascism. The reality is both are dangerous to the working class, and therefore both deserve to be condemned for their oppressive and exploitative nature. The fact that many of us have certain freedoms (and I use that term loosely) to protest and assemble (which in and of itself could easily be whisked away at the first sign of actual dissent) in these liberal democracies provides the basis for the building of class consciousness. Under Fascism, the likelihood of that happening is miniscule in comparison. Certainly, both use the propaganda of the media and the state to keep their citizenries under the illusion that they're operating for the good of all - but at least within these "democracies" we stand a better chance of organizing resistance. Of course, as I've noted earlier, these liberal democracies could easily pull the rug out from under these "rights" and some have already begun the process of doing so. They only maintain the illusion of democracy so long as the people still believe in it. Once the people recognize the farce that is liberal bourgeois democracy and cease to see it as a legitimate form of governance, the state and the ruling class will have to employ something else to contain the rise of mass discontent. Both systems deserve to be cast out as vile, oppressive structures of exploitation, but we shouldn't overlook the few benefits one of them provides for the furtherance of working class awareness and movements.

[Aazadi]

Yes it is. Did you even bother looking up what fascism is?

I'd rather discuss this in a different thread as this is going off the subject, but wikipedia isn't the be all and end all. I have a different interpretation of fascism.

[∞]

I think we can all agree that Aazadi makes a good point about implementation and theory.

Is there a thread in this forum where this has already been discussed?

No he hasn't. All he did was make that godawful "___, isn't that bad, just who was in charge," argument.

[Nox]

You may not think the USSR was communist but it is believed to be so.

Ok, now I am 100% sure you don't even know what Communism is.

[Ostrinski]

Macro removed.

[The Douche]

Fascism is really not that different, as an ideology, to communism. You cannot say the ideology of fascism is bad because of implementations of it, aka Italy and Germany, unless you accept that communism is bad because of the USSR and other authoritarian and oppressive communists regimes.

I think a lot of you are hypocrites.

http://www.kenevey.com/images/ThankYouClapping.gif



Sweet Jesus...

[#FF0000]

You may not think the USSR was communist but it is believed to be so.

I'm more concerned with what's, you know, correct, rather than what is believed.


Some people would argue that Nazi Germany wasn't fascist either. Authoritarian =/= fascist.

Yeah but they actually have a case to make there. Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were very different (though, there was a healthy amount of variation in every fascist movement in every country). No matter what, though, saying "communism and fascism are similar" betrays a tremendous ignorance of both fascist ideology, communist ideology, aaand how fascist and nominally communist states actually worked



The fact is, you have to keep this in mind. You judge an ideology on both its 'implementations' and its 'theory.' you cannot pick and choose.

That's what I do, and that's why I think that the USSR was effectively a capitalist society, despite all the red flags and lipservice.

[Aazadi]

Sweet Jesus...

I find it quite offensive that you are just simply disregarding what I have to say. In fact that is very rude and disgusting. Just because this is on the internet does not mean you have a right to treat people's views that way.

[#FF0000]

uh hey can we discuss things without the "lol ban'd lol troll" thing

[∞]

I'd rather discuss this in a different thread as this is going off the subject, but wikipedia isn't the be all and end all. I have a different interpretation of fascism.

Wikipedia is fine, it was using the common definition of fascism and was cited in every sentence. Unlike you, who just spewed idealist bullshit.

[Per Levy]

You may not think the USSR was communist but it is believed to be so. Some people would argue that Nazi Germany wasn't fascist either. Authoritarian =/= fascist. The fact is, you have to keep this in mind. You judge an ideology on both its 'implementations' and its 'theory.' you cannot pick and choose.

the way fascism was done is the way it was intended to do: a very authorian hierarchical order that is there to crush worker movements and the likes. if you are a syndicalist, do you think you would come far with a syndicalist union or a free union at all?


Banning someone for having a slightly different view? That would be classy.

well you're on a leftist forum, and you are apologizing fascism wich is the most antileft idiology that there is.

[The Douche]

I find it quite offensive that you are just simply disregarding what I have to say. In fact that is very rude and disgusting. Just because this is on the internet does not mean you have a right to treat people's views that way.

You have, literally, nothing to contribute to any sort of discussion on this board, certainly not one that deals with the issues of either communism of fascism.



My comments are rude and disgusting, but comparing communism to fascism is fair game.:laugh:

[Le Socialiste]

You may not think the USSR was communist but it is believed to be so. Some people would argue that Nazi Germany wasn't fascist either. Authoritarian =/= fascist. The fact is, you have to keep this in mind. You judge an ideology on both its 'implementations' and its 'theory.' you cannot pick and choose.

So we're just supposed to accept that the USSR was communist because the most prevalent opinion says it was? I'm sorry, but if we went by that we'd also have to accept that all muslims are terrorists, that the U.S. stands for liberty and democracy, that communism looks good on paper but impossible to implement in real life, that men and women are the way they are naturally - not due to society's gender roles, and that jobs provided by the government qualify as socialism. Should I continue?

[#FF0000]

I don't think this guy aims to say "hey guys fascism isn't that bad".

they are just bad at communicating so it sounds like it though

[AnonymousOne]

I don't think this guy aims to say "hey guys fascism isn't that bad".

they are just bad at communicating so it sounds like it though

To me I think he's just saying Liberal Democracy could be a potentially bigger threat to socialism than Fascism is.

[#FF0000]

To me I think he's just saying Liberal Democracy could be a potentially bigger threat to socialism than Fascism is.

In which case I'd agree but holy shit titling a thread "IN DEFENSE OF FASCISM" is a terrible idea.

[Susurrus]

ACTUALLY, though pretty much everything fascist from Mussolini onwards has been authoritarian, the original italian fascism was democratic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_manifesto

NOT that it was right, but technically it was democratic for a time.

[#FF0000]

ACTUALLY, though pretty much everything fascist from Mussolini onwards has been authoritarian, the original italian fascism was democratic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_manifesto

NOT that it was right, but technically it was democratic for a time.

Democracy in plain old liberal democracies is a total sham, so guess how much I trust the prospect of "fascist democracy"

[Susurrus]

Democracy in plain old liberal democracies is a total sham, so guess how much I trust the prospect of "fascist democracy"

You shouldn't, look how democratic Italy was under Mussolini. I was just pointing out that piece of history. Although to see a very strange combination of democratic proto-fascism and anarcho-syndicalism, look up the Charter of Carnaro, written by one of each.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_of_Carnaro

[Le Socialiste]

In which case I'd agree but holy shit titling a thread "IN DEFENSE OF FASCISM" is a terrible idea.

^This.

[Aazadi]

I'd like to clear up a few things, and I apologise for my difficulty in expressing myself. I don't want to come across as disjointed and stupid, but sometimes I find it difficult to put into words what I have to say.

In my quest of political research, evolution and theory, I explored many different ideologies and implementations of different theories. At one point in time, I saw myself as a fascist. Now it's important to realise that I was still anti-violence, anti-authoritarian and pro workers rights, but for a period I believed that through a nation of people working towards the common good of that nationalistic nation. I believed in the idea of the struggle towards self domination and strength which is a key tenant of fascism. I then began to realise, after talking in great lengths about politics with my best friend, who happens to be the thread starter and realised that the state was unnecessary and regardless of how well meaning people in positions of power, it was still an institution of oppression. It's important to realise that I was not a bad person and I didn't believe in any sort of oppression over anyone whilst I identified myself as a fascist.

Due to this, I find it difficult and annoying that in the leftist community especially, the word fascism is immediately shouted down, when people can have different interpretations of that ideology. Just because fascism was developed in Italy and turned into the state ran by mussolini does not mean that is the only interpretation, just like different interpretations of marxism have been developed through time and I'm sure many of you have different interpretations yourself.

I think it's quite hypocritical to immediately write off this thread because he's talking about fascism and liberal democracy when these terms can mean all manner of things. Many things that happen in a liberal democracy by politicians can be what a lot of people would define as 'fascism' just under a different label, just like some people would argue that the USSR was 'fascist.'

I realise that this is not really relevant to the thread but I just wanted to clarify some of my views and opinions.

[#FF0000]

You shouldn't, look how democratic Italy was under Mussolini. I was just pointing out that piece of history. Although to see a very strange combination of democratic proto-fascism and anarcho-syndicalism, look up the Charter of Carnaro, written by one of each.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_of_Carnaro

Yeah.

Fascism is fucking weird.

[#FF0000]

Due to this, I find it difficult and annoying that in the leftist community especially, the word fascism is immediately shouted down, when people can have different interpretations of that ideology. Just because fascism was developed in Italy and turned into the state ran by mussolini does not mean that is the only interpretation, just like different interpretations of marxism have been developed through time and I'm sure many of you have different interpretations yourself.


Sure, but there's a reason for this. Ask an anarchist in Russia what it means to run into a couple of fascists when coming off the train. I mean, of course Italian fascism or Nazism aren't the only interpretations of fascism -- anyone who's got a basic understanding of these ideologies beyond Italy and Germany know that. Brazilian Integralism is different. The Iron Guard of Romania had their own perspective. As such with the Blueshirts, and the Silvershirts.

We know different fascists have different ideas about fascism -- but they certainly don't have different ideas when it comes to us, and when it comes to the role of the worker in their integral, corporate society.

[Per Levy]

allright to awnser op question:

*btw " in defense of fascism" is terrible title in anyway*

so i guess that what you want to say is that the "liberal democracy" is worse then fascism because it gives enough freedom to the masses to kinda pacify them unlike fascism that is openly opressive and will be seen as an enemy?

the point is why most people(especially on here) see fascism as "worse" is that pretty much all of the members of revleft would prbally sit in laborcamps or something, our partys, organisations and unions would be banned and also the little of free speach and free press that there is would be crushed. bourgeoisie democracy might be bad but at least the left wont be crushed by an iron heel.

ps: i apologize for my bad english today, im tired and exhausted.

[Welshy]

I said it "isn't too different." I didn't say It was the same. My point is that fascism doesn't have to be authoritarian, just like communism doesn't have to. My main point is that you cannot judge an ideology on implementations unless you judge all ideology and belief systems on implementations.




First of, where did you learn about fascism from, because Mussolini's fascism is explicitly authoritarian.

Secondly and more importantly,

http://hardlaborsucks.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/cute-kittens-in-mugs.jpg

[GPDP]

I could give two miniscule shits what different fascists interpret fascism to be. Sure, it's interesting if you look at the matter academically, but in the real world, all I have to keep in mind is that none of them will hesitate to oppress us and/or kill us if ever they come to power, for I understand the material basis of fascism at its core is to be THE final solution to the socialist "problem."

[Susurrus]

A video on fascist anti-communist mentalities.
WARNING: CONTAINS VIOLENCE AND COMMUNIST KITTIES

OMpqzwJkK8Q

[Dr Mindbender]

Lets not forget about the Red Scare and the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans in the United States, for example.

Here in the British isles and certainly broader Europe, we never really had the whole McCarthyism-Red scare thing. On this side of the pond there was always a strong visible leftist presence, even if they never did terribly well electorally. Thats probably why its harder for Americans to envisage the leap from capitalism to fascism.

[Dr Mindbender]

To me I think he's just saying Liberal Democracy could be a potentially bigger threat to socialism than Fascism is.

Let him try advocating a pro-socialist position in a fascist society, see how far he gets.

[Thirsty Crow]

Fascism is much more vile compared to a liberal democracy for the same reason that Feudalism is worse than Capitalism.
Such comparisons are not valid in any way since they obscure the very nature of Fascism. There is no ground to compare meaningfully a specific mode of production, characteristic to a specific stage of the development of productive forces, to a specific form of the capitalist state and the specificity of capitalist relations of production which serve as its basis. For this alone the comparison is not valid since it would be politically very dangerous to draw an analogy between feudalism and Fascism.

But the main point of the thread is not any better. As communists, we shouldn't offer any kind of a "defence" for any kind of a capitalist state or any kind of modifications to the capitalist relations of production.

[RGacky3]

More democracy is ALWAYS better for the left, you know why the US needs tons and tons of propeganda? because they can't just shoot strikers anymore.

Thats rediculous, the whole point of socialism is more democracy.

[The Douche]

I'd like to clear up a few things, and I apologise for my difficulty in expressing myself. I don't want to come across as disjointed and stupid, but sometimes I find it difficult to put into words what I have to say.

In my quest of political research, evolution and theory, I explored many different ideologies and implementations of different theories. At one point in time, I saw myself as a fascist. Now it's important to realise that I was still anti-violence, anti-authoritarian and pro workers rights, but for a period I believed that through a nation of people working towards the common good of that nationalistic nation. I believed in the idea of the struggle towards self domination and strength which is a key tenant of fascism. I then began to realise, after talking in great lengths about politics with my best friend, who happens to be the thread starter and realised that the state was unnecessary and regardless of how well meaning people in positions of power, it was still an institution of oppression. It's important to realise that I was not a bad person and I didn't believe in any sort of oppression over anyone whilst I identified myself as a fascist.

Due to this, I find it difficult and annoying that in the leftist community especially, the word fascism is immediately shouted down, when people can have different interpretations of that ideology. Just because fascism was developed in Italy and turned into the state ran by mussolini does not mean that is the only interpretation, just like different interpretations of marxism have been developed through time and I'm sure many of you have different interpretations yourself.

I think it's quite hypocritical to immediately write off this thread because he's talking about fascism and liberal democracy when these terms can mean all manner of things. Many things that happen in a liberal democracy by politicians can be what a lot of people would define as 'fascism' just under a different label, just like some people would argue that the USSR was 'fascist.'

I realise that this is not really relevant to the thread but I just wanted to clarify some of my views and opinions.

Do you know what oppression is? Do you know what class conflict is? Do you understand what class society is?

You cannot be a fascist, and, as you said "not believe in oppression". You cannot be an "anti-authoritarian" fascist.

Please explain yourself further.

[Aazadi]

Do you know what oppression is? Do you know what class conflict is? Do you understand what class society is?

You cannot be a fascist, and, as you said "not believe in oppression". You cannot be an "anti-authoritarian" fascist.

Please explain yourself further.

Well I haven't identified myself as a fascist for some time, but I will answer your question.

The way I interpreted fascism was that the people of a nation, who were proud to be part of that nation came together and put their individuality aside for the good of everyone. Race, creed or background was irrelevant, all that mattered was that people wanted to work and even sacrifice themselves for the common good. My interpretation of fascism was that of voluntary service and nothing was to be forced. If someone wanted to be part of my nation state they would be expected to work towards it but would therefore reap the benefits, if they did not, then they were free to be part of something else.

I do know what oppression is and its many subtleties and I do know about class, but my interpretation of fascism really was not against these. I found the fasces symbolism very inspiring, the whole of idea of many together becoming strong.

My ideas, opinions and beliefs have evolved a lot since then, but I still believe fascism to be more interesting and variable than a lot of people give it credit for.

[RGacky3]

The way I interpreted fascism was that the people of a nation, who were proud to be part of that nation came together and put their individuality aside for the good of everyone. Race, creed or background was irrelevant, all that mattered was that people wanted to work and even sacrifice themselves for the common good. My interpretation of fascism was that of voluntary service and nothing was to be forced. If someone wanted to be part of my nation state they would be expected to work towards it but would therefore reap the benefits, if they did not, then they were free to be part of something else.


Thats not what fascism is or ever was.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Fascism seems to have a particularly bad name around here. And even though I agree that its a disgusting ideology that should be eliminated, I think that modern representative democracy, in many ways, is worse.

The liberal democracies of the world keep their citizens enslaved, not with open violence like most modern fascists do, but with violence which is hidden. How many citizens, under the rule of Mubarak (for example), believed that they were free? And, in contrast, how many people, for example, in the USA believe that they are free?

Liberal democracies are so successful because their limited electoral processes, limited political and civil freedoms are used as buffers in order to absorb the anger and frustration of the masses. It doesnt matter that these things dont make any practical difference to the destiny of the nation or its people, the citizens are still fooled by this charade of participation created by the bourgeoisie.

As long as people believe that they are free, they can not even begin to think about breaking away from their chains. People who live under fascism tend to know that they are oppressed, while people who live under liberal democracy tend to believe that they are free. Why is fascism singled out as the most terrible ideology when liberal democracy poses a threat which is, at the very least, on a par with fascism?

Fascism is capitalism in extremis, in a situation where the bourgeois is threatened and sees no other way to maintain control.

Perhaps people under "fascist" or more openly authoritarian regimes are more easily able to directly see their oppression, for examples it is perhaps easier to rebel against the governments in the Arab world rather than those of the EU. Under liberal democracy people internalize their oppression, "mind forged manacles" or Marcuse's "repressive desublimation".On the other hand comparing fascism and liberal democracy is like comparing apples and oranges. They represent capitalism at different levels and stages of development.

Having said all this, I'd rather live under liberal democracy. Its easier to organize politically, easier to carve out some social/political space for one self. easier to be "different", easier to avoid military conscription and other forms of mass mobilization, etc. even though LD is mostly a sham and the system has its own system of subtle control.

[RGacky3]

for examples it is perhaps easier to rebel against the governments in the Arab world rather than those of the EU.

Unless you've lived under a regeim where speaking out, joining a union, protesting or in other ways opposing the regime would get you murdered or inprisoned I think its fair to say you should shut the hell about about what is "easier."

In totalitarian states, they internalize oppression as well, they have propeganda too.

I think this idea that when things get bad enough people will revolt is rediculous and totally void of reality.

[Kiev Communard]

I would say that liberal anti-fascism is of course misleading and insufficient, as it ignores the class dimension of the fascist movement and the regimes created by it, blaming everything on "plebeian mob", rather than on old-good liberal-conservative gentlemen in the suits who control the said mob from behind. However, at the same time it is relatively more easy for the revolutionary socialists to operate under conditions of (relative) bourgeois "legality", so in a strictly tactical sense the so-called "representative democracy" is "better", as it leaves relatively more lacuna for the revolutionary Left to capitalise on.

[RGacky3]

I think people need to stop throwing around the word "liberal" without having an actual meaning for it.

Most people don't blame it on the plebeian mob, and definately not people you would call "liberals"

[Luís Henrique]

In b4 ban and trash.

Reasons why fascism is more terrible than capitalism-

-All democratic processes removed.

-All political opposition banned

-All trade unions banned.

-Blood n soil nationalist values.

-Political isolationism from rest of world

etc...

Holy fuck do i even need to go on?

There is a further reason why fascism is by far worse than liberal democracy: it makes liberal democracy look good.

Luís Henrique

[Jose Gracchus]

I think people need to stop throwing around the word "liberal" without having an actual meaning for it.

Most people don't blame it on the plebeian mob, and definately not people you would call "liberals"

Yes they do, what the fuck are you talking about? Constantly mainstream Western liberals repeat the slander that Nazism was popular and some kind of 'hysteria of masses' is at the root of fascism (and Communism too, of course).

[ComradeMan]

Yes they do, what the fuck are you talking about? Constantly mainstream Western liberals repeat the slander that Nazism was popular and some kind of 'hysteria of masses' is at the root of fascism (and Communism too, of course).

Nope, never heard that one.
:thumbup1:

[RGacky3]

Yes they do, what the fuck are you talking about? Constantly mainstream Western liberals repeat the slander that Nazism was popular and some kind of 'hysteria of masses' is at the root of fascism (and Communism too, of course).

I don't know, I really hav'nt heard it either, maybe from some right wingers like glenn beck, but not "liberals."

[A Marxist Historian]

Did you even read what I wrote?

All considered, reading no further than your header seems quite adequate. And yes, I did read what you wrote.

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

Well because you just proved my point.

I am not a fascist, I am probably more an anarcho-syndaclist right now although I don't like to categorise my beliefs. The problem is, I am sick of people seeing the word 'fascism' and immediately start shouting 'OMG HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE DIE DIE BAD BAD BAD' without thinking. It helps nothing. The thread creator has made a legitimate point and you people are simply shouting him down because he dared use the word 'fascist' without using it as target practice.

But Aazadi! You say that as if it was a bad thing!

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

I find it quite offensive that you are just simply disregarding what I have to say. In fact that is very rude and disgusting. Just because this is on the internet does not mean you have a right to treat people's views that way.

Not people. Just fascists and fascist lovers. We have every right to treat them that way.

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

I'd like to clear up a few things, and I apologise for my difficulty in expressing myself. I don't want to come across as disjointed and stupid, but sometimes I find it difficult to put into words what I have to say.

In my quest of political research, evolution and theory, I explored many different ideologies and implementations of different theories. At one point in time, I saw myself as a fascist. Now it's important to realise that I was still anti-violence, anti-authoritarian and pro workers rights, but for a period I believed that through a nation of people working towards the common good of that nationalistic nation. I believed in the idea of the struggle towards self domination and strength which is a key tenant of fascism. I then began to realise, after talking in great lengths about politics with my best friend, who happens to be the thread starter and realised that the state was unnecessary and regardless of how well meaning people in positions of power, it was still an institution of oppression. It's important to realise that I was not a bad person and I didn't believe in any sort of oppression over anyone whilst I identified myself as a fascist.

Due to this, I find it difficult and annoying that in the leftist community especially, the word fascism is immediately shouted down, when people can have different interpretations of that ideology. Just because fascism was developed in Italy and turned into the state ran by mussolini does not mean that is the only interpretation, just like different interpretations of marxism have been developed through time and I'm sure many of you have different interpretations yourself.

I think it's quite hypocritical to immediately write off this thread because he's talking about fascism and liberal democracy when these terms can mean all manner of things. Many things that happen in a liberal democracy by politicians can be what a lot of people would define as 'fascism' just under a different label, just like some people would argue that the USSR was 'fascist.'

I realise that this is not really relevant to the thread but I just wanted to clarify some of my views and opinions.

So Aazadi is by self-description an ex-fascist, a fascist in recovery, trying to work the Twelve Steps.

That being the case, subjecting him to hatred and scorn for his beliefs is for his own good and the best favor that can be done for him.

As for actual fascists, the only good fascist is a dead fascist.

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

Yes they do, what the fuck are you talking about? Constantly mainstream Western liberals repeat the slander that Nazism was popular and some kind of 'hysteria of masses' is at the root of fascism (and Communism too, of course).

That was Hannah Arendt's interpretation of fascism and communism. Too sophisticated for your average Western liberal, but she is after all held up as an ikon in liberal circles, by people who read her famous book on "totalitarianism" and and can't quite figure out what she is actually saying, but love all the dumping on evil communism. As she is rather an obscurantist, this is not totally their fault.

-M.H.-

[Aazadi]

Not people. Just fascists and fascist lovers. We have every right to treat them that way.

-M.H.-

Thats disgusting. Do you know what you sound like? Far right groups who hate socialists for the sole reason of them being socialists rather than for any pragmatic or logical reason. Attack the idea not the person. Just because someone has a different view on life does not make them any less of a person.

[DarkPast]

And let's not forget that some people on this forum are ex-fascists.

[Apoi_Viitor]

Attack the idea not the person. Just because someone has a different view on life does not make them any less of a person.

It does when their "view on life" is me dead.

[Apoi_Viitor]

Fascism is much more vile compared to a liberal democracy for the same reason that Feudalism is worse than Capitalism.

I agree with your statement, that fascism is much more vile than liberal democracy, but I don't follow your logic...


Stalininsm, and totally free market capitalism, both devolve rapidly into something that really is indistinguishable from fascism. So they're all pretty much the same thing in the end.

If you find Fascism, Free Market Capitalism, and Stalinism indistinguishable, then I question your knowledge on any of those subjects.

[agnixie]

Did you even read what I wrote?

Almost no fascist regime, if any at all, has been deposed by socialists. If anything it subsumed working class elements into populist nationalism.

[Dr Mindbender]

Almost no fascist regime, if any at all, has been deposed by socialists. If anything it subsumed working class elements into populist nationalism.

Well technically that is untrue, the DDR came from the remnants of nazi germany. Albeit through the force of Russian tanks.

[Die Rote Fahne]

Those foolish enough to undermine what Fascism really is, and compare it to liberal capitalism, should be ashamed of themselves.

[CHE with an AK]

http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/print/2007/3/Hitler-Galaxy-92FM.jpg

:ninja:

... carry on

[agnixie]

Well technically that is untrue, the DDR came from the remnants of nazi germany. Albeit through the force of Russian tanks.

Let me rephrase: "by domestic socialism"

Thank you :p

[Leftsolidarity]

I forgot how to give negative rep points but yeah. If I knew how I would.

[Wired]

I forgot how to give negative rep points but yeah. If I knew how I would.

In the top right hand corner of every post there is a red triangle. To the left of this red triangle there is a picture of some scales. Click this.

I'd appreciate it if you made a comment relevant to the thread also though.

[Dr Mindbender]

wow is this thread still alive?

[A Marxist Historian]

wow is this thread still alive?

It shouldn't be. Time to close it.

Moderators, please do so.

-M.H.-