Why "*No Fascists*"?

[Fourth Internationalist]

Why aren't fascists allowed to post in opposing ideologies?
They are an opposing ideology...
:confused:

[Ostrinski]

Because we could say with perfectly reasonable confidence upon the premise of historical precedent as well as fascist ideology that it would not create a productive atmosphere. If we allowed white nationalists or fascists to come here they'd probably just talk about how they're gonna kill communists and anarchists and troll with racist or other bigoted or chauvinistic expressions (which are bannable offenses). For all their stupidity and occasional weirdness, libertarians are capable of having (semi) reasonable discussions with communists, at least to the effect of not talking about killing us or arresting us or something.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Because we could say with perfectly reasonable confidence upon the premise of historical precedent as well as fascist ideology that it would not create a productive atmosphere. If we allowed white nationalists or fascists to come here they'd probably just talk about how they're gonna kill communists and anarchists and troll with racist or other bigoted or chauvinistic expressions (which are bannable offenses). For all their stupidity and occasional weirdness, libertarians are capable of having (semi) reasonable discussions with communists, at least to the effect of not talking about killing us or arresting us or something.

Say Stormfront were to ban blacks from the opposing ideologies (they're not to my surprise) because they "know niggers just want to kill all the whites; they're bigotted and are unable to reason." Blacks are to them as fascists are to us, but yet of all people they allow their (non existant) enemy and we don't?

[Art Vandelay]

Why aren't fascists allowed to post in opposing ideologies?
They are an opposing ideology...
:confused:

Cause they're scum.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Say Stormfront were to ban blacks from the opposing ideologies (they're not to my surprise) because they "know niggers just want to kill all the whites; they're bigotted and are unable to reason." Blacks are to them as fascists are to us, but yet of all people they allow their (non existant) enemy and we don't?

That's a false equivalence, we aren't talking about blacks and we aren't talking about their opposing ideologies board.

[Fourth Internationalist]

That's a false equivalence, we aren't talking about blacks and we aren't talking about their opposing ideologies board.

Yes but to them blacks are like our fascists but yet Stormfront of all places doesnt ban them in their opposing ideology boards, why should we ban fascists from our which are the eqjivilent to their blacks. Why do we leftIsts censor?

[Fourth Internationalist]

Cause they're scum.

I know but why should that mean we have to have censorship in the Opposing Ideologies section? That's what it is for, right?

[Ostrinski]

Because this is a discussion board. In accordance it is best take any course of action that will make it an optimal discussion atmosphere.

[Art Vandelay]

I know but why should that mean we have to have censorship in the Opposing Ideologies section? That's what it is for, right?

No platform to fascists.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Because the only good fascist is a dead fascist.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Because this is a discussion board. In accordance it is best take any course of action that will make it an optimal discussion atmosphere.

But how does censoring an opposing ideology in the Opposing Ideology discussion section help create optimal discussion about opposing ideologies where those a part of those ideologies are told that they can only post their?

[Art Vandelay]

Why are you so interested?

[Fourth Internationalist]

Why are you so interested?

Because I hate censorship.

[Ostrinski]

Because I hate censorship.This is a discussion board. Discussion boards need censorship to sift out the bullshit.

Thread closed.

[Art Vandelay]

Because I hate censorship.

Well I hate fascists and frankly am not some liberal who upholds the ideal of freedom of expression in any situation.

[Fourth Internationalist]

This is a discussion board. Discussion boards need censorship to sift out the bullshit.

Thread closed.

But that's what the Opposing Ideologies section is for, so we can keep the rest of the forums good while having a place where no leftists can post.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Well I hate fascists and frankly am not some liberal who upholds the ideal of freedom of expression in any situation.

How is allowing an opposing ideology to post in the Opposing Ideology section is somehow liberal? That has nothing to do with liberalism. :confused:

[Revolution starts with U]

No platform for fascists, period.

Also, unlike blacks, fascists actually do bring violence against leftist s, often.
They even have a sight "outing" leftists, with pics

[Art Vandelay]

You're annoying.

[The Jay]

Stop jumping on User Name. The question is valid and there's no need for name calling.

[Art Vandelay]

If he can't get it through his head that fascists should not be allowed to spout their filth, to deny it the chance of impregnating the minds of the ignorant, then I don't know what to say to him.

[Fourth Internationalist]

You're annoying.

That comment was about as constructive as your comment about how you are not a liberal...

[Fourth Internationalist]

If he can't get it through his head that fascists should not be allowed to spout their filth, to deny it the chance of impregnating the minds of the ignorant, then I don't know what to say to him.

By that logic we should get rid of the entire Opposing Ideologies section.

[#FF0000]

No platform, basically. Fascists certainly have a right to say whatever dumbness they want. We aren't obligated to facilitate that, though.

I also agree with getting rid of OI, though. OI folks should either be 1) banned, or 2) allowed to post anywhere with threads critical of communism should be restricted to a sort of "OI" section to keep every thread everywhere else from descending into a capitalism vs. communism thread.

[Art Vandelay]

By that logic we should get rid of the entire Opposing Ideologies section.

I'd be fine with that.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I can see that you (both) don't support an Opposing Ideologies section. Why is that? And, from the view that their is an Opposing ideology section, would it not be logical, as long as that section remains, for anyone with an opposing ideology to post in the Opposing Ideologies section?

[#FF0000]

Anyone we want.

But we don't want fascists.

It's as simple as that, really.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

I can see that you (both) don't support an Opposing Ideologies section. Why is that? And, from the view that their is an Opposing ideology section, would it not be logical, as long as that section remains, for anyone with an opposing ideology to post in the Opposing Ideologies section?
Reactionaries, capitalists and non-revolutionaries can post here. However, racists, trolls and bigots of any kind get banned. This applies to both OI and the main forums.

When an 'opposing ideology' overlaps with racialism, hate speech, supremacism or zionist conspiracy theories, conversing with it's adherents is not only unproductive but probably hurtful to members of the board. This should (hopefully) happen in real life as well. I don't debate a fascist on his unsubstantiated, narrow-minded and often violence-inducing opinion that 'blacks' are genetically inferior to 'whites'; I punch him for it.

[RadioRaheem84]

It's not even a matter of them trolling the forum it's that their ideology is really hardcore pseudo-philosophy and they spew a lot of pseudo-scientific nonsense. They presuppose too many moronic and loopy arguments to have any relevant and intelligent conversation with. It would be a complete waste of time.

[#FF0000]

There is really no other reason than "we don't want fascists here", and any attempt to try and say "well no fascism is really just that dumb" is dumb and dishonest.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Reactionaries, capitalists and non-revolutionaries can post here. However, racists, trolls and bigots of any kind get banned. This applies to both OI and the main forums.

When an 'opposing ideology' overlaps with racialism, hate speech, supremacism or zionist conspiracy theories, conversing with it's adherents is not only unproductive but probably hurtful to members of the board. This should (hopefully) happen in real life as well. I don't debate a fascist on his unsubstantiated, narrow-minded and often violence-inducing opinion that 'blacks' are genetically inferior to 'whites'; I punch him for it.

So the only opposing ideologies allowed in Opposing Ideologies are ones that are socially liberal (to an extent)?

[Flying Purple People Eater]

This is Stormfront's exotic ideological development in a nutshell.

> Becomes Nazi because dad with the chopper moustache tells him that all of the people with higher levels of melanin are stealing his future.

> Obsessed with Nazi occultism. Reads Bhagavad Gita.

> Realises that original Aryans were brown as baked potatoes.

> Becomes Hindu nationalist.

> Argues that Mahmoud is carrying on Hitler's legend. Calls fellow americans 'half-breed jew pussies'.

> restricted.

> After a few months, gets unrestricted after claiming that he now hates Persia.

> Still masturbates to pictures of Krishna hugging Mussolini.

[The Machine]

Honestly banning fascists outright is overkill in 2012 imo. Most modern day fascists like the BNP and EDL would end up getting banned for racism, and "no-platform" for like third positionist nerds is unnecesary since they arent a political threat at all in this day and age and there views aren't really all that much more abhorrent than you're average run of the mill reactionary. People get banned way too often in general on this forum though.

[RadioRaheem84]

There is really no other reason than "we don't want fascists here", and any attempt to try and say "well no fascism is really just that dumb" is dumb and dishonest.

I have a hard time as it is arguing with right libertarians and sifting through their presumed nonsense and circular reasoning. You want to give fascists free reign to spam the boards?

How is it dishonest?

[Flying Purple People Eater]

So the only opposing ideologies allowed in Opposing Ideologies are ones that are socially liberal (to an extent)?
What the fuck is 'socially liberal'? There's no such fucking thing as attaching emotions to a distinct political tract which exists within capitalism - you're either a bigot or you're not. If you understand the english meaning of the word bigot, you know for a fact that it is not an 'opposing ideology' of any kind, but rather abhorrent hate speech seldom wrapped in half-truths.

[Fourth Internationalist]

It's not even a matter of them trolling the forum it's that their ideology is really hardcore pseudo-philosophy and they spew a lot of pseudo-scientific nonsense. They presuppose too many moronic and loopy arguments to have any relevant and intelligent conversation with. It would be a complete waste of time.

And the discussions with various liberals, capitalists, etc have been effective? It's not like many fascists would care to visit anyway, but if one wants a serious discussion it should be allowed (I have had serious discussions with them, they generally are as effective as with all the other opposing ideologies that can post which generally aren't effective but are still allowed).

[#FF0000]

I have a hard time as it is arguing with right libertarians and sifting through their presumed nonsense and circular reasoning. You want to give fascists free reign to spam the boards?

How is it dishonest?

It's dishonest because we don't ban fascists because their ideas are stupid. We ban them because we want to (and the admin of the site is in Germany and could probably face some problems over allowing fascists here).


So the only opposing ideologies allowed in Opposing Ideologies are ones that are socially liberal (to an extent)?

No. Only the ones that aren't overtly racist.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I have a hard time as it is arguing with right libertarians and sifting through their presumed nonsense and circular reasoning. You want to give fascists free reign to spam the boards?

How is it dishonest?

Since when was anyone saying they should be allowed to spam?

[Fourth Internationalist]

What the fuck is 'socially liberal'? There's no such fucking thing as attaching emotions to a distinct political tract which exists within capitalism - you're either a bigot or you're not. If you understand the english meaning of the word bigot, you know for a fact that it is not an 'opposing ideology' of any kind, but rather abhorrent hate speech seldom wrapped in half-truths.

Socially liberal = pro gay pro choice pro marijuana
Socially conservative = anti gay pro "life" anti marijuana = bigots, which would excluded them by your reasoning while they're not fascists.

[RadioRaheem84]

Since when was anyone saying they should be allowed to spam?

Their illogical ramblings end up being spam. I mean have you ever read Mien Kampf? Or the works of fascist theotricians? There is so much tangled presumed nonsense that it would take page after page disentangling their stuff.

They're reactionaries to the tenth degree.

[Fourth Internationalist]

What the fuck is 'socially liberal'? There's no such fucking thing as attaching emotions to a distinct political tract which exists within capitalism - you're either a bigot or you're not. If you understand the english meaning of the word bigot, you know for a fact that it is not an 'opposing ideology' of any kind, but rather abhorrent hate speech seldom wrapped in half-truths.

Socially liberal = pro gay pro choice pro marijuana
Socially conservative = anti gay pro "life" anti marijuana = bigots, which would excluded them by your reasoning while they're not fascists.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Edit Double post accident this was a repeat of my post above

[Fourth Internationalist]

Edit Double post Accident this was a repeat of my post below

[Fourth Internationalist]

Their illogical ramblings end up being spam. I mean have you ever read Mien Kampf? Or the works of fascist theotricians? There is so much tangled presumed nonsense that it would take page after page disentangling their stuff.

They're reactionaries to the tenth degree.

You're supposed to disagree with them. They are reactionaries, yes. Hence they are an Opposing Ideology.

[#FF0000]

Their illogical ramblings end up being spam. I mean have you ever read Mien Kampf? Or the works of fascist theotricians? There is so much tangled presumed nonsense that it would take page after page disentangling their stuff.

They're reactionaries to the tenth degree.

illogical rambling isn't based on political persuasion.

again we only ban fascists because 1) we want to and 2) the owner of the site is German and could run into trouble.

[Art Vandelay]

I've wanted to say it since page one but I will finally articulate it: "user name" is a socket fash.

[#FF0000]

don't really think that's necessary tbh.

he just cares too much about a thing

[p0is0n]

I think it has less to do with censorship as a thing in itself, and more to do with most of us just plain not wanting to deal with them and their shit.

[Jimmie Higgins]

You're supposed to disagree with them. They are reactionaries, yes. Hence they are an Opposing Ideology.It's not that they disagree it's that they want to end us. Libertarians and Paleo-conservatives believe in at least a degree of bourgois rights - even if they desire to legally restrict them. Fascists, are ideologically opposed and almost as a defining feature want to destroy working class radicalism, and working class defensive organizations of any kind.

There is no more use in discussing politics with them there is use in a rabbit discussing dinner options with a fox.

[Blake's Baby]

... (and the admin of the site is in Germany and could probably face some problems over allowing fascists here)...

My understanding is, this.

The owner of the site is German. Even though the site might not be hosted in Germany as I understand it it is still his property under German law. In Germany, promotion of Fascism is a criminal offence, and therefore, if Fascists were allowed to post, the owner could be liable to prosecution.

Added to which, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that political discussions can be conducted among people who have different political viewpoints (eg communists and ultra-conservative pro-capitalists etc) because there is a certain shared framework of debate. We may hate them, and they may hate us, but we both know that that's on the basis of what we believe, not what we are.

'Blacks' and 'Fascists' however are not 'the same' because Fascists can give up being Fascists while black people can't give up being black. Capitalists can stop being capitalists; we don't hate them for anything intrinsic, just for their actions, for the system that gives them power. Communism (whether Marxist or Anarchist) takes about power as relationship between people, a social relationship. Fascism as an ideology posits the belief that certain biological groups are not only meaningful but important - power is seen as a biological relationship. There's no arguing with that, because it's not a rational position. So really, there's no point talking to them.

[Sea]

I'm not sure what that smell is in this thread.. but could it be that magical ultra-leftism that you guys have been talking about? Whatever it is, this stink should've been sealed off long ago.

Might be worth a gander, User Name:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/before-opening-thread-t159023/index.html

[l'Enfermé]

I have only read the first page of this thread so I don't know if the real reason for the ban on fascists was mentioned in the other pages, but fascists are automatically banned because this forum is owned by a German comrade and he could get into legal trouble if he opens up a platform for fascists and nazis and such filthy creatures.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Might be worth a gander, User Name:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/before-opening-thread-t159023/index.html

:crying:

[The Jay]

What the fuck is 'socially liberal'? There's no such fucking thing as attaching emotions to a distinct political tract which exists within capitalism - you're either a bigot or you're not. If you understand the english meaning of the word bigot, you know for a fact that it is not an 'opposing ideology' of any kind, but rather abhorrent hate speech seldom wrapped in half-truths.

Social and political liberalism are different. For example, a gay rights supporting paleoconservative would be socially and politically liberal. A gay hating paleocon would be socially conservative and politically liberal.

[Avanti]

Say Stormfront were to ban blacks from the opposing ideologies (they're not to my surprise) because they "know niggers just want to kill all the whites; they're bigotted and are unable to reason." Blacks are to them as fascists are to us, but yet of all people they allow their (non existant) enemy and we don't?

if you're gunna troll

stormfront

be prepared

they'll sneak out your identity

and you can be in deep trouble

saying that

i think

instead of banning fascists

we should have

hackers

who find out

their identity

and then we send

the information

to local anti-fa groups

nothing

so satisfying

as self-appointed

"supermen"

crying after their moms

[Fourth Internationalist]

if you're gunna troll

stormfront

be prepared

they'll sneak out your identity

and you can be in deep trouble

saying that

i think

instead of banning fascists

we should have

hackers

who find out

their identity

and then we send

the information

to local anti-fa groups

nothing

so satisfying

as self-appointed

"supermen"

crying after their moms

Bu- but I love trolling Stormfront! :crying:

[Avanti]

Bu- but I love trolling Stormfront!

if you like wasting

time with that

just go into

4chan

and pretend

to be a stormfronter

and then

provoke them

into attacking

stormfront

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Yes but to them blacks are like our fascists but yet Stormfront of all places doesnt ban them in their opposing ideology boards, why should we ban fascists from our which are the eqjivilent to their blacks. Why do we leftIsts censor?

The fact that they see blacks as “their fascists” is enough reason to ban the fucks.

[Avanti]

most whites

are really

uncomfortable

around brown people

i know that

because

i'm brown myself

to some extent

i see racism

as honesty

when i grew up

the only brown kid

in an all-white town

people

treated me

as they would treat

a very well-liked pet

it felt

unreal

un-authentic

i was not

a real human being

but

a verification

the community

i grew up in

was oh-sooo-tolerant

[DDR]

No freedom to the enemies of freedom, period.

[Philosophos]

Well fascists don't use logic about their opinions only their twisted feelings... It's like trying to talk to a lion... Can you? Ofcourse not. When I talk to GD members they tell me stuff like " all immigrants should die" and they don't think that about 13 million Greeks are immigrants (basically we have about 9 million Greeks inside the country it's our half+ population as immigrants). They also say that the eastern countries such as Turkey, Pakistan, India etc haven't offered anything to humanity and that the Greeks are superior to almost everyone that is not white....

In case someone has these beliefs he is fucked up, he doesn't use his logic/brain so what's the point at having a conversation with them? Most of their fans have left and generally communist ideas and they don't have a clue because they grew up in an enviroment full of bullshit like: "communists are atheist (like it's the worst thing), traitors of the country, antichristes and sings of the apocalypse.... What do you expect?

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Doesn't, historically speaking, everyone in Greece have an immigrant background?

[Avanti]

Well fascists don't use logic about their opinions only their twisted feelings... It's like trying to talk to a lion... Can you? Ofcourse not. When I talk to GD members they tell me stuff like " all immigrants should die" and they don't think that about 13 million Greeks are immigrants (basically we have about 9 million Greeks inside the country it's our half+ population as immigrants). They also say that the eastern countries such as Turkey, Pakistan, India etc haven't offered anything to humanity and that the Greeks are superior to almost everyone that is not white....

In case someone has these beliefs he is fucked up, he doesn't use his logic/brain so what's the point at having a conversation with them? Most of their fans have left and generally communist ideas and they don't have a clue because they grew up in an enviroment full of bullshit like: "communists are atheist (like it's the worst thing), traitors of the country, antichristes and sings of the apocalypse.... What do you expect?

logics and brain

are overrated

charisma,

vitality,

decisiveness

are what people

are wanting

lenin could

have taken

power

with any ideology

the bolsheviks

were strong

not because

of their ideology

but

because

the degree

in what they

were ready

to do

for their ideology

[Philosophos]

Doesn't, historically speaking, everyone in Greece have an immigrant background?

What exactly do you mean?

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

What exactly do you mean?

I might be wrong, but didn't the first civilisation in the Greece-area, and the whole of Europe, came about by people that travelled to Europe from other areas.
I vaguely remember something like that from a book, but I'm not certain.

[Philosophos]

Well there were 3 basic tribes in the first greek civilizations and the one called Doriis were from the north the two others I think were from much closer. Anyway we have been enstablishing colonies and trade spots from ancient times and from the begining of time we have been immigranting. After WWII there was a huge crisis in Greece and after some years lots of people started immigranting at Australia, Germany, France, England, South Africa and other countries all over the globe.

What fascists fail to understand is that the immigrants in Greece come here for a better future, to work and live with dignity. The thing is that there are no jobs around (oh bless capitalism) so they will have to steal and do illegal things to survive.

GD members say that Greek immigrants never stole anything and they have jobs and houses and they help the countries where they live in. Yeah like they've been with EVERY SINGLE GREEK IMMIGRANT and they were angels. Also they fail to understand that for example in Germany THEY HAD JOBS TO GIVE!

[GoddessCleoLover]

Fascism is based upon bigotry and superstition. Reasoning with Fascists is like trying to "plough the ocean" to borrow a phrase from Simon Bolivar.

[RadioRaheem84]

Fascism is based upon bigotry and superstition. Reasoning with Fascists is like trying to "plough the ocean" to borrow a phrase from Simon Bolivar.

Exactly, it's hard enough to reason with American right wing conservative reactionaries and libertarians. Why would we even bother to debate people who've gone off the cliff like fascists and neo-Nazis?

I mean you're arguing with people who take the Bell Curve as the most prominent scientific study of it's day and presuppose racial and religious crap that's far from having any basis in material reality.

[Rugged Collectivist]

I want to start off by saying that I don't think black people are stormfront's fascists. I think we're stormfront's fascists. As far as I know communists aren't banned there. They could be but I don't know. It's probably unwise to post there openly as a communist though because they'll try to dox you.

I find the reasons for banning them wholly unconvincing. There is only one reason I understand which I will get to later.

1. Fascists are stupid and trying to reason with them would be frustrating and a waste of time.

While this is certainly true, the same could be said of libertarians and they aren't banned.

2. Fascists want to kill us. Fuck them

Again, while this is true it could be said of other reactionaries. You remember semper fi? I could picture a guy like that wanting to kill us. What about hardcore patriots and paleocons who aren't racist or sexist or anything but still want to kill us because we're traitors or something.

3. Letting them post would spread their ideas like a plague.

I think this is bullshit. Someone interested in politics enough to find revleft has probably already found stormfront. Even if they haven't they probably already know what fascism is. At least any fascist here would have to argue with us.

4. The owner of the site isn't allowed to have them here because he's German.

This is the only response I really accept and I think it's valid enough to keep the no fascist policy in place. While I think the banning of fascists is arbitrary, I don't care enough to really do anything about it.

Fuck fascists.

[NGNM85]

As far as I understand it, the primary reason has to do with the fact that the lead admin is based in Germany, and this was just a practical decision taken to avoid running afoul of the German government's retrograde policies regarding the dissemination of ideas.

Were this not the case, I would see no reason for banning fascists, provided their posts were topical, and they were able to conduct themselves in a civilized manner. (Which is, admittedly, highly unlikely.) However; I fully admit that it would be extremely unlikely that such interactions would yield any substantive result, as fascism is a fundamentally incoherent philosophy.

[GerrardWinstanley]

In my humble experience, with every fascist and obscurantist I've had an argument with online or IRL, the person appears at first to have extremely low intelligence due to their incapacity for joined-up thinking, breathtaking ignorance and sheer lack of content to their arguments until it becomes apparent that they do have a certain intelligence. This intelligence is dedicated entirely to distortion, rhetorical sleight of hand and obfuscatory defence mechanisms.

And because their logic is circular, nobody wins the argument, which can go on forever until the fascist has the last word. You have to understand, "might is right" in these people's minds.

Another problem is fascists are the absolute worst when it comes to sock puppeting and troll raids. I really couldn't blame any forum moderator who would rather do without the whole business of dealing not only them, but the consequent exchanges of verbal abuse, which fascists and bigots have an uncanny ability to provoke out of even the most level-headed of people.

[Richard Nixon]

No freedom to the enemies of freedom, period.

Was that comment supposed to be ironic?

I'm curious about the definition of fascism for the purpose of the rules however. Most of the time it seems to be used more or less interchangeably with racist neo-Nazi/skinhead types, but it is theoretically possible for a fascist to not be a racist-many East Asian dictatorships and also Pinochet's Chile had elements of fascism although they were not really racist.

[Blake's Baby]

Technically, if you want to look at the origins of Fascism as a political ideology in Italy, it wasn't really racist at all. Too often 'fascism' is used to refer to Nazism, and then taken as a synonym for virulent racism, when my understanding of Fascism is that it really didn't have that racial component.

So perhaps the rules banning 'fascists' should be in fact read as banning 'National Socialists and followers of similar racist ideologies'.

[prolcon]

Consider, though, that fascism was a wholly reactionary philosophy, back to front. While not always explicitly racist in the same way Nazism was, it was still very susceptible to national-chauvinistic attitudes.

[Blake's Baby]

It was completely national-chauvinist. It just wasn't (as far as I understand it, which isn't very far) racial-chauvinist.

[Comrade #138672]

Because Fascists are the enemy and they will inevitably try to sabotage what we are doing.


It was completely national-chauvinist. It just wasn't (as far as I understand it, which isn't very far) racial-chauvinist.Is it not true that national-chauvinism gives rise to racial-chauvinism, because nationality and 'race' are not completely inseparable?

[#FF0000]

haha lets not overthink this one, guys.

[GoddessCleoLover]

In my humble experience, with every fascist and obscurantist I've had an argument with online or IRL, the person appears at first to have extremely low intelligence due to their incapacity for joined-up thinking, breathtaking ignorance and sheer lack of content to their arguments until it becomes apparent that they do have a certain intelligence. This intelligence is dedicated entirely to distortion, rhetorical sleight of hand and obfuscatory defence mechanisms.

And because their logic is circular, nobody wins the argument, which can go on forever until the fascist has the last word. You have to understand, "might is right" in these people's minds.

Another problem is fascists are the absolute worst when it comes to sock puppeting and troll raids. I really couldn't blame any forum moderator who would rather do without the whole business of dealing not only them, but the consequent exchanges of verbal abuse, which fascists and bigots have an uncanny ability to provoke out of even the most level-headed of people.


This.

[Baseball]

Technically, if you want to look at the origins of Fascism as a political ideology in Italy, it wasn't really racist at all. Too often 'fascism' is used to refer to Nazism, and then taken as a synonym for virulent racism, when my understanding of Fascism is that it really didn't have that racial component.

So perhaps the rules banning 'fascists' should be in fact read as banning 'National Socialists and followers of similar racist ideologies'.


fascism was also younger than National Socialism. the synonym developed as a result of the communists not wanting Hitler to sully the good name of socialism. this dovetails into the long standing practice of groups of self described socialists claimimg they are they are the true socialist, and denying that the other groups of self described socialists, are true socialists.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Why aren't fascists allowed to post in opposing ideologies?
They are an opposing ideology...
:confused:

Just as no one wants to hear someone else shit, no one wants to hear a Fascist speak. They sound virtually the same in my experience.

[Blake's Baby]

fascism was also younger than National Socialism. the synonym developed as a result of the communists not wanting Hitler to sully the good name of socialism. this dovetails into the long standing practice of groups of self described socialists claimimg they are they are the true socialist, and denying that the other groups of self described socialists, are true socialists.

Don't be ridiculous.

The Fascisti were formed in 1921 in Italy - they took their name from the 'fasces', the official badge of the Roman censors, because they stood for the purity of the Italian nation.

The National Socialists were formed in Germany an 1920, as a combination of nationalist parties who opposed what they saw as Jewish crony capitalism, and supported a German 'commonwealth' - their 'socialism' consisted of welfare schemes to what was seen as a German people (and only German people) suffering from the 'evils' of Jewish bankers and Marxists. It has nothing to do with 'international socialism' which they virulently opposed. They apparently added 'socialist' to their name to appeal to disaffected leftwingers, not because they were socialists.

The two movements have no causal connection at all, and neither of them were named by socialists. The fact that Mussolini had been a socialist until 1916 is irrelevant, he wasn't when he formed the Fascisti; and the Nazis weren't socialists at all, it was just an advertising tactic.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

Because I hate censorship.

Too bad, we are going to have to use the weapons of censorship and propaganda models efficiently once we take state power as well. Of course we always need to keep the illusion of plurality because people like you can not handle the truth that power needs to be protected; contrary to capitalist-imperialist violent monopoly power, ours will be socialist-worker violent monopoly power. And to protect this progressive power, we have to protect the state from ideological illegitimacy, fight the class struggle between nations in the homes on the telly of as many workers as our mediums can reach. Having a half way decent domestic propaganda model goes a far way in making the global capitalistic states look unfavorable.

Is it dishonest when creating a propaganda model for socialism? Whether or not it is, is irrelevant and anti-scientific socialist. The class enemy uses emotional, psychological and ideological manipulation very very effectively, we need to learn from it, and use it against the enemy. We need to use this weapon to bind the workers to their state; if we do not make workers see the superiority of Socialism (of which i am convinced 20th century German socialism was objectively better than West German Capitalism), then there is no "middle ground", but the Capitalists waiting to bind the workers to their Imperialist States and capitalist system. The main thing, however, is to create a propaganda model for socialist-workers' power which has an apparent democratic plurality of discourse and diversity of views. To quote one of the best propaganda ministers, the Fascist Goebbels, "A media system wants ostensible diversity that conceals an actual uniformity”.

All manager rank employs in all modern Corporations have to visit mandatory propaganda learning sessions. Everyday workers under Capitalism, whether they turn on the TV and watch the corporate brainwashing advertisements, the corporate media, read the corporate newspapers, or whether they talk to employees at a corporate shopping store, are constantly being emotionally and ideologically manipulated by hard thought out propaganda techniques of the Capitalist class. I am not saying that we should follow this trend to the end, of course our ultimate goal is the abolition of the state and real freedom, but so long the capitalist class still exists, all fronts of the class struggle have to be fought on.

[Baseball]

Don't be ridiculous.

The Fascisti were formed in 1921 in Italy - they took their name from the 'fasces', the official badge of the Roman censors, because they stood for the purity of the Italian nation.

The National Socialists were formed in Germany an 1920, as a combination of nationalist parties who opposed what they saw as Jewish crony capitalism, and supported a German 'commonwealth' - their 'socialism' consisted of welfare schemes to what was seen as a German people (and only German people) suffering from the 'evils' of Jewish bankers and Marxists. It has nothing to do with 'international socialism' which they virulently opposed. They apparently added 'socialist' to their name to appeal to disaffected leftwingers, not because they were socialists.

The two movements have no causal connection at all, and neither of them were named by socialists. The fact that Mussolini had been a socialist until 1916 is irrelevant, he wasn't when he formed the Fascisti; and the Nazis weren't socialists at all, it was just an advertising tactic.

sorry- but you misunderstood. you had suggested it is a mistake that fascism and Nazism
are synonyms. I do not entirely disagree, and simply explained how that synonym developed.

[Blake's Baby]

Your explanation of why the synonym developed - 'the term fascists was invented by socialists who didn't want to call the Nazis socialists because socialists always call other socialists not-socialists' is bullshit.

The socialists called the Nazis 'Nazis' - short for 'Nationalisten', nationalists. It's a name coined like the 'Sozi' - short for 'Sozialisten', socialists, and 'Inter-Nazi' - 'Internationalists'. A German friend of mine told me that German doesn't use acronyms made up from initial letters, it's much easier to break up and recombine syllables to make names.

The Nazis generally called themselves 'National Socialists' to be sure. The 'Sozi' and indeed the 'Inter-Nazi' might have called the Nazis 'Nazi' to avoid calling them socialists (but more likely they were just picking the word that comes first and indeed the word in the party name that's specific to the Nazis - there would be little point in referring to both the Socialists and the National Socialists as 'Sozi' for instance).

The confusion of 'Fascism' and 'Nazism' comes from the fact that though the Fascists were founded a year after the Nazis, within another year (1922) the Fascists had staged a coup and taken control of Italy. The Nazis at this point were an obscure band of malcontented Germans that were almost completely unknown to the outside world. When the Nazi movement became more widely known (from the late 1920s-early 1930s), it seemed obvious to outsiders that this was a kind of 'German Fascism'. That's why Nazis are labelled 'Fascists'.

[Jason]

Yeah, I can understand chauvanism as a reason for banning. I can have reasonable political discussions with most people, but if I encounter chauvanists, whether an adult or a 10 year old, then that breaks down the atmosphere.