# Let's define fascism



## mindlessobserver (Jun 24, 2018)

I have been trying for some time to get a solid definition for what fascism is that can be boiled down to one or two sentences. The term is bandied about and applied so liberally I feel nobody actually knows. This thread is to try and get that solid definition. No, this is not an endorsement of the ideology, just a sincere effort to define it so it can be identified.

 So here is my best stab at a one sentence attempt.

Fascism is the belief in an organized and authoritarian society where every portion of it from the individual to the government is controlled by a subjective narrative that defines all reality according to the dictates of the governing party.


----------



## PlasticOwls (Jun 24, 2018)

Trump


----------



## AnOminous (Jun 24, 2018)

Fascism adopted the fasces as its symbol.




 

It symbolizes the fundamental ideology of fascism, which is that individually, we are weak and easily broken, like twigs, but together, we form a mighty faggot.


----------



## Rand /pol/ (Jun 24, 2018)

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it's a merger of State and corporate power."

"All within the state,  
nothing outside the state, nothing  against the state."

-Mussolini

Fascism would seem to be the merging of state and corporate powers for the betterment of the nation, with an incredibly Militaristic, Nationalist, and Chauvinist society (kind of like in Starship Troopers).


----------



## HG 400 (Jun 24, 2018)

Mindless Observer said:
			
		

> a solid definition for what fascism is that can be boiled down to one or two sentences.



You mean like the first sentence of the wikipedia article on it?


----------



## PantsFreeZone (Jun 24, 2018)

Fascism, in 2018, is the authoritarian approach to political identity. It is found in the penalizing or de-platforming of individuals for "wrongthink" or differing political opinions and/or personal beliefs that fall outside the collective echo chamber of the mainstream progressive agenda.

Also:


----------



## OhGoy (Jun 24, 2018)

everyone who disagrees with me is a fascist


----------



## GreenJacket (Jun 24, 2018)

They like to dress up in black and overthrow governments...

Now where have I heard that before?


----------



## Deadwaste (Jun 24, 2018)

when the parents of teenagers tell them to go to bed because it's 3 am in the morning and the teens dont want to because they wanna listen to their lofi hip hop 24/7 music stream while writing that book in google docs for wattpad before playing the sims NO MOM THIS ISNT A WASTE OF MY LIFE. THIS IS SERIOUS WORK!


----------



## nanny911 (Jun 24, 2018)

Fascism is a vague political term which can encompass a range of authoritarian ideologies on both sides of the spectrum.

Far-right wing authoritarianism is corporatism, where corporations buy candidates, news networks, and smaller businesses to propagate their agenda.



Spoiler



So basically what Disney is doing.


----------



## mindlessobserver (Jun 24, 2018)

Fagnasty said:


> You mean like the first sentence of the wikipedia article on it?



The first sentence of the wiki page is garbage. It summarizes was Fascism DID, not what it IS. Hell the entire wiki page is essentially a summary of result and not cause. Hence this thread. Having a passing interest in political philosophy myself, I have realized I was never actually introduced to fascist philosophy in my University education. I got communism, romanticism, objectivism, rationalism, jingoism, nationalism, nativism, pretty much every ism there is. Except fascism.

Which is unfortunate considering the stupendously horrific impact this brand of political philosophy has had on history. I would not even care, yet the constant desire to label things as fascist in common political debate means an actual explanation of fascist philosophy is required. It cannot be avoided, especially since there is a determined effort to accuse people with contrarion opinions of being fascists by so many.


----------



## Piss Clam (Jun 25, 2018)

I'm fascist because I don't believe in a large central government and believe in empowering the individual.



> Which is unfortunate considering the stupendously horrific impact this brand of political philosophy has had on history.



I think communism has had a bigger impact than any Italian or German government in the 1930's.


----------



## Dr. Boe Jangles Esq. (Jun 25, 2018)

Things Fascism Is:
A political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

Things Fascism is Not:
Republicanism, conservative social policy, Pepe memes, not liking gays, being refused a state funded sex change, the idea that people should have to work a job to make money, a disregard for soft science and pop sociology culture theories, or internet trolls.

Fascism is actually a specific term referring to a specific thing. It is currently used in place of "conservative", "religious", "nationalist", or "fundamentalist" because those terms, while far more accurate, don't have as much punch when put into a facebook post.
We have reached a point in which people want to use words and ideas they barely understand to express their rather benign political views in such a way as to imply that theirs is the only view possible without losing an imagined battle for the soul of the country.

The reality is that, charged as things may seem right now, we are no closer or further from actual fascism than we've ever been. Most of the current issues people fight over have been fought over for generations. The only thing that's really changed is that we're far more hysterical and alarmist about what amounts to a handful of benign wedge issues.


----------



## skiddlez (Jun 25, 2018)

It's another one of those words that has lost all meaning with time, much alike "literally" and "ironic." I wouldn't look into it too much because there's no point, but as far as I know, this is basically the old definition in a nutshell.

The old definition of fascism is a governing style of *complete central authority* with a ruling dictator who uses (actual, legitimate) oppression as forms of social and behavioral control for order. This can include surveillance, lack of free speech/silencing of opposition, generations of punishment, slavery, etc. to invoke fear. Some governing styles believe that the best motivators are things such as rewards, while fascism attempts to scare people into doing things. It also implies the absence of democracy, making the dissolution of power extremely difficult without outside intervention. Leaders of fascist regimes (dictators) hence also become *moral leaders* who are often treated almost like gods. A great example is practically every communist regime in history having a cult of personality.

Fascism was not inherently right-wing. In fact there were more left-wing fascists in history (communists basically). A great example of modern-day fascism is North Korea. It's also worth noting that fascism is not indicative of any economic system but usually results in communism due to centralization of all power and authority.

Fascist regimes commonly used displays of power, weaponry, and military (militarism) to scare other nations as well as scare the citizens of their own nation into submission. An arms race might be a more peaceful way of doing this. Fascists in history also seem to often be warmongers in hopes of expanding/taking new territory, until I suppose they've taken over the world I guess.

It obviously scares people because in the event a fascist regime is successful and takes over everything, almost everyone is subjugated except for a ruling class with all the power, and there is nobody to help you or try to save you. The people would have to try to revolt but wouldn't have any rights and would probably very easily be taken down. However that's also getting into globalism which is a whole other thing...

Edit: I think this is important so I'm gonna add it. People often mistake racism or nationalism as "fascism." This isn't the case. Racism is only fascism when it's forced and mandated: "if you don't hate this group of people we'll kill your whole family and make you watch to invoke fear, because that's the government's agenda and you better do what we say." All modern racism is free-will racism, people are racist because they want to be, not because they are forced and scared into it.


----------



## Maxliam (Jun 25, 2018)

PantsFreeZone said:


> Fascism, in 2018, is the authoritarian approach to political identity. It is found in the penalizing or de-platforming of individuals for "wrongthink" or differing political opinions and/or personal beliefs that fall outside the collective echo chamber of the mainstream progressive agenda.
> 
> Also:
> 
> View attachment 480807


That girl has some DSL. Dictator Sucking Lips. *rimshot*


----------



## Your Sexy Futa Sister (Jun 25, 2018)

Why should we bother defining fascism when we can just Google it? :>


----------



## Positron (Jun 25, 2018)

Fascism is the overgrowth of fascia, the tough collaginous tissue that envelopes muscles.


----------



## Arkle Seizure (Jun 25, 2018)

"Pretending you care when you don't."


----------



## mindlessobserver (Jun 25, 2018)

Your Sexy Futa Sister said:


> Why should we bother defining fascism when we can just Google it? :>



Because definitions of fascism are like assholes. Everyone has one and they are full of shit.

For example, one thing I am noticing about fascist philosophy is that it's not just about instilling fear in the population so much as it is creating a alternative grand narrative that explains reality and then using fear/force to insure there is no competition to what the Government says is real. Hence the infamous quote "the truth is the enemy of the state".

If you just say the primary factor of a fascist state is nationalistic or racialist totalitarianism, then many traditional monarchies could be considered fascist, or even tribal groupings like the Mongol Empire or Manchu China. Which leads to the mistake of accusing someone with authoritarian tendencies or in favor of a strong central state to being a Nazi.

To me it seems the psychological control of the meta narrative over society is what is unique to fascist States. Something not shared by your standard run of the mill tyrants.


----------



## RichardMongler (Jun 26, 2018)

Oh, jeez. This isn't going to be an easy or concise question to answer as, depending on who you ask, you'll get a range of different and sometimes contradictory answers, but frankly, I'm of the opinion the best person to ask on the subject are those who claim to be one before crosschecking it with independent observers.



Dr. Boe Jangles Esq. said:


> Things Fascism Is:A political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.



This is a good start, but there's also a massive spiritual component that goes into Fascism. I remember in all of IronMarch / Rope Culture's propaganda was the repeated stressing of metaphysical concepts. They would frequently refer to the Universal Truth, Natural Order or Laws of Nature.


----------



## Toucan (Jun 26, 2018)

The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”
The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”
Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”
Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”
The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”
The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”
Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”
Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”
Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”
Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”
Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”
-14 signs of fascism, Umberto Eco, Italian writer who lived through fascism.

If we accept this list we can see that Trump is not a fascist however he is quite close to being more of a fascist than not.

Here is a link to the full essay. It is called Eternal Fascism (ur fascism) and it is really interesting in its full form.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/


----------



## Your Weird Fetish (Jun 26, 2018)

None of this stuff seems to really address its ideological roots or how it differs from other political philosophies, so much as symptoms of its presence and preconditions for it arising.


----------



## Toucan (Jun 26, 2018)

Your Weird Fetish said:


> None of this stuff seems to really address its ideological roots or how it differs from other political philosophies, so much as symptoms of its presence and preconditions for it arising.



Umberto Eco essentially states that such things are useless because the ideological justifications that fascism gives for itself are ultimately beside the point when it comes to its practical effect on the world. Fascism comes in many shapes and sizes and there is no real way of quantifying it. For instance he points to the three fascist powers of europe (spain germany and italy) who all had wildly divergent ideas of what fascism should be (spain resembled a theocracy, germany a military state and italy a corporate state) but ultimately they all acted in the same way.

However I would add a 15th symptom to the list. I think that no Fascist regime is complete without a cult of personality. A sort of pantheon made up of the various leaders and heroes and martyrs of the party


----------



## Your Weird Fetish (Jun 26, 2018)

Toucan said:


> Umberto Eco essentially states that such things are useless because the ideological justifications that fascism gives for itself are ultimately beside the point when it comes to its practical effect on the world. Fascism comes in many shapes and sizes and there is no real way of quantifying it. For instance he points to the three fascist powers of europe (spain germany and italy) who all had wildly divergent ideas of what fascism should be (spain resembled a theocracy, germany a military state and italy a corporate state) but ultimately they all acted in the same way.
> 
> However I would add a 15th symptom to the list. I think that no Fascist regime is complete without a cult of personality. A sort of pantheon made up of the various leaders and heroes and martyrs of the party


Ok but all these things apply to non-fascist regimes pretty strongly and given how much of Europe's history in the early 20th century was defined by a fight between fascism, communism, and liberalism, it seems fucked up that one of those essentially doesn't exist as a definable entity.


----------



## Dagwood (Jun 26, 2018)

Fascism is international socialism with the dividing lines between in- and out- groups drawn along national boundaries instead of class boundaries.

Mussolini liked socialism, but he liked Italy more. He tried to strike a "third way" between the capitalist systems, which he saw as greedy and exploitative, and international socialism, which sought to erase national borders and which he though was doomed to failure for being economically illiterate. His solution was to re-order Italian society so that everything would be run by a single strong leader for the benefit of all, and by everything he meant _everything_. Corporations, the arts, the press, all would be controlled - though not necessarily owned - by the government. Emotional appeals/populism/patriotic fervor were tools used to control the populace or gain its approval but were just means to the end of establishing a fascist state that would reap the "benefits" of socalism's centralized control without losing Italy as a distinct nation.


----------



## Toucan (Jun 26, 2018)

Your Weird Fetish said:


> Ok but all these things apply to non-fascist regimes pretty strongly and given how much of Europe's history in the early 20th century was defined by a fight between fascism, communism, and liberalism, it seems fucked up that one of those essentially doesn't exist as a definable entity.



The REALLY fucked up thing is that they resembled each other more than they didnt.


----------



## Your Weird Fetish (Jun 26, 2018)

Toucan said:


> The REALLY fucked up thing is that they resembled each other more than they didnt.


Well fascism is basically communism's weird nephew.


----------



## Toucan (Jun 26, 2018)

Your Weird Fetish said:


> Well fascism is basically communism's weird nephew.



Not even that but the imperial powers of france and england exhibited many of the qualities of a fascist state in those times too, perhaps even more so since they had been given a head start on conquering other nations. 

I think its a bit of a canard to make a distinction between Monarchy and fascism. Fascism is essentially a sleeker and more modern version of monarchy. If you are interested in reading there is a really interesting book called 'totalitarian art' by igor golomstock where he compares the officially recognised and lauded art works of the totalitarian powers. He even goes so far as to include saddam husseins iraq and saudi arabia and the united kingdom. What you end up finding is that art produced in these countries stagnated during times of totalitarian repression and they all universally depict a sort of romanticised realism of heroism or plentiful harvests or scenes from official history.


----------



## Piss Clam (Jun 26, 2018)

> Mussolini liked socialism, but he liked Italy more. He tried to strike a "third way" between the capitalist systems, which he saw as greedy and exploitative, and international socialism, which sought to erase national borders and which he though was doomed to failure for being economically illiterate. His solution was to re-order Italian society so that everything would be run by a single strong leader for the benefit of all, and by everything he meant _everything_. Corporations, the arts, the press, all would be controlled - though not necessarily owned - by the government. Emotional appeals/populism/patriotic fervor were tools used to control the populace or gain its approval but were just means to the end of establishing a fascist state that would reap the "benefits" of socalism's centralized control without losing Italy as a distinct nation.



Isn't the definition of Fascism Mussolini's words? Shouldn't we look there. Just as we look to Karl Marx.


----------



## Joan Nyan (Jun 28, 2018)

Fascism was the political ideology of the Italian government between 1925 and 1945. Extending it to any modern day political ideology is silly.


----------



## Commander Keen (Jun 28, 2018)

No one can define fascism because not even the ivory tower political scientists can agree on what it is. The only real-life example is Mussolini's Italy and Italians can't into government after Rome fell so I wouldn't list that as a prime example of pure fascism. 

I automatically dismiss anyone who calls someone a fascist or claims the US federal government is currently fascist. No one knows what it means, there's no universally agreed upon definition, so you're just bullshitting.


----------



## Hell0 (Jun 28, 2018)

Guys, Facism was really in our hearts the whole time.


----------



## AnOminous (Jun 28, 2018)

Commander Keen said:


> No one can define fascism because not even the ivory tower political scientists can agree on what it is. The only real-life example is Mussolini's Italy and Italians can't into government after Rome fell so I wouldn't list that as a prime example of pure fascism.
> 
> I automatically dismiss anyone who calls someone a fascist or claims the US federal government is currently fascist. No one knows what it means, there's no universally agreed upon definition, so you're just bullshitting.



Generalissimo Francisco Franco wants a word with you.


----------



## Krokodil Overdose (Jun 28, 2018)

I'm going to use Nick Land's definition: "Fascism is therefore broadly identical with a normalization of war-powers in a modern state, that is: sustained social mobilization under central direction." I realize this covers communism as well, but that's actually part of his thesis: Fascism is actually existing Communism as practiced in one country. The USSR and the Third Reich were supposed to be "communist" and "fascist" respectively, but in practical terms, there was very little daylight between them. (This definition comes from an article he dropped just before the 2016 election, "The F Word." I recommend giving it a look if you can take Land's prose style- he's done a lot of drugs, and it shows.)


----------



## SigSauer (Jun 28, 2018)

I would suggest watching Cultured Thugs videos. This dude is an OG Fascist and could tell you anything you'd want to know about it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHibZA-Qs78

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsAIuAMjzsc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp04VmdRyoI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ukylWmPfXA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McqXbRp92sI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-Le1pgsEDE

Also, ignore the LARPY faggots who call themselves the "American Blackshirts". They have nothing in common with Italy, they are about as "Fascist" as the bugmen who wear balaclavas and smoke meth while throwing bricks at real fascists. ABS is fucking gay.


----------



## Commander Keen (Jun 28, 2018)

AnOminous said:


> Generalissimo Francisco Franco wants a word with you.



No, he doesn't. A one party totalitarian dictatorship with smatterings of monarchy for flavor does not a fascist regime make. Just because someone is a dictator (or regent-for-life or whatever the spaniards cooked up) it doesn't make them a fascist. 

But in your own definition of fascism it may fit. But, like I pointed out, there has only been one legitimate regime that has embraced the label of fascist and the intellectuals who sit around and talk about this stuff all day can't agree on what fascism actually is. So this is all moot. 

If I sound dismissive of political scientists it's because that was my undergraduate major. Yes, I had to go to grad school for something entirely different in order to become employable.


----------



## Toucan (Jun 29, 2018)

Commander Keen said:


> No, he doesn't. A one party totalitarian dictatorship with smatterings of monarchy for flavor does not a fascist regime make. Just because someone is a dictator (or regent-for-life or whatever the spaniards cooked up) it doesn't make them a fascist.



Not even when he refers to himself as a fascist and the official ideology of the falangist party is expressly described as borrowing from Italian fascism and self described as fascism ?


----------



## Commander Keen (Jun 29, 2018)

Toucan said:


> Not even when he refers to himself as a fascist and the official ideology of the falangist party is expressly described as borrowing from Italian fascism and self described as fascism ?



I'm trying to find where generalissimo Franco explicitly said his rule was a fascist one, but I can't. Everything I've found has been mixed with the fascist label applied by armchair historians.

So please point me to where you found a quote by Franco saying "this is a fascist regime" or something like that. I can't find it.

I still wouldn't say that merely borrowing a few tenets from Italian fascist government makes you a fascist. Every major government on the planet shares a few commonalities with National Socialism but you wouldn't call them nazis.

Edit: typo


----------



## Toucan (Jun 29, 2018)

Commander Keen said:


> So please point me to where you found a quote by Franco saying "this is a fascist regime" or something like that. I can't find it.


Alright.

A totalitarian state will harmonize in Spain the operation of all the capabilities and energy in the country, that inside the National Unity, the work esteemed as the most unavoidable must be the only exponent of the people's will.
-Victory speech in Madrid (19 May 1939), Franco. (I understand it doesnt directly state it is fascism but if it doesnt make you think 'fascist' then nothing will.)

Fascism, *since that is the word that describes us*, fascism presents, wherever it manifests itself, characteristics which are varied to the extent that countries and national temperaments vary. It is essentially a defensive reaction of the organism, a manifestation of the desire to live, of the desire not to die, which at certain times seizes a whole people. So each people reacts in its own way, according to its conception of life. Our rising, here, has a Spanish meaning! What can it have in common with Hitlerisim, which was, above all, a reaction against the state of things created by the defeat, and by the abdication and the despair that followed it?
-Again Franco in an interview with Henri Massis in 1938

And finally here is a clip from a documentary about the Spanish civil war where the official ideology of the falangist party is admitted to be fascism.
https://youtu.be/81RhewkQbOk?t=33m53s
and then this clip later on
https://youtu.be/81RhewkQbOk?t=38m56s
Incidentally I highly recommend watching that documentary in full it is incredibly well done and possibly the best explination of the Spanish Civil war most people will ever come across.

I do not understand your obsession with trying to rigidly contain the definition of fascism to Mussolini when it is obvious that the ideology was adapted by both Hitler and Franco and others in South America and Africa.
Just because Mussolini came up with the idea of fascism doesn't mean that every slight veriation of that idea needs to be called something completely different and be judged using completely different metrics.
I wonder do you apply the same criteria to Communism since there are Varying degrees to that ideology too (Leninism Stalinism Maoism etc)

It would be like saying that every breed of dog be called something unique and that only one breed of dog may be hold the title. Its a bit grammar nazi-ish.


----------



## Commander Keen (Jun 29, 2018)

Toucan said:


> Alright.
> 
> A totalitarian state will harmonize in Spain the operation of all the capabilities and energy in the country, that inside the National Unity, the work esteemed as the most unavoidable must be the only exponent of the people's will.
> -Victory speech in Madrid (19 May 1939), Franco. (I understand it doesnt directly state it is fascism but if it doesnt make you think 'fascist' then nothing will.)
> ...



I'm really not. My point is that no one can agree on what fascism actually is so I'm reluctant to label something "fascist" just because it upsets my sensibilities. HOWEVER, if a government explicitly states that it is a fascist government then I'm cool with it. 

I have no issue whatsoever with a government saying "so we're fascists now" and then other people saying it's a fascist regime. I do have an issue with the slobbering masses yelling "FASCIST! YOU'RE A FASCIST CUNT! FAAAAAAAASCIST!" because they don't know what it means. I don't know what it means. No one knows what it means. But if a government in power releases a statement or manifesto or whatever that states "this is a fascist government" then I'll accept the fascist label. However, if a government does not apply the fascist label, then I am forced to compare its policies to previous examples that are widely agreed to be fascist regimes.

The term "fascist" is now a pejorative used by people who tend to lean left politically to discredit their opposition. At least here in the USofA. It's the same with the "socialist" label, but there seems to be a lot more agreement on what "socialism" actually is and it is more strongly defined. 

Full disclosure: I have a BS and MS in political science so I fully admit to being autistic in regards to government. Yes, I was completely unemployable and had to get a second MS in order to find work outside of a coffee shop.  Or, in my case, the alcohol industry.


----------



## Toucan (Jun 29, 2018)

Commander Keen said:


> I'm really not. My point is that no one can agree on what fascism actually is so I'm reluctant to label something "fascist" just because it upsets my sensibilities. HOWEVER, if a government explicitly states that it is a fascist government then I'm cool with it.
> 
> I have no issue whatsoever with a government saying "so we're fascists now" and then other people saying it's a fascist regime. I do have an issue with the slobbering masses yelling "FASCIST! YOU'RE A FASCIST CUNT! FAAAAAAAASCIST!" because they don't know what it means. I don't know what it means. No one knows what it means. But if a government in power releases a statement or manifesto or whatever that states "this is a fascist government" then I'll accept the fascist label. However, if a government does not apply the fascist label, then I am forced to compare its policies to previous examples that are widely agreed to be fascist regimes.
> 
> ...



I suppose thats reasonable. I just happen to believe that fascism is more of a 'you'll know it when you see it kind of thing. Fascist has a rightly earned negative connotation so I can't imagine too many people today and in the future willingly using it to describe themselves but I feel that they still should be described as fascist if they clearly display the attributes of one.
However I really do agree the word has been cheapened lately and it no longer holds the same impact or inspires the same kind of revulsion that it should hold, which is sad and possibly dangerous. 

And Im sorry I insinuated you were a grammar nazi.


----------



## AnOminous (Jun 29, 2018)

Toucan said:


> Just because Mussolini came up with the idea of fascism doesn't mean that every slight veriation of that idea needs to be called something completely different and be judged using completely different metrics.



He came up with the name, not the idea.  I doubt he even came up with the name itself.  Probably he took credit for it from someone else.  D'Annunzio is probably the forefather of fascism, although I don't think the word existed at that time, or at least not in its full sense as referring to a very specific political philosophy.


----------



## kinglordsupreme19 (Jun 29, 2018)

A) A belief that a nation or a community is functionally equivalent to an organism.
B) A belief that the organism is defined by a set of shared immutable characteristics of its members (for example, race, language, geography, religious background, etc).
C) That all efforts should be made to ensure that the organism flourishes, with little consideration given to constituent members or entities outside the organism.


----------



## mindlessobserver (Jun 30, 2018)

Reading through all the posts, I keep seeing the one unifying factor of various forms of fascism being the religious overtones. A supplantation of the national myths and religion with the doctrines of the State to buttress and justify control over all segments of society, from the economy to the arts. Sort of divine right monarchy on steroids.


----------



## The Hansome Goblin (Jun 30, 2018)

In the watered-down sense of the word, anyone who advocates any sort of nationalist ideology. They can be Third Way, Third Positionist or any other sort of cross-ideological, hybrid ideology and it makes absolutely no difference if you even so slightly hint at the integrity of the nation-state and the idea of excess multiculturalism being a bad thing.

In a more actual sense, modern fascism is best defined as government driven extreme nationalism to the point of blatantly disregarding the interests of all nations but your own, which is essentially a far-right position, regardless of whether you subscribe to a more corporatist or populist perspective of fascism.


----------



## Slap47 (Jul 1, 2018)

Fascism isn't an ideology. It's like Caudillismo, a manner of ruling.

You have a charismatic leader that wants individuals to *put the state before their own interests*. It can take the form of radical national socialism or as a puppet regime that whores out the country for foreign businesses under the auspices of preserving traditional values.

Mussolini had no ideology, he simply sought to grow the Italian states influence. He both applied socialist policy and kept himself well connected with large corporate leaders.

I would argue that North Korea and even USSR should be considered fascist states.

Alot of people get offended by anybody daring to claim that Hitler applied socialist policy and retarded conservatives make the argument that Hitler was a socialist but the reality is that Hitler's ideology wasn't clear-cut on economics and only dictated one thing - all business must benefit the state.


----------



## Your Weird Fetish (Jul 1, 2018)

Toucan said:


> I suppose thats reasonable. I just happen to believe that fascism is more of a 'you'll know it when you see it kind of thing. Fascist has a rightly earned negative connotation so I can't imagine too many people today and in the future willingly using it to describe themselves but I feel that they still should be described as fascist if they clearly display the attributes of one.


It's one of the great injustices of world history that communism hasn't ended up the same way.


----------



## Toucan (Jul 2, 2018)

Your Weird Fetish said:


> It's one of the great injustices of world history that communism hasn't ended up the same way.



I think its because communists are sexier than fascists. They have the whole 'viva la revolution' deal and at least pay lipservice to the idea of equality and stuff. Fascists on the other hand only appeal to people who have a rather suspect fetish for nazi uniforms


----------



## Your Weird Fetish (Jul 2, 2018)

Toucan said:


> I think its because communists are sexier than fascists. They have the whole 'viva la revolution' deal and at least pay lipservice to the idea of equality and stuff. Fascists on the other hand only appeal to people who have a rather suspect fetish for nazi uniforms


Fascists were very sexy before WW2. I think the main difference is that communists were our "allies" and it gave them a window to market themselves better and infect our institutions.


----------



## Slap47 (Jul 2, 2018)

Your Weird Fetish said:


> It's one of the great injustices of world history that communism hasn't ended up the same way.



Problem is that the USA installed fascist governments to suppress democratic movements and only the communists made any effort to seriously oppose those governments. Doesn't help that the church in Latin America really does have far too much power and the the wealth hoarding by a small % of kleptocrats can be really felt, especially in civil war ridden countries that basically had to deal with having fruit companies as their governments. 

In Russia its hard to argue against the progress the country experienced. In ww1 the Germans took on the Russian Empire with only a small % of their army and absolutely destroyed them. In ww2 the Germans threw an overwhelming majority of their army at the Russians and got their face kicked in. Kinda hard to argue that Hitler progressed Germany anywhere since he lost so much land and killed so many people. He doesn't really have any concrete policies outside of militarism (the autobahn was started by the Weimar Republic and expanded with slave labor during the Nazi period). 

And of course, through all that the American and western European moderate and radical left were condemning the USSR for rights abuses. On the other hand, the Nazi opposition to Hitler was silenced or liquidated during his rule. 



Toucan said:


> I think its because communists are sexier than fascists. They have the whole 'viva la revolution' deal and at least pay lipservice to the idea of equality and stuff. Fascists on the other hand only appeal to people who have a rather suspect fetish for nazi uniforms



Fascism is a radical form of nationalism but its not the only form of extreme nationalism. In the USA extreme nationalism takes the exact opposite form because the national identity takes the form of anti-authoritarianism, localism and civil liberties. Compare that to the Prussian idea of a strong centralized state that takes priority over every individual that Hitler romanticized and Mussolini wanted to create. 

Fascism in the USA can only come from a strange journey through a person reading some obscure books or watching some dumb documentaries or through extreme racism. It's an entirely foreign idea to non-racist Americans that the culture doesn't allow to just appear naturally. "Blood and soil" and an absolute dedication to the state doesn't really work with a diverse country of immigrants or a country that argues that the right to criticize, choose and even oppose the federal government is what makes it the greatest. 

Fascism in Italy is_ still alive _because many blame Italy's problems on the fact that it has a weak central government that allows mobsters to rule large parts of the country and because Italians want a government that will stick up for them rather than kowtow to the EU and its strange "end of whites" plan.


----------



## Gone_Fission (Jul 2, 2018)

It's hard to define what fascism is because fascism itself is an incoherent mish-mash of various ideas cobbled together by political opportunists. Unlike the various forms of liberalism or Marxism, fascism doesn't really work as a logically consistent ideology, it's just authoritarian gut impulses grafted onto other ideologies.

Personally, I think of fascism as being more of a reactionary and authoritarian trend within capitalist societies in periods of decay, that attempts to sublimate inwardly focused economic class struggles into outwardly focused national and racial struggles under the directives of a strong centralized state.


----------



## Forever Train Engineer (Jul 3, 2018)

I think fascism is just communism, but with more focus on racial superiority. It does with throwing away the religious establishment, and doing away with private businesses in favor of state-owned businesses, and for the "common interest of the superior race."


----------



## Gone_Fission (Jul 4, 2018)

Forever Train Engineer said:


> I think fascism is just communism, but with more focus on racial superiority. It does with throwing away the religious establishment, and doing away with private businesses in favor of state-owned businesses, and for the "common interest of the superior race."



That's how fascism and its propenents like to present fascism, but in practice it often involves a good amount of privatization of industry, like in the case of Nazi Germany, and the economic status of the already wealthy is secured even moreso than in liberal capitalism, seeing as how now striking workers can just be jailed as enemies of the state. 

Ironically, "communist" countries like Stalin's USSR were more effective at embodying the fascist ideal than the actual facsists ever were.


----------



## Toucan (Jul 5, 2018)

Apoth42 said:


> Fascism in Italy is_ still alive _because many blame Italy's problems on the fact that it has a weak central government that allows mobsters to rule large parts of the country and because Italians want a government that will stick up for them rather than kowtow to the EU and its strange "end of whites" plan.



Fascisim in Italy still lives because the collaborators and industrialists were allowed to live by the Allies. Had the Allies allowed the anti fascist partisans sort out the reformation of the country themselves, well lets just say nobody would be driving a FIAT anymore.

 When you go to italy you will see that modern right wing movements are composed almost exclusively of upper and upper-middle class people, all of them very prim and proper with maybe one or two skinheads here and there. If you look at the manifestos of parties like Lega Nord and Forza you will find some really weird ideas about turning italy into a corporate state, almost like something out of an Ayn Rand Novel. Obviously this appeals to the upper classes and it is the upper classes that are largely fascist sympathisers in italy.

Because the communists failed to take power in the closing days of the war and push the shit in of the capitalist class the germ of fascism was preserved in Italy. It is to the eternal shame of the Italian partisans that more people wernt strung up from that filling station gantry beside Mussolini.


----------



## Forever Train Engineer (Jul 5, 2018)

Gone_Fission said:


> Ironically, "communist" countries like Stalin's USSR were more effective at embodying the fascist ideal than the actual facsists ever were.


Especially when you take into consideration of Stalin's dislike for Ukrainians, Chechens, and even more non-Russian ethnic groups within pre-WW2 USSR


----------



## feedtheoctopus (Jul 11, 2018)

Fascism is less of a coherent ideology then it is a tendency. That's a bit vague, sure, but the major "thinkers" behind fascism were never specific to begin with. In general it's an outlook, it's not a political program. When you interpret it that way fascism becomes more easy to understand.

The basic defining features of this outlook are thus:

1. Romanticization of past/obsession with perceived national decline

2. Contempt for democratic norms and notions of equality/Machiavellian outlook on politics ("winning is more important than acting nobly")

3. Belief in the moral supremacy of the state (i.e, "what is law is right")

4.  Hyper-nationalism/fetishization of cultural identity

5. Belief that hostility between different nations/groups of people is the norm, and therefore attempts at peace and cooperation are inherently futile/general contempt for diplomacy

6. Human beings are approached in terms of their perceived usefulness, rather then as individuals with rights ("X group needs to be "removed" because they're a drain on taxes", that sort of thinking)

It should be noted that one or all of these trends/beliefs exist within every political system. It is when they reach a point of dominance over the entire structure that a government can be called reasonably "fascist". Until then fascism exists as a potentiality rather than a formal political faction. The alt-right for example, while clearly fascist in character, is far from "unified" in any meaningful sense and, indeed, a lot of people involved in that sort of thing often have serious disagreements with each other about how their ideal government would look. 

I would argue fascism doesn't rest on totalitarianism, so much as totalitarianism is simply an inevitable end result of fascisms normalization within a political culture. I can't tell you how many "libertarians" I've run into who start preaching for ethnic cleansing and state violence the moment somebody they don't like comes up. Everybody wants "freedom", just so happens most people want it for them and nobody else


----------



## ICametoLurk (Jul 26, 2018)

Marx was wrong. There is no international class struggle between the proles and bourgeois. There is only the Proletarian nations in a life and death struggle against Bourgeois nations.

You know, like this (Engels actually defended the war the USA had with Mexico btw)


----------



## Midlife Sperglord (Jul 26, 2018)

Fascism = every ideology I disagree with.

I am paraphrasing Tumblr’s definition.


----------



## Corbin Dallas Multipass (Jul 26, 2018)

I'd define it as an effectively totalitarian government (fake or heavily rigged democracies can count here).  Because it's so heavily characterized by the totalitarian leader or party, it's not easy to define it far past this to me.  I guess it's pretty much just a dictatorship in my mind, with all the censorship and suppression that goes along with that.


----------



## Tranhuviya (Jul 26, 2018)

An authoritarian socio-economic system with a focus on the inherent qualities, real or imagined, of the host country's people.


----------

