Words have definitions for a ******* reason. And yeah, we can go all over the ******* history of it and how it emerged, but at the end of the day but, on a normal ******* day, fascism is on the right side of the spectrum, not left ( if we are taking the simplistic view ).
Wrong. Again, you want it to be that way, but Fascism is and has always been a leftist movement. And not just "leftist" in the sense of "liberal" in the sense of "we're changing the status quo!" (which, let's face it, is meaningless), but actually a freaking branch of Socialism.
Where do you think the word "Fascism" comes from? Seriously. Go look it up. It was derived from the Fascia (or Fascio, if you're Italian), which referred to a bundle of small rods tied tightly together to form one single large and strong rod. The core concept of Fascism is that if you can get all of the people working towards a common cause, you are stronger than if you allow people to all do their own thing. As a form of government, its primary focus is to create "big government" programs to solve problems, and at the same time to employ any idle hand in work.
Sound familiar? That's socialism. I get that over time, folks on the Left have created this ideal image of Socialism, where it's all about fighting for social causes and whatnot. But that's not what actually defines socialism. Socialism is about the government having a high degree of control over the industry of a nation. Period. What is fascism? A government with a high degree of control over the industry of the nation. Fascism is a single specific instance of the broader umbrella concept of "Socialism". Just as communism is. They are all systems of government in which the good of "the people" is assumed to outweigh the freedoms of the individual, and allow for a state which forces individuals into actions which benefit the whole even if they would otherwise choose not to.
What the heck do you think the basic assumption behind Obamacare is? Make everyone fund into the same system, even if it financially hurts many, because the greater good to the whole is assumed to be worth it. Every freaking thing that defines socialism is about this. When we talk about big government, this is what we're talking about.
How did you get to that point? Are there some special classes?
Sadly, it apparently does require special classes, since so many are woefully ignorant on the history of these forms of government.
Riddle me this: How on earth can you possibly think that a philosophy of governing based on the assumption that individual freedoms is the most important thing, and that government should be as small as possible, with as little influence over our businesses and lives as possible, could ever be even remotely similar to Fascism? It makes zero sense. You have to have an authoritarian government to have Fascism. And Modern Conservatism (AKA: Classical Liberalism), is the exact opposite of that. Modern Socialism is the vehicle that can allow for Fascism.
But yeah, words matter. So no. All fascist are not socialists.
Yes, they are. They may not realize it. They may be using the same incorrect labels that you have been taught. But from an objective evaluation of the political ideologies involved, then yes, all Fascists are also Socialists. Socialism is the ideology that the government is the best tool to control things, and not the people individually. That's the same basic ideology that forms Fascism.
Not all Socialists are Fascists, but all Fascists are Socialists. Again,the problem is that since WW2, the modern Left has gone to great lengths to re-define things so as to distance themselves from Fascism (and specifically Nazism). But that does not change the absolute fact that the underlying principles of those two forms of government were derived from the root of Socialism. Without Socialism you can't have Fascism.
What to know what else is associated with Socialism, and the whole "good of the whole"? Eugenics. For some of us, this is pretty obvious. For others? Not so much.
**** me. Where the **** do you learn this idiocy? Like seriously. Is there a place I can go to ensure this **** stops?
The sad thing is when fact is labeled as idiocy. Seriously. Stop parroting labels and assumptions and engage your brain. We have two major "sides" in terms of modern western political ideology. One says that government should be as small as possible, with as little influence and power over the day to day actions of the citizens as possible. The other believes that government should actively involve itself in making the society better, and creates reams of regulations and government programs to pursue this goal, along the way empowering government.
Which one do you think could ever possibly develop freaking death camps? Hint: It's the second one. The one that empowers government to "make things better". You can't get Fascism without a Big Government starting point. You simply can't. And yes, while not all Socialist systems will go so far, it's a matter of degrees of power, and how far those in power think they should go to make the nation stronger, better, more pure, whatever. The same ideology that accepts the idea of using the government to force some people to pay more for something so that others can pay less, includes the idea of using the government to force some people into labor to provide for the rest, or any other forced action which can be justified on the grounds that the end result will be better for the whole.
And guess what? That ideology is behind just about every Democratic Party social program passed over the last 80 years or so. It's the same thing. What's scary is that you refuse to see this. Edited, Feb 27th 2018 7:04pm by gbaji