What is fascism?
>>18344802Any excercise of authority I don't like.
>>18344802As I understand it, it's a political ideology that roughly stands for the following:>binding of all a nation's institutions (whether they be part of the state, or commercial, or religious, or whatever else) into a unified whole (corporatism, not in the sense of the modern corporation, but to treat a nation as a single body or 'corpus')>this is a consequence of the above, but fascists also tend to be DEEPLY skeptical of internationalism and particularly suspicious of religions, ethnicities, intellectual movements, and economic systems that transcend borders.>hearkening back to the aesthetics of a prior golden age (real or imagined) while also seeking to utterly transform society through modern industrial/organizational/technological methods>broadly views history and current affairs through the lens of conflict and dominance, before anything else>the pursuit of truth as derived from principles is de-prioritized in favor of supporting lofty frameworks (like the primacy of a given nation or its' people, or the purpose of art to glorify the state, and so on). Whether something is actually real or not is less important than whether it fits into the aesthetic.
>>18344804thisthis is how normies, mainly leftatards, use the word
>>18344802Fascism is similar to communism in the sense that, in modern times, a lot of people think of them as something very different. They think that when someone says "communism," the Soviet Union was communist, which, based on the work of Marx and Engels, it wouldn’t be considered so. The same thing happened to fascism. I personally think that Nazi Germany wasn’t fascist, but rather National Socialism, since I would consider the definition of Giovanni Gentile as the standard for fascism. Sadly, I haven’t had time to read his work on fascism, but it was mainly about the idea that every person is a part of the state and that it should be their duty to enforce it on their own, even when they aren’t in the executive branch of the state. But maybe some Anon had the privilege to read his works and could maybe add their sense to it.
>>18344802Fascism is an authorization regime controlled by both government and corporate power like banking and industryUSA is secretly a fascist zionist/nazi regime that may collapse soon
>>18344812>the pursuit of truth as derived from principles is de-prioritized in favor of supporting lofty frameworks (like the primacy of a given nation or its' people, or the purpose of art to glorify the state, and so on). Whether something is actually real or not is less important than whether it fits into the aesthetic.The principle of truth from aesthetic is an seldom discussed aspect of fascism, which I find fascinating. It's not even an observation, but figures like Oswald Spengler openly discussed the idea that "what a thing appears is its true nature". But not to say that this idea solely belongs to and defines fascism. There are benign movements such as solarpunk which similarly glorify aesthetics above all else - the difference being the kind of aesthetic they glorify. I wonder if leftists are even aware of this vector of approach, because a lot of right-wing influencers publicly promote reason through looks and the entire incel discourse seems to be headed this way too.
>>18344959>Zionism = nazisI'm not even disagreeing. What a time to be alive.
>>18344802It's based
>>18344802>What is fascism?The only definition I've liked, and understood, so far is Umberto Eco's definition described in "How to spot a Fascist". Fascism has a unique combination of 14 qualities, see pic related. Why I like this definition so much is it sets up clear and concise rules and guidelines: if it has these 14 qualities, it's Fascism, if it's missing even 1, it isn't Fascism. So much of what people call Fascism is quite literally this: >>18344804 or Antisemitism for that matter (creating a unique situation where the United States feels they can handwave their growing Facism by pandering to Jews), or it's some kind of psuedo-intellectual lengthy essay that's pointlessly vague and useless to everyone.
>>18344802the vibes, Palpatine, secular neoconism, that kind of thing. The thing being struck at when they say that is ambition without purpose, pleasures for war for the sake of brainrot hype agendas.
>>18345404I don't understand it fully but it seems like socialism and fascism came from a need to fix inequalities caused by growing industrial capitalism. Socialists believed the world has always been divided into classes, and due to capitalism, the capitalist class is becoming powerful than ever before. The workers should overthrow the capitalist class. Fascists rejected classes and believed capitalism created this division in the first place. They believed the state should force capitalism's hand into getting rid of classes.
>>18344804FPBP>>18344802Now that /leftypol/ banned my entire ISP because the retarded jannies there would rather ban multiple proles before they have to actually fucking work to remove spam I might as well post this here too:I think the first problem we have with fascism is the term fascism itself.Mussolini had the first major movement (despite nationalism and the Young Turks existing beforehand) of a pro tradition, expansionist, anti communist autocratic government, so everyone called it fascism. The problem is this is fucking stupid, because all forms of fascism to come after his were all radically different. Most leftists know this and just ignore it. They don't come up with a solution to explain why, they just brush it off.In 1935 and 1934 it was referred to as "Chauvinistic Socialism." An equally meaningless term. Most socialists point out that there is a minor interest among liberals and conservatives to try and keep fascism as a definition entirely under nonstop confusion so that this way they can pick and choose what is and isn't fascism, for instance under many definitions for fascism the United States counts and has for centuries, but this extends to socialists too who can deny China and the USSR are too.I personally would say the following:-Because we cannot decide on how many levels of privatization vs state ownership a fascist economy needs, whether or not you believe they are socialistic or capitalists is irrelevant.-Because Hitler hated monarchists, and Mussolini and the fascists were initially futurists tradition and mythology is irrelevant.-Because state autocracy is often lesser than that of most socialist nations it's also irrelevant.So what is fascism?In almost every case fascism only arose during the first world war. Yes Volkisch, Roman revival, and Young Turk nationalist movements existed beforehand, but why were none of these retarded or based ideas ever implemented until after WW1?Because fascism is ultimately about military.
Cont.And now look, I know this might be going against my own people, there is nothing most leftists would want than to jump up and down as to beg and plead that fascism is when you are anti communist, the more anti communist the more fascister it is, and that every single fascist movement in history has always been a capitalist psy op--And don't get me wrong, there are multiple cases we see of revolutionary petit bourgeoisie movements being funded by the bourgeoisie to create fascist movements.The problem, my friends is that the same can be said for every single communist movement ever just as well.You need to look at it logically. I have, I've read as much as I could, and all things said over fascisms failings has nothing to do with it's beginnings.I see two major things that serious "fascism" has1. A disgruntled veteran class.2. This veteran class takes control and begins to indoctrinate the rest.This is also why I will not take any discussion about fascism seriously until after the next major war, because fascism can only come from a material class of ex veterans who lost.This is also why I think the word fascism is all wrong. It should either get a new name or be called stratocracy.Stratocracy is a government by the military built around militarization. It doesn't just want to have a slave class, or extract profit, or turn itself inwards, it is propped up by people who were in wars, and then keeps the wars going.It happened almost everywhere during WW2, the only reason Franco and a few more exceptions didn't do it is because they were too weak to get back up in time.With Germany and Italy, this disgruntled attitude left these war veterans to rekindle the war machine and try to get more people in it. You see the destruction of free enterprise, profit, class divide, and more just to do this, and whatever the ulterior motive be it honor or aristocratic proving oneself, whatever, the fact is it happened.
Now I'd just be repeating myself if I went any further, I was going to mention that these traits were present despite the differences in so called fascist (stratocratic) nations like Austria and Hungary, but there'd be no real point. I can go over multiple nations histories to prove my point but I thin I made myself clear, fascism above all is interlinked with the military.I will always be more afraid of whatever movement after a failed war props up when a major chunk of the population ends up manifesting even if they're self proclaimed social democrats, because they're infinitely more dangerous if you pay attention, than I ever will be of Trumps presidency, or even if Nick Fuentes runs and wins. Because stratocracy isn't something you can just force, it is the creation of a new society born from war to worship war. Any economics, cultic behavior, self destructive tendency, or analysis you can make of "fascism" ignoring this is doomed to fail because it's going to fail to get the full picture. Unless you realize that the military as a class over taking the bourgeoisie (not the Military Industrial Complex ran by the bourgeoisie, but actual war vets as a new class above the rest) then you won't under stand it period.Feel free to read that or don'tTLDR "Fascism" is a stupid word for it, it should get a new word or be called stratocracy because it is dependent on the military class above all else.
>>18344802Fascism treats nations as living organisms and citizens as cells of the nation. It's a worldview, not an ideology. Fascists reject any ideology because ideologies are universalist and therefore weaken the nation by subordinating it to an international cause
>>18345435>an apple is a spherical edible object that's either red or greenDescribing an ideology by its propaganda is profoundly retarded.
>>18345471>>18345489>>18345507Interesting perspective. Why did fascism not exist before WW1? If militarism is the defining characteristic of fascism you have plenty of examples of warrior cultures throughout history. To me the conflicting nature of fascist regimes makes me think that it's more productive to look at it as a historical movement rather than a concrete ideology. Fascist ideologies had multiple conflicting ideologies unified into a single movement, that's why it's so hard to describe it. Focus on the traditionalists and you'll leave out the futurists, focus on the futurists and you'll leave out the nationalism and racial ideology, etc.It reminds me of the endless debates on defining feminism. The reason for that is that feminism, like fascism, is not an ideology, but a movement. A bunch of people temporarily unified in achieving a shared vision/goal. You have to study fascism from a historical perspective, not an ideological one. Do you think Hitler or Mussolini ever got questioned about "how true of a fascists they are" before the end of the War? Compare that to the communists who had constant debates about what constitutes "real communism" since the Russian Revolution. WW2 largely ended the fascist movement so it makes no sense to talk "modern day fascism". Anything would at best be a reincarnation, but with completely different incentives and motivations that depend on the new leaders.
>>18345574> If militarism is the defining characteristic of fascism you have plenty of examples of warrior cultures throughout history.Not just militarism, a specific type of militarism based upon a capitalist civilization failing at invading another sending back a defeated class of war veterans. It's something that could only be forged with the industrial war machine that was first in WW1, then sent back. It's not just warrior culture, it's warrior culture of defeat and rage with the system that sent them there, and a need to keep it going. to redeem, by sending the entire youth and nation back in for whatever cause they claim to support. >Anything would at best be a reincarnation, but with completely different incentives and motivations that depend on the new leaders.Yes exactly. But the material conditions that lead to stratocracy can be viewed as the ones I stated. For so many bitter middle class or bourgeoisie funded movements ever since, none have ever led to what was seen from 1920-1945.
>>18344802Fascism is when the state does things and the more things it does the more Fascister it is
>>18344804Pretty much. Being a "fascist" just means liking an authority mongrels do not like.
>>18345435>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.”Thinking is a form of making yourself a masculine predator for leftists. They have flipped this on its head.>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.”Hence, leftism has largely abandoned modernism though grapples with it, as they have purity tests and can't handle disagreement.>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,So, the identity politics. The appeal to frustration characteristic of the left.>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.”Hence, their attitude toward white men.>Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”Hence, leftists insisting that inaction is political and makes you an enemy.Need I go on? Many of the distinctions he makes are sexist toward men, but anyone who doesn't live under a rock can discern that if maleness and thought is equivalent to invalidity, the roles can indeed be reversed between the sexes in the matter of facism.
>>18344802Just another counter-revolutionary ideology which reject free market capitalism and claims that political rulers will better take care of the people than market competition. Somewhat better than full-retard communism as it doesn't reject at least _some_ market forces. Still stupid and authoritarian.
>>18346978yeah
>>18345574Mussolini himself thought Fascism was a unique temporal occurence and said in his interview with Emil Ludwig that whatever would come after him won't be Fascist. Of course in that same interview he made his oft quoted "race is a feeling" remark which he reneged on a decade later.
>>18344812It can basically be summed up as 'Revolutionary Nationalism Collectvism'Most people miss the collectivist part, and usually starts to REEEEE when you bring it up, because it makes fascism closer to the left-wing spectrum than right wing.
>>18347811>which he reneged on a decade later.Because he was pandering to Hitler.None of the other fascist movements cared about race either. Neither Oswald Mosley or José Antonio Primo de Rivera.Mussolini started his political career as a socialist, and his fascism was very much built around socialism.The main rift was the fact that Mussolini was pro-war because he was a nationalist. The socialists were pacifists and saw class-struggle as above nationalism.
