Fascism is not 'far-right'.The ideology of fascism consists of 3 pillars:1. Hypernationalism2. Authoritarianism3. CollectivismIn order to be fascist, all three requirements must be met. One or two is not enough.If it was only nationalism and authoriarianism, then states like Erdogans Turkey would be fascist, which it isnt.A typical argument is that fascist nationalism relies on national rebirth of a past, but again this is not enough, because it would have constituted Nassers Egypt as fascist which it wasnt.The best examples however would be Salazars Portugal and Metaxas Greece, both whom were anti-communist, authoritarian, hypernationalists, yet not considered fascist.The point is that if these were the only requirements for being fascist, you'd have an inflation of fascist states.The key component missing is collectivism. All fascist leaders, thinkers, founding fathers etc (such as Gentile, Mussolini, Antonio de Rivera, Mosley etc) were syndicalists. The collectvist part is very evident when you read the ACTUAL fascist manifesto by for example the Falangist Party and the National Fascist Party. The correct term for fascism is National-Syndicalism.Syndicalism is collectvism, and collectvism is a far left-wing doctrine.What is collectvism? It means the state controls the demographic and the economy. All indivial interests are subservient to the will of the state. It controls the production, the market, the worker.This is why Fascism was not a racist ideology, and Mussolinis fascist party had an extremely high number of jewish members. It was what primarily differ fascism from National-Socialism, which is fixated on race, and Mussolini only made racial and anti-semitic laws to appease Hitler but it was never fundemental to fascist ideology since fascism wants to turn the people into a collective mass for the state. It is anti-individualistic.1/2
>>18513804Left and right are concepts from the French revolution. Fascists reject the French revolution and it's consequences, including the false left-right dichotomy that lolbertarians are obsessed with
>>18513804>Muh left>Muh rightNigger who cares
2/2The only rationale used to justify fascism as a 'Far-right' ideology is an outdated concept from the time of the French Revolution, where cosmopolitans and nationalists were seperated left to right.The problem however is that:1. We no longer categorize the left-right spectrum based on whether you're a nationalist or a cosmopolitan. We categorize it depending on how much state control versus individualstic an ideology/economic policies a party has that should dictate the state. You are left wing if you advocate for greater state intervention in order to create a more harmonious society, and you are right wing if you believe the freedom of the individual shouldnt be subservient to the will of the state in order for society to prosper.2. If nationalism is the only key component to something being 'far-right' then an immediate problem exists: Many communist states (if not all of them) become deeply hypernationalistic. This goes from Stalins USSR to the current regime in North Korea. The problem with communism is that it only exists on paper: a stateless, classless, money-less society. In reality however communism often evolves into a nationalist, militaristic, statist society ruled by an extremely powerful and wealthy elite over the masses. This unironically is very much what fascism advocates for.The problem with when people try to define fascism, is that nationalism and authoritarianism is very abstract and its not enough as a guideline to govern a state. You need an economic plan as well, and that's what people leave out. Syndicalism is different from communism. In syndicalism private property and private businesses are allowed, but these are organized to be subservient to the will of the state. The fact that they are private thus becomes completely redundant.
>>18513820You posted too fast.See part 2 post>>18513825Why are you on a history discussion board if your attitude is "who cares?"
Btw here are links to two fascist manifestosItalian: https://sjsu.edu/faculty/wooda/2B-HUM/Readings/The-Doctrine-of-Fascism.pdfSpanish: https://identityhunters.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/jose-antonio-primo-de-rivera-the-twenty-six-point-program-of-the-falange.pdfFrom the Italian:"Fascism denies the materialistic conception of happiness as a possibility, and abandons it to the economists of the mid-eighteenth century. This means that Fascism denies the equation: well-being = happiness, which sees in men mere animals,""Fascism is definitely and absolutely opposed to the doctrines of liberalism, both in the political and the economic sphere.""If liberalism spells individualism, Fascism spells government."From the Spanish:"10. We repudiate the capitalistic system which shows no understanding of the needs of thepeople, dehumanizes private property, and causes workers to be lumped together in a shapeless,miserable mass of people who are filled with desperation. Our spiritual and national conceptionof life also repudiates Marxism. We shall redirect the impetuousness of those working classeswho today are led astray by Marxism, and we shall seek to bring them into direct participation infulfilling the great task of the national state."
>>18513804Left and Right are defunct labels that only Amerimutts still care about
>>18513804>The ideology of fascism consists of 3 pillars:>1. Hypernationalism>2. Authoritarianism>3. Collectivism>In order to be fascist, all three requirements must be met. One or two is not enough.You misunderstand what fascism is. Fascist ideology cant be defined by a couple terms you haphazardly slapped together like booru tags. This is a product of a flawed education system in which most teachers just put this on a whiteboard and dont elaborate much furtherFascism is mythical and emotional, it is a direct reaction to the colder, academic and pragmatic attitude displayed by socialist states like China. It's a government ran by human will and the gut that doesnt hold itself to principles and long overly elaborate plans that can be derailed by bureocrats for personal profit. It's immediate action as opposed to long term ideological planning (socialism) and it understands the individual cannot be disconnected from his nation's spirit and state under any capacity unless he's terminally unfunctional>1. We no longer categorize the left-right spectrum based on whether you're a nationalist or a cosmopolitan. We categorize it depending on how much state control versus individualstic an ideology/economic policies a party has that should dictate the state. You are left wing if you advocate for greater state intervention in order to create a more harmonious society, and you are right wing if you believe the freedom of the individual shouldnt be subservient to the will of the state in order for society to prosper.Lolbertarian meme, that's not the original definition as estabilished by both ends of the table during the french revolution. You have to be 18 to post here. Do you believe Gorky is right wing by any means?
>>18513804Fascism was a collection of national/racial interests that aligned with one another in the early 20th century (Italian, German, Hungarian, Japanese, etc.). Mostly due to them feeling slighted by the first world war and having parallel interests to one another.The left is, similarly, a collection of national/racial interests that aligned with one another (Jewish, Slavic, third worldist, etc.) with the goal of destroying both the fascist and conservative blocs.Even conservativism was really just the interests of the dying Anglo-French hegemonies attempting to remain in power.It isn't nebulous ideologies which drive human conflict but rather national and racial interests
>>18513857> Fascist ideology cant be definedYes it can. If you read the manifestos it can be quite clearly defined because the manifestos perfectly outline what kind of state and society the Fascist desires.If every fascist movement had the same ideology, then how can you say fascism cannot be defined since they were perfectly able to copy each others?>Lolbertarian meme,Then explain why I am wrong instead of the "trust me bro" reply. Explain where the left-right spectrum originated from and also explain what defines it today, since according to you I am wrong.Kinda odd how you say "lol no you're wrong" and then refuse to elaborate further. You say I'm a child but you're hardly not debating like an adult by doing this are you?
>>18513863Fascism did not deal with race however.I laid that out in my OP.There is nothing in the manifesto that points towards racial categorization (other than what was the norm in the early 20th century, which isnt attributed to the ideology itself).Fascist Italy never racialially categorized jews hence why so many jews were members in Mussolinis party, and it never categorized other races because its conflicting to the doctrine of Fascism that the state rules over the collective mass.This is the core difference between fascism and national-socialism.In National-Socialism, race is paramount. The state is defined by the blood of the people.In Fascism, the state is the identity of the people. The people are defined by the state.
>>18513882And just to add, Mussolini did invoke antisemitic and racial laws later on, but only after Italy had been firmly been positioned in the Axis in order to appease Germany.
>>18513846>"Fascism denies the materialistic conception of happiness as a possibility"Important line. The fascists were socialistic, anti-bourgeois, but also anti-materialist / anti-Marxist. They based their concepts in nationalism and "unity" and the power of will and duty. They were basically left-wing radicals who embraced World War I as an event which could shake up the world, and then got hardened by their experiences in combat and chudded out, basically. But this took them very far from their left-wing origins, they became something different. Also this was true more for the leaders of the organization, a lot of guys they recruited were just straight-up right-wing military guys, like the Proud Boys but 100x more ferocious and had no sympathy for left-wing socialists / communists:https://youtu.be/JMBJFijT-MAMussolini still tried to keep one foot in the left but faced near-rebellions from his new Blackshirt base.It's a cliche to say that Starship Troopers was a sendup of fascism, but I read "A History of Fascism" by Stanley Payne, and by the end of it I was like, well that was a long read but they were basically trying to do Starship Troopers:https://youtu.be/EVyhmImXJsE
>>18513888>Mussolini still tried to keep one foot in the left A lot of people dont know that Mussolini was a socialist.The reason he got kicked out of the socialist party was because he was a nationalist who supported Italy in the great war, while the Italian socialists were pacifists who believed that the working classes of either side of the conflict shouldnt kill each others over bourgeoisie interests.And that's when Mussolini leaped over to Giovanni Gentiles writings and formed Fascism; it kept the socialist elements but added the embrace for nationalism.>They based their concepts in nationalism and "unity" and the power of will and duty.Correct, but in order to achieve such unity fascism advocates for state>all.In order to maximize state power, the state must have control over everything, both people and production. This is why Fascism is so authoritarian, it's anti-individualistc because indivialism is anti-unity. It wants the people to become a collective mass in order to better serve the state to maximize state power.
>>18513898>The reason he got kicked out of the socialist party was because he was a nationalist who supported Italy in the great warExactly.His own professed beliefs also started changing. It was gradual but I was reading Zeev Sternhell who described a shift in rhetoric that accelerated with the war. Like instead of just talking about "the workers" he'd start talking about "Italian workers" and then would just talk about "Italy."I thought it was interesting that he was initially anti-war, but became pro-war when Italy joined in. I think he was also frustrated that anti-war socialists failed to carry out a revolution in 1914. His style of socialism was more-left-than-left. Like ultra-left / "we need a general strike now." Some of this seemed to stem from a psychological drive in Mussolini to take very radical positions. Also another position the fascists developed is that war veterans should lead the country because they had earned it through their bravery and sacrifice.>>18513898>In order to maximize state power, the state must have control over everything, both people and production. I think this was overstated in practice though. I read some of this as being about the concept of the "general will." That's the idea that the state expresses the nation's collective will. Now, obviously that can lead to a fairly authoritarian state. But the fascists never attained anything close to the kind of state control over the economy that the USSR did. The Nazis did it more.>It wants the people to become a collective mass in order to better serve the state to maximize state power.Yeah. Well I would say the main thing is that the fascists want citizens to behave like soldiers. It's like military virtues of discipline, sacrifice, loyalty, unity. That's a kind of collective mass but they had a specific vision of what that mass was supposed to do. Seriously I reference Starship Troopers because that's how these guys thought:https://youtu.be/EBxgrr0wL8M
I think where the debate here is that more libertarian types define politics as individualism vs. collectivism. And they see fascist collectivism, and think collectivism is like "the goal" of fascism. But I don't think that's accurate. It wasn't collectivist simply because it was collective, it had a larger set of goals in mind.Insane goals but it wasn't just to maximize state power just because, but because of "destiny" and more power leads to great things and restoring vitality and making "history." It's something that gives meaning.Some of this came out of the "fin de siecle" period in Europe which was marked by cultural ennui. This is another part of the chuddiness of fascism. Like "is this all there is???" We're just going to be consumers??? Or you just work in a factory putting widgets into more complicated assortments of widgets and that's all you know how to do. The fascists REJECTED this narrowing of horizons for something GREATER. No more shall we be held back! Rowr!!!! Lmao.
>>18513925>Yeah. Well I would say the main thing is that the fascists want citizens to behave like soldiers. A very accurate way of describing it, because one thing which I didnt state in my OP but probably should have is that another key component that seperates fascists from "the left" is that they're anti-egalitarian, and it's also why people puts them in the "far-right" category. The socalists wants egalitarianism, they want class struggle. The fascist rejects this and instead embraces hierarchy, and this hierarchy exists even in a collectivist society where the people becomes a collective identity from the state. It's also why a fascist economy is perfectly fine with private businesses, but that these are still organized to be surbservient to the will of the state (i.e corporatism), hence why fascism is simply another word for the much broader word: National-Syndicalism.Fascists hates socialists because socialists wants to break the "unity" by class struggle.
>>18514051I think that's mostly right, although I wouldn't describe fascism as national-syndicalism (although several important leaders had been syndicalists) since the idea behind syndicalism was that workers organizations should run the state. But that wasn't what fascist corporatism involved. "Unity" is big though. You might translate fascism as "Unity-ism." Or maybe more literally "League-ism" as the term fascio came out of an Italian term for political "leagues" of various kinds.Also, anti-egalitarian yes. But it's part of whole different metaphysical and emotional framework about what politics is. That said I think you can get groups (including today) who look and sound far left (like oddball sects), call themselves socialist or communist even or adopt those symbols, but in the substance they are really more inclined towards a fascistic ethic than a socialist one as understood in Italy in 1915.
>>18513804I would change this to1. Hypernationalism2. Authoritarianism3. Anti-Marxist socialism And it would be perfect.
>>18514273No.And I said it in my OP. If you remove collectivism then you need to explain why an infinate number of states does not qualify as fascist despite meeting your criteria.You can start with Salazars Portugal and Metaxas Greece during ww2. They were both1. Hypernationalist2. Authoritarian3. Anti-communist.Yet no historian labels them as fascist.You cannot remove the collectivist component from fascist because that is literally the entire economic structure of a fascist state.
>>18514389In fact, even Franco meets all your criterias yet historians very much hesitate to call him a fascist.The Falangist party however were absolutely fascist, and I linked their manifesto in this thread, and in that manifesto it shows quite clearly that their ideology is collectivist."Our conception of Spain in the economic realm is that of a gigantic syndicate of producers.We shall organize Spanish society corporatively through a system of vertical syndicates for thevarious field of production, all working toward national economic unity""11. The National-Syndicalist State will not cruelly stand apart from man’s economic struggles,nor watch impassively while the strongest class dominates the weakest. Our regime willeliminate the very roots of class struggle, because all who work together in production shallcomprise one single organic entity. We reject and we shall prevent at all costs selfish interestsfrom abusing others, and we shall halt anarchy in the field of labor relations""12. The first duty of wealth- and our State shall so affirm- is to better the conditions of thepeople. It is intolerable that enormous masses of people should live wretchedly while a smallnumber enjoy all kinds of luxuries."
