First off, we must understand that this all starts with the industrial revolution and this is all simply different ideas of how to manage that world. Any talk of "proto-x" or how this or that medieval or ancient society is actually the origin is junk bunk. From there, we can define socialism as a big tent idea with many variants that all share in common the core principle of collective ownership of the means of production. From there we can define Communism as another broad umbrella within socialism. Within this broad definition of Communism, they all share in common the core concepts class warfare and materialism. Now that this groundwork is laid, we can properly define Fascism. This is also under broad socialism definition, but we can define Fascism best by contrasting it with Communism, specifically that Fascisms core concepts are class collaboration and metaphysical/anti-materialism.Both Fascism and Communism share the core socialist concept of collective ownership of the means of production. They diverge on class conflict and materialism. Communism embraces class warfare; Fascism embraces class collaboration. Communism embraces materialism, Fascism embraces mysticism.
What about this? Would it beat American imperialism?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi-Maoism
>>18538301Fascism is what the Italians did. Trying to decouple the word from them is as retarded as decouple Marxism from Karl Marx. Führerprinzip is also not a core tenet of national socialism. Also, fyi, Austro-fascism is not a serious term, it's a term invented by a political enemy over a decade after the Dollfuß Regime collapsed.
Fascism is simply a nationalistic movement that presents itself as an alternative to both unrestrained capitalism and chaotic communism. It seeks to unite the people of the nation and use the state as a mediator for class conflict. Outside of that core, it is highly adaptable, since Fascism is a national movement it will naturally vary from country to country, according to the needs of the nation. Mussolini always said Fascism was not a set in stone doctrine. Some Fascist movements are more conservative whilst others are more radical, some are more explicitly pro-worker and anti-capitalist, some are anti-clerical whilst others are devoted followers of the church.
>>18538301>We try to accurately define FascismAll within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state
>>18538301Fascism is when you don't think parents should have their kids taken away for not letting them transition.
>>18538352>Fascism is what the Italians did.This is just factually not true since Austria and Germany adopted soon after Italy. Other countries like Thailand and even some post war Marxist-Leninist states were inspired by it too>>18538397boiling down Fascism to just "super nationalism" or something similar is bone headed.
>>18538560>boiling down Fascism to just "super nationalism" or something similar is bone headed.That's not what the comment does.
>>18538577>Outside of that core, it is highly adaptableThis was his comment, that Nationalism was the core across all flavors of Fascism. Im rejecting that "nationalism" is the common core. It is accurate to say Fascist movements are nationalist, but its boneheaded in that its distracting and misleading, especially to normies. When you say this it just feeds into the fascist boogeyman thing where if someone flys their nations flag on their home, theyre a fascist. I still hold that my definition of class collaborationist. mystical, socialism is a better definition.
>>18538596The original comment literally mentions class collaboration.
>>18538301Fascism=post-democratic nationalist autocracy/totalitarianism.Stable democracies never developed strong Fascist movements in the 20s and 30s (groups like the the BUF or the Silver Legion remained fringe movements). Traditional autocracies also didn't get taken over by Fascists (they tend to have Communist revolutions instead), and I would not consider something like Saudi Arabia to be Fascist.The shared factor of all of the movements in the op is that they came out of democracies in crisis. This greatly shaped Fascist ideology, which is a negation of democracy's principles (political pluralism, checks and balances, equality etc.), but keeping the demos ("the people") as the source of legitimacy for the state, and expecting the people to take an active role in politics, but not in a pluralistic-democratic way (voting, debating policy), rather as assets of authority.If this sounds a bit like Socialism/Communism, yes, Fascism did branch of from Socialist thought outside of Marxist orthodoxy. The main difference being that Communist/Socialist remained strongly materialists while Fascist went into more idealist directions (or in the case of the Nazis, into a dumb version of materialism where they replaced economics with race as the base). This lead to Fascists embracing nationalism and hierarchy much more.
>>18538301palingenetic ultranationalismhyper militarizationsolving problems with forceus vs them mentalityirredentismpretty much it
>>18538692>solving problems with forceBased.
>>18538665Fascists styled themselves as a "third position". It's only during and after ww2 that fascism got the "far right" label.Fascism viewed capitalism as destructive because capitalism panders to the selfish individual.Likewise fascists viewed socialism as destructive because class struggle was seen as divisive.Fascism is about creating absolute unity and it is about giving people purpose. The 'nationalism' in fascism isnt the ordinary nationalism, the nationalism in fascism is treated more as a religion, a larger-than-life. To be a citizen of a fascist regime is to become a new man. The state has a sprirtual meaning. You should hence surrender your individuality to the state. It's a sacred collective that mobilize society. It's very subjective, and that's why fascist movements in different countries emerged with different variations, but what they all had in common was that the nation was above everything. It is above the individual, it is above class, it is above economic materialism. You can read Mussolinis / Gentiles fascist manifesto. It's almost biblical.>https://sjsu.edu/faculty/wooda/2B-HUM/Readings/The-Doctrine-of-Fascism.pdfThe Falangist manifesto is more concrete>https://identityhunters.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/jose-antonio-primo-de-rivera-the-twenty-six-point-program-of-the-falange.pdf
Faschism is a property, not a form of government. The more of these criteria a state fulfills, the more fascist it is:>muh traditionRetvrn to our ancestors roots and shiet (even though they might not even be our ancestors)>modernism BAD progress BADBasically the whole "muh degenerate art/literature/etc" type of thinking. Important, this does NOT mean technology bad>you disagree? REEE TRAITORThis is often exhibited within fascism.>oh you're le different? FUCK OFF/DIEoften applied to minority groups fascists don't like >fellow middle classFascists like to appeal to a disgruntled middle class>le ebin world conspiracyYou know the drill, world government and shiet>KEK! our enemies are so pathetic! FUCK OUR ENEMY IS TOO STRONG WE NEED TO FIGHT THEMboth have to be true at the same time and are used interchangeably >pacifism le BAD, we gotta fightFascists state tend to be war centric >oh you're weak? Kek pussyIronically, fascist states like to kick down>muh heroism/epic sacrifice Fascists like the idea of a heroic death a lot. Especially male heroism>we support the will of the people! ...but not THOSE peopleAppeal to populism but selective populism And finally >newspeakYes, ironically fascists both hate non fascist newspeak and find it degenerate, but also use it themselves
>>18538692>Your average communist regime
>>18538701Very poor and unhelpful post.
>>18538706Instead of seething maybe elaborate, otherwise I accept your concession
>>18538701Fascism can be either reactionary or progressive
>>18538702only the latter 3, and yes commie regimes are very similar to fascist regimes regardless if this site likes to see it that way or not
>>18538714>Fascism can be either reactionary or progressiveI never said a fascist state has to fulfill all of the criteria, just most of them. It's literally in the top of my post.
>>18538301Mussolini couldn't give a proper definition of Fascism, 100+ years later and scholars still can't give a proper answer...hopeless endeavour... The whole mystic and ambiguity around the term was also deliberate and one of the reasons those parties got so popular.
>>18538737No I would say all of them.Every communist regime becomes extremely nationalistic and militaristic.There is a difference between communism on paper vs communism in practice, and communism in practice almost always becomes what fascism is on paper.
>>18538301Authoritarian third position nationalism.
>>18538665How could fascism be post-democratic? Italy didn't have democracy to speak of before it.
>>18539098Yes they did?
>>18539104No, they really didn't. What makes you think they did? When, how?
>>18538596>I still hold that my definition of class collaborationist. mystical, socialism is a better definition.>>18538700>To be a citizen of a fascist regime is to become a new man. The state has a sprirtual meaning.I think an important thing to fascists is that the nation constitutes an organic whole with a quasi-sacred transhistorical "essence" with a destiny or mission. They also perceived themselves to be radicals, revolutionaries leading their nation which has been gypped over and "deprived of the will to live, to expand... to create HISTORY" but thanks to a ~divine force~ a mysterious spirit intervened and prevented the nation from perishing. It's hard to squeeze that into a precise definition but when you get angry patriots talking like that, they're veering into a fascistic direction.Also an aspect that isn't mentioned enough is the "life" stuff. Fascism has a Nietzschean quality where the human spirit is going to overcome people being turned into cogs in a machine. I wouldn't say he's a "fascist" necessarilly but think of Alex Jones railing about biomechanical/digital control.https://youtu.be/uDOwK8wn__U>>18538665>If this sounds a bit like Socialism/Communism, yes, Fascism did branch of from Socialist thought outside of Marxist orthodoxy. There were also things like party uniforms and rallies, that is fascism adopted certain modern mass-mobilizing techniques, a political style, which made them different from basic-bitch conservative rightists (including authoritarian rightists) in their day. What liberals like Hannah Arendt did was look at the resemblance to that and communist techniques and then come up with horseshoe theories about totalitarianism, while communists stress the economic differences. At any rate the fascists didn't simply rely on brute-force repression, they engaged in mass games, mass rallies, mass rituals, marches and all kinds of stuff that aimed to mobilize the masses.
>>18539122Good effortpost
Nationalistic Stalinism is the ultimate nationalist ideology. Instead of starting wars you break contact and shut yourself away from foreign influences.
>>18539105Not him butThey had a parliament(senate?), with political parties, and voting. It was a constitutional monarchy.>The new electoral law introduced in 1919 increased the electorate by more than a quarter to 11 million.>The population of Italy in 1919 was approximately 35.7 million people.
>>18538301Fascism is institutionalized folk-politics.Thats why it cannot be described using an ideological framework.There is no ideology behind folk politics just like there is no ideology behind monarchism.There is no “here is a political treatise on how a king should eat bread in winter while on campaign”.You adapt.
>>18538301Fascism is Capitalism in crisis. where in the face of imminent or ongoing popular unrest from the proletariat due to deteriorating conditions the Bourgeois empower the most violent psychopaths they can find to ruthlessly crush labor under heel in order to safeguard capital. All the other parts of the ideology are window dressing that is inconsistent and constantly changing, because it only exists to provide cover and misdirection for the smashing of the proles.
>>18539214That's when fascism took over.
>>18539419wut? can you please google it mate you're being a bit silly
>>18538692>palingenetic ultranationalism>hyper militarizationIf a liberal regime had turned communist and people wanted liberalism back by violent means would that be fascism?
Going off the original in italy>Anti-Communism>Class Collaboration>Mass Politics>Corporatism>"Everything inside the state, nothing outside the state">Revolutionary Nationalism
>>18538779>Mussolini couldn't give a proper definition of FascismYou clearly have no idea what youre talking about, have never read anything from Mussolini, and are just operating off of tired and redigested Eco slop from lelddit.
>>18539122I do think there is something to the horeshoe theory in that at the end of the day, communist and fascist regimes do operate in very similar ways. I think the difference being in that the communist would argue that their current state is only a transitional one and simply a step to achieve the final form of communism as a post scarcity stateless and classless society while the fascist would say that their current form is the final ideal form. Also, no one really understands what fascist corporatism is. They ALWAYS thinks its when you give total control over to big private industries.
>>18538701More reductive shit. This is list made by an Italian leftist who intentionally made it as vague as possible in order to just go into paranoia and claim anyone you dont like is fascist.
>>18541092There's nothing vague about a criteria system you can easily use to measure how fascist something is, little brainlet
>>18541105yes it is. Once again, youre operating off of a list made by Italian leftist Umberto Eco. He made this list with the intention of making it vague so that the term fascism could be used as a PR weapon against anyone leftist dont like. Its the direct cause of the current paranoid leftist bullshit where everyone and anyone is a fascist. Its just low IQ slop for retards. Its like trying to define communism solely by criteria made by your right wing boomer uncle.
>>18541114You can easily apply this list to a communist state and realize it had a lot of fascist characteristics too. This list is not exclusively leftist, and the fact that you keep seething about eco instead of actually criticising the contents of the list is very telling
>>18541119Yeah dude, I am seething at braindead lelddit tier talking points based on absolute bullshit. Take your ass back over there if you want to have the same boring, rehashed discussions over and over again. Fuck you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwGSKr0tw2M
>>18541090I think the closest you get to horseshoe theory with a transhistorical / idealized version of communism is in Stalinism. But it's a kind of an Orwellian doublethink version where there are idealized forms (socialist realism) and "socialism has been achieved" which justifies political and social repression and fixing things in place, although such regimes also do articulate what they're doing as "socialist construction" on the road to communism. Like a trope in socialist realism is people looking at some smelly pond, but it can't be a smelly pond, it's where a park *will be* a year from now. Socialist realism isn't "realism" in the sense that it's a reflection of reality. Stalinism is highly weird, like it just collapses what is immediate and what is theoretical, so the ideology/theory is constantly being re-written to justify tactical maneuverings in any given situation. They also rewrote the history of the revolution so Stalin played a central role rather than being the eminence grise troubleshooter than he was in reality, while Trotsky was written out even though he was one of the top two guys along with Lenin.At any rate, I read "A History of Fascism" by Stanley Payne, and by the end I was like, okay so they were going for a combination of Laibach and Starship Troopers. It had this sci-fi element with ministries named MilCulPop (Ministry of Popular Culture) and officials going around with titles like Federal Inspector. But then also in the Nazi version there's this organic Völkisch nature worship which had a long tradition in Germany. Like right-wing hippies:https://youtu.be/LB9lObWclFQ
>>18541090Also on the "life" stuff (and crunchy, organic stuff) and rebelling against being turned into "cogs in a machine," a trope that comes up in far-right stuff that was also the case back then is visualized here in a David Dees illustration. This is a thing in reactionary worldviews, like a sense of having "had it out" with the ennui of the modern world -- is this all there is??? Nothing ever happens. And the sense that people are being subjected to technological enslavement. That's materialism, liberalism, communism, JUDAISM, instrumental rationality. Dislike of modern cities. There's a strong element in fascism of imagining yourself as like a knight of a romantic quest. (National destiny / mission.) Historians write about the influence of the fin de siecle period in Europe in the late 19th century. This is how Wikipedia describes it:>"Fin de siècle" is a French term meaning 'end of century', a phrase which typically encompasses both the meaning of the similar English idiom turn of the century and also makes reference to the closing of one era and onset of another. Without context, the term is typically used to refer to the end of the 19th century. This period was widely thought to be a period of social degeneracy, but at the same time a period of hope for a new beginning. The "spirit" of fin de siècle often refers to the cultural hallmarks that were recognized as prominent in the 1880s and 1890s, including ennui, cynicism, pessimism, and "a widespread belief that civilization leads to decadence."
