Who Are Fascists?

[Kropotkin]

Then this is no point at all. Why even bring it up? That's like saying some people say Scandinavian when others say Swede.

I explained this earlier.

You wrote your sentence in such a way that the only way it could be interpreted as if you meant that fascists and nazis are two different things. It is not my fault you meant something other than you wrote and then continued to defend it. All nazis are fascists, so there is no reason not to use the two terms interchangably.

It's not my fault you interpet the text in a way you find suitable. My point was that some people tend to use the one of the other for the same thing.

Superficial debate, maybe. I don't think it's all that worthwhile debating the rhetorical differences between the Nazis and the Fascists.

Well some people obviously do. That some people think that there's a distinction between the essence of fascism and nazism while others -like you- are the opinion that they are one and the same might actually say something. Some people want to see the world as black and white, others chose to see shades of gray. But I wasn't really interested in this debate.

I mean the USA. And I didn't say you were a moron. I said your statement was utter crap, because it relied on two untrue positions.

No, you didn't call me a moron. I was being somewhat sarcastic. And (if it's actually possible to understand wich two positions was untrue but I'm guessing. It's kind of hard as my first response was a comment to 'utter crap') a) I'm basing my opinion that the use of the word fascism is mostly used by socialists on a number of observations from a number of countries, that hardly makes it an untrue position. You yourself point to the stalinst use of the word in you latest post. Furthermore, you make some bizzare leaps when it comes to what I'm actually saying. And b) when it comes to the use of diamat visavi fascism, there's plenty of strange and obscure arguments. But all this is really boring me. My original point was and is that the word fascism has gotten a much broader meaning today and this is partly, at least, due to marxists and other socialists first and foremost but also other people.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Communism seeks to establish an egalitarian and democratic society (even if it failed miserably at the latter). Fascism seeks to abolish democracy and scoffs at the notion of egalitarianism, instead enshtring the idea of the superior man. Communism officially abhors violence (but mostly has no qualms about using it). Fascism glorifies violence as the supreme human activity. Communism is far less aggressive than even capitalism (historicaly and ideologically). Fascism not only glorifies war, war is a necessity for it. Fascism seeks to divide humanity. Communism seeks to unite humanity. Fascism argues about the supremacy of blood, communism for international brotherhood.

Isn't that the problem, however? The type of communism you describe has never been witnessed by the world. The two largest communist nations (USSR and PRC) were neither egalitarian nor democratic. They both used violence as an action and a threat and were extemely aggressive. The problem is that these countries ran around calling themselves communists. So it is not surprising that countries like the US saw communism as a threat at the time and that anti-communist propaganda was so easy to sell to the American public (and still is). Those countries have defined communism negatively. In the minds of most people, this is what they think of when they hear communism.

I think in order to have a constructive debate about communism, there needs to be a consensus on what communism actually is.

[laurentius]

german nazi kittens

http://www.rathergood.com/laibach/

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by laurentius
german nazi kittens
http://www.rathergood.com/laibach/

Did you miss the hammer and sickles on the kittens? Those are commie kittens.

[Brundlefly]

Re: Who Are Fascists?

Originally posted by DaShi
Capitalists or communists?

Which side do you think is fascist and why?

Lets have them compete against each other in a 100-yard dash and we'll see which is fascist.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by DaShi
The type of communism you describe has never been witnessed by the world.

I suggest you pay more attention to the parenthetical remarks.

The two largest communist nations (USSR and PRC) were neither egalitarian nor democratic.

Both the USSR and the PRC were far more egalitarian than any other society. The people at the very top of the USSR made only seven times what the average Soviet worker made (though they also had some nice perks). Andropov, for example, lived in an apartment building, with other normal Soviets. And the Soviets weer democratic at the very beginning, though it didn't last long.

They both used violence as an action and a threat and were extemely aggressive.

Neither the USSR nor the PRC were exceptionally aggresive. Compared to the imperialist powers, they were practically timid. The United State alone has attacked, invaded, intervened, or overthrown close to 50 countries since 1945. The USSR, just seven. China, five, if you accept Tibet as a seperate country and not a rebellious province.

The problem is that these countries ran around calling themselves communists. So it is not surprising that countries like the US saw communism as a threat at the time

The US saw the USSR and PRC as threats not because of what they did but because of what they were. Their very existences were threats to the established order of imperialism. Every minute they continued to exist, they represented an alternative to slaving away to some foreign capitalist for the third world. Those countries, a flawed as they were, inspired millions around the world to demand their own freedom from colonialism, imperialism, and capitalism. In Western Europe, governments were forced to provide unheard of social benefits in order to keep thei own workers from revolting.

Anti-communist propaganda was so easy to sell to the American public (and still is).

Anything is easy to sell to the American public. Look at the BS war we just fought. As P.T.Barnum said, no one ever went broke underestimatnig the good taste of the American public.

Those countries have defined communism negatively. In the minds of most people, this is what they think of when they hear communism.

Irrelevent to this discussion.

I think in order to have a constructive debate about communism, there needs to be a consensus on what communism actually is.

This was a discussion as to the differences between fascists and communists. The fact that the Communists seek to establish egalitarian and democratic societies (even if they failed), is a real difference from those would seek to abolish democracy and create a society where some are fit to rule and others to serve (and others to die). Even in failure, the Communists have to pay lip service to their ideals. The Fascists didn't even do this.

[DaShi]

I was just curious.

[GePap]

A basic difference between Communism and facism is the method by which men form ther conciousness-and what type of solidarity is more important. That difference alone separates the two notions dramatically. Yet both rise from the same forces unleashed afetr the enlightenment, so they share some characteristics that the enlightenment or pre-nelightenment notions like liberalism lack.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

The problem is that these countries ran around calling themselves communists. So it is not surprising that countries like the US saw communism as a threat at the time

The US saw the USSR and PRC as threats not because of what they did but because of what they were. Their very existences were threats to the established order of imperialism. Every minute they continued to exist, they represented an alternative to slaving away to some foreign capitalist for the third world. Those countries, a flawed as they were, inspired millions around the world to demand their own freedom from colonialism, imperialism, and capitalism. In Western Europe, governments were forced to provide unheard of social benefits in order to keep thei own workers from revolting.

United States installed anti-communist dictatorships, while the Soviet Union installed anti-capitalist dictatorships.

no win situation

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by GePap
A basic difference between Communism and facism is the method by which men form ther conciousness-and what type of solidarity is more important.

Do you mean that both fascists and communists see life as struggle or conflict, however while the communist sees the capitalist-worker conflict as the focus of his fight, the fascists sees the nation-nation struggle as his? The type of solidarity one sees among fascists resembles the warband, while to the communists it is the labor union.

So why is there this variation in consciousness?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Thorn
Hmm... I think I'll write a book Harry Potter and the Sorcerors Stone then......

However, certain phrases can be trademarked.

I think Harry Potter is trademarked.

[Ecthy]

welcome to triple figures

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Sava
don't make me school your ass like I did Imran with the definition of "liar"

what you're really saying is "don't get me pwned like I was with Imran and the definition of liar"

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Namely that man is by nature greedy and self centered etc

Actually, capitalism doesn't assume this. It merely has mechanisms for dealing with situations in which people are greedy and self-centered

[Serb]

Everything is very simple folks.

Capitalism-
Fascism-
Nazism-

Communism-