The ongoing ISIS massacres

[Sava]

Functionally, a fascist economy functions very similarly to the modern US conservative wet dream of deregulation:

The Labour Charter of 1927 confirmed the importance of private initiative in organising the economy, while still reserving the right for state intervention - most notably in the supposedly complete fascist control of worker hiring. In 1930 the National Council of Corporations was established, it was for representatives of all levels of the twenty-two key elements of the economy to meet and resolve problems. In practice it was an enormous bureaucracy of committees, that while consolidating the potential powers of the state resulted in a cumbersome and inefficient system of patronage and obstructionism. One consequence of the Council was the fact that trade unions held little to no representation whereas organized business, specifically organized industry (CGII), was able to gain a foothold over its competitors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy..._under_fascism

The economy may be run by the state... in the sense that the state appoints those private entities to run the economy... which is what they would be doing in a more laissez faire system.

[Sava]

Nazi economic philosophy:

Early in his political career, Adolf Hitler regarded economic issues as relatively unimportant. In 1922, Hitler proclaimed that "world history teaches us that no person has become great through its economy but that a person can very well perish thereby", and later concluded that "the economy is something of secondary importance".[9] Hitler and the Nazis held a very strong idealist conception of history, which held that human events are guided by small numbers of exceptional individuals following a higher ideal. They believed that all economic concerns, being purely material, were unworthy of their consideration. Hitler went as far as to blame all previous German governments since Bismarck of having "subjugated the nation to materialism" by relying more on peaceful economic development than on expansion through war.[10]

For these reasons, the Nazis never had a clearly defined economic programme. The original "Twenty-Five Point Programme" of the party, adopted in 1920, listed several economic demands (including "the abolition of all incomes unearned by work," "the ruthless confiscation of all war profits," "the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations," "profit-sharing in large enterprises," "extensive development of insurance for old-age," and "land reform suitable to our national requirements"),[11] but the degree to which the Nazis supported this programme in later years has been questioned. Several attempts were made in the 1920s to change some of the program or replace it entirely. For instance, in 1924, Gottfried Feder proposed a new 39-point program that kept some of the old planks, replaced others and added many completely new ones.[12] Hitler refused to allow any discussion of the party programme after 1925, ostensibly on the grounds that no discussion was necessary because the programme was "inviolable" and did not need any changes. At the same time, however, Hitler never voiced public support for the programme and many historians argue that he was in fact privately opposed to it. Hitler did not mention any of the planks of the programme in his book, Mein Kampf, and only talked about it in passing as "the so-called programme of the movement".[13]

Hitler also believed that individuals within a nation battled with each other for survival, and that such ruthless competition was good for the health of the nation, because it promoted "superior individuals" to higher positions in society.[22] At Berchtesgaden Hitler held his final speech, drafted by Albert Speer, in front of an audience. He emphasised the "self-responsibility of industry". After the won war "private initiative of German business will experience its greatest moment", and Hitler expressed his belief in "the further development of humanity through the promotion of private initiative, in which alone I see the precondition for all real progress."[23]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany

[Hauldren Collider]

Sava's just wrong about me being a fascist. I've merely observed that there have been cases where democracy has failed to take hold, because there is one election, where dictators take power, and democracy stops.

I don't believe in authoritarianism, I don't believe in state control of the economy. I don't even believe what he asserts, namely that muslisms are incapable of democracy, merely that in the area, it has never worked, and trying to make it work has caused lots of bad things to happen. This is observational, not theoretical.

I don't like authoritarian/autocratic governments. I however still prefer some authoritarians to other authoritarians. That's why I say stuff like Mubarak is better than the Muslim Brotherhood. Not because I like Mubarak. Quite the contrary.

[Sava]

Sava's just wrong about me being a fascist.

I'm not labeling you a fascist. In fact, I've said THE EXACT OPPOSITE THING

[Sava]

state control of the economy.

This is not a key feature of fascism.

[Hauldren Collider]

I'm not sure where you're getting that I support violence, either. I certainly think there are cases where we should use military force, but that's with the end goal of reducing the level of violence, not increasing it.

[Sava]

a brief bit about Franco's Spain:

Economic liberalism was replaced with economic intervention according to the wishes of the corporations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism

If the corporations want to be deregulated, that's 100% compatible with a fascist system.

[Hauldren Collider]

God, sava, you're retarded. And you're putting words in my mouth and attributing beliefs to me that I have never and will never hold. Arguing with you is pointless.

[Sava]

I'm not sure where you're getting that I support violence, either.

Do you read your own posts?

I'd point to the Russia thread, if it was still around.

Most recently, I recall you creaming your pants over Prince Harry roasting Taliban from a helicopter. I believe you called it "neato".

[Sava]

God, sava, you're retarded. And you're putting words in my mouth and attributing beliefs to me that I have never and will never hold. Arguing with you is pointless.

If you find that someone's perception of you is incorrect, perhaps you should examine the things you say.

FWIW, I'm not focusing on you. I'm more interested in clearing up the confusion regarding the economics of fascism that seems to exist here.

In fact, I've merely stated that your views could quite easily be categorized as existing on a spectrum of fascism. Now, this could be said of most anyone. However, your views seem particular more compatible with fascism than most others.

If I had to label you, I'd say you are a corporatist who self-identifies as a conservative.

[Hauldren Collider]

No, you're pretty focused on me.

[Sava]

This is pretty ****ing cool.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2845668/SAS-quad-bike-squads-kill-8-jihadis-day-allies-prepare-wipe-map-Daring-raids-UK-Special-Forces-leave-200-enemy-dead-just-four-weeks.html#ixzz3JqbQ9XAX

SAS

Promoting the use of violence? Maybe?

That was literally the first post I saw when going back one page. The search to find your fascist-friendly views is not a difficult one.

[Sava]

No, you're pretty focused on me.

Until your most recent reply, I only mentioned you in one post. The rest of the time I was discussing the economics of fascism with dannubis.

[Sava]

and HC, I'm legitimately not trying to insult or offend you... just calling it like I see it

I'd just call you names if I wanted to insult you.

[N35t0r]

What the hell is your point?

*sigh*

You treat the rest of the world as if it was supposed to be subservient to your interests, then act surprised when they take issue with it.