When is a fascist not a fascist?

[InsaneApache]

Certainly. Especially people who mix up socialism with fascism.

I take you didn't bother looking then.

An uncomfortable truth. Facism is the bastard child of the left. They are still left wing, look at the social policies. About as far away from the free arket as you could get.

Unlike socialist they only pick on certain sections of society, not all sections. Equally of course.

[CountArach]

An uncomfortable truth. Facism is the bastard child of the left. They are still left wing, look at the social policies. About as far away from the free arket as you could get.

So what you mean is that Fascism is Keynesian. Keynesianism is not Socialism by any means - Socialism is the centralisation of the modes of production in the hands of the working class. Fascists believed in state intervention for the benefit of Corporations - every Fascist regime in history has had Corporatist structures within it.

Further, Socialism is built around the use of trade unions - Fascism had always destroyed unions and replaced them with state-run organisations.

[Beskar]

He is probably in the opinion Stalin is actually a Communist as depicted in the Communist Manifesto.

In short - He isn't.

[CountArach]

He is probably in the opinion Stalin is actually a Communist as depicted in the Communist Manifesto.

In short - He isn't.

The same argument I've been making for at least 6 months in the Backroom. I'll get sick of repeating myself one day.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

He is probably in the opinion Stalin is actually a Communist as depicted in the Communist Manifesto.

In short - He isn't.

You think Stalin is a fascist? I would remind you, before you answer, that there is more than one variant of communism.

[CountArach]

You think Stalin is a fascist? I would remind you, before you answer, that there is more than one variant of communism.

Stalin was a Stalinist. Funny how these terms already exist, init?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Stalin was a Stalinist. Funny how these terms already exist, init?

And what is Stalinism? A variant of communism (or an interpretation of it, etc). I don't see your point with defining Stalin as Stalinist though. Is Marxism not a form of communism because it is Marxism?

[KarlXII]

And what is Stalinism? A variant of communism (or an interpretation of it, etc). I don't see your point with defining Stalin as Stalinist though. Is Marxism not a form of communism because it is Marxism?

We have specific varieties of every umbrella political theory. Democracy can be Parliamentary, Republican, Representative, Direct. Monarchy can be Absolute, Constitutional.

[InsaneApache]

Hey guys. Try typng Benito into google. He was the author of the fascists after all. It's amazing how much you pick up from not reading history, isn't it?

[CountArach]

Hey guys. Try typng Benito into google. He was the author of the fascists after all. It's amazing how much you pick up from not reading history, isn't it?

Mussolini was indeed a former Socialist, however the nationalistic bastardisation he offered was thoroughly unsocialist. And to show I do know what I'm talking about I'm actually going to quote from *shock and horror* an historian. This is from Robert Paxton in "The Anatomy of Fascism", one of the most complete studies of the formation and policies of Fascism.

pp. 145-147:

In no domain did the proposals of early fascism differ more from what fascist regimes did in practice than in economc policy. This was the area where both fascist leaders conceded the most to their conervatiuve allies.
[...]
Fascism was not the first choice of most businessmen, but most of them preferred it to the alternatives that seemed likely in the special conditions of 1922 and 1933 - socialism or a dysfunctional market system. [...] Mussolini's famous corporatist economic organization, in particular, was run in practice by leading businessmen."

Peter Hayes puts it succinctly: the Nazi regime and business had "converging by not identical interests." Areas of agreement included disciplining workers, lucrative armaments contrats, and job-creation stimuli. Important areas of conflict involved government economic controls, limits on trade and the high cost of autarky
[...]
Fascists had to do something about the welfare state. In Germany, the welfare experiments of the Weimar Republic had proved too expensive after the Depression struck in 1929. The Nazis trimmed them and perverted them by racial forms of exclusion. But neither fascist reime tried to dismantle the welfare state (as mere reactionaries might have done).

I can't be bothered to type any more right now, but rest assured I know what I am talking about and the facts are on my side.

[PowerWizard]

I take you didn't bother looking then.

An uncomfortable truth. Facism is the bastard child of the left. They are still left wing, look at the social policies. About as far away from the free arket as you could get.

Unlike socialist they only pick on certain sections of society, not all sections. Equally of course.

To claim who's Fascist and who's not you have to
1./ define the characteristics of Fascism
2./ assign those characteristics to said person / movement / party with an utmost certainty that leaves no doubt it is a coincidence and not similarity

I'd bet 1,000 USD that no one in this thread will ever tackle these tasks.

I foretold it in the first reply, lol.

Violence or the threat of violence is a fascist tactic.

Aw'some, so the people who revolted in France in 1789 against tyranny were fascists.

[InsaneApache]

That's the best you can do? I told you so!

Very sad.

[Papewaio]

Aw'some, so the people who revolted in France in 1789 against tyranny were fascists.

Well how many of them were then executed by their fellow revoltees?

Its not like saying one is revolting for democracy makes one not a facist. Heck the most famous facists have quite happily played the democratic game.

[Hosakawa Tito]

I foretold it in the first reply, lol.



Aw'some, so the people who revolted in France in 1789 against tyranny were fascists.

I know it can be a challenge, but try to stay on topic here. You are implying it is acceptable for those who are politically opposed to the BNP to use violence and the threat of violence to deny them the right to express their views. Do you feel the BNP has that same right to violently suppress the views of others?

[InsaneApache]

Thanks for that CA. It doesn't matter how many apologists you roll out though does it? The founder of fascism was a socialist.

You can dress it up like a christmas tree on the 24th december but that fact just wont go away will it?

Put it this way sunshine, he was hardly a tory, was he?

[CountArach]

Thanks for that CA. It doesn't matter how many apologists you roll out though does it? The founder of fascism was a socialist.

It is clear you have no interest in a serious argument, nor a leg to stand on.

Put it this way sunshine, he was hardly a tory, was he?

Neo-Liberal economics hadn't been invented yet, so no, no he wasn't. Was he a Socialist? No. His actions prove that.

[Tribesman]

The founder of fascism was a socialist.

No he wasn't , the founder of fascism was someone who had rejected socialism.

There ya go. Violence or the threat of violence is a fascist tactic.

Jesus was a fascist then.

[Husar]

For a proper assault you need an assault rifle, not eggs.
It is however not nice to waste eggs like that while children in africa are hungry...

[Louis VI the Fat]

Why did the protesters only throw one egg?

...because one egg's un œuf!



Ba-boom-tish!!!

[PowerWizard]

I know it can be a challenge, but try to stay on topic here. You are implying it is acceptable for those who are politically opposed to the BNP to use violence and the threat of violence to deny them the right to express their views. Do you feel the BNP has that same right to violently suppress the views of others?

No, you are not going to escape from explaining your statement: "There ya go. Violence or the threat of violence is a fascist tactic." I pointed out a random example that counters the validity of your statement. But I could point out a thousand other random examples from history where violence or the threat of violence was used in politics. Sure, you haven't read The Prince, do you? Are you implying Machiavelli was the ideologue of fascism? Try to realize your statement was false, and violence or threat of violence existed long before Fascism.

And if egg throwing is violence, pushing a cake in someone's face is attempted murder. I'm not saying it's a good thing, actually it's quite ridiculous.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

And if egg throwing is violence, pushing a cake in someone's face is attempted murder.

Assault - a crime of violence against a person.
Violence - the expression of physical force against self or other.

Definitions from Wiki.

Egg throwing is, if not violence, completely unacceptable. Thing is though, it is violence. Pushing a cake into the face of an individual is also violence, but an egg is far more likely to cause physical harm.

[HoreTore]

Assault - a crime of violence against a person.
Violence - the expression of physical force against self or other.

Definitions from Wiki.

Egg throwing is, if not violence, completely unacceptable. Thing is though, it is violence. Pushing a cake into the face of an individual is also violence, but an egg is far more likely to cause physical harm.

Oh come on. Like you didn't applaud it when one of brown's ministers(name escapes me atm) got green sauce all over his face.

Throwing an egg is the same. Ie., not violence. It won't cause physical harm, it won't make anyone intimidated.

[Fragony]

intimidating it is though, it means you are on their list and that your life is in danger.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Oh come on. Like you didn't applaud it when one of brown's ministers(name escapes me atm) got green sauce all over his face.

I didn't hear about it in the first place, but no, I wouldn't applaud it. Every democratically elected minister, MP, or MEP deserves a certain amount of respect, no matter how distasteful I find their views.

Do you really think I would defend the BNP over Labour?

[Hosakawa Tito]

Ah, the double standard and obfuscation on the actual topic at hand in action. There is no debate here, only inane hairsplitting on the real definition of "is". Time for a beer and less trivial pursuits.

[Tribesman]

The protesters were rubbish . They should have thrown a curry at him after he had given his speech, after all curry is the British national dish

[Furunculus]

Violence or the threat of violence is a fascist tactic. Allow them their say and let the audience decide the merit of their ideology

Aw'some, so the people who revolted in France in 1789 against tyranny were fascists.

you are doing Hosakawa a grave dis-service by only partially quoting him.

the free dictionary to give but one example uses this definition: "a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism"

using the above we can determine two things:
> you use of french revolutionaries is invalid as they were the suppressed in a non-representative system, not the dictatorial government itself.
> the BNP seen in this light are in opposition to government and being suppressed through terror and censorship (read: eggs and biased press).