Posted on 06/11/2024 7:32:28 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Words have meaning — especially words that mean the opposite of what one thinks. Clear definition has greater meaning.
Fascism allows the business to keep the means of its production, the factories or farms, but takes the output (profit). The Nazis of 1930s Germany were Fascists. “Nazi” is an acronym for the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. Today we call it corporatism. The end result is control.
Communism takes both the means of production and the output. The Communist Party ruled the USSR until its economy failed in the 1980s.
Both assume that the State owns everything. In truth, both imply that the individual has no rights, no individualism, no freedom. The State is all. Their slogan is “Together.” But their meaning is “Give me everything.”
While fascism and communism are social concepts, the State cannot obtain control of everything without intervening in its population’s private and economic lives. Since, in their minds, the State is all, there can be no individual and therefore no right to ownership. The State will regulate everything; tax all; and live, for a short time, off the steadily declining capital of the few remaining individuals.
Socialism is the midpoint between freedom and serfdom. It is the gateway drug to convince the weak and weary that if they give up their greedy, individual ways, and worship a government, that government will take care of them.
Socialism starts the population down the path of believing that their problems are so great (climate change, pandemics, inflation, recession) that they need a greater entity to step in. That greater entity is the State, government, bureaucracy. Show me any economic philosophy that survives communism, fascism, or socialism.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Fascism was a reaction to Communism. There would have been no Mussolini, Hitler or Franco without Lenin. Europeans, unlike Americans, were aware of the massive crimes committed by the Communists. Fascists were more supportive of traditional values. They were pro-family where the Soviets wanted to abolish the family. They were more tolerant of the church. Anti-Fascism is the religion of the progressives. Hitler comes in a poor third in the mass murder competition, yet he is the only one used as an example of inhumanity. He is accused of wanting to conquer the world but did not cross a 22 mile channel.
Fascism is corporations and politicians scratching each others back, while keeping the masses sufficiently happy so they won’t revolt.
By that definition we live in a fascist state, as are all so called “capitalist” states.
It is the most stable form of government. It is the one most governments end up being - the final destination of governance. China is a perfect example. They morphed from a decrepit communist state (no private property) to a very successful fascist (capitalist) state.
Politicians have the power and can control corporations. But entrepreneurs/corporations are the ones that know how to create wealth if given enough freedom to do so, so smart politicians allow that. And the masses mostly go along with the program as long as they’re kept reasonably content. If not they blow up the whole thing and start over.
All calls for unity in politics represent a call for the elimination of true diversity in some manner, and pretend we all should be on the same page on far too many things. Unity is in the end a call to eliminate Liberty, even if only bit by bit.
Whereas a call for Liberty is a call for true divesity, in which we pledge that we do not have to agree on everything, and are willing to not have the government control or run everything, allowing a larger role of Liberty and individual choices to build society in diverse ways and with more true diversity as a result.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T_98uT1IZs
(What is Fascism?)
Neither. It’s called a 3rd Positionist ideology.
“Fascism allows the business to keep the means of its production, the factories or farms, but takes the output (profit).”
They don’t take ALL of the profit, just some, like our government does.
Thus, we’re very much a fascist state... and that’s not bad.
There are basically three forms of governments.
1. Communism - the state owns and decides everything. It knows best in everything.
2. Fascism - the state recognizes that some people (entrepreneurs) are very good at producing and inventing things, so it gives them enough free rein and property rights to create wealth for themselves, with the state (politicos) and the masses also getting a cut of it. The smart politicos make sure that they don’t kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
3 - libertarianism - at its extreme, no government, no laws, everyone on his own. A free for all jungle. This is the most unstable form of government that’s why there aren’t any around.
Stopped reading after the second sentence.
Fascism is a *ONE PARTY* government with a market economy. Full stop. The name delineates it from “Socialism” which is
a one-party state with the GOVERNMENT owning the means of production or a free market state with multiple parties.
The definition is by the man who is only a professional journalist who ever ascended to power. He also implemented it to include a nationalist and expansionary foreign policy.
By definition, no state with competing parties has a fascist government nor does any state without a market economy.
Some random author or professor does not get to rewrite original definitions so that a word can just mean “Something I don’t like”
China is fascist. Fascism revitalized Germany. Fascism can work quite well as far as economic development goes.
People often look at the political spectrum and see Leftists and Communism on one side, and at the complete and opposite end, Rightists and Nazism on the other.
I think that is a completely inaccurate way of looking at the ideological spectrum.
I believe the view that it is total anarchy (no government) at one end, and at the complete and opposite end, is total and tyrannical government.
In this model, the Communists and Nazis are clustered together, even overlapping near to the end of the total and tyrannical government. Constitutional Republics like ours (or, what ours used to be) are found in the left of center or right of center. Libertarians (at least the old school ones) would be found closer to the anarchical end.
This interpretation makes sense to me, but it also made sense to both Communists and Nazis in the years leading up to WWII. They found on both the Communist and Nazi sides that they weren’t that far apart from each other, and the other side was fertile ground for converts.
There was nothing national about national socialism. It was a global movement. Socialism is the antithesis to Frederick Bastiat’s small government free markets free elections model. Socialism and communism are almost identical with slight differences. Why the false dichotomy ?
Your view of the political spectrum matches mine. Anarchists would also belong on the far right, but I think most that call themselves anarchists are really communists that only want the instability of anarchy to crash the system so communism can “build back better” (better meaning worse).
LOL, of course the Libertarians are harder to categorize because they are often so inconsistent and unrealistic that they are all over the map.
But...I see that exact distinction about at least some of those “Libertarians” who just want to see it all burn...
I have never seen that before, and I agree it has some value. But the “Modern Conservatism” > “Nazism” is simply the result of the Leftist value setting.
The caveat is how you define “Modern Conservatism”.
I don’t define “Modern Conservatism” as “RINO” because those are all, IMO, Leftists.
And if “Modern Conservatism” is defined as those who believe in the Constitution, it simply CANNOT drive them down the “Left” side of that graphic. (and certainly cannot drive them down the “Right” side to Nazism)
A Republic guided by the Rule of Law and respect for the individual CANNOT descend to “Tyranny” if that is how “Modern Conservatism” is defined, because in that case, “Modern Conservatism” is wholly incompatible with “Tyranny”.
That said, I did find the graphic thought provoking, so...I appreciate your posting it.
I have been learning recently about the Nazi “obsession” with public health
The Nazis conducted the first government anti-smoking, diet recommendations, and “greening” campaigns for workspaces and factories. They were also active promoters of vaccinations, and conducted extensive research into modifying humans to improve useful traits for the nation and collective. We are all aware of their view of eugenics. Hence the large amount of medical experimentation done at concentration camps.
They had what is now a very secular-humanist, atheistic, and modernist, utilitarian view of human life the face of science, and believed that science, combined with the power of the state could greatly improve the health and genetics of the population.
They were also active promoters of vaccinations, and conducted extensive research into modifying humans to improve useful traits for the nation and collective.
That “tradition” continued with the East Germans and their Olympic athletes.
According to Giovanni Gentile, the co-founder of fascism and Mussolini’s ghostwriter, fascism is “the most viable form of socialism.”
Mises wrote about “Russian socialism, “ i.e., Communism, and “German socialism,” i.e., fascism/Naziism. There are only small shades of difference. I often say that the difference between the two is roughly the difference between maroon and burgundy. Fascism is perhaps half a baby step to the right of Communism, but in practice, they amount to the same thing.
Fascist leaders like Mussolini and Hitler were admired by early progressives and they shared many ideas.
Fascism is simply a slightly different form of leftism than Communism is.
Fascism and Communism - Two rabid dogs fighting over the same bone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.