Replies

One of the true differences between the extreme right and the extreme left is how they react to capitalists when they do get into power.

The extreme left wants them gone and usually give them the choice of leave or die. The extreme right usually caters to their needs as long as they are cooperative.

Otherwise, their policies tend to look very similar. The right extreme usually lasts longer because at least they don't destroy the basis of their wealth. This is a necessity because by agreeing to be goverened by extremists, the people expect immediate improvements in their lives. Thus, a redistribution of wealth is the immediate consequence.

Yes, of course the NSDAP (the "S" stands for Sozialist) had programs that were very similar to communists. In fact, many have said that the Nazis were brown on the outside, but red on the inside.

Having majored in German history and being fluent in German, I am willing to bet I have forgotten more about the subject than you've ever learned. So take your secondary resources and shove them you know where.

But, I must say, we are definitely experiencing some serious thread drift here. As long as you admit that extreme right wing and extreme left wing philosophies quickly experience confluence, I will cede the fact that my original phrase of "right-wing facist" is a less than clear description of what I was trying to convey.

Here is a definition just for fun. It would appear as if 4. and 5. lend themselves to both sides of our argument:

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

Fascism (fsh´zm) (KEY) , totalitarian philosophy of government that glorifies the state and nation and assigns to the state control over every aspect of national life. The name was first used by the party started by Benito Mussolini, who ruled Italy from 1922 until the Italian defeat in World War
II. However, it has also been applied to similar ideologies in other countries, e.g., to National Socialism in Germany and to the regime of Francisco Franco in Spain. The term is derived from the Latin fasces.
1 Characteristics of Fascist Philosophy Fascism, especially in its early stages, is obliged to be antitheoretical and frankly opportunistic in order to appeal to many diverse groups. Nevertheless, a few key concepts are basic to it. First and most important is the glorification of the state and the total subordination of the individual to it. The state is defined as an organic whole into which individuals must be absorbed for their own and the state’s benefit. This “total state” is absolute in its methods and unlimited by law in its control and direction of its citizens.
2 A second ruling concept of fascism is embodied in the theory of social Darwinism. The doctrine of survival of the fittest and the necessity of struggle for life is applied by fascists to the life of a nation-state. Peaceful, complacent nations are seen as doomed to fall before more dynamic ones,
making struggle and aggressive militarism a leading charackteristic of the fascist state. Imperialism is the logical outcome of this dogma.
3 Another element of fascism is its elitism. Salvation from rule by the mob and the destruction of the existing social order can be effected only by an authoritarian leader who embodies the highest ideals of the nation. This concept of the leader as hero or superman, borrowed in part from the
romanticism of Friedrich Nietzsche, Thomas Carlyle, and Richard Wagner, is closely linked with fascism’s rejection of reason and intelligence and its emphasis on vision, creativeness, and “the will.”
4 The Fascist State
Fascism has found adherents in all countries. Its essentially vague and emotional nature facilitates the development of unique national varieties, whose leaders often deny indignantly that they are fascists at all. In its dictatorial methods and in its use of brutal intimidation of the opposition by the militia and the secret police, fascism does not greatly distinguish itself from other despotic and totalitarian regimes. There are particular similarities with the Communist regime in the Soviet
Union under Joseph Stalin. However, unlike Communism, fascism abhors the idea of a classless society and sees desirable order only in a state in which each class has its distinct place and function. Representation by classes (i.e., capital, labor, farmers, and professionals) is substituted for representation by parties, and the corporative state is a part of fascist dogma.
5 Although Mussolini’s and Hitler’s governments tended to interfere considerably in economic life and to regulate its process, there can be no doubt that despite all restrictions imposed on them, the capitalist and landowning classes were protected by the fascist system, and many favored it
as an obstacle to socialization. On the other hand, the state adopted a paternalistic attitude toward labor, improving its conditions in some respects, reducing unemployment through large-scale public works and armament programs, and controlling its leisure time through organized activities.
6 Many of these features were adopted by the Franco regime in Spain and by quasi-fascist dictators in Latin America (e.g., Juan Perón) and elsewhere. A variation of fascism was the so-called clerico-fascist system set up in Austria under Engelbert Dollfuss. This purported to be based on the social and economic doctrines enunciated by Pope Leo XIII and Pope Pius XI, which, however, were never put into operation