definition of "fascism"

Author: prefix
Fascism

Posts

Total: 357
#151
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
the rule of elites

seems to be in direct conflict

with "cultural liberalism"

We currently have rule by the elite. What is wrong with a populist being the fist of the people so the elite are supplanted?
do you really trust a single person to "drain the swamp" ?


i'm using the definition of "liberalism" presented in post#5

Liberalism, political doctrine that takes protecting and enhancing the freedom of the individual to be the central problem of politics.

#152
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,187
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@prefix
My best attempt at a definition is that it is a system by which the government extinguishes the personal sense of self for a greater sense of community. They also get rid of any people who don’t fit that sense of community, aka Jews.
#153
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@WyIted
I will see if I can find an audio book of that
perhaps you might elaborate ?
#154
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,475
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
In his book How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them (2018), Jason Stanley defined fascism as "a cult of the leader who promises national restoration in the face of humiliation brought on by supposed
I am talking about reading this book or actually listening to the audiobook to get your perspective. I couldn't find it free though. 


#155
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@WyIted
I am talking about reading this book or actually listening to the audiobook to get your perspective. I couldn't find it free though. 

#156
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,475
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
Thank you

#157
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,475
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
It's 30 minutes not the full book
 I found a 2 hour speech but I wanted the full book 
Topic's author
#158
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
On #145

Later,the Nazi regime transferred public ownership and public services to the private sector

It was already shown that only SOME items were privatize, usually for convenience.

The Great Depression spurred State ownership in Western capitalist countries. Germany was noexception; the last governments of the Weimar Republic took over firms in diverse sectors.


And there it is. Hitler's fascism was preceded by the socialism of Weimar.

Also, from  YOUR link it stated "Privatization was part of an intentional policy with multiple objectives and was notideologically driven." (http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf)

Topic's author
#159
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
on #146


"that basic definition encompasses a wide range of real-world variations on socialism"
"In practice, socialist countries can run the gamut from impressively progressive to staunchly conservative"

My citation was a broad definition. You statement above does not change it. Of course there is "a wide range of real-world variations on socialism" Not all socialist countries morph into fascism, but some do.


AND I'M NOT SURE IF YOU UNDERSTAND THAT "IMPRESSIVELY PROGRESSIVE" IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH FASCISM

Actually it is you who does not understand "precursor"



#160
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
It was already shown that only SOME items were privatize, usually for convenience.
privatizing public services is THE OPPOSITE of socialism
#161
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
Not all socialist countries morph into fascism, but some do.

we agree - end of debate
Topic's author
#162
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
On #147

YOUR LINK LISTS GREENLAND AND ICELAND AND MEXICO AND BRAZIL AS "SOCIALIST"

It does not.  Here is what my cite says.... they "have constitutions that state that they are based on socialism, even if they do not rigidly follow the economic or political systems associated with socialism,"    ( https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/socialist-countries)

AND YOUR PREMISE, BASED ON YOUR QUOTES FROM "RICH-MAN" CLAIM THAT SOCIALISM DEMANDS 100% STATE OWNERSHIP AND THEREFORE LEADS INEVITABLY TO AND OR IS FUNCTIONALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM TOTALITARIANISM AND FASCISM

The author is saying the socialism  tends toward "100% STATE OWNERSHIP". 


DO YOU BELIEVE THAT GREENLAND AND ICELAND AND MEXICO AND BRAZIL ARE 100% STATE OWNED AND THEREFORE TOTALITARIAN FASCIST GOVERNMENTS ?

Already answered above. You seem to think that my position is that socialism = totalitarianism et al.  That is not my position


OR, DO YOU BELIEVE THEY ARE NOT SOCIALIST STATES ?

Answered above,


OR, WOULD YOU PERHAPS LIKE TO REFRAME YOUR POSITION ?

My position stands. It is that socialism is a necessary precursor  to fascism.

Perhaps you would like to re frame YOUR position, or better yet, perhaps you would like to clearly state YOUR position?


Topic's author
#163
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
On #148

SOCIALISM IS NOT TOTALITARIANISM
That was never said.  However they do share some features. 



(IFF) SOCIALISM AND TOTALITARIANISM AND FASCISM ALL HAVE THE SAME DEFINITION (THEN) SOCIALISM = FASCISM

That was never said. I never said socialism =  totalitarianism. 

You then say basically that if you want to know what a socialist is, then ask a socialist. I answer that most socialists do not know what socialism is. The proof can be found by reviewing this forum.

THE NUMBER ONE LESSON OF EPISTEMOLOGY IS THAT KNOWLEDGE HAS HARD LIMITS

HUME'S GUILLOTINE

NEVER CONFLATE FACT WITH OPINION
 That is why I use citations, and ask YOU to do the same.
Topic's author
#164
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
On #161

I stated "Not all socialist countries morph into fascism, but some do.'

we agree - end of debate
This was not a debate.  Better to end it now.


#165
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
It does not.  Here is what my cite says.... they "have constitutions that state that they are based on socialism, even if they do not rigidly follow the economic or political systems associated with socialism,"    ( https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/socialist-countries)
so having an explicit commitment to socialism in your constitution does NOT make you a socialist state ?

what do you personally believe qualifies as a socialist state ?
#166
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
My position stands. It is that socialism is a necessary precursor  to fascism.
wrong again

fascism does not require socialism
#167
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
Perhaps you would like to re frame YOUR position, or better yet, perhaps you would like to clearly state YOUR position?
oh, ok, sure

you probably don't remember the part

where i said quite clearly

that socialism is not a form of government

socialism is a system of ownership

in the same way

capitalism is not a form of government

capitalism is a system of ownership
#168
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
I answer that most socialists do not know what socialism is
who do you think is the KING of socialism

who is the high priest of socialism

who gets to declare the one and only true definition of socialism ?
#169
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
 That is why I use citations, and ask YOU to do the same.
your citations are SECOND HAND OPINIONS

you don't even have your own OPINIONS

you have to borrow them from SOMEONE ELSE
Topic's author
#170
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
On #165

so having an explicit commitment to socialism in your constitution does NOT make you a socialist state ?

NO!.   You even said that socialism is a system of ownership. You did not say it was an article in a constitution. 
To use your language ....Just because some random guy in some random state puts some random words in a random document, it does not make that a socialist state.

I thought you were finished, but you keep pitching, I'll keep hitting home runs.

Topic's author
#171
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
On #166

I said ...."My position stands. It is that socialism is a necessary precursor  to fascism."

wrong again

fascism does not require socialism
Perhaps if you understood the word "precursor" you would see. 

I thought you were finished, but you keep pitching, I'll keep hitting home runs.


Topic's author
#172
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
On #167

that socialism is not a form of government

socialism is a system of ownership
As I said many times, the topic is "socialist STATES" not socialism as a micro ideal.

I thought you were finished, but you keep pitching, I'll keep hitting home runs.


Topic's author
#173
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
On #168

Your comment is not worthy of reply.






I thought you were finished, but you keep pitching, I'll keep hitting home runs.


Topic's author
#174
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
On #169

your citations are SECOND HAND OPINIONS
No. They are SUPPORTED opinions. You have your opinions, yet you fail to support them.

You could opine that the world is flat. I could opine that it is not.
You give no supporting sources. I give DOCUMENTATION from numerous disciples.

Which carries greater weight?


I thought you were finished, but you keep pitching, I'll keep hitting home runs.


#175
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
 You even said that socialism is a system of ownership. You did not say it was an article in a constitution. 

ok, so NOW you decide to agree to my definition of socialism ?
#176
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
Perhaps if you understood the word "precursor" you would see. 
perhaps if you understood the word "require" you would see
#177
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
As I said many times, the topic is "socialist STATES" not socialism as a micro ideal.
please explain how your personally preferred definitions of socialist states and socialism are incompatible
#178
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
On #168

Your comment is not worthy of reply.

who do you think is the KING of socialism

who is the high priest of socialism

who gets to declare the one and only true definition of socialism ?
Topic's author
#179
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
On #175

ok, so NOW you decide to agree to my definition of socialism ?
The topic is not "socialism". It is SOCIALIST STATE".

from #172

As I said many times, the topic is "socialist STATES" not socialism as a micro ideal.

I thought you were finished, but you keep pitching, I'll keep hitting home runs.


#180
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@prefix
No. They are SUPPORTED opinions. You have your opinions, yet you fail to support them.
please be slightly more specific