What do you support?

[Lenin]

Don't think anyone is gunna have a serious conversation over this forum. But if you wanna talk shoot me a pm on irc. As far as Revolutionary Socialist goes, all I know about them is that they are against capitalism because it takes advantage of people.

 

Capitalism is an ideology, but individuals who are capitalists majority of the time do take advantage of people in so many ways. Capitalism rose with terrible means such as slavery, child labour and direct-violence.

 

I'm always up for debates, pm me which irc and I'll come on some time.

[CAPS]

Cmon bro, half of the dumb ass morons on these boards probably don't know what any of those terms mean.

[eop hider123456]

Can you explain what Capitalism is?

 

Also, please explain what a utopia is, and what Socialism and Communism are?

 

Thats not what Fascism is, thats one of the effects that Fascism produces directly. & your last sentence can be directed at any ideology or belief system.

 

OP: I am a Revolutionary Socialist (theoretically a Libertarian-Marxist), and I am happy to answer all questions regardless of whatever it is. Debates are excellent educational grounds for individuals to trade knowledge.

Capitalism in MY OWN definition is the economic system in which whatever economic means you start with you have the possibility of working your way up with so called "hard work" and "skill" even though in this day in age most of the wealthy in the United States and other capitalist nations is passed down frozen wealth. I support capitalism only, because I see it as the only economically system worth trusting not to fall apart, it's aggressive, unique, and fluctuates. Socialism and Communism are both immensely different, however my best definition of these two is that they both believe in equal share of everything and that there is no such thing as classism in a society, meaning no higher, lower, or middle class is present. This belief, economic, and political standpoint makes it seem TO ME like communism and socialism want to establish a utopia which is physically impossible given numerous circumstance. You're partly correct with fear being something that is found in alot of belief systems and ideology, but when you break down the soul component of Fascism, the core of it is FEAR. Fear is single handily the most powerful tool a fascist leader and government can use because fear will do anything to an individual, fear of collapse, fear of chaos, fear of instability, fear of another race or idea, etc. 

[Trajan]

Every system has it's flaws, I personally believe that Capitalism is the most effective in most cases in the real world. On paper, Communism/Socialism are excellent, but in real life tend to be ruined due to natural human flaws (Capitalism does as well but not to the same degree). In theory, with a perfect, incorruptible ruler, Fascism is arguably the most efficient system of government. Since perfect, incorruptible humans don't exist, Fascism almost inevitably leads to terrible abuses etc.

[Lenin]

Capitalism in MY OWN definition is the economic system in which whatever economic means you start with you have the possibility of working your way up with so called "hard work" and "skill" even though in this day in age most of the wealthy in the United States and other capitalist nations is passed down frozen wealth. I support capitalism only, because I see it as the only economically system worth trusting not to fall apart, it's aggressive, unique, and fluctuates. Socialism and Communism are both immensely different, however my best definition of these two is that they both believe in equal share of everything and that there is no such thing as classism in a society, meaning no higher, lower, or middle class is present. This belief, economic, and political standpoint makes it seem TO ME like communism and socialism want to establish a utopia which is physically impossible given numerous circumstance. You're partly correct with fear being something that is found in alot of belief systems and ideology, but when you break down the soil component of Fascism, the core of it is FEAR. Fear is single handily the most powerful tool a fascist leader and government can use because fear will do anything to an individual, fear of collapse, fear of chaos, fear of instability, fear of another race or idea, etc. 

 

There is no such thing as "my own definition". A definition isn't based on interpretation.

 

That is certainly not what Capitalism is, and I suggest you do a little research/study into these topics.

 

Capitalism is an economic structure in which the means of production (or 'capital') is privately owned by the individual(s) who use it to accumulate profit, a system which is characterized by wage labour, private property, and at the core, having a competitive market.

 

Capitalism made use of the industrial era/revolution and accumulated a lot of capital. Although it sucessfully did this at a time when Capitalism wasn't as corrupted as it is now, it achieved all of this in the most undesirable means through slavery, child labour, starvation, alienation, segregation etc. creating violence in so many ways. Since you mentioned an effect of Fascism, lets discuss the effects of Capitalism:

• Wealth inequality - the masses of profits drives the capitalist to make even more, going to extreme measures to delete competition and form oligarchies. Many grand companies are connected and force out competition who won't go within their rules. As a result, the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer.
• Direct violence - capitalism requires a violent hierarchy to guard its intrests such as the police state. The police and the justice systems (which are heavily sadistic, corrupt and racist) abuses their powers, and were created to, protect the intrests of capitalists. If there were no rules, everyone would uprise against the capitalists.
• Propaganda - any idea such as leftists, who challange the capitalist system, will be put to silence so that the capitalists can continue existing. Workers rights have always been stepped on by the capitalists, and use false information trying to keep the workers at their place.
• Starvation - a lot of people depend on low paying jobs to survive. We call this violent exploitation. The capitalist knows the worker is poor and has to work in order to survive and feed his/her family, so the capitalist exploits the workers conditions. Its violent because of the direct effect it has. If the worker did not work, they would die.
• Inequal oppurtunities - a child born into a wealthy family will always do or have more oppurtunities over a child born into a poor family, and how can anybody blame a child for this? You do not choose where you are born to.
• Investing fallacy - capitalism expects businesses to invest in things i.e. products, ideas etc. and when the profits dont seem to be reasonable or they simply wait, the economy suffers from this as its expecting businesses to commit to the economy. Thus the system will not sustain and as you see the economy of those 'powerhouses' are collapsing.
• Need for Imperialism - imperialism refers to the usage of violence in order to aid a policy or procedure. The police state earlier is an example of imperialist methods. Capitalism's long history involves imperialism throughout. The invasions, massacres, genocides, killings, rapings, stealings etc. of so many cultures are the acts of America, Britain etc. which are crimes they've never paid for.
• No taxation - although a lot of poeple don't like paying taxes, they dont realise that this money is being used to benefit them and the rest of society. A child should not suffer because their parents/home/life isn't decent, thats not their or their sons/daughter's fault. Thats the fault of the system.

These are some of the mass effects that Capitalism causes, I've not even dwelved into the theoretical i.e. economical and political, contradictions and invalid ideas Capitalism proposes.

 

On Socialism and Capitalism, you state that they are two different things but propose the same criticism (which is a bad criticism, ill explain why)?

 

Socialism is an economic system in which the capital is demoractically owned by society (social/worker ownership), which establishes a system of equality not based on your wealth, gender, race, family status etc. Socialism can potentially have a state, known as workers-state which protects the workers/people of society. Socialism can potentially have money, trading and markets, but privatization is completely removed.

 

Communism is a classless, stateless and moneyless society in which there is a guiding principle, 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need'. Society produces based on need and ability, not excessive and unhealthy amounts to make profit. It aims to establish a completely equal society. Communism abolishes all privately owned property, but just like Socialism, allows for personal property. Communism in most cases (thinkers, writers, revolutionaries etc.) is thought to be the higher stage of Socialism, and when the 'state fully withers away' Communism will be achieved.

 

There is an idea of Utopian Socialism, but it does not refer to the utopia you're thinking of, at some peaceful forest with animals jumping around and everyone is in love. Thats fantasy. If you have any questions about either I will do my best to answer.

 

Albert Einstein wrote a fabulous document entitled 'Why Socialism?'. Its a really good read.

 

I was just being picky on the Fascist thing, by and large you are absolutely right.

[Lenin]

Every system has it's flaws, I personally believe that Capitalism is the most effective in most cases in the real world. On paper, Communism/Socialism are excellent, but in real life tend to be ruined due to natural human flaws (Capitalism does as well but not to the same degree). In theory, with a perfect, incorruptible ruler, Fascism is arguably the most efficient system of government. Since perfect, incorruptible humans don't exist, Fascism almost inevitably leads to terrible abuses etc.

 

Refer to this on what each are http://www.sharkbrew.com/community/index.php?/topic/17291-what-do-you-support/?p=450006

 

I study Psychology with Cognitive Neuroscience, and I can tell you right now that 'human nature' is very complicated and not static. That simply means that behaviour changes over time. In very old times, humans lived in societies collectively (hunter-gatherer) and capitalistic ideas then seemed unnatural. Behaviour can always change, and it is better if that behaviour changed to a healthier one instead. Capitalism is associated with greed, profit hungry and violent-methods (like slavery), are those really healthy traits?

 

I really think you should do more studies on what Fascism is, because you're thinking of a utopia led by a dictator or not.

[Codi]

You niggas writing essays to eachother lmfao

[knikker]

1

[Datassd0e]

@@Lenin capitalism isn't perfect, but the U.S saw that and have put up laws so monopolies couldn't form.

There must be competition or the company would be broken up.

[eop hider123456]

There is no such thing as "my own definition". A definition isn't based on interpretation.

 

That is certainly not what Capitalism is, and I suggest you do a little research/study into these topics.

 

Capitalism is an economic structure in which the means of production (or 'capital') is privately owned by the individual(s) who use it to accumulate profit, a system which is characterized by wage labour, private property, and at the core, having a competitive market.

 

Capitalism made use of the industrial era/revolution and accumulated a lot of capital. Although it sucessfully did this at a time when Capitalism wasn't as corrupted as it is now, it achieved all of this in the most undesirable means through slavery, child labour, starvation, alienation, segregation etc. creating violence in so many ways. Since you mentioned an effect of Fascism, lets discuss the effects of Capitalism:

• Wealth inequality - the masses of profits drives the capitalist to make even more, going to extreme measures to delete competition and form oligarchies. Many grand companies are connected and force out competition who won't go within their rules. As a result, the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer.
• Direct violence - capitalism requires a violent hierarchy to guard its intrests such as the police state. The police and the justice systems (which are heavily sadistic, corrupt and racist) abuses their powers, and were created to, protect the intrests of capitalists. If there were no rules, everyone would uprise against the capitalists.
• Propaganda - any idea such as leftists, who challange the capitalist system, will be put to silence so that the capitalists can continue existing. Workers rights have always been stepped on by the capitalists, and use false information trying to keep the workers at their place.
• Starvation - a lot of people depend on low paying jobs to survive. We call this violent exploitation. The capitalist knows the worker is poor and has to work in order to survive and feed his/her family, so the capitalist exploits the workers conditions. Its violent because of the direct effect it has. If the worker did not work, they would die.
• Inequal oppurtunities - a child born into a wealthy family will always do or have more oppurtunities over a child born into a poor family, and how can anybody blame a child for this? You do not choose where you are born to.
• Investing fallacy - capitalism expects businesses to invest in things i.e. products, ideas etc. and when the profits dont seem to be reasonable or they simply wait, the economy suffers from this as its expecting businesses to commit to the economy. Thus the system will not sustain and as you see the economy of those 'powerhouses' are collapsing.
• Need for Imperialism - imperialism refers to the usage of violence in order to aid a policy or procedure. The police state earlier is an example of imperialist methods. Capitalism's long history involves imperialism throughout. The invasions, massacres, genocides, killings, rapings, stealings etc. of so many cultures are the acts of America, Britain etc. which are crimes they've never paid for.
• No taxation - although a lot of poeple don't like paying taxes, they dont realise that this money is being used to benefit them and the rest of society. A child should not suffer because their parents/home/life isn't decent, thats not their or their sons/daughter's fault. Thats the fault of the system.

These are some of the mass effects that Capitalism causes, I've not even dwelved into the theoretical i.e. economical and political, contradictions and invalid ideas Capitalism proposes.

 

On Socialism and Capitalism, you state that they are two different things but propose the same criticism (which is a bad criticism, ill explain why)?

 

Socialism is an economic system in which the capital is demoractically owned by society (social/worker ownership), which establishes a system of equality not based on your wealth, gender, race, family status etc. Socialism can potentially have a state, known as workers-state which protects the workers/people of society. Socialism can potentially have money, trading and markets, but privatization is completely removed.

 

Communism is a classless, stateless and moneyless society in which there is a guiding principle, 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need'. Society produces based on need and ability, not excessive and unhealthy amounts to make profit. It aims to establish a completely equal society. Communism abolishes all privately owned property, but just like Socialism, allows for personal property. Communism in most cases (thinkers, writers, revolutionaries etc.) is thought to be the higher stage of Socialism, and when the 'state fully withers away' Communism will be achieved.

 

There is an idea of Utopian Socialism, but it does not refer to the utopia you're thinking of, at some peaceful forest with animals jumping around and everyone is in love. Thats fantasy. If you have any questions about either I will do my best to answer.

 

Albert Einstein wrote a fabulous document entitled 'Why Socialism?'. Its a really good read.

 

I was just being picky on the Fascist thing, by and large you are absolutely right.

 

 Actually a "definition" may be conceived by personal opinion, not everyone may use the exact dictionary definition of words or terms. I'm sure not everyone would say Capitalism in the same way another individual would define it. But I do believe you're correct that I do need to do more research on this topic. I just like to give my own opinion on the matter, because I believe these debates let me learn something new. 

 

 

I like your standpoint on the effect of Capitalism though, it's very interesting to see and realize that Capitalism in all senses is no where near perfect.

 

 

Lenin I'd like to challenge you on the Propaganda and Imperialism points you made though. Propaganda from a capitalist standpoint is a soul driving motivator for us. If you fail to convince you're people that the system isn't damn "perfect" or at the least efficient you will fail horribly in trying to motivate citizens in a capitalism country, because who wants to work in a capitalism country with no motivation to work hard? If your an educated American you realize that the idea of the "American Dream" is the biggest use of propaganda the United States rest on. However you can't skip out on Communism (not socialism) because what we saw early on in the creation and establish of communism the use of propaganda to convince people that everything will be equal and that you don't have to worry about competition, since the government will monitor everything. I'm not saying either of these types of propaganda are bad, but lets be honest here any system NEEDS a way of convincing it's people that it will work, you can be chill about it or you can radical about it in that case leading to radical/aggressive nationalism which 9 times out of 10 will lead to a fascist government and country. 

 

Now your imperialism point is clear cut, Capitalism thrives off exploiting other countries for natural resources as well as political objectives. This has resulted in the conquest and division of South American countries, most of North America, Asia, Southeast Pacific, and none the less my people in Africa (scrabble of Africa). I just wanted to say I agreed with you on this stand point a lot cause it makes me think of the world in a different way if this never happened. 

@@Lenin

 

I appreciate the educated debate though I'm learning more about this stuff.

[Lenin]

You niggas writing essays to eachother lmfao

Its called education.

 

@@Lenin capitalism isn't perfect, but the U.S saw that and have put up laws so monopolies couldn't form.

There must be competition or the company would be broken up.

@@Datassd0e, thats not the only criticism. & those laws haven't affected much, multi-millionaire (or billionaire w/e) companies still exist in contact with each other. Industries like film and vehicle are pretty much dominated by certain companies. Watch this;

It explains it better.

 

Competition on fair grounds is acceptable, but on unfair grounds that Capitalism will inevitably provide, its terrible and will cripple the economy. Socialists aren't inherently against competition, there is something called Market Socialism. However, if your purpose is to avoid taxes (that inherently benefit society), use crippling cheap labour and attack smaller/med competition, (which all 3 are the reality of Capitalism) then this isn't a healthy system.

[Lenin]

 Actually a "definition" may be conceived by personal opinion, not everyone may use the exact dictionary definition of words or terms. I'm sure not everyone would say Capitalism in the same way another individual would define it. But I do believe you're correct that I do need to do more research on this topic. I just like to give my own opinion on the matter, because I believe these debates let me learn something new. 

 

 

I like your standpoint on the effect of Capitalism though, it's very interesting to see and realize that Capitalism in all senses is no where near perfect.

 

 

Lenin I'd like to challenge you on the Propaganda and Imperialism points you made though. Propaganda from a capitalist standpoint is a soul driving motivator for us. If you fail to convince you're people that the system isn't damn "perfect" or at the least efficient you will fail horribly in trying to motivate citizens in a capitalism country, because who wants to work in a capitalism country with no motivation to work hard? If your an educated American you realize that the idea of the "American Dream" is the biggest use of propaganda the United States rest on. However you can't skip out on Communism (not socialism) because what we saw early on in the creation and establish of communism the use of propaganda to convince people that everything will be equal and that you don't have to worry about competition, since the government will monitor everything. I'm not saying either of these types of propaganda are bad, but lets be honest here any system NEEDS a way of convincing it's people that it will work, you can be chill about it or you can radical about it in that case leading to radical/aggressive nationalism which 9 times out of 10 will lead to a fascist government and country. 

 

Now your imperialism point is clear cut, Capitalism thrives off exploiting other countries for natural resources as well as political objectives. This has resulted in the conquest and division of South American countries, most of North America, Asia, Southeast Pacific, and none the less my people in Africa (scrabble of Africa). I just wanted to say I agreed with you on this stand point a lot cause it makes me think of the world in a different way if this never happened. 

@@Lenin

 

I appreciate the educated debate though I'm learning more about this stuff.

 

Its best to use a neutral definition, or else any defintion can include examples or emotions towards it. I've tried to leave that out (the emotion of hating Capitalism or Fascism) in the defintion I gave you which is from various Capitalist books. Just more educational and mature to do so.

 

So let me reply to the propaganda first. I'm sure you realise that is in fact a criticism of Capitalism.. brainwashing people passively. There was a film, can't remember the name, where someone puts on glasses and sees advertisements and messages and crap about Capitalism. It was a good movie. Its not a healthy system to develop, people shoudn't be lying towards the people you serve.

 

Propaganda is used terribly in the world, esp. on these forums, people really don't know what it means. Propaganda has two faces, one is good propaganda and one is bad propaganda. Good propaganda is sending a message into society or whoever your target it sucessfully, without any harmful affects. Bad propaganda is the same, but it has devastating affects.

 

I think you mean Russia about the Communism-Propaganda thing. At the time when Lenin was in Russia (after the revolution), education, economy, living standards, variation in foods, liberty (newspapers etc.), individual rights (women's rights) etc. all improved in such a short time it was unbelievable. From such a backward country developed a very stable and developing country. Lenin died too early, and believe me when I say many of us would give our lives right now for Lenin to have lived 5 more healthy years. Lenin wrote a will/testament, stating that Stalin should be removed from power. Stalin manipulated the sitatution and killed the majority of the party members and becoming the leader. He reverted all progress made from Lenin's time. Stalin imprisoned practically anyone, increased poverty, a secret power abusing police was established.. pretty much a dictator. A lot of people associate Communism to Stalin, which is just wrong, instead of Lenin, who was the actual Marxist/Communist. Communism never asks anyone to work less than another. All individuals in society who are able to work must work, but they must share their work with others. So If I'm a farmer and you're a miner, we share our makings like food and ore/iron so that we are both able to live. Its to make sure everyone in society suceeds and has the oppurtunities to become anything they want from a barber to a doctor.

 

Ofcourse. There are a few people which I'm sure you've heard of, such as Huey P Newton and Malcolm X (he was a father I never met) who wrote and lectured absolutely great things about African history and the impacts of Capitalists on black people in America and worldwide. They were both Socialists (Malcolm became a Communist a month before he got assassinated), but even so, they still write a lot of good things.

 

Ofcourse man, debating is really important. You have what most people in these forums/communities don't, the will to become better. That potential is great.

[Codi]

Its called education.

 

@@Datassd0e, thats not the only criticism. & those laws haven't affected much, multi-millionaire (or billionaire w/e) companies still exist in contact with each other. Industries like film and vehicle are pretty much dominated by certain companies. Watch this; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaH9DHLqaeg It explains it better.

 

Competition on fair grounds is acceptable, but on unfair grounds that Capitalism will inevitably provide, its terrible and will cripple the economy. Socialists aren't inherently against competition, there is something called Market Socialism. However, if your purpose is to avoid taxes (that inherently benefit society), use crippling cheap labour and attack smaller/med competition, (which all 3 are the reality of Capitalism) then this isn't a healthy system.

It's*

[Lenin]

It's*

 

I'd like to see you type those paragraphs in about 5 minutes without any mistakes.

 

Not sure what your purpose here is. You still understood the sentence.

[Pain]

This thread is heaven for @@Lenin , am I rite?

[ewby]

SHARKBREW

[cole]

ehh lets give socialism a try tbh

[eop hider123456]

Its best to use a neutral definition, or else any defintion can include examples or emotions towards it. I've tried to leave that out (the emotion of hating Capitalism or Fascism) in the defintion I gave you which is from various Capitalist books. Just more educational and mature to do so.

 

So let me reply to the propaganda first. I'm sure you realise that is in fact a criticism of Capitalism.. brainwashing people passively. There was a film, can't remember the name, where someone puts on glasses and sees advertisements and messages and crap about Capitalism. It was a good movie. Its not a healthy system to develop, people shoudn't be lying towards the people you serve.

 

Propaganda is used terribly in the world, esp. on these forums, people really don't know what it means. Propaganda has two faces, one is good propaganda and one is bad propaganda. Good propaganda is sending a message into society or whoever your target it sucessfully, without any harmful affects. Bad propaganda is the same, but it has devastating affects.

 

I think you mean Russia about the Communism-Propaganda thing. At the time when Lenin was in Russia (after the revolution), education, economy, living standards, variation in foods, liberty (newspapers etc.), individual rights (women's rights) etc. all improved in such a short time it was unbelievable. From such a backward country developed a very stable and developing country. Lenin died too early, and believe me when I say many of us would give our lives right now for Lenin to have lived 5 more healthy years. Lenin wrote a will/testament, stating that Stalin should be removed from power. Stalin manipulated the sitatution and killed the majority of the party members and becoming the leader. He reverted all progress made from Lenin's time. Stalin imprisoned practically anyone, increased poverty, a secret power abusing police was established.. pretty much a dictator. A lot of people associate Communism to Stalin, which is just wrong, instead of Lenin, who was the actual Marxist/Communist. Communism never asks anyone to work less than another. All individuals in society who are able to work must work, but they must share their work with others. So If I'm a farmer and you're a miner, we share our makings like food and ore/iron so that we are both able to live. Its to make sure everyone in society suceeds and has the oppurtunities to become anything they want from a barber to a doctor.

 

Ofcourse. There are a few people which I'm sure you've heard of, such as Huey P Newton and Malcolm X (he was a father I never met) who wrote and lectured absolutely great things about African history and the impacts of Capitalists on black people in America and worldwide. They were both Socialists (Malcolm became a Communist a month before he got assassinated), but even so, they still write a lot of good things.

 

Ofcourse man, debating is really important. You have what most people in these forums/communities don't, the will to become better. That potential is great.

Give me till tomorrow morning to gather my thoughts on this comment.

[Ben]

I'm not a Fascist but people have got a really misshaped view of Fascism. 

 

Nazi Germany and the later stages of Mussolini's Italy have really tarnished it's reputation. I'm not a Fascist, nor do I support it but to say that force or authoritarianism is at it's heart of the ideology is wrong. Nationalism is at it's heart and is what made it so popular in Mussolini's Italy. People view the events of the 1930s-40s in a far too linear way and therefore fail to realise that Fascism in Italy in the early 1930's was far different to that in the latter stages. In the early 1930's, Fascism caught on in Italy due to its focus on Italian culture; its artwork and its language and that installed a sense of nationalism within the Italian people and made them relate what Mussolini was saying. It wasn't the later stages of the 1930's that this Fascism took a horrible turn and turned into expansionism (which could also be viewed as a trait of Capitalism to a certain extent albeit in a financial situation). It's actually widely argued that that the movements which spread across Europe in the late 1930's and early 1940's which are seen to be violent/forceful weren't truly Fascism at all (whole new debate totally). 

 

Force/Violence is just a tool used by rulers to try and embed their philosophy onto others and has been throughout history, it can't be associated with one single ideology when all the "rulers" or ideologues mentioned on this topic have used violence/force at some point in history to maintain superiority.

 

Anyway, I didn't study politics too much, just history - hence the difference approach. I'll read through the rest of the posts when I have time, but this was something that bugged me on the first page 

[TBR]

idk

[Lenin]

I'm not a Fascist but people have got a really misshaped view of Fascism. 

 

Nazi Germany and the later stages of Mussolini's Italy have really tarnished it's reputation. I'm not a Fascist, nor do I support it but to say that force or authoritarianism is at it's heart of the ideology is wrong. Nationalism is at it's heart and is what made it so popular in Mussolini's Italy. People view the events of the 1930s-40s in a far too linear way and therefore fail to realise that Fascism in Italy in the early 1930's was far different to that in the latter stages. In the early 1930's, Fascism caught on in Italy due to its focus on Italian culture; its artwork and its language and that installed a sense of nationalism within the Italian people and made them relate what Mussolini was saying. It wasn't the later stages of the 1930's that this Fascism took a horrible turn and turned into expansionism (which could also be viewed as a trait of Capitalism to a certain extent albeit in a financial situation). It's actually widely argued that that the movements which spread across Europe in the late 1930's and early 1940's which are seen to be violent/forceful weren't truly Fascism at all (whole new debate totally). 

 

Force/Violence is just a tool used by rulers to try and embed their philosophy onto others and has been throughout history, it can't be associated with one single ideology when all the "rulers" or ideologues mentioned on this topic have used violence/force at some point in history to maintain superiority.

 

Anyway, I didn't study politics too much, just history - hence the difference approach. I'll read through the rest of the posts when I have time, but this was something that bugged me on the first page 

 

It wasn't only Mussolini who 'tarnished' (if thats what you want to call it) the reputation of Fascists, but also those in Germany, Spain and many other places around the world. There are so many things wrong with Fascism itself its difficult where to begin. I'll try to put forward something unbias as I did for Capitalism and Socialism/Communism, and then move onto criticisms.

 

Fascism first and foremost is an ideology over something like Socialism (mainly economic). Although Nationalism is at the core of Fascism, so is authoritarianism. Its not a choice between either, its both, or else why differentiate between Fascism and Nationalism. As Communism is a further step from Socialism, Fascism is a further step from Nationalism. Fascism is an authoritarian structure in which a single government has complete power over a country, and the country is held to be the most important thing one can hold socially. Conserving the values of a country is made almost sacred, alongside religions. You saw this with many Fascist powers, such as Mussolini and the Catholic Church being very close and aiding each other into power. The philosophy behind Fascism is extremely segregating, with some classes or more typically races being held above others as superior. Hitler and his legion famously misunderstood the works of Friedrich Nietzsche who wrote about the master-slave philosophy - the Nazi propaganda selectively used parts of such philosophers to increase people's acceptance of superior and inferior races even though Nietzsche was completely against that. Above all, Fascism literally has no direction within society, and is economically blind. Hitler tried to adopt this ideology called 'National Socialism' but they are just completely different things, and Hitler did this mainly to gain the support of the Socialists and Communists. He later showed his true colours.

 

It didn't take a horrible turn in the 1930s as it occured before that, but the reality was that Fascism has obvious problems within its ideology and things like genocide, massacres, domination etc. all inevitably descend one after another. The whole idea of upholding a single country to be the most important will create friction between other countries. As soon as people are threatened they will resort to violence. The currently stronger country will dominate and these faults will just increase. You cannot stop this. Liberty, rights, beliefs etc. are all disregarded in a Fascist country if the conservative values are the opposite. Mussolini hunted down Socialists and Communists in so many ways. Hitler's actions caused a genocide. Spaniards had a cival-war. The whole idea of nationalism is simply preposterous. You cannot choose where you are born to, you have no control over that. Why would you punish or socially outcast someone for not being the same as you. Why would you then dominate over another country to crush their values? Variation is healthy both genetically and socially, and this has been proven in countless studies over such a long time. Its one thing to acclaim a national identity or any identity, its another to use it and attack someone else with it. To differentiate between Imperialism and Fascism you must look at the philosophy of each example, in this case the influence to other countries were certainly of Fascistic reasons.

 

I completely agree with the force-violence statement.

[Waifu Pillow]

Idk I just like clearing Slaughter in the wilderness tbh lol

[TBR]

Idk I just like clearing Slaughter in the wilderness tbh lol

[Datassd0e]

 

Idk I just like clearing Slaughter in the wilderness tbh lol

[Idk]

 

Sharkbrew