Facism

[Vern Humphrey]

Definition of fascism
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

How do our home-grown Left-Wing National Socialists differ from this definition?

The exalt the collective above the individual, they seek a centralized autocratic government (remember, Obama was ruling by decree, and Hillary promised to do the same thing), they want higher, confiscatory taxes -- and they brutally suppress any opposition.

[togor]

So in other words you use the same verbs but different objects and thereby claim equivalence.

For example: An addict needs heroin and Beverly needs a ride to work, consequently Beverly has many of the same traits as a heroin addict. I mean, everyone exalts something. Does that make everyone a facist?

Facism places a leader front and center as the embodiment of the national aspirations of the movement. That leader usually looks to the Conservative elements of society for institutional support, including the military, the ownership class, and sometimes the clergy (depending on the country). The coercive power of the state is used where necessary to crush opposition, but this is a feature of authoritarian regimes in general and not specific to facist movements.

But seriously, if we were to consider the different political movements in the US today, and look for one that features a powerful singular leader with a mass following who simultaneously allies himself with the ownership class, while advancing a very nationalist political agenda, then which movement best fits that bill?

[Roadkingtrax]

Thank GOD we live in a Republic!!! Leader worship is lame.

[Vern Humphrey]

You see where trying to start an intelligent discussion leads with these fonzanoons -- they gush with sophistry.

[togor]

Was my reply not substantive? It challenges your thesis but not disrespectfully, and my comments are cogent. 'Trax was just getting warned up for Sam. The floor remains open to you if you want it.

[leftyo]

id tend to call our average liberal a socialist, much more than a fascist.

[Vern Humphrey]

id tend to call our average liberal a socialist, much more than a fascist.

Fascists ARE socialists. The Nazi party was originally the "German Worker's Party" (not the "German Capitalist's Party") It went through some name changes, but the acronym "NAZI" stands for "National Zocialsm." If you read the "25 Points of the Nazi Party" you see why they called themselves that -- fourteen of those points are socialist (in whole or in part) and eleven are nationalist.

[leftyo]

yes fascists are socialists, but not all socialists are fascists.

[clintonhater]

Leader worship is lame.

Doesn't that depend on the leader?

"Worship of a Hero is transcendent admiration of a Great Man. I say great men are still admirable; I say there is, at bottom, nothing else admirable! No nobler feeling than this of admiration for one higher than himself dwells in the breast of men." [Carlyle, p. 11]

Great Men these days are conspicuous by their absence, but that sad fact doesn't negate the principal.

[togor]

It also depends on the nature of the relationship between leader & followers.

[togor]

Fascists ARE socialists. The Nazi party was originally the "German Worker's Party" (not the "German Capitalist's Party") It went through some name changes, but the acronym "NAZI" stands for "National Zocialsm." If you read the "25 Points of the Nazi Party" you see why they called themselves that -- fourteen of those points are socialist (in whole or in part) and eleven are nationalist.

But those guys got purged in 1934 in exchange for the army backing Hitler's assumption the presidency after Hindenburg's death. The industrialists, the army, the Junkers, all Conservative institutions in Germany, endorsed Hitler as dictator because they supported his nationalist agenda, including rebuilding the armed forces.

May Day, 1933. Chancellor Hitler throws a big party to honor German labor and the next day they raid the trade union offices, arrest their leaders and confiscate their funds.

Vern, how many of those socialist points were enacted once Hitler became the absolute ruler of Germany? None!

[Roadkingtrax]

It also depends on the nature of the relationship between leader & followers.

I found this an interesting read.

One mentioned the lesser of two evils. How about this from the June 24th, 1932, Atlanta Constitution:

[togor]

Fantastic post, 'Trax. In hindsight we understand that it was a false choice, specifically set up to look a certain way. The correct answer is to not choose evil at all and to find an alternative.

[clintonhater]

In hindsight we understand that it was a false choice, specifically set up to look a certain way. The correct answer is to not choose evil at all and to find an alternative.

Exactly how were Germans in 1932 supposed to obtain that hindsight? However, the choice they faced at the time was NOT a false one--either the Nazis or the Bolsheviks (backed by the USSR) were going to prevail, & "to not choose evil at all" is an absurd evasion of the historical reality; the ONLY alternative was the Weimar Republic, and it had already failed miserably! Individual Germans had the "alternative" of leaving the country, if they had money enough to do it, but was that possible for the entire population?

[blackhawknj]

In an Order of the Day to the Reichswehr in 1932, General Wilhelm Groener said the only thing distinguishing the Nazis from the Communists was their "national base", and in the Weimar Republic the two parties often collaborated, the Communists reserving their venom for the Socialists. Later after the Communist Party was outlawed, SA Chief Ernst Roehm welcomed former Communists into the ranks-"I like them radical." he said.