|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On January 14 2017 06:15 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 06:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 06:03 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 05:57 mustaju wrote:On January 14 2017 05:42 LegalLord wrote:
Europeans annexed and conquered all the way until they no longer had the ability to do so. Well into the 20th century for that matter, far past WWII, until the major European powers got bitch-slapped out of all the fruits of their consquests. It's hypocritical, to say the least.
The "fascists and communists" bit... I certainly hope you're not serious. He's half right. Countries are held together in part by ideologies as well as social norms. Russia and China definitely have fascist and communist parts in their current ideological set. As far as "hypocrisy" is concerned, this is a really flimsy excuse to deflect criticism. There has to be some point in time where aggression like this is curtailed or it's doomsday for all of us. This generation of Europeans has not fought wars for territorial gain, and a lot of them define themselves as pacifists. Dismissing all morality while not acknowledging progress means that less progress will take place. Before we head any further, we should come up with a definition for "fascism" and "communism" that are used to make these assertions. In my eyes, the first people who should be called out on fascism are those who consider Nazi collaborators to be heroes of their countries. There are a lot of those out there. Isn't there already strict definitions to what those two words mean--or are we trying to pin down what the accusation of those words mean? The latter. It's really a buzzword accusation more than anything else.
Then yes--the pejorative needs to be super precise if we are to have an actual discussion about it. Its already super gray as is, so lets get to details.
I don't like using the term fascist unless the argument or policy being passed is intended to spread or preserve a perceived idea of enforced nationalism. For example, "Make America Great Again" is a very fascist dialectic, but definitely not a fascist policy--something like Arizona's ID laws are definitely policies and laws I would define as fascist. What are other people's definition of fascist? Or, at least, when do you call someone a fascist? What requirements do they need to meet?
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On January 14 2017 06:15 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 06:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 06:03 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 05:57 mustaju wrote:On January 14 2017 05:42 LegalLord wrote:
Europeans annexed and conquered all the way until they no longer had the ability to do so. Well into the 20th century for that matter, far past WWII, until the major European powers got bitch-slapped out of all the fruits of their consquests. It's hypocritical, to say the least.
The "fascists and communists" bit... I certainly hope you're not serious. He's half right. Countries are held together in part by ideologies as well as social norms. Russia and China definitely have fascist and communist parts in their current ideological set. As far as "hypocrisy" is concerned, this is a really flimsy excuse to deflect criticism. There has to be some point in time where aggression like this is curtailed or it's doomsday for all of us. This generation of Europeans has not fought wars for territorial gain, and a lot of them define themselves as pacifists. Dismissing all morality while not acknowledging progress means that less progress will take place. Before we head any further, we should come up with a definition for "fascism" and "communism" that are used to make these assertions. In my eyes, the first people who should be called out on fascism are those who consider Nazi collaborators to be heroes of their countries. There are a lot of those out there. Isn't there already strict definitions to what those two words mean--or are we trying to pin down what the accusation of those words mean? The latter. It's really a buzzword accusation more than anything else.
Alright, here's a description by someone paraphrasing Heywood:
Political ideologies, 5th edition wrote:Fascism is a political ideology whose core theme is the idea of an organically unified national community, embodied in a belief in 'strength through unity'. The individual, in a literal sense, is nothing; individual identity must be entirely absorbed into the community or social group. The fascist ideal is that of the 'new man', a hero, motivated by duty, honour and self-sacrifice, prepared to dedicate his life to the glory of his nation or race, and to give unquestioning obedience to a supreme leader. In many respects, fascism constitutes a revolt against the ideas and values that dominated Western political thought from the French Revolution onwards; in the words of the Italian Fascist slogan: '1789 is Dead'. Values such as rationalism, progress, freedom and equality were thus overturned in the name of struggle, leadership, power, heroism and war. In this sense, fascism has an 'anti-character'. It is defined largely by what it opposes: it is anti-rational, anti-liberal, anti-conservative, anti-capitalist, anti-bourgeois, anti-communist and so on. Fascism represents the darker side of the Western political tradition, the central values of which it transformed rather than abandoned. For fascists, freedom means complete submission, democracy is equated with dictatorship, progress implies constant struggle and war, and creation is identified with destruction.
Source
Here's a few elements that I maintain are part of Russian mainstream ideology that overlap.
- Constantly referring to Russia as oppressed by outside forces and rising from it's knees. (very similar to interbellum Germany)
- A political discourse of ethnic nationalism that reaches outside it's borders into other sovereign states.
- A reference to might makes right as a paradigm of international relations.
- Collectivism as opposed to "decadent individualism"
Note that none of these are necessarily enough to accurately describe Russia as fascist (I would argue that would be an incorrect description). This is just to show that the argument has basis in political science. That said, your disagreement is probably not worth my time. This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia.
|
People just need to look at Dugin's political theory to see how influential these fascist ideas are in contemporary Russia. The guy is batshit crazy and still has a fairly large following especially among Russian military circles
|
On January 14 2017 06:03 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 05:57 mustaju wrote:On January 14 2017 05:42 LegalLord wrote:
Europeans annexed and conquered all the way until they no longer had the ability to do so. Well into the 20th century for that matter, far past WWII, until the major European powers got bitch-slapped out of all the fruits of their consquests. It's hypocritical, to say the least.
The "fascists and communists" bit... I certainly hope you're not serious. He's half right. Countries are held together in part by ideologies as well as social norms. Russia and China definitely have fascist and communist parts in their current ideological set. As far as "hypocrisy" is concerned, this is a really flimsy excuse to deflect criticism. There has to be some point in time where aggression like this is curtailed or it's doomsday for all of us. This generation of Europeans has not fought wars for territorial gain, and a lot of them define themselves as pacifists. Dismissing all morality while not acknowledging progress means that less progress will take place. Before we head any further, we should come up with a definition for "fascism" and "communism" that are used to make these assertions. In my eyes, the first people who should be called out on fascism are those who consider Nazi collaborators to be heroes of their countries. There are a lot of those out there. As for "we're pacifists now" you might want to look at recent (within the past decade) military involvement of European nations. Europe became weaker, not more moral.
I'm entirely with Orwell on this:
When one critic writes, ‘The outstanding feature of Mr. X's work is its living quality’, while another writes, ‘The immediately striking thing about Mr. X's work is its peculiar deadness’, the reader accepts this as a simple difference opinion... The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable’. The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different. Statements like Marshal Petain was a true patriot, The Soviet press is the freest in the world, The Catholic Church is opposed to persecution, are almost always made with intent to deceive. Other words used in variable meanings, in most cases more or less dishonestly, are: class, totalitarian, science, progressive, reactionary, bourgeois, equality.
Communism joins those in some ways people use it. More or less honestly in stating what Lenin and early revolutionary Russians were hoping to achieve through socialism, both honestly and dishonestly and somewhat imprecisely when you refer to just major themes from The Communist Manifesto on class struggle, dialectic and historical materialism, and too many shades of dishonest or totally vague references to count (if two different people called Sanders communist, frankly I might agree with one and disagree with the other based on what they meant).
|
On January 14 2017 06:52 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 06:03 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 05:57 mustaju wrote:On January 14 2017 05:42 LegalLord wrote:
Europeans annexed and conquered all the way until they no longer had the ability to do so. Well into the 20th century for that matter, far past WWII, until the major European powers got bitch-slapped out of all the fruits of their consquests. It's hypocritical, to say the least.
The "fascists and communists" bit... I certainly hope you're not serious. He's half right. Countries are held together in part by ideologies as well as social norms. Russia and China definitely have fascist and communist parts in their current ideological set. As far as "hypocrisy" is concerned, this is a really flimsy excuse to deflect criticism. There has to be some point in time where aggression like this is curtailed or it's doomsday for all of us. This generation of Europeans has not fought wars for territorial gain, and a lot of them define themselves as pacifists. Dismissing all morality while not acknowledging progress means that less progress will take place. Before we head any further, we should come up with a definition for "fascism" and "communism" that are used to make these assertions. In my eyes, the first people who should be called out on fascism are those who consider Nazi collaborators to be heroes of their countries. There are a lot of those out there. As for "we're pacifists now" you might want to look at recent (within the past decade) military involvement of European nations. Europe became weaker, not more moral. I'm entirely with Orwell on this: Show nested quote +When one critic writes, ‘The outstanding feature of Mr. X's work is its living quality’, while another writes, ‘The immediately striking thing about Mr. X's work is its peculiar deadness’, the reader accepts this as a simple difference opinion... Show nested quote +The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable’. The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different. Statements like Marshal Petain was a true patriot, The Soviet press is the freest in the world, The Catholic Church is opposed to persecution, are almost always made with intent to deceive. Other words used in variable meanings, in most cases more or less dishonestly, are: class, totalitarian, science, progressive, reactionary, bourgeois, equality. Communism joins those in some ways people use it. More or less honestly in stating what Lenin and early revolutionary Russians were hoping to achieve through socialism, both honestly and dishonestly and somewhat imprecisely when you refer to just major themes from The Communist Manifesto on class struggle, dialectic and historical materialism, and too many shades of dishonest or totally vague references to count (if two different people called Sanders communist, frankly I might agree with one and disagree with the other based on what they meant).
Preach.... This has happened to alot of words over the last 10 years and i think its behind the sentiments of many in the anti-PC crowd.
|
On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia.
I could say the same in reverse.
In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description.
The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection.
It's nice how you pick and choose which subjects to vastly oversimplify and make huge logical leaps in. Where's your sources for your positions? I do remember reading quite similar positions on RT.
|
On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection.
Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals.
Because he could make a cheap shot attack on my country tag that he parrots off Baltic-critical sources, trying to make everything relative again.
|
On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals.
It's the connection most useful for the purposes of what mentions of fascism are brought up to do - to draw a connection to Hitler.
Otherwise, its use as a pejorative isn't very useful. Do you think, for example, that anyone would be interested in arguing whether or not fascism is bad? No, because its mention is meant to draw a Hitler connection.
|
On January 14 2017 07:19 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals. Because he could make a cheap shot attack on my country tag that he parrots off Baltic-critical sources, trying to make everything relative again.
You presume that I am taking a potshot at Estonia or the Baltics. That is not the case.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On January 14 2017 07:21 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals. It's the connection most useful for the purposes of what mentions of fascism are brought up to do - to draw a connection to Hitler. Otherwise, its use as a pejorative isn't very useful. Do you think, for example, that anyone would be interested in arguing whether or not fascism is bad? No, because its mention is meant to draw a Hitler connection.
I did not mention Hitler once. Nazism is a subset of fascism, your attack is unfounded and unfair.
EDIT: On January 14 2017 07:23 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:19 mustaju wrote:On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals. Because he could make a cheap shot attack on my country tag that he parrots off Baltic-critical sources, trying to make everything relative again. You presume that I am taking a potshot at Estonia or the Baltics. That is not the case.
You are welcome to justify why you singled out that subgroup of people, rather than activist groups with similar, updated ideologies that would fit the uncontested definition of fascism by Heywood, or say, actual historical people working in the infrastructure of fascist countries, if you bring up history already. It's hard to see it as anything but a cheap shot considering the context of the conversation.
|
On January 14 2017 07:21 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals. It's the connection most useful for the purposes of what mentions of fascism are brought up to do - to draw a connection to Hitler. Otherwise, its use as a pejorative isn't very useful. Do you think, for example, that anyone would be interested in arguing whether or not fascism is bad? No, because its mention is meant to draw a Hitler connection.
That makes absolutely no sense--Hitler wasn't a fascist. That's like trying to insinuate that someone is similar to Trump by calling him a Hippie.
|
On January 14 2017 07:25 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:21 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals. It's the connection most useful for the purposes of what mentions of fascism are brought up to do - to draw a connection to Hitler. Otherwise, its use as a pejorative isn't very useful. Do you think, for example, that anyone would be interested in arguing whether or not fascism is bad? No, because its mention is meant to draw a Hitler connection. I did not mention Hitler once. Nazism is a subset of fascism, your attack is unfounded and unfair.
Do you think that some cases exist where fascism as defined is a good thing? Or do you agree that it is an ideology that should only be interpreted unfavorably?
|
On January 14 2017 07:27 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:21 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals. It's the connection most useful for the purposes of what mentions of fascism are brought up to do - to draw a connection to Hitler. Otherwise, its use as a pejorative isn't very useful. Do you think, for example, that anyone would be interested in arguing whether or not fascism is bad? No, because its mention is meant to draw a Hitler connection. That makes absolutely no sense--Hitler wasn't a fascist. That's like trying to insinuate that someone is similar to Trump by calling him a Hippie.
It would border on absurd to say that among the populace as a whole, the name most closely associated with the word "fascism" is Hitler. This is the implicit purpose of any attempt to prove something or someone is a fascist.
|
Not, really at least not in any serious discussion. Italian fascism for example is very different from Nazism. Both are unambiguously bad and awful but they're distinct ideologies. Russia isn't immune to fascism accusations just because they historically fought Nazism.
|
Norway28781 Posts
I agree entirely that fascism is virtually never used as a positive word, that it's always a pejorative. I can also agree that it's a word thrown around too carelessly, a leftist version of how right wingers have misused socialism if you like.
But describing something as fascist does not equate to drawing a parallel between whatever is described and Hitler. This is just not true.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On January 14 2017 07:28 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:25 mustaju wrote:On January 14 2017 07:21 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals. It's the connection most useful for the purposes of what mentions of fascism are brought up to do - to draw a connection to Hitler. Otherwise, its use as a pejorative isn't very useful. Do you think, for example, that anyone would be interested in arguing whether or not fascism is bad? No, because its mention is meant to draw a Hitler connection. I did not mention Hitler once. Nazism is a subset of fascism, your attack is unfounded and unfair. Do you think that some cases exist where fascism as defined is a good thing? Or do you agree that it is an ideology that should only be interpreted unfavorably?
I deliberately did not make value judgements in my comparison of the definition of fascism and Russian ideology. I can assure you, there are people who call themselves fascists proudly, and see it as a valid ideology. Clearly, I do not belong in that subcategory, but that does not mean that comparisons are automatically invalid.
On January 14 2017 07:35 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I agree entirely that fascism is virtually never used as a positive word, that it's always a pejorative. I can also agree that it's a word thrown around too carelessly, a leftist version of how right wingers have misused socialism if you like.
But describing something as fascist does not equate to drawing a parallel between whatever is described and Hitler. This is just not true.
Mystifying ideologies does not help in understanding them. While it is misused often, it is terminology in political science, and I linked a source for context.
|
On January 14 2017 07:35 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2017 07:28 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 07:25 mustaju wrote:On January 14 2017 07:21 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 07:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 14 2017 07:00 LegalLord wrote:On January 14 2017 06:32 mustaju wrote:
This is meant to be informative for others, you have shown how made up your mind already is in all topics related to Russia. I could say the same in reverse. In any case, the description as given is largely a caricature of Russian positions rather than a reality. There is plenty within Russian political ideology that one might find troubling, but the word "fascism" would be a rather poor description of those elements. And as far as calling China communist as a pejorative, that should also be a pretty quickly apparent caricature of a description. The people who praise Nazi collaborators are those who should most quickly be tied to fascism. Other ideologies you don't like, find some other way to describe them rather than trying to invoke a Hitler connection. Why the continually link to specifically Nazi collaboration? Fascists and Nazis were two very different political groups with two very different long term end goals. It's the connection most useful for the purposes of what mentions of fascism are brought up to do - to draw a connection to Hitler. Otherwise, its use as a pejorative isn't very useful. Do you think, for example, that anyone would be interested in arguing whether or not fascism is bad? No, because its mention is meant to draw a Hitler connection. I did not mention Hitler once. Nazism is a subset of fascism, your attack is unfounded and unfair. Do you think that some cases exist where fascism as defined is a good thing? Or do you agree that it is an ideology that should only be interpreted unfavorably? I deliberately did not make value judgements in my comparison of the definition of fascism and Russian ideology. I can assure you, there are people who call themselves fascists proudly, and see it as a valid ideology. Clearly, I do not belong in that subcategory, but that does not mean that comparisons are automatically invalid.
To expand, there are also people who, if Fascism was described to them without the term Fascism used, would embrace that ideology deeply. Fascism, like most Nationalism ideals, was vilified by the results of World War II and not because the ideals each philosophy has is itself disliked by the public.
Trump's "Make America Great Again" is super fascist in its message; ie we as a nation are under siege and we need to rise back up as a power. This doesn't mean that Trump is a fascist, just his message. Because, understandably so, there is great allure to a nationalistic anti-capitalist message that places emphasis on tribal unity.
|
Norway28781 Posts
I'm not arguing that people should never describe something as fascist, nor did I object to your use of the term. But I still think there's truth to the sentiment that things are labelled as fascist too frequently, and I think this increases the likelihood of kneejerk rejection of the term even when correctly applied.  It's a bit tricky because while there are certainly traits of fascism that are possible to define, it's also strongly associated with certain historical applications and there are bound to be significant differences between 2017 fascism and 1930 italy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
