4 ms·

Just curious why everyone loves throwing around the term "fascist" so much. Why not use more precise language to describe what you dislike about a candidate? T

Just curious why everyone loves throwing around the term "fascist" so much. Why not use more precise language to describe what you dislike about a candidate? The term seems ambiguous, and no one seems to have a clear definition of what it is. At most, there seems to be some related factors. For example, my image of Fascists is that they heavily promote war and expanding the empire. But, in contrast, the "fascist" candidate in this election wants to reduce our military footprint, and have other countries defend themselves.

wutbrodo 10y ago
This is hardly a mystery: Because language is powerful and the vast majority of people are too stupid and lazy to do anything but absorb the positive/negative valence of the term being used. The redefinition and stretching of terms is hardly a new thing. Just because Stalin was famous for Orwellian use of language doesn't mean that it doesn't happen at pretty much every level of politics even in relatively well functioning political systems.
RandomInteger4 10y ago
Did you even bother to read the article? You say that you think the term is ambiguous and this article is here exactly for the purpose of elucidating the idea of Fascism as it appears in it's obvious and not so obvious forms. You say people are quick to throw around the term, yet you're equally quick to disregard those who see some very obvious similarities between Trump's style of campaigning and the rise of various fascist leaders. These clues are not subtle in Trump's case. It's mind boggling to think that people do not see them. It's like watching Blue's Clues with the audience of children yelling "THE CLUE IS RIGHT THERE!" and Steve is completely oblivious for the whole episode. In the end Blue dies because Steve is ignorant. Blue is our Democracy. You are Steve.
drodgers 10y ago
Maybe the term has been overused to the point of meaninglessness, but I don't think so. The particular fascistic ideas Drumpf's movement expresses are: * Nationalism * A notion of racial or ethnic purity (see for example, the 2nd-generation American judge who wasn't *really* American because of his Mexican heritage) * Attraction to 'strong' leadership * The concept of a natural aristocracy (eg. based on race or national identity) * A theory of historical decline, often combined with a promise of some great destiny (make America great *again*) * High praise for cultural traditions of the in-group (divided on racial, ethnic or national lines). This can make it easy to confuse facism with conservatism, but for non-facist conservatives, ethnic divisiveness isn't a desirable goal. * Localist perspective on all issues (no tendency towards globalism or universalism). Only the interest of the in-group are considered. * Strong masculine/feminine divide. Particular emphasis on masculine qualities for the state and its leaders. I've seen some journalists using the word 'Authoritarian' to try do work-around the overuse of 'Facist', but that's actually less precise accurate: authoritarianism doesn't entail the kinds of ethnic purity ideology which is critical to fascism (and Drumpf).
amyjess 10y ago
For normal candidates, I'd agree with you, but Trump absolutely nails a rather objective and detailed definition of fascism. See my comment elsewhere in this thread for sources: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12729018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12729018

wutbrodo 10y ago

This is hardly a mystery: Because language is powerful and the vast majority of people are too stupid and lazy to do anything but absorb the positive/negative valence of the term being used. The redefinition and stretching of terms is hardly a new thing. Just because Stalin was famous for Orwellian use of language doesn't mean that it doesn't happen at pretty much every level of politics even in relatively well functioning political systems.

RandomInteger4 10y ago

Did you even bother to read the article? You say that you think the term is ambiguous and this article is here exactly for the purpose of elucidating the idea of Fascism as it appears in it's obvious and not so obvious forms. You say people are quick to throw around the term, yet you're equally quick to disregard those who see some very obvious similarities between Trump's style of campaigning and the rise of various fascist leaders. These clues are not subtle in Trump's case. It's mind boggling to think that people do not see them. It's like watching Blue's Clues with the audience of children yelling "THE CLUE IS RIGHT THERE!" and Steve is completely oblivious for the whole episode. In the end Blue dies because Steve is ignorant. Blue is our Democracy. You are Steve.

drodgers 10y ago

Maybe the term has been overused to the point of meaninglessness, but I don't think so. The particular fascistic ideas Drumpf's movement expresses are: * Nationalism * A notion of racial or ethnic purity (see for example, the 2nd-generation American judge who wasn't *really* American because of his Mexican heritage) * Attraction to 'strong' leadership * The concept of a natural aristocracy (eg. based on race or national identity) * A theory of historical decline, often combined with a promise of some great destiny (make America great *again*) * High praise for cultural traditions of the in-group (divided on racial, ethnic or national lines). This can make it easy to confuse facism with conservatism, but for non-facist conservatives, ethnic divisiveness isn't a desirable goal. * Localist perspective on all issues (no tendency towards globalism or universalism). Only the interest of the in-group are considered. * Strong masculine/feminine divide. Particular emphasis on masculine qualities for the state and its leaders. I've seen some journalists using the word 'Authoritarian' to try do work-around the overuse of 'Facist', but that's actually less precise accurate: authoritarianism doesn't entail the kinds of ethnic purity ideology which is critical to fascism (and Drumpf).

amyjess 10y ago

For normal candidates, I'd agree with you, but Trump absolutely nails a rather objective and detailed definition of fascism. See my comment elsewhere in this thread for sources: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12729018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12729018