5 ms·

Fascist is word losing its meaning. Its use should be limited to WW2 in my opinion. Replacing the word with authoritarian in your post would allow for the inclu

Fascist is word losing its meaning. Its use should be limited to WW2 in my opinion. Replacing the word with authoritarian in your post would allow for the inclusion of other types of oppressive regimes.

Kye 7y ago
Fascist has long been a synonym for authoritarian. I don't know why so many people suddenly take issue with it. Terms for social and political movements often come to refer to sets of behaviors associated with those movements.
- viridian 7y ago
  Fascism is a well defined political ideology that doesn't just boil down to authority = good, though. It's like if people equated having a strong head of state with monarchism. In doing so you throw away 95% of the ideology, and use it as a synonym for a much simpler idea.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  > Fascist has long been a synonym for authoritarian. I don't know why so many people suddenly take issue with it. "Fascist" means something much more specific than just "authoritarian". Far from suddenly taking issue with the misuse of the term, I have always chafed at its misuse. That said, I don't agree with chrisdhoover that "fascist" should only be used in a WWII context. Real fascism existed long before WWII, and still exists today.
- crankylinuxuser 7y ago
  I disagree. In my city of Bloomington, IN, we have a city run farmers market with known and admitted members of Identify Evropa (now American Identity Movement). Digging into what they want mirrors a "white ethnostate" with strong Nazi tendencies. When the call theselves "volkmom" and talk of lebensraum, the idea of fascism isn't some 80 year old quaint idea. Now, the city cannot remove her, as she has been accused of nothing illegal. And it's a government run market. But last week, was a protest that lead to the arrest (but not detained) of 5 protesters. That ended up in Newsweek. Where I'm sitting, it's right there and up front.
  - Kye 7y ago
    This is an example of the generic-ified form being useful. They're not a WW2-era party that's time traveled to 2019, but they tick all the boxes. The person I replied to suggested limiting the term to discussion of WW2. I suggested that terms like this always go generic because the ideas never die with the movement. New movements tend to take on the language of movements that inspire them, or people use those terms on them because they seem to (or do) share many of the same attributes. For example: people who call anyone who suggests a better social safety net socialist, communist, Marxist, or more recently: bolshevik. Where are we in disagreement? Your example is one I would use to support my own point.
- TallGuyShort 7y ago
  It seems to me to just be a synonym for "far-right" in the US right now, often used by people with equally authoritarian left-ish stances.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    Well, mud-throwers (regardless of their ideology) have always misused terms like that. These days, the preferred insult from the radical left tends to be "fascist", and the preferred insult from the radical right tends to be "socialist". Both sides are using them as a slang way of saying "scum". But their abuse of these terms doesn't (or shouldn't) actually change their meaning to the rest of us.
    - dmix 7y ago
      I don't mind the meaning of words changing, I just don't like words being thrown around to the point they are meaningless. Words like "fascism" and "nazi" have lost meaning, particularly on the internet, as they are frequently used by political ideologues to describe anything to the right of Justin Trudeau. Abusing terms in politics isn't new of course but it's not something we should be encouraging or ignoring because there are some legitimate consequences. The obvious one is the disinterest/dismissal it generates when people legitimately do need to raise the alarm because people have been crying wolf incessantly. It also helps the legitimately bad guys to dismiss the attacks and pretend they are just like the moderates facing exaggerated attacks from an hysterical foe.
  - braythwayt 7y ago
    Well, some people may just throw the term around, but if you read the definition, it’s easy to see why some people might think that we are on the brink of Fascism taking root in America: “Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy.” I mean, we have supporters of the US President chanting “lock her up,” and propaganda outlets accusing US Democrats of being “treasonous” and “enacting an illegal coup,” which sounds like preparing the way for “forced suppression of opposition.” We may disagree with them, but surely we can understand that some of the people using this word are sincerely attempting to use it in good faith. Wikipedia goes on to discuss the relationship between Fascism and economic policy: “Fascists advocate a mixed economy, with the principal goal of achieving autarky (national economic self-sufficiency) through protectionist and interventionist economic policies.” That sounds like the current US administration. The most interesting bit to me is this quote: “Fascists believe that liberal democracy is obsolete and regard the complete mobilization of society under a totalitarian one-party state as necessary to prepare a nation for armed conflict and to respond effectively to economic difficulties.” Does the US administration believe that liberal democracy is obsolete? As a citizen of a country where we bend over backwards to help people vote, I look at the voter suppression in the US and can’t help but think that America is more interested in “democracy theatre” than democracy, but that’s just an opinion, and I am aware that most Americans vigorously disagree. Likewise, when the people of America elected Mr. Obama, and there was a vacant supreme court seat plus a hundred other vacant judgeships, I would have thought that the GOP-controlled senate refusing to hear any of the President’s nominations was a sign of their disinterest in democracy, especially in the will of the people who elected and then re-elected Mr. Obama. But again... I imagine most Americans disagree. That being said, if someone does hold the view that the current administration, or various far-right groups out there have turned away from democracy, even if we disagree with them, can we not accept that they are using the word “Fascist” in good faith?
watwut 7y ago
The ideology did not appeared during WWII and did not disappeared after it.
mirimir 7y ago
Interesting rant about that: https://www.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/al0abm/libertarianism_is_just_nonauthoritarian_fascism/ https://www.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/al0abm/libertari...
- prepend 7y ago
  That’s a funny video...”Thing is just not bad fascism”

Kye 7y ago

Fascist has long been a synonym for authoritarian. I don't know why so many people suddenly take issue with it. Terms for social and political movements often come to refer to sets of behaviors associated with those movements.

viridian 7y ago
Fascism is a well defined political ideology that doesn't just boil down to authority = good, though. It's like if people equated having a strong head of state with monarchism. In doing so you throw away 95% of the ideology, and use it as a synonym for a much simpler idea.
JohnFen 7y ago
> Fascist has long been a synonym for authoritarian. I don't know why so many people suddenly take issue with it. "Fascist" means something much more specific than just "authoritarian". Far from suddenly taking issue with the misuse of the term, I have always chafed at its misuse. That said, I don't agree with chrisdhoover that "fascist" should only be used in a WWII context. Real fascism existed long before WWII, and still exists today.
crankylinuxuser 7y ago
I disagree. In my city of Bloomington, IN, we have a city run farmers market with known and admitted members of Identify Evropa (now American Identity Movement). Digging into what they want mirrors a "white ethnostate" with strong Nazi tendencies. When the call theselves "volkmom" and talk of lebensraum, the idea of fascism isn't some 80 year old quaint idea. Now, the city cannot remove her, as she has been accused of nothing illegal. And it's a government run market. But last week, was a protest that lead to the arrest (but not detained) of 5 protesters. That ended up in Newsweek. Where I'm sitting, it's right there and up front.
- Kye 7y ago
  This is an example of the generic-ified form being useful. They're not a WW2-era party that's time traveled to 2019, but they tick all the boxes. The person I replied to suggested limiting the term to discussion of WW2. I suggested that terms like this always go generic because the ideas never die with the movement. New movements tend to take on the language of movements that inspire them, or people use those terms on them because they seem to (or do) share many of the same attributes. For example: people who call anyone who suggests a better social safety net socialist, communist, Marxist, or more recently: bolshevik. Where are we in disagreement? Your example is one I would use to support my own point.
TallGuyShort 7y ago
It seems to me to just be a synonym for "far-right" in the US right now, often used by people with equally authoritarian left-ish stances.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  Well, mud-throwers (regardless of their ideology) have always misused terms like that. These days, the preferred insult from the radical left tends to be "fascist", and the preferred insult from the radical right tends to be "socialist". Both sides are using them as a slang way of saying "scum". But their abuse of these terms doesn't (or shouldn't) actually change their meaning to the rest of us.
  - dmix 7y ago
    I don't mind the meaning of words changing, I just don't like words being thrown around to the point they are meaningless. Words like "fascism" and "nazi" have lost meaning, particularly on the internet, as they are frequently used by political ideologues to describe anything to the right of Justin Trudeau. Abusing terms in politics isn't new of course but it's not something we should be encouraging or ignoring because there are some legitimate consequences. The obvious one is the disinterest/dismissal it generates when people legitimately do need to raise the alarm because people have been crying wolf incessantly. It also helps the legitimately bad guys to dismiss the attacks and pretend they are just like the moderates facing exaggerated attacks from an hysterical foe.
- braythwayt 7y ago
  Well, some people may just throw the term around, but if you read the definition, it’s easy to see why some people might think that we are on the brink of Fascism taking root in America: “Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy.” I mean, we have supporters of the US President chanting “lock her up,” and propaganda outlets accusing US Democrats of being “treasonous” and “enacting an illegal coup,” which sounds like preparing the way for “forced suppression of opposition.” We may disagree with them, but surely we can understand that some of the people using this word are sincerely attempting to use it in good faith. Wikipedia goes on to discuss the relationship between Fascism and economic policy: “Fascists advocate a mixed economy, with the principal goal of achieving autarky (national economic self-sufficiency) through protectionist and interventionist economic policies.” That sounds like the current US administration. The most interesting bit to me is this quote: “Fascists believe that liberal democracy is obsolete and regard the complete mobilization of society under a totalitarian one-party state as necessary to prepare a nation for armed conflict and to respond effectively to economic difficulties.” Does the US administration believe that liberal democracy is obsolete? As a citizen of a country where we bend over backwards to help people vote, I look at the voter suppression in the US and can’t help but think that America is more interested in “democracy theatre” than democracy, but that’s just an opinion, and I am aware that most Americans vigorously disagree. Likewise, when the people of America elected Mr. Obama, and there was a vacant supreme court seat plus a hundred other vacant judgeships, I would have thought that the GOP-controlled senate refusing to hear any of the President’s nominations was a sign of their disinterest in democracy, especially in the will of the people who elected and then re-elected Mr. Obama. But again... I imagine most Americans disagree. That being said, if someone does hold the view that the current administration, or various far-right groups out there have turned away from democracy, even if we disagree with them, can we not accept that they are using the word “Fascist” in good faith?

watwut 7y ago

The ideology did not appeared during WWII and did not disappeared after it.

mirimir 7y ago

Interesting rant about that: https://www.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/al0abm/libertarianism_is_just_nonauthoritarian_fascism/ https://www.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/al0abm/libertari...

prepend 7y ago
That’s a funny video...”Thing is just not bad fascism”