4 ms·

Again? When was the USA or world fully fascist? Whose endgame?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
mcv 6y ago
Fascism did control quite a number of countries some 80 years ago. I think it's not unreasonable to say that full fascism was their endgame.
- mjburgess 6y ago
  Fascism was a political situation in 1930s italy. I think the commentor is objecting to this new, rhetorical use of the term which essentially connects any "nostalgic, authoriatrian" impulse to a 1930s-style tyranny. The left's use of "fascism" today is much like the rights use of "socialism/communism".
  - grey-area 6y ago
    Just like the symbol of fasces was only used in ancient Rome and has no other meaning? Or the swastika, used in India as a symbol meaning wellbeing? Do you genuinely think symbolism and the meaning of words isn't plastic and contingent on context?
    - mjburgess 6y ago
      I think when people trade on the negative connotations of "fascism" and then turn around and go "oh i mean this..." they're being duplicitous and alarmist. The antifa lot essentially define fascism as an eternal set of human psychological impulses: nostalgia, in-group preference, desire for cultural homogenity, etc. These did not lead to Fascism, the "obviously bad thing" which they are being alarmist about. Fascism was a direct result of, and contingent upon, the mass death and poverty caused by WWI. Words do have meaning, and it is precisely the negative connotations of fascism that are being appealed to in the accusation. Absent these connotations, almost everyone is fascist some of the time.
      - bluescarni 6y ago
        > Fascism was a direct result of, and contingent upon, the mass death and poverty caused by WWI. That is grossly wrong. There was no "mass death and poverty" in Italy during or after WWI.
        mjburgess 6y ago
        wtf are you talking about? Half a million Italians died in WW1. And as many again from the spanish flu. And all of Europe was in a permanent condition of poverty until way into the 20th C. 80% of the population was poor working class even in 1970. You do not get Russian communism without the prolonged period of slavery called "serfdom" which persisted into the late 19th C. in russia. You do not get fascism in italy without WW1. This isn't controversial in political science.
        bluescarni 6y ago
        The Italian deaths in WW1 were overwhelmingly soldier deaths, as the fighting on Italian soil was limited to north-east border of the country (where incidentally I am from). The civilian population was largely unaffected by the war. > And as many again from the spanish flu. Who talked about flu? You were talking about WW1, now you are pivoting to the flu? > And all of Europe was in a permanent condition of poverty until way into the 20th C. 80% of the population was poor working class even in 1970. This is also grossly wrong. I suggest you better inform yourself about the 20-th century history of European societies before spouting more nonsense.
        mjburgess 6y ago
        WW1 was a total war. Fascism was a response to total war which conscripted every civilian into the military. Italy did not have an army of 500,000 soliders before WW1, no country did. The british empire's armed force was 80,000 -- and was one of the largest in the world. Where do you think 500,000 "soliders" came from? They were drafted from the population. It's literally in the first paragraph in the wikipedia article on fascism... > Fascists saw World War I as a revolution that brought massive changes to the nature of war, society, the state, and technology. The advent of total war and the total mass mobilization of society had broken down the distinction between civilians and combatants. A "military citizenship" arose in which all citizens were involved with the military in some manner during the war. > I suggest you better inform yourself about the 20-th century history of European societies before spouting more nonsense. I'm British and I know my own history very well. Read any book of the time, "Road to Wigan Peer" will give you the quality of poverty.. and any graph by any serious economic study of human history will give you the actual level of wealth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_World_War_I https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_World_War_...
choeger 6y ago
Full fascism just means a state that is overtly fascist. We already have notable anti-semitic movements in Europe, as well as overtly authoritan governments. We also have massive militarization and secret policing in parts of Europe and the US. I do not see anything that prevents these trends to merge towards full fascism again. Of course it might have a different flavor this time. As in "Ok, this time we do not harass the (white, non-jewish) gays.", or even "Yes, Ok, the slaves are not really inferior.", but that are minor differences.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

mcv 6y ago

Fascism did control quite a number of countries some 80 years ago. I think it's not unreasonable to say that full fascism was their endgame.

mjburgess 6y ago
Fascism was a political situation in 1930s italy. I think the commentor is objecting to this new, rhetorical use of the term which essentially connects any "nostalgic, authoriatrian" impulse to a 1930s-style tyranny. The left's use of "fascism" today is much like the rights use of "socialism/communism".
- grey-area 6y ago
  Just like the symbol of fasces was only used in ancient Rome and has no other meaning? Or the swastika, used in India as a symbol meaning wellbeing? Do you genuinely think symbolism and the meaning of words isn't plastic and contingent on context?
  - mjburgess 6y ago
    I think when people trade on the negative connotations of "fascism" and then turn around and go "oh i mean this..." they're being duplicitous and alarmist. The antifa lot essentially define fascism as an eternal set of human psychological impulses: nostalgia, in-group preference, desire for cultural homogenity, etc. These did not lead to Fascism, the "obviously bad thing" which they are being alarmist about. Fascism was a direct result of, and contingent upon, the mass death and poverty caused by WWI. Words do have meaning, and it is precisely the negative connotations of fascism that are being appealed to in the accusation. Absent these connotations, almost everyone is fascist some of the time.
    - bluescarni 6y ago
      > Fascism was a direct result of, and contingent upon, the mass death and poverty caused by WWI. That is grossly wrong. There was no "mass death and poverty" in Italy during or after WWI.
      - mjburgess 6y ago
        wtf are you talking about? Half a million Italians died in WW1. And as many again from the spanish flu. And all of Europe was in a permanent condition of poverty until way into the 20th C. 80% of the population was poor working class even in 1970. You do not get Russian communism without the prolonged period of slavery called "serfdom" which persisted into the late 19th C. in russia. You do not get fascism in italy without WW1. This isn't controversial in political science.
        bluescarni 6y ago
        The Italian deaths in WW1 were overwhelmingly soldier deaths, as the fighting on Italian soil was limited to north-east border of the country (where incidentally I am from). The civilian population was largely unaffected by the war. > And as many again from the spanish flu. Who talked about flu? You were talking about WW1, now you are pivoting to the flu? > And all of Europe was in a permanent condition of poverty until way into the 20th C. 80% of the population was poor working class even in 1970. This is also grossly wrong. I suggest you better inform yourself about the 20-th century history of European societies before spouting more nonsense.
        mjburgess 6y ago
        WW1 was a total war. Fascism was a response to total war which conscripted every civilian into the military. Italy did not have an army of 500,000 soliders before WW1, no country did. The british empire's armed force was 80,000 -- and was one of the largest in the world. Where do you think 500,000 "soliders" came from? They were drafted from the population. It's literally in the first paragraph in the wikipedia article on fascism... > Fascists saw World War I as a revolution that brought massive changes to the nature of war, society, the state, and technology. The advent of total war and the total mass mobilization of society had broken down the distinction between civilians and combatants. A "military citizenship" arose in which all citizens were involved with the military in some manner during the war. > I suggest you better inform yourself about the 20-th century history of European societies before spouting more nonsense. I'm British and I know my own history very well. Read any book of the time, "Road to Wigan Peer" will give you the quality of poverty.. and any graph by any serious economic study of human history will give you the actual level of wealth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_World_War_I https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_World_War_...

choeger 6y ago

Full fascism just means a state that is overtly fascist. We already have notable anti-semitic movements in Europe, as well as overtly authoritan governments. We also have massive militarization and secret policing in parts of Europe and the US. I do not see anything that prevents these trends to merge towards full fascism again. Of course it might have a different flavor this time. As in "Ok, this time we do not harass the (white, non-jewish) gays.", or even "Yes, Ok, the slaves are not really inferior.", but that are minor differences.