5 ms·

> fascists on both the far-left While I appreciate your comment otherwise, fascism is universally agreed to be a far-right ideology and claiming otherwise at t

> fascists on both the far-left While I appreciate your comment otherwise, fascism is universally agreed to be a far-right ideology and claiming otherwise at this point in history can't really be taken as anything but inflammatory, which isn't what belongs here in an otherwise insightful comment.

camillomiller 6y ago
Good people on both sides...
wolco 6y ago
You proved that faacists can exist on both the left or the right by your last post. Imposing that point of view is equally unpleasant right or left.
- mirimir 6y ago
  Just how did they "prove" that? And just who is doing the "imposing" here?
  - wolco 6y ago
    Parent poster is the who. Proof can be found in the aggressive tone and imposing the opinion that only the right can be this way. Leave a little room for discussion.
    - mirimir 6y ago
      Hey, it's just an opinion. And it's arguably not clear-cut. Or at least, the Wikipedia article doesn't think so.
mirimir 6y ago
Actually the full quote is: > fascists on both the far-left and far-right of the political debate According to Merriam-Webster, fascism is:[0] > 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 It's true that some on both the "left" and "right" (which is an absurdly simplistic one-dimensional distinction) are over-the-top extremist and forcibly suppress their opposition. However, that's only one aspect of the definition of "fascist". Even so, Merriam-Webster doesn't restrict fascism to the right wing, so I defer to it. But Wikipedia does.[1] Last, I note that the Soviet Union was arguably fascist. While it didn't exalt any nation above the individual, it did exalt the Party, and more generally the state. And its government was certainly autocratic and dictatorial. 0) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  >the Soviet Union was arguably fascist // You appear to be starting from an assumption that everything USSR did, politically, was left-wing; and thus concluding that fascism can be left wing. A dictator is diametrical opposed to left-wing ideology. What you're doing is like saying uxoricide (murdering your wife) is part of FOSS, because a proponent of FOSS did it.
  - mirimir 6y ago
    > You appear to be starting from an assumption that everything USSR did, politically, was left-wing; and thus concluding that fascism can be left wing. No, I did not. Basically I'm arguing that the USSR pretended to be "left-wing" but were actually "right-wing". So perhaps they were fascist, but that doesn't imply that truly left-wing governments and movements are fascist.
    - wolco 6y ago
      The USSR is what happens when you take left wing to the extreme. Go too far replacing free speech with right speech and you get censorship. Censorship requires a heavy police state to enforce. It's the natural progression.
- chinesempire 6y ago
  > the Soviet Union was arguably fascist No, it wasn't. Fascism is not simply "what you don't like" If USSR was arguably fascist, so are the USA then. Do you think bombing other countries for their oil or to seize control of countries close to the enemy borders (like in Vietnam) looks more democratic or fascist? USSR has been at war in Afghanistan for 9 years, mainly because USA financed the resistance, creating and arming those mujahideen that years later became "terrorists" simply because they weren't needed anymore... USA has been at war in Afghanistan for 19 years now (and counting) and the evidence to go to war were falsified. Fascism is a specific thing, if we broaden the meaning of that word, anything can be called fascist.
  - 6y ago
tomjen3 6y ago
There is not universal agreement that the earth is round. But a better word choice by op might have been extreme authoritarians, but a sub-optimal word choice hardly makes a comment intentionally inflammatory.
sukilot 6y ago
Left and right are arbitrary labels applied to the two largest opposing parties in a country. They aren't ideologies.
- guerrilla 6y ago
  Left and right are indeed not ideologies but properties of ideologies and they are well-defined in mainstream political science models of classification. In all of those models, fascism is a far-right ideology.

camillomiller 6y ago

Good people on both sides...

wolco 6y ago

You proved that faacists can exist on both the left or the right by your last post. Imposing that point of view is equally unpleasant right or left.

mirimir 6y ago
Just how did they "prove" that? And just who is doing the "imposing" here?
- wolco 6y ago
  Parent poster is the who. Proof can be found in the aggressive tone and imposing the opinion that only the right can be this way. Leave a little room for discussion.
  - mirimir 6y ago
    Hey, it's just an opinion. And it's arguably not clear-cut. Or at least, the Wikipedia article doesn't think so.

mirimir 6y ago

Actually the full quote is: > fascists on both the far-left and far-right of the political debate According to Merriam-Webster, fascism is:[0] > 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 It's true that some on both the "left" and "right" (which is an absurdly simplistic one-dimensional distinction) are over-the-top extremist and forcibly suppress their opposition. However, that's only one aspect of the definition of "fascist". Even so, Merriam-Webster doesn't restrict fascism to the right wing, so I defer to it. But Wikipedia does.[1] Last, I note that the Soviet Union was arguably fascist. While it didn't exalt any nation above the individual, it did exalt the Party, and more generally the state. And its government was certainly autocratic and dictatorial. 0) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

pbhjpbhj 6y ago
>the Soviet Union was arguably fascist // You appear to be starting from an assumption that everything USSR did, politically, was left-wing; and thus concluding that fascism can be left wing. A dictator is diametrical opposed to left-wing ideology. What you're doing is like saying uxoricide (murdering your wife) is part of FOSS, because a proponent of FOSS did it.
- mirimir 6y ago
  > You appear to be starting from an assumption that everything USSR did, politically, was left-wing; and thus concluding that fascism can be left wing. No, I did not. Basically I'm arguing that the USSR pretended to be "left-wing" but were actually "right-wing". So perhaps they were fascist, but that doesn't imply that truly left-wing governments and movements are fascist.
  - wolco 6y ago
    The USSR is what happens when you take left wing to the extreme. Go too far replacing free speech with right speech and you get censorship. Censorship requires a heavy police state to enforce. It's the natural progression.
chinesempire 6y ago
> the Soviet Union was arguably fascist No, it wasn't. Fascism is not simply "what you don't like" If USSR was arguably fascist, so are the USA then. Do you think bombing other countries for their oil or to seize control of countries close to the enemy borders (like in Vietnam) looks more democratic or fascist? USSR has been at war in Afghanistan for 9 years, mainly because USA financed the resistance, creating and arming those mujahideen that years later became "terrorists" simply because they weren't needed anymore... USA has been at war in Afghanistan for 19 years now (and counting) and the evidence to go to war were falsified. Fascism is a specific thing, if we broaden the meaning of that word, anything can be called fascist.
- 6y ago

tomjen3 6y ago

There is not universal agreement that the earth is round. But a better word choice by op might have been extreme authoritarians, but a sub-optimal word choice hardly makes a comment intentionally inflammatory.

sukilot 6y ago

Left and right are arbitrary labels applied to the two largest opposing parties in a country. They aren't ideologies.

guerrilla 6y ago
Left and right are indeed not ideologies but properties of ideologies and they are well-defined in mainstream political science models of classification. In all of those models, fascism is a far-right ideology.