4 ms·

I'm going to use a political trigger word but please give this a moment to consider because I found it fascinating when someone suggested it to me. We hear a l

I'm going to use a political trigger word but please give this a moment to consider because I found it fascinating when someone suggested it to me. We hear a lot about the social/cultural aspects of fascism, but we don't talk as much about the economics of fascism. Think about all this talk about acquiring TikTok in the context of this definition: > Fascism is an economic system in which the government controls the private entities that own the factors of production… A central planning authority directs company leaders to work in the national interest. https://www.thebalance.com/fascism-definition-examples-pros-cons-4145419 https://www.thebalance.com/fascism-definition-examples-pros-...

UncleOxidant 6y ago
"the government controls..." "A central planning authority directs..." But sometimes isn't it the other way around with Fascism? ie corporate or money interests have great influence over the government and influence it so as to increase the power of the corporate influencer? It seems more like with fascism it's hard to tell the difference between the government and the moneyed interests (be they corporations, companies, extremely wealthy individuals, etc.) because they're so intertwined.
- dfxm12 6y ago
  It's certainly hard to tell with the current US administration, since the government and moneyed interests are the same: https://www.citizen.org/article/corporatecabinet/ https://www.citizen.org/article/corporatecabinet/ I do think the key here is that the government doesn't have to cave to moneyed interests, but a fascist leader does (either because they're weak, complicit or some other reason).
voldacar 6y ago
Thanks for the link, that's some really groundbreaking analysis. It even reminds me of this book 1984 by George Orwell
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ffggvv 6y ago
by that logic consumer and labor protection laws all fit under your definition of fascist. you can contort words to mean anything by stretching definitions or being vague enough but i don’t think that’s a useful definition
thursday0987 6y ago
how about using the actual definition of facsism instead of your version, which is wrong and biased? from Merriam Webster dictionary: Definition of fascism 1 often capitalized : 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 2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism
- xster 6y ago
  Doesn't seem like you two are disagreeing. He's just pointing out the economic side and you're referencing the political side. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism > Fascist governments exercised control over private property, but they did not nationalize it. Scholars also noted that big business developed an increasingly close partnership with the Italian Fascist and German fascist governments. Business leaders supported the government's political and military goals. In exchange, the government pursued economic policies that maximized the profits of its business allies. > While other Western capitalist countries strove for increased state ownership of industry during the same period, Nazi Germany transferred public ownership and public services into the private sector. Seems consistent with the point he's trying to make.

UncleOxidant 6y ago

"the government controls..." "A central planning authority directs..." But sometimes isn't it the other way around with Fascism? ie corporate or money interests have great influence over the government and influence it so as to increase the power of the corporate influencer? It seems more like with fascism it's hard to tell the difference between the government and the moneyed interests (be they corporations, companies, extremely wealthy individuals, etc.) because they're so intertwined.

dfxm12 6y ago
It's certainly hard to tell with the current US administration, since the government and moneyed interests are the same: https://www.citizen.org/article/corporatecabinet/ https://www.citizen.org/article/corporatecabinet/ I do think the key here is that the government doesn't have to cave to moneyed interests, but a fascist leader does (either because they're weak, complicit or some other reason).

voldacar 6y ago

Thanks for the link, that's some really groundbreaking analysis. It even reminds me of this book 1984 by George Orwell

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ffggvv 6y ago

by that logic consumer and labor protection laws all fit under your definition of fascist. you can contort words to mean anything by stretching definitions or being vague enough but i don’t think that’s a useful definition

thursday0987 6y ago

how about using the actual definition of facsism instead of your version, which is wrong and biased? from Merriam Webster dictionary: Definition of fascism 1 often capitalized : 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 2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism

xster 6y ago
Doesn't seem like you two are disagreeing. He's just pointing out the economic side and you're referencing the political side. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism > Fascist governments exercised control over private property, but they did not nationalize it. Scholars also noted that big business developed an increasingly close partnership with the Italian Fascist and German fascist governments. Business leaders supported the government's political and military goals. In exchange, the government pursued economic policies that maximized the profits of its business allies. > While other Western capitalist countries strove for increased state ownership of industry during the same period, Nazi Germany transferred public ownership and public services into the private sector. Seems consistent with the point he's trying to make.