5 ms·

> Nobody really knows what fascism is. It's more of an excuse to make up the rules as you go along to obtain a certain objective. Both left and right are suscep

> Nobody really knows what fascism is. It's more of an excuse to make up the rules as you go along to obtain a certain objective. Both left and right are susceptible to it. This really only serves to muddy the waters. There are a few clear and well-recognized definitions of fascism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism#By_scholars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism#By_scho... There may be some differences, but they very clearly describe the same set of core traits.

starkd 6y ago
My point was that its not a "left" or "right" phenomenon. The political extremes tend to resemble one another as they are willing to forego principles such as free speech in order to suppress political opponents. Everyone should be very weary of this. We can survive Trump, what we can't survive is a press that feels the need to censor content. If they get away with it, they will use it again and again.
- CogentHedgehog 6y ago
  That's not true either though. Fascism is by definition a right-wing form of authoritarianism, because of how it uses class divides to build its political power. The corresponding left-wing authoritarianism would be "leftist populism", "Stalinism", or some other term. What you're describing is called Horseshoe Theory, and it's not well-supported by evidence. Right-wing and left-wing populism have a few things in common (authoritarianism primarily), but have much larger differences than similarities. I will point out that attacks on a free press ARE a clear sign of authoritarian regimes. I would encourage you to take a look at the history of the German word "Lügenpresse" (literally "lying press"). Especially take note if you see similar things being said about the modern media -- and which groups are saying it.
  - knaq 6y ago
    You say "by definition a right-wing form [...] it uses class divides to build its political power", but how does that match the right? The very first thing I associate with obtaining power via class divides is Karl Marx. There's also Mao, Lenin, Pol Pot, and anybody in modern USA politics who complains about the "1%ers" or "income inequality". I'm really really not seeing how that matches up as you claim it does. I think you need to accept the uncomfortable and obvious conclusion here.
    - CogentHedgehog 6y ago
      I phrased that poorly. Fascism uses economic and class features that largely do not exist in a far-left society, such as a sizeable middle class and corporate power. From Umberto Eco's definition of fascism: "'Appeal to a Frustrated Middle Class', fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups." From Gentile's definition: "corporative organization of the economy that suppresses trade union liberty, broadens the sphere of state intervention, and seeks to achieve, by principles of technocracy and solidarity, the collaboration of the 'productive sectors' under control of the regime, to achieve its goals of power, yet preserving private property and class divisions;" I understand that it is appealing to try to dilute the meaning of "fascism" by applying it overly broadly until it loses its meaing. Whataboutism is also convenient way for the Right to distance themselves from the evils committed by the right-wing Nazis and other far-right fascist groups. The better way for the Right to distance itself is by supporting moderate democratic norms rather than giving in to violent populist impulses. Power is one heck of a drug though.
      - knaq 6y ago
        The world has gone 75 years without real fascism or Nazis, so the definitions shouldn't be changing, yet they have over the last 20 years. Older dictionaries and encyclopedias very clearly contradict the newer ones on the left-right measure of fascism and Nazis. So, correcting for the projection: "I understand that it is appealing to try to dilute the meaning of "fascism" by applying it overly broadly until it loses its meaing. Whataboutism is also convenient way for the Left to distance themselves from the evils committed by the left-wing Nazis and other far-left fascist groups." The facts don't change just because some people want to fling a dehumanizing insult.
Fellshard 6y ago
A better phrasing of the parent post is that very few people use the term fascism based on its actual definition; it's a highly-parroted word whose colloquial meaning has been entirely diluted, yet still carries gargantuan negative weight.
- CogentHedgehog 6y ago
  I will agree that people intentionally misuse the word "fascism." For example, the people in this comment thread claiming that editors making editorial decisions are the "fascist left" are pretty clearly misusing the word.
  - Fellshard 6y ago
    I would tend to agree. It would be stronger to extract the individual behaviours in mind, and not use that word incorrectly. That said, 'not fascistic' does not imply 'good'.
    - CogentHedgehog 6y ago
      Sure, there's TONS of things that are 'not fascistic' but are bad.

starkd 6y ago

My point was that its not a "left" or "right" phenomenon. The political extremes tend to resemble one another as they are willing to forego principles such as free speech in order to suppress political opponents. Everyone should be very weary of this. We can survive Trump, what we can't survive is a press that feels the need to censor content. If they get away with it, they will use it again and again.

CogentHedgehog 6y ago
That's not true either though. Fascism is by definition a right-wing form of authoritarianism, because of how it uses class divides to build its political power. The corresponding left-wing authoritarianism would be "leftist populism", "Stalinism", or some other term. What you're describing is called Horseshoe Theory, and it's not well-supported by evidence. Right-wing and left-wing populism have a few things in common (authoritarianism primarily), but have much larger differences than similarities. I will point out that attacks on a free press ARE a clear sign of authoritarian regimes. I would encourage you to take a look at the history of the German word "Lügenpresse" (literally "lying press"). Especially take note if you see similar things being said about the modern media -- and which groups are saying it.
- knaq 6y ago
  You say "by definition a right-wing form [...] it uses class divides to build its political power", but how does that match the right? The very first thing I associate with obtaining power via class divides is Karl Marx. There's also Mao, Lenin, Pol Pot, and anybody in modern USA politics who complains about the "1%ers" or "income inequality". I'm really really not seeing how that matches up as you claim it does. I think you need to accept the uncomfortable and obvious conclusion here.
  - CogentHedgehog 6y ago
    I phrased that poorly. Fascism uses economic and class features that largely do not exist in a far-left society, such as a sizeable middle class and corporate power. From Umberto Eco's definition of fascism: "'Appeal to a Frustrated Middle Class', fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups." From Gentile's definition: "corporative organization of the economy that suppresses trade union liberty, broadens the sphere of state intervention, and seeks to achieve, by principles of technocracy and solidarity, the collaboration of the 'productive sectors' under control of the regime, to achieve its goals of power, yet preserving private property and class divisions;" I understand that it is appealing to try to dilute the meaning of "fascism" by applying it overly broadly until it loses its meaing. Whataboutism is also convenient way for the Right to distance themselves from the evils committed by the right-wing Nazis and other far-right fascist groups. The better way for the Right to distance itself is by supporting moderate democratic norms rather than giving in to violent populist impulses. Power is one heck of a drug though.
    - knaq 6y ago
      The world has gone 75 years without real fascism or Nazis, so the definitions shouldn't be changing, yet they have over the last 20 years. Older dictionaries and encyclopedias very clearly contradict the newer ones on the left-right measure of fascism and Nazis. So, correcting for the projection: "I understand that it is appealing to try to dilute the meaning of "fascism" by applying it overly broadly until it loses its meaing. Whataboutism is also convenient way for the Left to distance themselves from the evils committed by the left-wing Nazis and other far-left fascist groups." The facts don't change just because some people want to fling a dehumanizing insult.

Fellshard 6y ago

A better phrasing of the parent post is that very few people use the term fascism based on its actual definition; it's a highly-parroted word whose colloquial meaning has been entirely diluted, yet still carries gargantuan negative weight.

CogentHedgehog 6y ago
I will agree that people intentionally misuse the word "fascism." For example, the people in this comment thread claiming that editors making editorial decisions are the "fascist left" are pretty clearly misusing the word.
- Fellshard 6y ago
  I would tend to agree. It would be stronger to extract the individual behaviours in mind, and not use that word incorrectly. That said, 'not fascistic' does not imply 'good'.
  - CogentHedgehog 6y ago
    Sure, there's TONS of things that are 'not fascistic' but are bad.