6 ms·
Ask HN: Why is it ok for my uni to have a Marxism society but not a Fascism one?
*DISCLAIMER: I think both are abhorrent*
Have they just abstracted the deaths that lead from Marxist thinking and ignored them? Surely one could make the same argument for fascism. I am genuinely curious, because my university certainly won't give me the answer, nor the student union.
- uberman 6y agoThis of course is a lightning rod, but I'll give me perspective. At a high level, Marxism is not the antithesis of Fascism, it is more so the antithesis of Capitalism. As such we might expect there to be plenty of influence in higher education for Capitalistic and Marxist thought given they are at least partially grounded in the economics of allocation of scarce resources. Fascism has little grounding in economic theory nor in fostering discussions on how to allocate scarce resources. At some level Fascism offers no room for enlighten discussion at all. Fascism is a form of authoritarian ultra-nationalism that is inconsistent with contemporary higher education. As such, we might reasonably expect that we might find Marxist and Capitalistic "societies" but not Fascist ones at universities. Even then, I imagine that many who would join a Marxist society actually believe and advocate for a form of cooperative socialism not a revolutionary one and stop well short of Communism.
- solus_factor 6y agoThere is plenty of economics in Fascism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
- uberman 6y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism "Historians and other scholars disagree on the question of whether a specifically fascist type of economic policy can be said to exist." "scholars argue that fascists had no economic ideology, but they did follow popular opinion" If the experts cannot agree if a fascist type of economic policy can be said to exist how can you be so sure that one does?
- solus_factor 6y agoThat's a bit different than saying that Fascism "has no grounding in economic theory nor in fostering discussions on how to allocate scarce resources". Both Marxism and Fascism *can* provide valid discussions about economics and how to "allocate scarce resources". So your argument that we can dismiss Fascism because it has no relation to economy is simply wrong.
- soledades 6y agoThere is also considerable room for argument as to the extent to which Marxism is inextricable from the crimes of Stalin or Capitalism is from the crimes of the Belgian Congo, whereas Fascism is defined to a considerable extent (at least in the minds of people) by its association with with mass murder.
- Miner49er 6y agoTrue. When people starve to death, or die in prison, etc, under Marxist countries, the deaths are attributed to Marxism. When the same happens in liberal, capitalist countries, or due to those countries imperialism, the deaths don't seem to be attributed to liberalism or capitalism.
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago> When the same happens in liberal, capitalist countries, or due to those countries imperialism, the deaths don't seem to be attributed to liberalism or capitalism. Probably because it wouldn’t make sense to attribute the effects of imperialism or anti-liberal, anti-capitalist policies to liberal capialism; whereas the Marxists took over specifically in the basis that they claimed to be able to have better living conditions and fewer deaths and less suffering than capitalism. Surely you can understand that we are interested in how poorly they have failed to live up to this promise.
- Miner49er 6y ago> effects of imperialism or anti-liberal, anti-capitalist policies to liberal capialism; I don't what you're saying. Are you saying that imperialism is anti-capitalist?
- chordalkeyboard 6y agoYes, imperialism is where a government exerts political and economic control over another different country. Capitalism is a system of private ownership of the means of production. Clearly, these systems are in opposition.
- chaganated 6y agoI don't think you have given an honest answer. Fascism is just a modern riff on imperialism, which is old as the hills. As such, it is definitely something that should be studied and discussed from every possible angle. And if it is a mistake (it is), you should have faith that these college kids will, upon closer examination, outgrow the sieg heil phase, and come out with a better understanding of politics & history. OR, just keep suppressing everything with credentialed word salad, Streisand the hell out of it, and make it so that even the Jewish kids are denying the holocaust.
- uberman 6y agoWhat the hell are you talking about?
- chaganated 6y agoinconsistent with contemporary higher education These are the words of a bureaucrat doing battle, not a teacher.
- nvoid 6y ago>This of course is a lightning rod I will admit this was a particularly barbed question, probably why it was flagged. I like your answer although arguably reading about the Nazis you can generate a lot of discussion around it (obviously much of it counter-arguments). I think if a Marxism society can generate any discussion worth having, a fascism society could do the same? >advocate for a form of cooperative socialism not a revolutionary one and stop well short of Communism I think you'd be surprised considering the number of hammer and sickles social media posts and Che Guevara t-shirts.
- Miner49er 6y agoIs it actually against the rules to have a Fascist society? Or is there just not one?
- nvoid 6y agoI don't think there is a rule against it per say but just as a thought experiment, I don't think it would go down well. Perhaps a better question would be why is a Marxism society accepted?
- dragonwriter 6y ago> Perhaps a better question would be why is a Marxism society accepted? Broadly, because Marxism isn't the same thing as Leninism and because non-Leninist Marxism, though it wanted more radical change, was a central source of ideas, organization, and activism in the movement from classical capitalism to the modern mixed economy throughout the developed world.
- nvoid 6y agoI have read this sentence several times and I still don't understand what you are saying. Can you either expand or convey your thoughts in plainer English? > it wanted more radical change, was a central source of ideas You could say the same thing about Fascism
- dragonwriter 6y agoI'm sorry, I'm confused, are you claiming you didn't understand what I said about Marxism or that you did and it is equally true of fascism? To attempt to dispense with either: Marxism very much was and Fascism very much was not an important source of ideas, activism, and organization driving the transition from relatively pure capitalism (“pure” in the sense of being essentially the dominant system in the developed West criticized under that name by Marx, not pure in the sense of embodying the post hoc idealistic rationalizations invented in response to criticism of that system) to the modern mixed economy.
- jimmyvalmer 6y ago100 years of intellectual masturbation surrounding these schools of thought, but in a nutshell, Marxism = "Property should be public!", and Fascism = "Do what I say or else!"
- JoeyBananas 6y agoFascism is necessarily bad but Marxism is at least plausibly deniable