2 ms·

I ask because your definition is very broad. Generally, every political system has business owners / elites / lords who have more influence. The Bolsheviks ha

I ask because your definition is very broad. Generally, every political system has business owners / elites / lords who have more influence. The Bolsheviks had almost exclusive influence and control, but they weren't fascist. Most liberal democracies have elites and lobbyists who have more influence than the common man. they aren't fascist. I think your definition is convenient because it's so broad and then you can apply it to who you dislike. Among the american elite, at least 1/5 of congress, most of the senate, most of the fortune 500, a good chunk of hollywood would qualify as fascist according to this definition.

jxjnskkzxxhx 1y ago
> The Bolsheviks had almost exclusive influence and control, but they weren't fascist. Who is "the Bolsheviks"? Most supporters of the party did not have as explicit goal to accumulate power for themselves. If you're referring to Lenin and Stalin, they certainly where fascists by the useful definition. > Among the american elite, at least 1/5 of congress, most of the senate, most of the fortune 500, a good chunk of hollywood would qualify as fascist according to this definition. No, I disagree. Most of those people have only enough power to effect miniscule tweaks to the system. Those don't qualify. Like I said, it is in part a matter of degree. > I think your definition is convenient because it's so broad and then you can apply it to who you dislike. Aaaaand I'm done talking to you.