4 ms·

Which "fascists" are we talking about, here? Be careful around powerful words with meaning (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/

by cbeach 1y ago

Which "fascists" are we talking about, here? Be careful around powerful words with meaning (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism ). If we casually use these words to refer to people we simply disagree with - one day, when actual fascists start rising, we'll have taken all the meaning out of the language we rely on to identify them.

bongodongobob 1y ago
Trump and his cronies. Who the fuck do you think.
- cbeach 1y ago
  Trump doesn't pass the fascism test, I'm afraid: * Dictatorial leader - Trump ceded power at the end of his last term, and the opposition had a term. That doesn't happen in a dictatorship. * Centralised autocracy - Trump has maintained the US political system with its checks and balances. * Militarism - As with his previous term, Trump is more interested in creating peace treaties (e.g. the Abraham Accords) than participating in wars. * Forcible suppression of opposition - Democrats have not been suppressed * Belief in a natural social hierarchy - Trump believes in meritocracy, not any other order. * Subordination of individual interests for the perceived interest of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy - Trump is the archetypal capitalist - he believes all people should strive to produce with free enterprise, and have an ownership stake in the means of production via the free market. Fascist regimes, on the other hand, have a top-down regimentation of the economy akin to socialism (which is no surprise, as Musollini and Hitler were both socialists before they developed fascism).
  - esseph 1y ago
    Holy shit you really believe this don't you
    - imoverclocked 1y ago
      Be careful with this type of argument. It can be easily employed by “both sides” since the information each side is working from supports their own view and simply polarizes each side further.
      - esseph 1y ago
        The largest voting block are independents, so everytime someone gives me the "both sides" argument I normally throw something at them.
        imoverclocked 1y ago
        I can see how you got there since I did use the term "both sides." My argument is that anyone can make the same claim towards any stance with the exact same passion. Making that claim simply polarizes the opposing viewpoint further. The discourse doesn't provide constructive feedback nor a reason outside of a bandwagon style pressure to conform to a different opinion. Arguably, a cult of personality is part of the problem in the first place. HN tends to value academic discourse rather than emotional triggers. While both do exist here, academic discourse is generally the goal.
        esseph 1y ago
        You can't reason someone out of something they didn't reason themselves into, right?
        imoverclocked 1y ago
        Often true. The discourse between people on HN is seen by many so the effects are more varied than just the active participants. As such, I’m loath to leave certain comments completely unchecked.
  - imoverclocked 1y ago
    > Trump ceded power at the end of his last term Jan 6th is a well known counterexample > Trump has maintained the US political system with its checks and balances Trump has used emergency powers to do almost everything since the start of this term. This includes tariffs. > As with his previous term, Trump is more interested in creating peace treaties He has increased funding to DHS and renamed the DoD to DoW (Defense vs War) > Democrats have not been suppressed Melissa and Mark Hortman were murdered by a right wing nut job. Charlie Kirk (a YouTuber) was given the honor of flags at half mast for a week. The rest of your arguments also don’t jive with what I know about him.
    - cbeach 1y ago
      > Jan 6th is a well known counterexample Trump took to social media to denounce political violence on that day, but a small bunch of unorganised Trump supporters entered the Capitol during a protest. One person was tragically killed (a Trump supporter). The political transition happened. > Trump has used emergency powers to do almost everything since the start of this term. This includes tariffs. He's made a number of executive orders to achieve the actions he promised in the manifesto that got him democratically elected. Few politicians have been as true to their word as Trump, in terms of delivering the change that the people voted for. Trump has not changed the political system. He has merely used its existing executive powers. > He has increased funding to DHS and renamed the DoD to DoW (Defense vs War) So what? What wars has he started? How does his record compare to the Democrat presidents that preceeded him? > Melissa and Mark Hortman were murdered by a right wing nut job. You found one incident of a nut job. That does not mean the Democrat opposition has been suppressed by Trump. And what do you say about the multiple assasination attempts on Trump? It's clear where the political violence is coming from.
      - piva00 1y ago
        > violence on that day, but a small bunch of unorganised Trump supporters entered the Capitol during a protest. One person was tragically killed (a Trump supporter). The political transition happened. Why are you ignoring that Trump riled them up way before all that? Are you unaware of that fact? > January 6th, 13:10 > Mr Trump ends his speech with the words: "We fight. We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue." > Shortly afterwards a Capitol police officer calls for backup. Can you picture Clinton, Bush, Obama, or Biden doing a rally like this, completely aware that the Proud Boys were in the crowd, even invited by the administration to be there? Picture that and tell us again how peaceful all of it was.
MSFT_Edging 1y ago
> when actual fascists start rising, we'll have taken all the meaning out of the language we rely on to identify them. Isn't this a delightful Catch-22. If you forewarn about a developing Fascist movement, you're simply taking away the meaning from the word until it's too late and the Fascists take power. You cannot call anything Fascist, for there may be something more Fascist that may need the power of the word. But ah! We couldn't call out their fledgling movement full of dog whistles and double speak so no one was aware enough to stop them as a fledgling movement!
esseph 1y ago
Nonsense. We killed a bunch of Italian fascists and Nazis but never learned to deal with the ideology. Modern Americans could look at many of Mussolini's policies today and wouldn't bat an eye.
imoverclocked 1y ago
We have lived in a period without significant fascism in power. Fascism doesn’t start with concentration camps and gas chambers, it builds up to them. It’s easy to dismiss because we were taught about just how bad it got but surely it’s not that bad _here_. The problem is, it’s only getting worse and ignoring it is how it got so bad in the past. Fascists are continuing to rise right now. Googling “Hallmarks of fascism” gives us an AI overview: Key hallmarks of fascism include fervent nationalism, authoritarian leadership, the suppression of opposition, and the use of violence to achieve national rejuvenation. … We blatantly have all of those things from the current administration.
- yibg 1y ago
  Also fascism doesn't require concentration camps and gas chambers, it just has little to prevent them. There have been fascists that also didn't involve gas champers etc. So to say only when we get concentration camps is there fascism is also just wrong
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- cbeach 1y ago
  > We blatantly have all of those things from the current administration. > fervent nationalism I grant you, Trump supporters are heavily nationalist. Supporters of Winston Churchill in the UK were also fervently nationalist, when the UK was protecting Europe against actual fascists. You cannot extrapolate fascism from nationalism. > authoritarian leadership An authoritarian regime grows the size of the state to cement its power. Trump is more of a libertarian, demonstrably reducing the scale and power of the state apparatus (DOGE) > the suppression of opposition Biden, and Biden-aligned judges weaponised the law against Trump, with spurious cases and fines. They tried to pin anything they could on Trump, in an attempt to prevent him becoming president. Trump has not done anything similar against Harris, Clinton or Biden. > the use of violence to achieve national rejuvenation Nope. Compare what happened in Democrat cities in the wake of George Floyd's death vs what's happening in Republican areas after Charlie Kirk's assasination. There was riots and looting, and Antifa intimidation of political opponents for Floyd. There are peaceful, respectful vigils for Kirk. --- > Fascism doesn’t start with concentration camps and gas chambers, it builds up to them. Trying to extrapolate a "fascist" future version of the current Trump regime is an example of the "Slippery Slope" logical fallacy.
BizarroLand 1y ago
[flagged]

by cbeach 1y ago

bongodongobob 1y ago

Trump and his cronies. Who the fuck do you think.

cbeach 1y ago
Trump doesn't pass the fascism test, I'm afraid: * Dictatorial leader - Trump ceded power at the end of his last term, and the opposition had a term. That doesn't happen in a dictatorship. * Centralised autocracy - Trump has maintained the US political system with its checks and balances. * Militarism - As with his previous term, Trump is more interested in creating peace treaties (e.g. the Abraham Accords) than participating in wars. * Forcible suppression of opposition - Democrats have not been suppressed * Belief in a natural social hierarchy - Trump believes in meritocracy, not any other order. * Subordination of individual interests for the perceived interest of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy - Trump is the archetypal capitalist - he believes all people should strive to produce with free enterprise, and have an ownership stake in the means of production via the free market. Fascist regimes, on the other hand, have a top-down regimentation of the economy akin to socialism (which is no surprise, as Musollini and Hitler were both socialists before they developed fascism).
- esseph 1y ago
  Holy shit you really believe this don't you
  - imoverclocked 1y ago
    Be careful with this type of argument. It can be easily employed by “both sides” since the information each side is working from supports their own view and simply polarizes each side further.
    - esseph 1y ago
      The largest voting block are independents, so everytime someone gives me the "both sides" argument I normally throw something at them.
      - imoverclocked 1y ago
        I can see how you got there since I did use the term "both sides." My argument is that anyone can make the same claim towards any stance with the exact same passion. Making that claim simply polarizes the opposing viewpoint further. The discourse doesn't provide constructive feedback nor a reason outside of a bandwagon style pressure to conform to a different opinion. Arguably, a cult of personality is part of the problem in the first place. HN tends to value academic discourse rather than emotional triggers. While both do exist here, academic discourse is generally the goal.
        esseph 1y ago
        You can't reason someone out of something they didn't reason themselves into, right?
        imoverclocked 1y ago
        Often true. The discourse between people on HN is seen by many so the effects are more varied than just the active participants. As such, I’m loath to leave certain comments completely unchecked.
- imoverclocked 1y ago
  > Trump ceded power at the end of his last term Jan 6th is a well known counterexample > Trump has maintained the US political system with its checks and balances Trump has used emergency powers to do almost everything since the start of this term. This includes tariffs. > As with his previous term, Trump is more interested in creating peace treaties He has increased funding to DHS and renamed the DoD to DoW (Defense vs War) > Democrats have not been suppressed Melissa and Mark Hortman were murdered by a right wing nut job. Charlie Kirk (a YouTuber) was given the honor of flags at half mast for a week. The rest of your arguments also don’t jive with what I know about him.
  - cbeach 1y ago
    > Jan 6th is a well known counterexample Trump took to social media to denounce political violence on that day, but a small bunch of unorganised Trump supporters entered the Capitol during a protest. One person was tragically killed (a Trump supporter). The political transition happened. > Trump has used emergency powers to do almost everything since the start of this term. This includes tariffs. He's made a number of executive orders to achieve the actions he promised in the manifesto that got him democratically elected. Few politicians have been as true to their word as Trump, in terms of delivering the change that the people voted for. Trump has not changed the political system. He has merely used its existing executive powers. > He has increased funding to DHS and renamed the DoD to DoW (Defense vs War) So what? What wars has he started? How does his record compare to the Democrat presidents that preceeded him? > Melissa and Mark Hortman were murdered by a right wing nut job. You found one incident of a nut job. That does not mean the Democrat opposition has been suppressed by Trump. And what do you say about the multiple assasination attempts on Trump? It's clear where the political violence is coming from.
    - piva00 1y ago
      > violence on that day, but a small bunch of unorganised Trump supporters entered the Capitol during a protest. One person was tragically killed (a Trump supporter). The political transition happened. Why are you ignoring that Trump riled them up way before all that? Are you unaware of that fact? > January 6th, 13:10 > Mr Trump ends his speech with the words: "We fight. We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue." > Shortly afterwards a Capitol police officer calls for backup. Can you picture Clinton, Bush, Obama, or Biden doing a rally like this, completely aware that the Proud Boys were in the crowd, even invited by the administration to be there? Picture that and tell us again how peaceful all of it was.

MSFT_Edging 1y ago

> when actual fascists start rising, we'll have taken all the meaning out of the language we rely on to identify them. Isn't this a delightful Catch-22. If you forewarn about a developing Fascist movement, you're simply taking away the meaning from the word until it's too late and the Fascists take power. You cannot call anything Fascist, for there may be something more Fascist that may need the power of the word. But ah! We couldn't call out their fledgling movement full of dog whistles and double speak so no one was aware enough to stop them as a fledgling movement!

esseph 1y ago

Nonsense. We killed a bunch of Italian fascists and Nazis but never learned to deal with the ideology. Modern Americans could look at many of Mussolini's policies today and wouldn't bat an eye.

imoverclocked 1y ago

We have lived in a period without significant fascism in power. Fascism doesn’t start with concentration camps and gas chambers, it builds up to them. It’s easy to dismiss because we were taught about just how bad it got but surely it’s not that bad _here_. The problem is, it’s only getting worse and ignoring it is how it got so bad in the past. Fascists are continuing to rise right now. Googling “Hallmarks of fascism” gives us an AI overview: Key hallmarks of fascism include fervent nationalism, authoritarian leadership, the suppression of opposition, and the use of violence to achieve national rejuvenation. … We blatantly have all of those things from the current administration.

yibg 1y ago
Also fascism doesn't require concentration camps and gas chambers, it just has little to prevent them. There have been fascists that also didn't involve gas champers etc. So to say only when we get concentration camps is there fascism is also just wrong
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
cbeach 1y ago
> We blatantly have all of those things from the current administration. > fervent nationalism I grant you, Trump supporters are heavily nationalist. Supporters of Winston Churchill in the UK were also fervently nationalist, when the UK was protecting Europe against actual fascists. You cannot extrapolate fascism from nationalism. > authoritarian leadership An authoritarian regime grows the size of the state to cement its power. Trump is more of a libertarian, demonstrably reducing the scale and power of the state apparatus (DOGE) > the suppression of opposition Biden, and Biden-aligned judges weaponised the law against Trump, with spurious cases and fines. They tried to pin anything they could on Trump, in an attempt to prevent him becoming president. Trump has not done anything similar against Harris, Clinton or Biden. > the use of violence to achieve national rejuvenation Nope. Compare what happened in Democrat cities in the wake of George Floyd's death vs what's happening in Republican areas after Charlie Kirk's assasination. There was riots and looting, and Antifa intimidation of political opponents for Floyd. There are peaceful, respectful vigils for Kirk. --- > Fascism doesn’t start with concentration camps and gas chambers, it builds up to them. Trying to extrapolate a "fascist" future version of the current Trump regime is an example of the "Slippery Slope" logical fallacy.

BizarroLand 1y ago

[flagged]