4 ms·
As best I understand it fascism originally described a sort of reverse socialism, I mean realistically it was socialist, it was after the same end goals as soci
by somat 1y ago
As best I understand it fascism originally described a sort of reverse socialism, I mean realistically it was socialist, it was after the same end goals as socialist policy, but it achieved them in the opposite manner, Where socialism seeks to balance corporate power usually by increased regulation and control of the corporations which has the side effect of incorporating them into the state. fascism seeks to balance state power by having corporations run the state. Which is the same end result, the corporations are incorporated into the state.
But any way you swing it fascism did not stand for that very long and now days usually is intended to mean a police or military state. Or more often because nobody knows what fascism is but everyone knows that it is objectively bad it is what you call your political opponent. case closed, argument won.
- epolanski 1y agoYou can't have any authoritarian government labeled as fascist if: - it lacks the reactionary qualities of fascism: ideological rejections of liberal democracy, rationalism, and it's equal distance from capitalism and socialism. - it lacks the revolutionary qualities: the centrality of the creation of a new man, the overthrowing of institutions through total mobilization (not just military, but the entire society) - it lacks the expansionist, colonialist, ethnic-and-cultural focuses of fascisms Under this light, there is one, and only one other government that chased the same revolutionary and reactionary ideologies, nazi Germany, with a distant second one being imperial Japan. Spain, Chile, Argentina, Portugal are (very, very) distant thirds. And even the distant thirds often lack the fascist qualities: - Pinochet's came from a coup, not from a movement. It had none of the revolutionary or reactionary qualities of fascism. - Spain's Franco outright rejected overt fascism starting already since ww2 and purged its own party from fascist elements, instead embracing a more classical combination of nationalism-monarchy-religion authoritarian regime. - Argentina's Peronism allowed both for elections, dissent and lacked any expansionist or totalitarian ambitions. - Salazar's Portugal outright refused mass-mobilization and the revolutionary dynamism of fascism. It exalted obedience and order, not conquest and transformation. > But any way you swing it fascism did not stand for that very long It absolutely did, from start to the end of the regimes in all of Italy, Germany and Japan.