3 ms·

Disagreeing with fascism seems like a reasonable position to me.

majorchord 1mo ago
The problem in this case is a flamewar about what really is or isn't "fascist". The fact that the vast majority of people are not calling the same things fascist as OP is, tells me this seems to be a quite controversial opinion.
- Balinares 1mo ago
  OP is calling blatant fascism fascism. I am utterly baffled by your position.
  - happytoexplain 1mo ago
    I disagree. Enough people disagree that "blatant" is probably, by definition, not an appropriate adjective. But at the same time, I don't hold that position passionately. Maybe it is fascism. It's not "blatant", but it's arguable. Semantic arguments are never very interesting. It's more reasonable to simply argue that something is immoral - to argue the specifics of your disagreement - rather than to fight over whether a specific term applies, which would serve as emotional leverage for your argument due to its connections to historical atrocities. That's some kind of logical fallacy that I can't name.
  - allanmacgregor 1mo ago
    Sorry, but people are calling anyone who disagrees with them nazis or fascists so frequently that it is hard to take seriously anymore? You don't agree with my exact political views?! Then you are a fascist. Also blatant fascism? By which definition? the OP article pretty much cites a single blog post as his evidence of DHH being a fascist; but never really defines fascism. I get it DHH is not a very likeable guy, and a bit of a prick but calling him a fascist or taking childish jabs like calling Omarchy "vibecoded scripts on top of Arch" really removes a lot of credibility
throwawaypath 1mo ago
Disagreeing with communism seems like a reasonable position to me.
- omnimus 1mo ago
  As far as i know there is no threat of communism formin in US. Unlike fascism
  - deleted 1mo ago
    [deleted]
  - hagbard_c 1mo ago
    You must have been living under a comfy rock the last few years since there are several communists - real ones, by their own say - in the running for positions in the "democratic" party. The coming elections will show whether they gain traction, if they do there is a real danger of communism forming in the USA. As to fascism that remains to be seen. If by fascism you mean the actual meaning of the term, i.e. (section headings from Britannica [1]) Opposition to Marxism and socialism, Opposition to parliamentary democracy, Opposition to political and cultural liberalism, Totalitarian ambitions, Conservative economic programs and Corporatism I think there is some chance of this taking hold. Let's take these characteristics one at a time: Opposition to Marxism and socialism: clearly present in the current US government, in my opinion rightly so since these ideologies have been shown to lead to disaster time and time again. Opposition to parliamentary democracy: not present in the current US government, somewhat present in the current "democratic" party where DSA members want to radically change the way the country is governed by abolishing the Senate, abolishing the presidency, abolishing the supreme court and replace it with something resembling a politburo [2] Opposition to political and cultural liberalism: clearly present in the current US government, to be expected given that the US two-party system largely comes down to 'political and cultural conservatism' versus 'political and cultural liberalism' Totalitarian ambitions: some people in the current and previous US governments think and thought they could rule this way, they were and are held back by the courts and other institutions Conservative economic programs: partly present in the current US government, to be expected given that it is part and parcel of the Republican program. Partly because a large part of the economic program (around 59% of the budget, data from 2025) consists of mandatory spending on social security (~22%), Medicare (14%), Medicaid (10%) and other mandatory programs (13%) Corporatism (which according to Britannica means 'the theory and practice of organising society into “corporations” subordinate to the state ... workers and employers organised into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction'): not present in the current US government, partly present in the "democratic" party where the DSA pushes an amalgamation of similar policies What are your thoughts on this subject now that I made an attempt to put the term 'fascism' in its historical context? [1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism [2] https://program.dsausa.org/ https://program.dsausa.org/

The problem in this case is a flamewar about what really is or isn't "fascist". The fact that the vast majority of people are not calling the same things fascist as OP is, tells me this seems to be a quite controversial opinion.

Balinares 1mo ago
OP is calling blatant fascism fascism. I am utterly baffled by your position.
- happytoexplain 1mo ago
  I disagree. Enough people disagree that "blatant" is probably, by definition, not an appropriate adjective. But at the same time, I don't hold that position passionately. Maybe it is fascism. It's not "blatant", but it's arguable. Semantic arguments are never very interesting. It's more reasonable to simply argue that something is immoral - to argue the specifics of your disagreement - rather than to fight over whether a specific term applies, which would serve as emotional leverage for your argument due to its connections to historical atrocities. That's some kind of logical fallacy that I can't name.
- allanmacgregor 1mo ago
  Sorry, but people are calling anyone who disagrees with them nazis or fascists so frequently that it is hard to take seriously anymore? You don't agree with my exact political views?! Then you are a fascist. Also blatant fascism? By which definition? the OP article pretty much cites a single blog post as his evidence of DHH being a fascist; but never really defines fascism. I get it DHH is not a very likeable guy, and a bit of a prick but calling him a fascist or taking childish jabs like calling Omarchy "vibecoded scripts on top of Arch" really removes a lot of credibility

throwawaypath 1mo ago

Disagreeing with communism seems like a reasonable position to me.

omnimus 1mo ago
As far as i know there is no threat of communism formin in US. Unlike fascism
- deleted 1mo ago
  [deleted]
- hagbard_c 1mo ago
  You must have been living under a comfy rock the last few years since there are several communists - real ones, by their own say - in the running for positions in the "democratic" party. The coming elections will show whether they gain traction, if they do there is a real danger of communism forming in the USA. As to fascism that remains to be seen. If by fascism you mean the actual meaning of the term, i.e. (section headings from Britannica [1]) Opposition to Marxism and socialism, Opposition to parliamentary democracy, Opposition to political and cultural liberalism, Totalitarian ambitions, Conservative economic programs and Corporatism I think there is some chance of this taking hold. Let's take these characteristics one at a time: Opposition to Marxism and socialism: clearly present in the current US government, in my opinion rightly so since these ideologies have been shown to lead to disaster time and time again. Opposition to parliamentary democracy: not present in the current US government, somewhat present in the current "democratic" party where DSA members want to radically change the way the country is governed by abolishing the Senate, abolishing the presidency, abolishing the supreme court and replace it with something resembling a politburo [2] Opposition to political and cultural liberalism: clearly present in the current US government, to be expected given that the US two-party system largely comes down to 'political and cultural conservatism' versus 'political and cultural liberalism' Totalitarian ambitions: some people in the current and previous US governments think and thought they could rule this way, they were and are held back by the courts and other institutions Conservative economic programs: partly present in the current US government, to be expected given that it is part and parcel of the Republican program. Partly because a large part of the economic program (around 59% of the budget, data from 2025) consists of mandatory spending on social security (~22%), Medicare (14%), Medicaid (10%) and other mandatory programs (13%) Corporatism (which according to Britannica means 'the theory and practice of organising society into “corporations” subordinate to the state ... workers and employers organised into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction'): not present in the current US government, partly present in the "democratic" party where the DSA pushes an amalgamation of similar policies What are your thoughts on this subject now that I made an attempt to put the term 'fascism' in its historical context? [1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism [2] https://program.dsausa.org/ https://program.dsausa.org/