Fascism

[Coyote]

This article has a pretty good explaination of left/right...

The Left-Right Political Spectrum Explained - Fact / Myth

Despite the ambiguity and complexity involved in creating a political spectrum, the political left and right are properly defined (from a historical perspective that considers the basic government types, the basic political parties, social contract theory, and the origin of left-right), by the following two paradigms (which should both be considered at once):

1. Most importantly, “Liberal (favoring liberty) is left, and conservative (favoring authority) is right” (see a discussion on liberalism vs. conservatism).
2. And, almost equally as important, ideologies that favor the collective are left, and ideologies favoring the individual are right. See individualism vs. collectivism.

Thus in summary: the left-right spectrum can be defined by the “individualism (right) vs. collectivism (left) paradigm” compared to the “authority (right) vs. liberty (left) paradigm”. This means there is not one primary left-right factor, but at least two that must be considered simultaneously!​

and

Basic Liberal Vs. Conservative Political Ideology Spectrum – What is the Difference Between the Left-Wing and the Right-Wing?

As noted above, historically speaking, the simplest way to understand left-right ideology is: liberal is left and conservative is right. Also noted above this relates to the authority and collectivism vs. individualism paradigms. With this information covered, let’s better define the underlying terms so we can be clear on their meaning.

• Liberalism (AKA classic liberalism) typically being a fight for liberty, progress, and democracy and against authority. It supports the individual liberty and individual authority of the people, but at the expense of collective liberty and collective authority of the state. At its worst, it is lawless anarchy or a tyrannical mob.
• Conservatism (AKA traditional conservatism) being a push toward tradition, order, and authority and away from liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state, but at the expense of collective and individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst, it is a tyrannical dictatorship.
• A third concept, Socialism, is a populist movement rooted in late 19th century Marxism, that is typically to the left on most issues. Conservatism stands against this as well, as does classic liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state to ensure collective liberty, but at the expense of individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst it is also a tyrannical dictatorship.

​

Yeah, we've seen how accepting Liberals are.

About as accepting as Conservatives.

If you are attempting to converse in regards to the US economy I suggest you do read some history and discover that both parties, of which Trump is neither, are BOTH fucking up our economy.
And I'm not referring to the Bleeding Heart Liberal or Sociopathic Neo-Conservative version of history.

What does that have to do with being accepting?

 

[Indeependent]

This article has a pretty good explaination of left/right...

The Left-Right Political Spectrum Explained - Fact / Myth

Despite the ambiguity and complexity involved in creating a political spectrum, the political left and right are properly defined (from a historical perspective that considers the basic government types, the basic political parties, social contract theory, and the origin of left-right), by the following two paradigms (which should both be considered at once):

1. Most importantly, “Liberal (favoring liberty) is left, and conservative (favoring authority) is right” (see a discussion on liberalism vs. conservatism).
2. And, almost equally as important, ideologies that favor the collective are left, and ideologies favoring the individual are right. See individualism vs. collectivism.

Thus in summary: the left-right spectrum can be defined by the “individualism (right) vs. collectivism (left) paradigm” compared to the “authority (right) vs. liberty (left) paradigm”. This means there is not one primary left-right factor, but at least two that must be considered simultaneously!​

and

Basic Liberal Vs. Conservative Political Ideology Spectrum – What is the Difference Between the Left-Wing and the Right-Wing?

As noted above, historically speaking, the simplest way to understand left-right ideology is: liberal is left and conservative is right. Also noted above this relates to the authority and collectivism vs. individualism paradigms. With this information covered, let’s better define the underlying terms so we can be clear on their meaning.

• Liberalism (AKA classic liberalism) typically being a fight for liberty, progress, and democracy and against authority. It supports the individual liberty and individual authority of the people, but at the expense of collective liberty and collective authority of the state. At its worst, it is lawless anarchy or a tyrannical mob.
• Conservatism (AKA traditional conservatism) being a push toward tradition, order, and authority and away from liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state, but at the expense of collective and individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst, it is a tyrannical dictatorship.
• A third concept, Socialism, is a populist movement rooted in late 19th century Marxism, that is typically to the left on most issues. Conservatism stands against this as well, as does classic liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state to ensure collective liberty, but at the expense of individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst it is also a tyrannical dictatorship.

​

Yeah, we've seen how accepting Liberals are.

About as accepting as Conservatives.

If you are attempting to converse in regards to the US economy I suggest you do read some history and discover that both parties, of which Trump is neither, are BOTH fucking up our economy.
And I'm not referring to the Bleeding Heart Liberal or Sociopathic Neo-Conservative version of history.

What does that have to do with being accepting?

You seem to believe that Trump is a Nazi.
I think anyone who financially fucks their fellow American is a Nazi.

 

[2aguy]

EXACTLY.

Why is that so hard to understand.

Capitalism means LIBERTY FREEDOM


.

Really? To some. To others it's sweatshops.

Capitalism needs some regulation.

Something you're completely unqualified to provide as what you want in "regulation" is socialism.

What you are arguing is corporatism, which is another form of socialism. Corporations get government to control the economy in their favor. Free people cannot be held in sweatshops. You're arguing against yourself

Corporatism isn't socialism: corporatism | ideology

Socialism: means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

yes, it is another form of socialism. capitalism includes no government since all transactions must be voluntary.

No, it's not socialism since socialism means owned or regulated by the community - the workers.

Corporatism: According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction.

You don't even understand Socialism....Socialism is supposed to be the step after the fall of capitalism where the government controls the means of production until true communism can be enacted...moron.....it means government control.....

 

[2aguy]

This article has a pretty good explaination of left/right...

The Left-Right Political Spectrum Explained - Fact / Myth

Despite the ambiguity and complexity involved in creating a political spectrum, the political left and right are properly defined (from a historical perspective that considers the basic government types, the basic political parties, social contract theory, and the origin of left-right), by the following two paradigms (which should both be considered at once):

1. Most importantly, “Liberal (favoring liberty) is left, and conservative (favoring authority) is right” (see a discussion on liberalism vs. conservatism).
2. And, almost equally as important, ideologies that favor the collective are left, and ideologies favoring the individual are right. See individualism vs. collectivism.

Thus in summary: the left-right spectrum can be defined by the “individualism (right) vs. collectivism (left) paradigm” compared to the “authority (right) vs. liberty (left) paradigm”. This means there is not one primary left-right factor, but at least two that must be considered simultaneously!​

and

Basic Liberal Vs. Conservative Political Ideology Spectrum – What is the Difference Between the Left-Wing and the Right-Wing?

As noted above, historically speaking, the simplest way to understand left-right ideology is: liberal is left and conservative is right. Also noted above this relates to the authority and collectivism vs. individualism paradigms. With this information covered, let’s better define the underlying terms so we can be clear on their meaning.

• Liberalism (AKA classic liberalism) typically being a fight for liberty, progress, and democracy and against authority. It supports the individual liberty and individual authority of the people, but at the expense of collective liberty and collective authority of the state. At its worst, it is lawless anarchy or a tyrannical mob.
• Conservatism (AKA traditional conservatism) being a push toward tradition, order, and authority and away from liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state, but at the expense of collective and individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst, it is a tyrannical dictatorship.
• A third concept, Socialism, is a populist movement rooted in late 19th century Marxism, that is typically to the left on most issues. Conservatism stands against this as well, as does classic liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state to ensure collective liberty, but at the expense of individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst it is also a tyrannical dictatorship.

​

Sorry.....those don't hold for the U.S.....in the U.S. the left represents increased government control.....the Right is less government control....so your post is invalid......Libetheralism is essentially the Right in the United States....less government control, not more.

You can use left wing definitions all you want.....but socialism advocates government control of the means of production....left wing....the Right....less government interference and more individual liberty.....

 

[2aguy]

The "left" stole the term Liberal in order to hide their desire to have the government take control......now they are using the word Proggressive to hide from the term Liberal since that word is now associated with their true goal of the government controlling everything...

The left changes their name...in order to hide their true goals and nature from uninformed people.....

 

[Contumacious]

Do you yet understand why fascism can't be both left or right? Do you understand the problem with that line of thinking? Fascism is a collectivist government type. Thus is is leftist. The opposite of a collectivist government type is an individualist system. The most extreme version of that is anarchy. Those are your two extremes. Fascism, socialism, communism, are ALL leftwing. Anarchy is rightwing.

HUH?

Fascism is the system of government that cartelizes the private sector, centrally plans the economy to subsidize producers, exalts the police State as the source of order, denies fundamental rights and liberties to individuals, and makes the executive State the unlimited master of society.

So it doesn't matter whether the collectivists are left or right wingers

Here in the US , anti-"drugs" laws, anti-prostitution , anti-pornography military conscription and others originate from the right wing. So the right wingers are as capable as the left wingers to create a POLICE STATE in order to control and regulate whatever they decide they do not want.


.

None of those things creates a police state, so your syllogism is bullshit.

HUH?
The Drug War, Mass Incarceration and Race

With less than 5 percent of the world’s population but nearly 25 percent of its incarcerated population, the United States imprisons more people than any other nation in the world – largely due to the war on drugs.

The Police State: Know It When You See It


.

The Gargantuan Police State brought to a neighborhood near you by the "anti-government" Conservatives:


The Drug War, Mass Incarceration and Race

With less than 5 percent of the world’s population but nearly 25 percent of its incarcerated population, the United States imprisons more people than any other nation in the world – largely due to the war on drugs.

The Police State: Know It When You See It



.

Yeah...don't sell drugs and you don't go to jail.....

The problem my friend is that in a free country , people have a right to sell "drugs" and to self medicate.

Americans did so before 1914 without any problems.

The FASCISTIC war against drug users have caused the creation of a gargantuan police state and the abolition of the 4th and 5th Amendments.


.

 

[danielpalos]

EXACTLY.

Why is that so hard to understand.

Capitalism means LIBERTY FREEDOM


.

Really? To some. To others it's sweatshops.

Capitalism needs some regulation.

Something you're completely unqualified to provide as what you want in "regulation" is socialism.

What you are arguing is corporatism, which is another form of socialism. Corporations get government to control the economy in their favor. Free people cannot be held in sweatshops. You're arguing against yourself

Corporatism isn't socialism: corporatism | ideology

Socialism: means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

yes, it is another form of socialism. capitalism includes no government since all transactions must be voluntary.

No, it's not socialism since socialism means owned or regulated by the community - the workers.

Corporatism: According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction.

Yes, it is a form of socialism. You are simply resorting to political jargon from the Cold War era, because our fantastical right wing, has reading comprehension issues. Socialism starts with a social Contract like a Constitution. Degree of ownership of means of production is irrelevant.

 

[kaz]

Nazi Camps
From its rise to power in 1933, the Nazi regime built a series of detention facilities to imprison and eliminate so-called "enemies of the state." Most prisoners in the early concentration camps were German Communists, Socialists, Social Democrats, Roma (Gypsies), Jehovah's Witnesses, homosexuals, and persons accused of "asocial" or socially deviant behavior. These facilities were called “concentration camps” because those imprisoned there were physically “concentrated” in one location.

This is just deflection. We keep saying he was at war with his fellow leftist Russians and anyone else who threatened his power. No one was arguing he did not fight with socialists.

The point you are trying to contradict, badly, is that he was against socialism. Interesting you are trying to do that by saying what we did, he fought socialists.

A Siamese Beta fish killing another Siamese Beta fish doesn't prove that it wasn't a Siamese Beta fish ...

Socialists/communists as a GROUP were considered enemies of the state, he specifically opposed socialism and communism as an ideology

Then why don't any of your quotes show that? Your quotes said he opposed socialists who oppose him. I keep asking for a quote for what you made up that he opposes socialISM and so far you've completely struck out.

Explain how his killing socialists who oppose him makes him not a socialist. You're like arguing with an eight year old. Blacks kill blacks. Does that mean they aren't black? That's the intellectual level you are arguing

 

[kaz]

The question was whether he was against socialism, not whether he'd killed a socialist. ...

Yes, because everyone knows socialists murder socialists and RWNJs murder RWNJs. /sarcasm

...It's interesting that you call "Divine.Wind" most people call "noxious intestinal gas." To each his own

Awesome insult for a person with a GED.

Yep, socialists murder socialist all the time. Stalin murdered millions of socialists.

Remind me...did Stalin specifically oppose socialism or communism? Hitler did. Killed them, and denounced socialism in entirety.

All you've come up so far is that Hitler killed socialists who were against him. Now you're repeating that he "denounced socialism," the claim you couldn't back up last time I asked

Note the pattern Coyote of your ignoring the question I actually asked you

 

[danielpalos]

Should we ask "Right to Work" States to pioneer unemployment compensation on an at-will basis simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in any "Right to Employ Act" State.

 

[kaz]

Nazi Camps
From its rise to power in 1933, the Nazi regime built a series of detention facilities to imprison and eliminate so-called "enemies of the state." Most prisoners in the early concentration camps were German Communists, Socialists, Social Democrats, Roma (Gypsies), Jehovah's Witnesses, homosexuals, and persons accused of "asocial" or socially deviant behavior. These facilities were called “concentration camps” because those imprisoned there were physically “concentrated” in one location.

This is just deflection. We keep saying he was at war with his fellow leftist Russians and anyone else who threatened his power. No one was arguing he did not fight with socialists.

The point you are trying to contradict, badly, is that he was against socialism. Interesting you are trying to do that by saying what we did, he fought socialists.

A Siamese Beta fish killing another Siamese Beta fish doesn't prove that it wasn't a Siamese Beta fish ...

Coyote, note again you ignored the actual question

 

[12icer]

Really? To some. To others it's sweatshops.

Capitalism needs some regulation.

Something you're completely unqualified to provide as what you want in "regulation" is socialism.

What you are arguing is corporatism, which is another form of socialism. Corporations get government to control the economy in their favor. Free people cannot be held in sweatshops. You're arguing against yourself

Corporatism isn't socialism: corporatism | ideology

Socialism: means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

yes, it is another form of socialism. capitalism includes no government since all transactions must be voluntary.

No, it's not socialism since socialism means owned or regulated by the community - the workers.

Corporatism: According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction.

Yes, it is a form of socialism. You are simply resorting to political jargon from the Cold War era, because our fantastical right wing, has reading comprehension issues. Socialism starts with a social Contract like a Constitution. Degree of ownership of means of production is irrelevant.

Some fantasy there bud you need to work on YOUR reading comprehension and find some REAL instances where a socialist society was anything but a government run dictator controlled government of RULING CLASS poor working class.

 

[kaz]

So when Hitler killed a socialist who was speaking against him, you actually believe the issue was that he was a socialist, not that he was speaking against him. Go ahead, say it, say that's what you believe. That would be stupid that's funny...

The point being is that Hitler was a fascist, not a socialist. Fascism isn't anymore socialism than North Korea is a Democratic Republic. I'm sorry you cannot seem to comprehend this point.

I've been fascinated over the past few years when the far Right meme that Hitler was a socialist surfaced. Anyone know who said it first? Was it Beck? He's pretty fucked up and it sounds like something he'd say. Rush?

The real difference between Hitler and Stalin was ... what ???

 

[danielpalos]

Something you're completely unqualified to provide as what you want in "regulation" is socialism.

What you are arguing is corporatism, which is another form of socialism. Corporations get government to control the economy in their favor. Free people cannot be held in sweatshops. You're arguing against yourself

Corporatism isn't socialism: corporatism | ideology

Socialism: means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

yes, it is another form of socialism. capitalism includes no government since all transactions must be voluntary.

No, it's not socialism since socialism means owned or regulated by the community - the workers.

Corporatism: According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction.

Yes, it is a form of socialism. You are simply resorting to political jargon from the Cold War era, because our fantastical right wing, has reading comprehension issues. Socialism starts with a social Contract like a Constitution. Degree of ownership of means of production is irrelevant.

Some fantasy there bud you need to work on YOUR reading comprehension and find some REAL instances where a socialist society was anything but a government run dictator controlled government of RULING CLASS poor working class.

We don't have "real" socialism, but socialism, limited by our social Contract and enforcible at law.

 

[kaz]

Whatever type of socialism works....fascism will use....

Socialism is the elimination of classes, collective ownership of all property and means of production. Fascism is not. It's an authoritarian rightwing ideology that utilizes some aspects of socialism. That doesn't make it "socialist".

Now you're playing word games. Both socialism and fascism have an elite political class. You're pretending the socialist elite political class doesn't exist when it clearly does

Defacto - yes, but I'm talking about just the ideology not how it ended up working with real human beings. Just like capitalism without regulation actually stifles competition and has no moral compass.

You're using "regulation" as a euphemism for government control, and that's not capitalism it's socialism. There is no need for "regulation" and it doesn't exist. Regulation is government controlling companies in advance.

What we do need are civil and criminal courts for when they do wrong. That's not what you are talking about. You're talking about controlling wages, controlling benefits, controlling healthcare, telling companies what they are allowed to do ... socialism ...

Government either controls through regulation or outright owns production and controls every aspect of it. You're trying to create a fuzzy area where government interferes in the private sector and calling it socialism in SOME cases and not in others and drawing arbritrary lines.

In fact, in the mid-1930s after breaking with the socialists, the Nazi regime transferred public ownership to the private sector although they maintained strict regulations.

Go back to the car example you never understood. What Hitler did was in no relevant way moving against socialism. I explained what capitalism is. See the blue. Do you ever actually READ posts you respond to? I mean beyond picking out enough key words to pick the correct DNC talking point to refute it with.

When you control companies in advance, you are doing it for the purpose of government. For sure companies and the people who work for them commit crimes. And they should be held accountable. But with people you don't call for government to "regulate" us in advance, you make them prove they committed a crime. With business, you just control them.

You're a socialist, so of course you do. But start showing some honesty. You support mob rule and you don't respect the liberty or property of others

 

[danielpalos]

Socialism is the elimination of classes, collective ownership of all property and means of production. Fascism is not. It's an authoritarian rightwing ideology that utilizes some aspects of socialism. That doesn't make it "socialist".

Now you're playing word games. Both socialism and fascism have an elite political class. You're pretending the socialist elite political class doesn't exist when it clearly does

Defacto - yes, but I'm talking about just the ideology not how it ended up working with real human beings. Just like capitalism without regulation actually stifles competition and has no moral compass.

You're using "regulation" as a euphemism for government control, and that's not capitalism it's socialism. There is no need for "regulation" and it doesn't exist. Regulation is government controlling companies in advance.

What we do need are civil and criminal courts for when they do wrong. That's not what you are talking about. You're talking about controlling wages, controlling benefits, controlling healthcare, telling companies what they are allowed to do ... socialism ...

Government either controls through regulation or outright owns production and controls every aspect of it. You're trying to create a fuzzy area where government interferes in the private sector and calling it socialism in SOME cases and not in others and drawing arbritrary lines.

In fact, in the mid-1930s after breaking with the socialists, the Nazi regime transferred public ownership to the private sector although they maintained strict regulations.

Go back to the car example you never understood. What Hitler did was in no relevant way moving against socialism. I explained what capitalism is. See the blue. Do you ever actually READ posts you respond to? I mean beyond picking out enough key words to pick the correct DNC talking point to refute it with.

When you control companies in advance, you are doing it for the purpose of government. For sure companies and the people who work for them commit crimes. And they should be held accountable. But with people you don't call for government to "regulate" us in advance, you make them prove they committed a crime. With business, you just control them.

You're a socialist, so of course you do. But start showing some honesty. You support mob rule and you don't respect the liberty or property of others

I think the right wing is just, full of fallacy for claiming any degree of ownership of the means of production is a requirement for socialism.

Government, is a "public sector means of production".

 

[kaz]

Capitalism exists in degrees - from totally unfettered (which I think does not exist anywhere but in theory now) to almost completely state controlled. Can we agree on that?

No...complete state control means capitalism does not exist.

EXACTLY.

Why is that so hard to understand.

Capitalism means LIBERTY FREEDOM


.

Really? To some. To others it's sweatshops.

Capitalism needs some regulation.

Something you're completely unqualified to provide as what you want in "regulation" is socialism.

What you are arguing is corporatism, which is another form of socialism. Corporations get government to control the economy in their favor. Free people cannot be held in sweatshops. You're arguing against yourself

Corporatism isn't socialism: corporatism | ideology

Socialism: means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

"The community as a whole" is a euphemism for government.

So of course corporatism is socialism. Socialism is government. Corporatism is government picking market place winners and losers.

One end is socialism (government control), the other end is capitalism (individual choice). Every form of government is on that scale. Obviously corporatism isn't individual choice. And only government can enable corporations to make our choices for us because only government can make our choices for us.

There are democratic socialist countries. You have consistently shown an inability to separate the democratic from the socialist. Sure, in a homogeneous, small country like Sweden, socialist countries can be largely popular. In Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany they are extreme. The "socialist" refers to the government control, not what government does with that control. But all socialism by definition steamrolls individual choice and government ALWAYS acts in it's own interest even if it is relatively benevolent, like Sweden

 

[kaz]

So now your claiming that fascism and socialism have no relation to the left/right political spectrum?

You've argued yourself into a circle. You've been claiming for this entire thread that fascism is "right wing," but now you just admitted that calling it "right wing" is bullshit.

Actually if you read what I wrote (which you don't seem very good at) - I've stated the following. Hitler's Nazism is largely regarded as neither right nor left, but a mess of both and unique and I've posted sources for that already. Fascism is widely regarded as rightwing. Socialism as leftwing.

In fact both Stalinism and Nazism have become their own categories.

However,,you've been educated here that that is incorrect.....

Afraid not. Open your mind and learn something new

Socialism is socialism. There is nothing new in that. What is new is your spin, which you can't even coherently describe. Stalinism isn't socialism cus. The same reason you think fascism isn't socialism. It doesn't fit the Democrat agenda. You're saying nothing

Actually, claiming fascism is leftwing and socialist is a new spin on history by those trying and demonize the left and whitewash the right. The Republican Agenda.

Yet you still can't name a real difference between Nazi Germany and Communist Russia.

And you're wrong. Leftists have been challenged and argued your canard that fascism isn't left since you redefined the term after WWII to serve your interests. Apparently despite all your quotes, you don't actually read very much

 

[Divine Wind]

....Government, is a "public sector means of production".

Government can be a "public sector means of production" but not necessarily so.

In the US, does the government make anything or do they subcontract it out to be done?

HINT: Military members know the phrase "built by the lowest bidder" very well.

 

[kaz]

EXACTLY.

Why is that so hard to understand.

Capitalism means LIBERTY FREEDOM


.

Really? To some. To others it's sweatshops.

Capitalism needs some regulation.

To them, it is work by their choice...

In fascism, you can quit a job and starve or get another job...

In communism you can never quit a job.....

What kind of choice did they have in the old mining structure where they were paid in script that could only be used in the highly inflated company stores, homes owned by the companies, and the miners kept in debt and forbidden from working elsewhere or they and their families would be evicted? Eh...ya, lots of choice in Appalachia then.

Capitalism has it's faults too. Communism as a social and economic system beyond small religious communities is a failure.

They had the choice to leave the "old mining structure" and go somewhere else they liked the rules better. Capitalism doesn't mean I have to give you want you want. That's why you like socialism, then you can run to government to use their guns to force me to give you what you want

It's nice to have a choice, but it's arrogance to assume there is always a "choice". But in some cases it's only in theory since the choice of starvation for your family and no other available jobs isn't much of a choice in the 1920's and 30's. Employers can hold a lot of threats, including forced debt, over a workers heads. Hence the need for unions.

20s? Not a student of history, are you?

And government caused the Great Depression and it's activities endlessly prolonged it. Income taxes and corporate taxes soared along with regulations with catastrophic effect and governments were starting endless trade wars stifling economic activity. It was the start of the era of big government