Is fascism definable?
Edgy ultranationalism with an oligarchy
Enphasis on edgy, you need to randomly invade people and then call it calculated realpolitik
>>866520
It's a more pure national socialism than implemented by the Nazis, mainly because the Nazis implemented the Jew-exterminating part.
>>866520
Fascism is an ideology of absolute etatism, formed around cult of a leader and aggresive youth activism. Ofcourse, because they grow in era when nation state become the norm, they borrow alot from nationalism but reject nationalist egalitarian view that everyone in the nation is equal. The Leader is pinnacle of man, the aggression of party member is an ideal emanating from Him.
Fascism is just as definable as any other political ism: communism, capitalism, socialism, liberalism, etc.
That is to say, hardly definable at all. Every single person you talk to has a different, oftentimes conflicting definition of these things. The best you can do is a vague feeling based on historical examples. You're better off talking about specific policy rather than trying to generalize anything into meaningless catchalls.
>Authoritarian
>Based around a strong leader, possible cult of personality
>Strongly Nationalist
>Imperialist/Expansionist
>Corporatism (Groups are formed according to business interest and the state mediates between capital and labour)
>Active youth movement
>Anti-Communist
Fascism is any ideology you don't like and is not communism.
>>866520
It makes no sense unless it's based on what has actually been tried.
>>866520
It is hard, as said by >>866588.
Though I would say Fascism is a ideology trying to create a government of action, and this is accomplish through unity. But there is no right way to accomplish this.
The reason Fascism is often associated with >>866592 is because one of the ways Fascism often accomplishes is goals is through Populism. And since Fascism is pretty much dead, we can only see to the countries of WWII as examples.
>>866592
expansionism isn't fundamental to the fascist ideology
>>866520
Any government I don't like.
>>866592
Yea, about this but I wouldn't say imperalism or expansionism are central too Facism
I'd add strong social conservatism and while It's hard to say Environmental protectionism is a core principle of Fascism, It does seem that pretty much every Fascist party, past and present, has pretty conservationist views on the Environment
Mandatory Mussolini came up with the name and provided a definition:
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm
>>866588
This is a really good post. Vote based on the merit of individual policies instead of voting based on how much they fall in one camp vs another. Moderation seems to be key for survival, extreme political systems just collapse in on themselves.
Something positive I've been wanting to say about fascism is that it has its time and place.
If you're being invaded by a foreign army you might need to get a little facist. A strong leader to rally behind who you give extra power to so that they can act more efficiently. One problem is that it's built for war and absolute power has a hard time letting go. That and it has no place in modern America, I don't know why it seems to be picking up support recently. I assume it's cowardly individuals who feel like they are under attack or edgy contrarians who honestly think Nazi Germany was a huge success.
Socialist policies have their place as well. It's all about moderation.
>[Fascism] was an explosion against intolerable conditions, against remediable wrongs which the old world failed to remedy. It was a movement to secure national renaissance by people who felt themselves threatened with decline into decadence and death and were determined to live, and live greatly.
As vague and wishy washy as Mosley's definition of fascism was, it works since fascism itself was rather wishy washy. The definitions stressing government of action probably are the most accurate in expressing one of the the universal tenets of fascism, along with ironically a rejection of internationalism, fascism was dedicated to creating a national programme and ideology, rather than an intermational one following strict principles worldwide, though the idea was lost with many who adopted the mantle of fascism. Just look at the 1934 'Fascist international', the Italian Fascist Party, and Falange announced no official representatives, and no members of the British Union of Fascists attended. The accepted definition of Fascism as authoritarian, Conservative, nationalism generally comes from the domiance of Nazism in 'Fascist' circles during and after the war, Hitler managing to exert pressure over Italy to enforce the 1940 racial laws being a classic example, fascism has died off (with some like Mosley the last of the original generation saying fascism outright died and lost its usefulness following the war) and National Socialism having largely taken its place as a new more intentionalist (often associated with white nationalism rather than traditional nationalism and often expressing pan-European nationalism and the aggressive expansion of Nazi Germany elsewhere), Fascism is difficult to define dud to most fascist intellectuals writing on a national basis rather than international, but there's definetely a decent explanation out there
Also we have this thread every single day now
>>866520
The gist of the philosophy of the Italian fascist movement was absolute pragmatism for the good of the country, which is embodied by the state.
It was an ideology that rejected ideology. Whatever works best is what we ought to do.
Today, anyone who actually identifies with fascism doesn't call themselves a fascist because the word is mainly used in a contemporary context to refer to either someone you don't like or if you are an edgy stormfag.
Fascism is basically anti-doctrine. It doesn't have to tick certain boxes in order to be classified as such and, many times, things which "seem" like it are thus considered it. Unfortunately for people who have an interest in the philosophy and theory behind his fascinating movement, we come to a point where even Donald Trump is classified a Fascist yet he exhibits very few characteristics of one.
Other non-Fascists include Hitler, Franco, Salazar and various groups in the Balkans. A good example however, would be Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore.
I posted this last time and I will post it again, the basis of fascism and it's various branches rely on one simple statement:
For the health and well being of the nation and it's people.
>>866966
>Fascism is pretty much dead
What is America.
For a fascist: everything I like
For a non-fascist: everything I don't like
>>867363
Oh god, get the fuck out before your idiocy makes me puke
>>867363
...Not...Fascist...
>>867363
This is bait
>>866563
This is like an eigth grader summarizing it.
>>868446
National socialism is just a specific sub-type of fascism though
>>867363
America isn't Fascist, it secretly wants to be one.
>>868499
National Socialism is more an ideology in its own right today, even Hitler himself never claimed by any means to be a Fascist, more hid National Socialist movement took heavy inspiration from Fascism in Italy (rather than developing independently), and today most self-confessed Fascists turn to Nazi Germany as their source of inspiration in ideology, while those turning to Mussolini's Doctirne is s minority, with others like Rivera and Mosley reserved for even greater special snowflakes, and there's the traditional argument that fascism as a movement died of, with National Socialism remaining as almost s ghost of it;
>>866996
>>866966
>>867010
Can Fascism be used for good?
>>866520
Fascism is the absence of ideology, it's more like a mode of operation than a goal.
>>868534
I can see a sort of utilitarian meritocratic fascism being a force of good.
>>866520
Yes. But Post-Modernism cannot explain it, therefore it shall be forever misunderstood. More importantly, since it also misunderstood, it shall grow very quickly. Ultimately, it will blindside many nations, up until we decide to take Sociology seriously again. Noam Chomsky and Chris Hedges are especially is responsible for misdefining Fascism, incapable of telling the specific features of its properties.
I may be the only fucker on Earth who knows enough to actually understand it intellectually, now that Rorty is dead.
>>866996
>Fascism is difficult to define due to most fascist intellectuals writing on a national basis rather than international, but there's definitely a decent explanation out there
That's not why it's difficult to define. It's difficult to define because the subject matter is too gruesome for anyone who preaches Liberalism, and Fascism itself is defined by peculiar anti-intellectual characteristics. Id have more luck explaining Fascism to an Accountant than I would a Professor or a Politician.
Winston understood Fascism, which was why Great Britain managed to survive the war. Alternatively, Napoleon would be another example of Fascism, if using a consistent definition.
>>868630
So what is it then?
>>868673
The thing that will come when things fall apart. Right now, I am unsure if America will go 'actual' Fascist, because the last best alternative was me. I prefer to keep this information to myself at the moment.
Think of it this way.
The kill order in Fascism is
>Communists
>Jews
>Trade Unionists.
Does that sound peculiar to you? Why would Trade Unionists be murdered in equal measure with Jews? And why Communists? I thought Fascism was supposed to be "Left-Wing." Gee wilckers, I guess spending billions on dismantling on organized labor only wound up to the gain of White Supremacists.
I know the beltway enough to know its unprepared. Regardless, I will get with the program, whoever comes out.
>>866520
literal faggotry
>>866520
>Many writers on socioeconomic policy have warned that the old industrialized democracies are heading into a Weimar-like period, one in which populist movements are likely to overturn constitutional governments. Edward Luttwak, for example, has suggested that fascism may be the American future. The point of his book The Endangered American Dream is that members of labor unions, and unorganized unskilled workers, will sooner or later realize that their government is not even trying to prevent wages from sinking or to prevent jobs from being exported. Around the same time, they will realize that suburban white-collar workers—themselves desperately afraid of being downsized—are not going to let themselves be taxed to provide social benefits for anyone else.
>At that point, something will crack. The nonsuburban electorate will decide that the system has failed and start looking around for a strongman to vote for—someone willing to assure them that, once he is elected, the smug bureaucrats, tricky lawyers, overpaid bond salesmen, and postmodernist professors will no longer be calling the shots. A scenario like that of Sinclair Lewis’ novel It Can’t Happen Here may then be played out. For once a strongman takes office, nobody can predict what will happen. In 1932, most of the predictions made about what would happen if Hindenburg named Hitler chancellor were wildly overoptimistic.
>One thing that is very likely to happen is that the gains made in the past forty years by black and brown Americans, and by homosexuals, will be wiped out. Jocular contempt for women will come back into fashion. The words “nigger” and “kike” will once again be heard in the workplace. All the sadism which the academic Left has tried to make unacceptable to its students will come flooding back. All the resentment which badly educated Americans feel about having their manners dictated to them by college graduates will find an outlet.
>>868630
Ah yes, how could forget the post-modern philosopher Noam Chomsky. Or the science of politics known as sociology. Or how sociology is completely overtaken by post-modernists.
Truly, you're one of our times great intellectual and I'm sure you're influence among the circle of people who haven't finished high-school.
>>868805
Shit-test me all you want. I deliver the deeds on my words.
