Ok /pol/ let us have another discussion about fascism. Last thread had some good traction.
Before we begin let's get a few things clear.
Fascism isn't a strict set of unchanging idealized ideas, the very idea is that the spirit is fascist but the manifestation can take multiple routes.
It is chiefly a rule of nation as according to the principles most efficient in the history of humanity.
> Fascism was not the nursling of a doctrine previously drafted at a desk; it was born of the need of action, and was action; it was not a party but, in the first two years, an anti-party and a movement. The name I gave the organization fixed its character.
Now then let us get to some of the key aspects.
It accepts the doctrine that life is suffering, but it takes a positivist view. Saying that suffering and struggle refines the individual and gradually perfects the sum of humanity by force.
Fascism rejects Marxism the single largest reason being that Marxism says well-being=Happiness.
Fascism says service, refinement, perfecting and strengthening brings happiness. Fascism is a moral doctrine.
Fascism rejects democracy.
In rejecting democracy, Fascism rejects the absurd conventional lie of political equalitarianism, the habit of collective irresponsibility, the myth of felicity and indefinite progress.
Fascism is against liberalism in all it's forms, this includes economic liberalism (but not nesscarily privatization and libertarian economy policy see pinochet)
Liberalism leads to decadence and degeneracy.
The fascist view of the state and individual is the same as the military view of the single soldier and the army in which he serves.
The state is a spiritual force that exists in each and every citizen, by dissolving the singular into the state you do not weaken the individual, just as in an army the power of the single soldier is multiplied by all other soldiers so is it with the citizen and the state.
>>63706891
fascism has problems. too secular, too focused on a cult of personality, too populist, too economically left wing. (and no, right wing does not mean 'capitalism')
Who's Julius Evola disciple?
The Fascist State organizes the nation, but it leaves the individual adequate elbow room.
It has curtailed useless or harmful liberties while preserving those which are essential. In such matters the individual cannot be the judge, but the State only.
Finally it should be understood that fascism is a spiritual force but it is in no way opposed to religion, it sees the value of religion and specifically the Christian religion.
Fascism respects the God of ascetics, saints, and heroes, and it also respects God as conceived by the ingenuous and primitive heart of the people,
the God to whom their prayers are raised.
For those who wish for record of fascist governments and rulers and beliefs, look at Caesar, Mussolini, Hitler, Pinochet and many other great men.
If I had to condense fascism down to three core aspects these would be the aspects.
1. all pervasive nationalism
This is a core aspect, this sense of duty and love for your people must be cultivated and this is key to the strength of the state and key for it to prosper,
2. Meritocracy
Acceptance of the law of nature which is the law of the strong. (The mentally strong and those who show merit are better and more fit to lead and survive than those who are work.) this is not ethnic and this is not racial, this is simply an acceptance of fact that can be observed in nature and society.
3. A rejection of egalitarianism and it's implications
Egalitarianism makes the smart and strong have to suffer for the good of the weak and foolish, it breeds weakness and punishes refining of one's self. This unnatural doctrine is rejected.
Now then, let us discuss fascism.
>>63706891
Facism always ends in shit for everyone just like communism and all other totalitarian goverments. You can fantasize about it in your manga / anime fantasy world but in reality it ends up with incompetent leaders who do lunatic shit because of total power.
For those who say that fascism and it's economic style is not plastic, let us look at those who exemplify the fascist spirit and those who are understood as fascist.
It is said that fascism is syndicalism and socialism, but this is not true. Fascism can take any shape and form and will take it for whatever system is most effective and useable in any given circumstance on a case by case circumstance.
Pinochet was in no way a socialist and anyone can understand this.
Julius Caesar was in no way a syndicalist nor was Augustus.
And so on and so forth.
The spirit of fascism is a realistic approach that uses history as it's basis for what works most properly and what can be applied properly at any given time.
Falling to blind idealism leads to destruction.
>>63707005
Fascism accepts and embraces the religions of the people and can be classified as a mystical stream of thought in it's own right.
Pinochet dispels the notion that a fascist regime must be socialist in nature.
It must be understood that the spirit of fascism is plastic and will change depending on the nation.
Finally as for populism, democracy is literally populism. The elected heads are those who appeal to the lowest common denominator.
>>63707285
Chile seems to be doing alright, Julius Caesar did fine as did Augustus.
Sparta for it's time was quite alright was it not?
No one interested in fascism today?
>>63707285
I'm a programmer. A very rough idea just popped into my head after reading your post.
Create a video game, a simulation of society. Multiplayer. To test/simulate communism/socialism/fascism/nazizm/democracy etc. And see how that works out.
However, i have no idea what game it would be. This is a rough idea that just popped in my head.
>>63708267
Wouldn't work for fascism.
A key aspect of fascism is it's pragmatic nature. It'll try to do whatever is most efficient at any given time.
>>63706891
OP, I enjoy these threads and I am glad you are still making them. Thank you.
I am interested in the "anti-party" or anti-movement nature of fascism, that it is borne out of a reactionary element to a perceived degeneration of the society in question. If this is the case, is it in the nature of modern man to toss aside the ideals of a fascist society in the interest of progressive liberalism, or is this a residual effect of events like the French Revolution? Is it in man's nature to liberalize over time, or is it a historical condition that we still feel the effects of today? Can a fascist society persist for an extended period of time over generations?
>>63708267
EVE Online is a massive MMO in which massive Playerorganisations are build and have a big poltical and dimplomatic part.
I don't know how this organisations are governed. But would be interessting to find out.
>>63707011
>Who's Julius Evola disciple?
Listen to Jonathan Bowden's speech about Evola if the subject interests you. Great insight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YqKf3v2aPs
>>63707908
Erryday senpai
>>63709107
Third pick looks more like anarchism.
>>63707417
Fascism makes use of populist spirit, not giving power to the population for decisions though. You have to instill the spirit of the state in people through populist rhetoric and community action.
>>63708629
My understanding of that degeneracy effect is this.
Fascist and conservative regimes are efficient, the most efficient models that we have.
This efficiency gives forth surplus, when there is enough surplus people become lazy.
They lose fear, they lose the will to strive for maximum efficiency. They want to partake of the spoils.
Liberalism and socialism are very much the devourers, these are the things in my understanding which seek to remove the surplus for short-term pleasures and to fulfill unproductive hungers.
Understand that no system is truly permanent or sustainable, only systems can last for long periods.
Fascism is among the ranks of the systems that have that capability.
We can see it's influences in plato's republic which is influenced by Sparta.
We can see it's influences in Rome and it's empires.
We can see it's influences in monarchy and aristocracy with the realism of machiavelli and so on and so forth.
The fact is, efficiency gives forth surplus, and within surplus hedonism and senseless idealism will eventually arise.
Fascism is very plastic, it'll always adapt to the current situations.
Consider democracy in it's original form from the Greeks, a trick used to make slaves work harder and pretty much just a lie.
Democracy is a poison that allows the lowest and most common to thrive, and it's beginning is with liars.
>>63707005
> too secular,
No it's not. Is is actually a fusion of state and religion in a way that religion guides, and the state keeps religion in check.
>too focused on a cult of personality,
Not necessarily, the Führer doctrine only exists in NatSoc. It's just that at the initial stage a fascist state has to have a leadership figure. The mistake is that the leaders never succeeded in implementing a successful government system before they died. It's either their personality cult backfired and the people wouldn't let go or they tried to keep it going on by appointing a successor, like Franco and we all know how the Jews ended that.
Councillary fascism in the key.
A state governed by councils - every branch is governed by it's own council, consisting of the most successful and dedicated representatives of the branch - military consisting of the generals, war heroes and military intel dierctors, economy council consisting of the bakers and corporate CEOs, technology council consisting of senior engineers and renown scientists etc. They are the executive branch of the government.
The councils then elect a representative to the general council of all branches, which is basically the legislative branch.
>too populist
that's what fascism is. for the people, by the people.
>too economically left wing.
Shlomo detected.
>>63709247
They would all be shooting each other if that were the case.
>>63709438
The fascist conception of the state is this.
The state is the spiritual force which is the sum of all men who ever lived, live and shall live within the nation.
Therefore in this nationalism, all of the people are one body.
The understanding of the government then is as if the mental faculties of man, and just as your mind is higher and built of more specialized parts so must the rulers of society be specialized and higher.
This is hierarchy, this is the unity professed in the state and this is the power of fascism. A unity that isn't blind, a unity that is in a harmonious and beautiful image and form.
>>63709646
Good response.
>The fact is, efficiency gives forth surplus, and within surplus hedonism and senseless idealism will eventually arise.
We are seeing the dramatic effects of this concept in today's industrial world. Among those that align with the left, there is the conception that we live in a society of post-scarcity. Since this is the case (this is their belief, it isn't true in reality), then any type of inequality, poverty, or other perceived injustices are morally incompatible with today's world of abundance. They believe that it is only through the fault of the top 1% of society that the rest of the society suffers from their greed.
This idealism, as you stated, is only possible in a society of surplus borne out of efficiency and productivity. When this reaches critical levels like it has today, this surplus is consumed in the interest of leftist ideologies such as the welfare state.
Is this a reasonable argument that history truly does operate in a cyclical pattern? High productivity and efficiency is borne out of man's more natural condition (fascist order and natural selection), and is eventually degenerated by its own success, which produces systems that eventually collapse into themselves and the cycle begins all over again.
>>63706891
bump
>>63710928
How does one handle the fact that under a fascist system there is, usually, one leader?
How is that leader chosen? How long do they serve? This is one of the biggest pratfalls when it comes to fascism.
I've seen various theories about having a system akin to the House of Lords being used as a 'safety net' so to speak (many alt-right thinkers believing that an aristocracy of sorts is something that is necessary) but, again, this would cause problems, too.
>>63710435
It seems you have the gist of it.
In any case fascism rejects the notion of indefinite progress, society will always have time of falls and times where man rises.
We must look at history, when we look at history we see all of the great empires fall and wax and wane in terms of influence and power.
We must also accept that world peace is not possible, we must reject a pacifist notion because it is ultimately of the devourers.
It is a part of this fall that we always see, this notion of peace while war and death are at the gates.
This is why it is essential that a nation be filled with vigor.
>>63711050
>>63711117
With some changes you can get a good system. But the idea of a totalitarian state with an "overlord", call it king, emperor, dictator or even president, its going to fail always. Look at history, when a man reach this level of power he becomes crazy as fuck, and act like he is a god. His madness end in massacres, wars, and such.
>>63711537
Franco is still in top 3 of the greatest leaders of Spain.
You wish you still had him, don't you?
>>63711054
>How does one handle the fact that under a fascist system there is, usually, one leader?
Hierarchy, the top of it regulates his fields of influence while those below him have full control over that which they are allocated.
In this the benefits of local/small government can be utilized by fascism.
>How is that leader chosen? How long do they serve? This is one of the biggest pratfalls when it comes to fascism.
There are many ways and this will method will be different for different nations I suspect. As for me personally, I believe a pure examination of the merit of individuals as reduced to numbers in a bureaucratic method that cares only for merit relating to the stations is most likely the most efficient way of finding the greatest leaders.
>I've seen various theories about having a system akin to the House of Lords being used as a 'safety net' so to speak (many alt-right thinkers believing that an aristocracy of sorts is something that is necessary) but, again, this would cause problems, too.
I too advocate for an aristocracy, however the aristocracy would be held to draconian laws and extremely high standards, with the merit of individuals allowing one to enter the aristocracy and the lack of merit causing one to fall from it.
Of course a secret police would enforce this and a public force.
One model which I'm contemplating is how Rome forced individuals who collected enough wealth to be a part of the senate.
>>63711537
All systems fail and break down eventually, i also advise you to look up the older forms of monarchy.
The Union of public and private interest in monarchy stops the monarch from going crazy with power and stops him from abusig the nation.
>>63711092
>In any case fascism rejects the notion of indefinite progress, society will always have time of falls and times where man rises.
What are the main sources of today's idea of the infallible concept of progress, specifically embodied in the term "progressive" politics? During the 19th century, writers such as Spengler rejected these notions and stated that the Victorian idea of mankind's steady progress beginning with the Enlightenment into the Industrial Revolution was flawed. The idea that man is on an unalterable, destined course to a utopian, idealistic future is more powerful today than it has ever been. Ideas like you've stated are not only taboo, but they fall so far outside of what is morally acceptable to discuss that you can only find it on places like /pol/. What happened to society to bring us to this point?
>We must look at history, when we look at history we see all of the great empires fall and wax and wane in terms of influence and power.
Another concept that isn't a remote spark in the consciousness of the average American, both from an interest in the historical perspective and even moreso in the fact that it has no impact on their day to day life. This type of discourse is not only seen as boring, but potentially dangerous. This, of course, leads to a tragic degeneration of man's ability to think about, much less discuss the subject.
>We must also accept that world peace is not possible, we must reject a pacifist notion because it is ultimately of the devourers.
>It is a part of this fall that we always see, this notion of peace while war and death are at the gates.
Yes, absolutely. It is a core component of the human condition to struggle, to wage war upon each other. One needs look no further all of recorded history for evidence of this. It is man's way of expressing nature's will through the ideal of struggle, of refinement through conflict, destroying those that are too weak to survive the process.
>>63711777
You mean the man who maked 4 american gibraltars? The one that broke the historical neutrality of Spain and maked of his country in point of warheads? The one who sold his land for power? Nah. Primo de Rivera would have been the one.
>>63706891
>Last thread had some good traction.
>mfw I was the lolbertarian french guy
Too drunk to participate in this one though lads. Have a good thread.
>>63707011
Julius Evola wasn't even white.
>>63711992
You are right, I was talking about the new order, the old regime is the best. In the old kingdom of León, we had our own version of the representative democracy, 1100 years ago.
>>63711092
>>63712001
Continued -
One issue with modern warfare is that it has stripped away many avenues of the refinement of man through struggle - there is nothing honorable or a test of a man's strength through being annihilated by nuclear warfare, or ripped apart by an attack helicopter. Our technology has distilled warfare into a battle of machines instead of testing a society's ability to wage battle upon each other through strength, martial prowess, and tactical ingenuity.
>>63706891
My issue with fascism is its autocratic nature. It depends on a strong leader leading his nation with an iron hand, even if he's benevolent
If the people wish progress, they will naturally see the light. They don't need to be coerced. They don't need to be forced to accept the situation. Democracy should be the most sacred thing in any country, any government that claims to represent the State and Her peoples
>>63711820
Hierarchy isn't the problem. The problem is that the state collapses with the death of the leader.
>>63712038
Well, you actually had your own industry, agriculture and banking under Franco. Spanish-engineered cars, that were sold over the world, Spanish aviation, that had contracts with US Air Force and Spanish heavy machinery, that was actually competitive. Spain even had a space program.
Now you are reduced to a place where people go at summer to party, use drugs and bang underage sluts. You are the Mexico of Europe.
You agriculture is owned by Monsanto and other gen-tech corporations, your industry is owned by Germany and you banking is owned by the Brits.
To rub it in, we even put German factories in Spain and use you to assemble our Seat cars, now German owned, engineered and built.
>>63706891
Okay /pol/, so I have a question:
What am I?
I believe I a social hierarchy, a strong cultural identity and strict border controls. I believe in having a strong leader who can unify the people.
I am more of a collectivist than I am an individualist, but not totally collectivist.
But here's the thing: I believe in total, unrestrained freedom of speech and press, and also equality for all Irish and integrated European immigrants.
I believe all liberal arts programs should be shut down and replaced by more STEM ones.
What the hell am I?
I would almost call myself a Fascist if I didn't believe in total free speech and equality for all Irish citizens (except travellers unless they start contributing to society.)
The keystone of the Fascist doctrine is its conception of the State, of its essence, its functions, and its aims. For Fascism the State is absolute, individuals and groups relative.
Benito Mussolini
>>63708267
Running a country depends on SO MANY variables that it's impossible to actually show it through a game.
Some game try, but end up being too superficial and depend on the creator's opinion, like Democracy 3
>>63712001
The main sources of these ideas on progress no longer matter.
They arise purely from flawed indoctrination, the ones who believe in it no longer belief in the root and stem of where their beliefs originate.
This degeneracy of lineage leads to greater cognitive dissonance among the sum of the left when considering each other.
The fact is that these idealists and devourers breed more and brainwash more.
They hide their brainwashing in the clothes of values and rights,
They pretend their beliefs are unchanging virtues, belief that their rigid belief systems are what is objectively that which is Good.
These beliefs always die out eventually due to inefficiency.
As for boredom, this is another thing in which the left has created.
They inject their ideology into that which they find exciting and fun, they do this to cause association with pleasure with their ideology for the masses.
They've further conditioned man to be used to hard, fast and cheap pleasures and stimulants.
Many of them do know that their inefficiency leads to ruin, they decide to not think about it out of fear.
>>63709107
National Socialism is the worst form of fascism. It takes the anti-egalitarist formula to the extreme and alienates the people, controlling every aspect of their life in search of an impossible ideal, just like Communism
>>63713164
I'm not a National Socialist by any means, but I'd hardly call it impossible. I mean, it nearly happened.
>>63712767
Fascism doesn't explicitly restrict freedom of speech. Only should the speech serve to weaken the state. The argument one would need to make would be that criticisms or even promotion of the dissolution of the state doesn't weaken it. If you can demonstrate that and find arguments, with evidence, supporting that then you can maintain being a fascist.
The first argument I would make is that much like the individual, the state must also go through struggles in order to become stronger. One form of struggle would be people criticizing or promoting the dissolution of the state and then responding to it. Therefore complete freedom of speech and the struggle it brings is a key component to Fascist ideology.
>>63712064
Always welcome, I like libertarians I just think you guys have to accept aggressive principles as efficient
.>>63712472
I do believe it is still honorable, but it has been so demonized.
Man lacks the sense of duty he once had to go to war and kill and be killed.
A key to mimimizing the degenerate influences to me, is to establish a military culture across the entire nation.
>>63712571
Do you have any historic evidence which proves democracy is worthy of the sacred nature and value you ascribe to it?
>>63712767
Explain to me something, to what level do you permit free speech?
If an Islamist were to come to your town and scream that he wishes to marry and have sex with 9 year olds and that your culture will be destroyed, would you permit that?
Do you really believe the press should be trusted with something as important as informing the population with unbiased information?
Historically that just isn't what we see.
>>63711117
Diese juden
>>63713423
I didn't say it's impossible. I said it's too opressive of human nature
It cligs to hate of other people, and it was doomed to fail after the War. Nationalism should base itself im the people's love for their nation and their compatriots
I get that facism is based around more right wing economics but do facists believe in any social programs?
>>63713838
Well, I mean no, I actually despise Islam, but I wouldn't restrict their right to talk about it.
But if an Islamist comes in saying he's gonna rape kids then I could probably pull him on a charge of intent of child molestation. Freedom of speech, for me, only goes as far as threatening other people's rights, which would certainly be the case in your scenario.
>>63706891
What happens if you successfully establish a fascist government and we elect a liberal president who then uses the system to shove everything you hate down your throat?
>>63712900
>This degeneracy of lineage leads to greater cognitive dissonance among the sum of the left when considering each other.
Yes, we are beginning to see the effects of this idea through certain leftist groups starting to oppose each other - former allies becoming enemies. I feel that a strong source of this cognitive dissonance is a primal, deep-seated realization in their unconscious that they are fighting nature itself, to choose to do combat with the ideas of natural selection and empowering the weak at the expensive of the strength is incredibly unnatural and a part of their human spirit recognizes this.
>They pretend their beliefs are unchanging virtues, belief that their rigid belief systems are what is objectively that which is Good.
>Many of them do know that their inefficiency leads to ruin, they decide to not think about it out of fear.
I'm honestly not so sure on this point. The new religion of the modern age which has supplanted traditional Christian society is the belief in progressive humanism, a form of secular worship of "progress" for humanity. I sincerely believe that the main sources of energy behind this ideology believe in their heart that they are fighting for the objective good, like you stated. They are on a profound moral crusade against what they perceive as objective evil.
If they do not sincerely believe it, they have been indoctrinated to the degree that it is indistinguishable or irrelevant compared to genuine conviction in the belief. Leftist ideology has permeated the social consciousness of the western world to such a degree that it is expected to be the core philosophy of the common man, and to stray from this is to mean alienation from society. Discussions on /pol/ often reflect this phenomenon through the expression of its user base - we feel that this is the only place where such discussion is acceptable.
Quality thread and responses so far. Wish there was more content like this on /pol/.
>>63714078
I agree.
>>63714329
So you believe that freedom of speech should end when it starts to potentially be damaging or threatening to society and the nation?
If so, that's the fascist doctrine, unnecessary and damaging liberties are removed.
>Be fascist
>Symbol is literally a faggot
>>63713838
Well, certainly!
Isn't every single civilized society of today democratic? Didn't the people, through the years, naturally claim their right to freedom?
Take China for example. No political analyst sees them surviving a hundred more years without a certain degree of political liberalization. And that's because the people wish to be free, and are more than willing to take down a government that has brought great progress to them in exchange for it
>>63706891
I asked this one before, but didn't get an answer from anybody:
How could/would fascism work in the 21th century?
And what would happen to the internet in a fascist state?
>>63714537
Hmmm, I hadn't considered that.
But she I say freedom of speech, I mean more even than the amount we have today.
I just haven't seen that historically. I think the closest we got was Mussolini, but even he had restrictions.
>>63714734
>And that's because the people wish to be free
Define freedom.
Somehow people lived under absolute monarchies, feudalism and dictates for thousands of years, but "HURR DURR THE COUNTRY WON'T SURVIVE IF IT'S Not LIBERAL"
>>63714078
Do you even realize wtf happened in 1940's Germany and what Hitler was on about?
>Nationalism should base itself im the people's love for their nation and their compatriots
Absolutely happened.
>It cligs to hate of other people
Look for those peaceful negotiation terms and what Hitler was asking for right up until the war.
He didn't 'Hate' outside people. He just didn't focus on it, he didn't even want to go to war, he wanted to grow and liberate his people who got boot fucked for nearly 40 years straight.
"We will disarm, when the world agrees to disarm. We will gladly own up to a peaceful agreement between nations, when the nations agree to a peaceful agreement between themselves." - Hitler, three times.. No reply... Then assassinations happened to German people.
Hate was bred within his system, it wasn't the starting point.
>>63706891
Antonio Salazar best fascist to be honest. If he didn't care so much about his stupid colonies he would have been the best leader Portugal ever had by far.
What are some good /lit/ recommendations about Fascism?
Anything, though I'm looking in particular books that go more in depth on the subject, and biographies on Benito Mussolini
>>63715593
I'm with this guy.
Taking a trip to the Library later today and was going to look for it regardless, but some good Go-To books would be helpful, /pol/
>>63715593
>>63715679
Evola's work is good, but I wouldn't expect most bookstores or libraries to have it.
are there any British fash groups that aren't a) shit (national front I'm looking at you) and b) football hooligans?
>>63715593
>>63715679
The closest I've ever come to owning a 'fascist' book was my purchase of Mein Kampf.
50 euros in one bookstore and 12 euros un the one up the road. That's mad.
He's right on a few things, but man does he ramble on.
>>63715930
Britain First :^)
They're totally not retarded skinheads who hate just for the sake of it and think the word 'racism' was coined by Leon Trotsky.
>>63716152
Britain first aren't fash at all.
>>63715946
I would recommend Mein Kampf or Hitler's second book to anyone interested in this topic. It's challenging literature, so be ready to dedicate yourself.
>>63715946
I hope you bought the original version and not an edited one by Mr. Shekelstein...?
What's goin on in here?
>>63715593
I've always liked Mishima and Codreanu's writing for beginners. Sun and Steel is really good and I think it includes good notes on Neitzsche. Evola is like fascist Marx to me, the stuff about hyperboreans coming out of the ground is nonsense, but the practical stuff he writes about is very good. Take Evola with a pinch of salt, he was quite the "mystic".
I do love the idea of the farmer soldier, meant to colonise and tame the land after conquest, and employ martial discipline in all aspects of life. It's a very good concept.
>>63715826
>>63715946
Thankyou.
Now to contradict myself.
Are there ACTUAL libertarian books that arn't new-age?
Also, Right Wing - Left Wing.
The more reading material the marrier.
So far my Political reading prowess consists of a bunch of old Military books
My schools never let me actually do an extensive search on politics.
Doesn't nessecarily have to be a 'How Does X Work' book, but Biography's of one living in that type of nation would do.
>>63716401
People who are debating whether fascism should work or not.
Really interesting thread in my opinion. Fascism is kind of dead at this moment, and I myself do not trust democracy, it's all lies and even more lies, it's always the same... First they lie, then they refuse to actively do something for their County
>>63715041
As people grow more educated and away from self subjugation, they wish to express their opinions and participate in leading their own lives. They wish to have power, either to benefit themselves or others, but the thing is, even when people have different beliefs, they band together to advance the case for political freedom
Countries with low education levels tend to be more autocratic because the people don't know enough to contest the estabilishment. Would fascism have been developed if not for educated people?
Also
Democracy ≠ Liberalism
>>63714740
>How could/would fascism work in the 21th century?
Good question. I believe that the conception of a 21st century fascist state is inconceivable with the current social paradigm of the west. Radical social change would have to occur first, which means catastrophe or some other form of social fallout. An event as revolutionary as an emergent fascist state is impossible at the moment. Things have to get bad, really bad before such a reaction can manifest.
>And what would happen to the internet in a fascist state?
Depends on the society where such a revolution takes place. Social media like Facebook, Twitter, etc are incredibly powerful tools of communicating propaganda to the population. Organizations like Hitler's Germany or Mussolini's Italy realized the value of technology through avenues like radio and television. The internet is the evolution of these ideas.
As for regulation and control of the internet, I don't know. Such a world where a fascist revolution could take place is hard to imagine and the conditions present to make such a thing possible are difficult to conceive.
>>63716778
I meant: What's going on here???
>>63716380
I bought pic related version.
Unlike the new one in Germany, it's not plastered in notes that shit all over the book. There's a brief introduction at the start and then little notes occasionally to explain historical terms that Hitler uses that the modern reader may not understand
>>63716778
I believe we're on the rope time for "friendly fascism". This isn't Weinar Germany with roving gangs of disenfranchised soldiers, but youths who like identity, solidarity and something to believe in. We need something that will install facist values in young people in a friendly manner, like helping the homeless, the elderly, and members of communities that need help. But also a strong sense of loyalty to your position and cause. Lots of people are ready for the third position, after being lied to by the modern left and right countless times.
>>63716777
>Are there ACTUAL libertarian books that arn't new-age?
Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt. I can recommend the attached for a discourse on libertarian (Austrian school) economics. I can't immediately think of any that approach it from a political or sociological perspective.
The book posits arguments for the primacy of free markets, unregulated trade, and other core concepts of Austrian school economics. It's worth reading.
>>63717042
This is a very accurate image, a porn star who sells best as a pseudo 12 year old is holding the flag of an ideology only supported by 12 year olds.
>>63706891
Fascism would be great as long as the leader doesn't go full on Imperialist and start declaring war left and right on its neighbors. That was the problem with Hitler and Mussolini. Both great leaders , but their ambitions of grand conquest ultimately ruined their regimes and sullied their names in history. Isolationist Nationalism coupled with far, but authoritarian rule is the way to go. Basically Fascism-lite.
>>63716832
Very true. The same holds for communism.
Theres also another factor to have in consideration. Fear, usually from an outside enemy (real or imaginary) or a major economic depression.
>>63717031
Hmmm... Very interesting.
I guess the regulation depends on the leader/party, since fascism is always executed in a different way.
>>63717925
Well if it ain't ol' beady
>>63717967
Yes, of course. In my other post, I pointed out that Germany wouldn't survive long after the war.
The main reason for that is that their nationalism was based on the hate of jews/communists/slavs/whatever they chose to be classified as an Untermenschen. There wasn't much conecting the people outside of that. As soon as those enemies had been vanquished, there would either be a liberalization of society or the collapse of the German Reich
>>63716832
>As people grow more educated
Define education.
Do you mean the modern indoctrination in the universities?
Because classical education only leads to acceptance of your role and submission.
The people as a mass have no defined will or needs. They need to be educated and pushed into a certain direction. And the one who educates them has to pick the direction.
>>63706891
Shut up retarded.
Go read La dottrina del fascismo .
Its a socialist program without internationalism.
You are demented like Mussolini and your thread is shitty because you are uninformed.
>>63717354
Thankyou, Political books and Economical books might have more to do with one another than i'v given credit to.
Any possible reads on Left/Right political spectrum. So far the only concepts I have on either of these are the retarded 'Political Spectrum' posts you see.
Left = Cry baby wanting a silver spoon from earners / demanding saftey nets contrary to laws of nature
Right = Cry baby wanting silver spooners to stop leeching off their earnings / refuses to create saftey nets for even their own kin
>>63717925
I don't agree with authoritarian rule, but I pointed that out in another post
Just posting to say that if you're a fascist and Mosley isn't your waifu, you should just kill yourself
>>63718783
You know what I mean. People reading philosophy, understanding how others think and comprehend the world. Forming their own beliefs and being able to defend them. You and me are educated for example, so we don't conform to other's standards, but the average Eritrean doesn't know enough to critiscize the government
Also, are you defending that intelectual progress must be halted and forced into one direction?
First of all, all that does is hinder progress, which will eventually just trump the country and create even worse conditions for the people (see- Soviet Union)
And notice that you are advocating the manipulation of the people. That's not fascism. Fascism grows under the auspices of the people, of their tradition and beliefs, and manipultin their thoughts to something taht they would normally not agree with is at least Marxist in nature
Sorry guys had to go, I'll try to respond anything I missed.
>>63714734
Just because it is popular does not mean it is most efficient. The positives of these democratic nations can more or less all be attributed to capitalism which isn't one and the same with democracy by any means.
Show us some examples where democracy has been more efficient.
>>63715593
I've said it before I'll say it again.
It is best that we look at the influences that drew up the fascist movement, as these are the pinnacles of the spirit of fascism.
The republic by Plato, and even Timaeus. Plato puts forth a meritocratic society and his ideas are very much a foundation.
We have leviathan by Thomas Hobb's, which makes a case for autocracy and monarchy.
And the realism and pragmatic nature of fascism is best seen in the prince by Machiavelli. I don't see it possible that anyone can read these three and not have their viewpoints altered in some fashion.
>>63714740
I actually did answer this one but it was delayed just like this response.
Fascism would come about most likely without the name fascism. An injection of nationalism in every field.
For the Internet, all propaganda and opposing harmful doctrine would obviously be silenced.
It should be understood however, fascism is pragmatic so what ever happens would depend entirely upon the nation who takes up fascism and the particular circumstances of every action.
There is no definite way to predict how such would operate.
>>63717266
I've said it before I'll say it again, we need our own long march into academia. This shall secure our position.
>>63718836
Saying someone is ignorant on fascism then directly comparing them to Mussolini isn't the most logical course of action to prove your point.
>>63709247
Wouldn't they be shooting and enslaving each other?
>>63719841
>You know what I mean. People reading philosophy, understanding how others think and comprehend the world.
You are missing the point. There is classical philosophy, like Plato, Socrates, Clausewitz, Kant, Confucius etc. It actually teaches the acceptance of your role and submission.
Then there is philosophy like Baudrillard, Derrida, critical theory and other psy-op shit that resulted into what we are witnessing now.
>>63718552
You don't know for sure, but is a thinkable hypothesis.
>>63708267
But we are that game anon, you didn't realize this is all a simulation yet?
>>63720214
>Saying someone is ignorant on fascism then directly comparing them to Mussolini isn't the most logical course of action to prove your point.
I hope you got some motivation.
>>63720245
But here we reach a really important point: Is submission a good thing? Isn't it humanity's destiny to always strive for greatness, for progress and glory? Nationalism shouldn't be only focused in wallowing in past achievements. It should be a tool to unite the people under a goal for humanity's future. And for that we need people with ambition for something beyond their normal day-to-day lives
>>63706891
Great thread OP. Really liking the debate here
Just one thing: remember to post the next one earlier, because at this time mos Euros are asleep and it's work time for most Americans
>>63712900
>>63714377
some of the best in the thread
I can follow along with yall and understand but if someone asked me the same in a week or so I could not give as an exact answer as you both have.
how do I up my game? furthermore ,do you try and share this with others? or only those who you fell are "close to" your beliefs
>>63720854
>Isn't it humanity's destiny to always strive for greatness, for progress and glory?
And this can only be achieved through submission. Historically proven. Authoritarian and imperialist societies are infinitely more effective than the liberal ones.
>>63720854
>But here we reach a really important point: Is submission a good thing?
Yes, know your place in the hierarchy and the machine that is the state can function properly.
>Isn't it humanity's destiny to always strive for greatness, for progress and glory?
Define progress, and fascism does strive for greatness and glory and the advancement of the nation as a whole.
>Nationalism shouldn't be only focused in wallowing in past achievements.
It's the embracing of the past for the sake of unity to go forward with a unified and stronger will.
>It should be a tool to unite the people under a goal for humanity's future.
You are not working for all of humanity, all you can strive for is working for the majority of the people who you directly interact with, and who directly interact with you.
It is far more efficient to improve your environment and the idea that you have to work for the sum of humanity is a part of the ideals of the left not fascism.
>And for that we need people with ambition for something beyond their normal day-to-day lives
Duty, obligation to the state and ambition for the will of the state which is the will of all who live within the nation are key factors of fascism.
Why were Nazi's such cucks?
>>63721166
>how do I up my game? furthermore ,do you try and share this with others? or only those who you fell are "close to" your beliefs
Study philosophy and politics a bit, study history and contemplate. Do not read without consideration.
Just think and examine and consider and weigh and learn.
Eventfully you'll spot the trends that humans go through.
>>63721443
Exactly.
>>63721483
I'm not a national socialist, I do not advocate socialism in any form.
socialism is an emotional system that i find has no real use.
>fascism
Watch "120 days of sodom" and report back
>>63721730
>Study philosophy and politics a bit, study history and contemplate. Do not read without consideration.
>Just think and examine and consider and weigh and learn.
>Eventfully you'll spot the trends that humans go through.
>theres no easy way
right on right on. had a feeling that was the type of answer-not sure what i expected, good thread though
>>63706891
>Fascism rejects Marxism the single largest reason being that Marxism says well-being=Happiness.
>Fascism says service, refinement, perfecting and strengthening brings happiness. Fascism is a moral doctrine.
I'm all for meritocracy, self-cultivation, and nationalism - how can a philosophical case be made for favouring fascism over our modern-day utilitarianism? "Well-being" breeds leisure and degeneracy whereas self-cultivation can occur regardless of socio-economic status, but I was hoping for someone to help me strengthen this argument.
>>63721461
Discipline and obedience are essential, yes. But a society solely based on repressing the human desire of power is toxic. Sometimes the lowliest son of a farmer can be a great man and leader, but if he's locked in a societal imposed hierarchical structure, what can he do? Even if he's the best farmer of the world, he will suffer to get into a position of power.
>It's the embracing of the past for the sake of unity to go forward with a unified and stronger will.
But it's important to not forget why our ancestors were able to create such great things, and that is for the good of the future generations
>You are not working for all of humanity, all you can strive for is working for the majority of the people who you directly interact with, and who directly interact with you. It is far more efficient to improve your environment and the idea that you have to work for the sum of humanity is a part of the ideals of the left not fascism.
The progress of a society is never limited to its own, and if people are around the same level, healthy competition, which stimulates more advancement, can arise
But of course a nation must advace for itself under it's own people, and for the benefit of it's own people. The "humanity's future" bit was, admitedly, a bit melodramatic
>Define progress, and fascism does strive for greatness and glory and the advancement of the nation as a whole
Progress is how much of nature we can curb with our advancements, our power and technology. What are our greatest advancements, if not when we reached the limits that nature has imposed on us?
Also, note that I'm not a complete opposer of fascism. It is an impressive ideological product. But I'm currently not sure if I can identify myself with any school of it
>>63722158
In any case about telling others about these beliefs, is explain and promote them in singular fashion.
The logic and reasoning of the ideas behind fascism are rather hard to deny, it is when combined and when the word fascism comes up that the bells and horns go off within people's minds.
>>63722901
How do you wish to tackle the problem? From a moral and intellectual view point we can examine and see the following.
First that the Marxist and socialist doctrines arise from illogical patterns of thought that copy pattern.
Is man just a puppet of the economy? Are the heroes and empires and religious systems and philosophies and every movement just something which must come forth? Fascism rejects this materialistic view of history because we examine the particular examples in history and why what events led to what.
Of course resources and the like are important, but to go even further on the train of thought where man is puppet to the economy we also have to reject the idea that class struggle is the prime mover of all social and cultural change.
How did class struggle bring us from feudalism to capitalism? Who can say that before the rise of popular capitalism the rich and powerful did not exist, that the wealthy and poor did not exist?
Therefore we look at this in natural terms of powerful and weak, not in such veiled and misleading terms such as bourgeois and proletariat.
We must also understand that the equation well-being=happiness reduces man to mere animals, being content with eating becoming fat reduces man to a vegetative existence.
I ask any socialist, would they truly be happy if that was the sum of their lives? Being fattened and fattened and not else?
To go further, ask the socialist why all men shouldn't be filled with the hardest of drugs and fattened and chained to a bed if pleasure and instant happiness are the only things of value.
>>63708267
Have you heard of Civcraft?
>>63721443
>And this can only be achieved through submission. Historically proven. Authoritarian and imperialist societies are infinitely more effective than the liberal ones.
That is incorrect. We were only able to curb nature when we decided to release ourselves from the shackles of submition to it. Galileo defied the church and set the bases for modern science. The Illumnists defied absolute monarchies and created the first social dvancements in a long time. Under more democratic societies science thrived.
Wasn't it the free market that allowed Ford to create modern industrial procedures?
Wasn't the liberty of prussian opression that made it possible for Einstein begin to estabilish the basis of taming the Atom?
Wasn't free thinking and accepting revolutionary ideas that allowed NASA to put the man on the Moon?
Also, sorry guys, I have to sleep as it's getting really late and I have to work tomorrow. But do post your responses so that I can read them and try to talk about them in the next thread
>>63722018
>all emotions are bad
But socialism in a homogenous society seems okay. I mean, I wouldn't mind paying taxes to medicare if only people of my gene pool could use it, would you? It'd be like helping a family member
>We don't say to the rich 'Give to the poor', we say 'German people, help each other'. Rich or poor, each one must help thinking, there's someone even poorer than I am, and I want to help them as a fellow countryman
>>63724192
>The Illumnists defied absolute monarchies and created the first social dvancements in a long time.
Holy fuck you are bluepilled.
The whole thing was a masonic plot to install the rule of the capital. Descartes was a freemason and Robespierre was a worshipful master.
And then they failed miserably and ruined the country to the point where the French begged Napoleon to be crowned to save it.
>Wasn't the liberty of prussian opression that made it possible for Einstein begin to estabilish the basis of taming the Atom?
No, it was actually the totalitarian German education. The Jew just fled to the west with all the ideas of German scientists who were working on it long before that.
>Wasn't free thinking and accepting revolutionary ideas that allowed NASA to put the man on the Moon?
No, it was actually the nazi Werner von Braun, who put the man on the moon.
>>63723445
>But a society solely based on repressing the human desire of power is toxic.
Fascism doesn't reject this desire, it dissolves and magnifies it into a unified desire for the nation and state.
>Sometimes the lowliest son of a farmer can be a great man and leader, but if he's locked in a societal imposed hierarchical structure, what can he do?
He can prove his worth and merit by any method that he can, no one is forcing him to be a farmer but nature has allocated him to his family and his circumstance.
If he deserves a higher place in the hierarchy he can prove it and I say that a fascist society would allow and cultivate this far more than any other society. Because all other types of society would exalt the unworthy above and in equal status to this merit filled person, but in fascism this merit filled individual can prove himself truly greater than the majority by his actions.
>Even if he's the best farmer of the world, he will suffer to get into a position of power.
Everyone has particular circumstances, a kitten doesn't complain that it was born to cats instead of lions, even if it is as ferocious as a lion. It can prove itself as ferocious however.
>forget why our ancestors were able to create such great things, and that is for the good of the future generations
I am advocating for the continuation of what made these things great, again fascism is plastic and will change to fit the nation.
But in making our nations greater we must trim off the unneeded and inefficient. There is no option. These will build up negatively eventually.
>Progress is how much of nature we can curb with our advancements, our power and technology. What are our greatest advancements, if not when we reached the limits that nature has imposed on us?
Look at history, can you honestly say that every civilization and nation and empire brought progress? Do you really believe that technology wasn't lost and re-recovered ?
Cont
>>63722039
An anti-fascist propaganda film not even based on any true events. Nice try, Schlomo.
I really don't think democracy should be ditched altogether. Self-determination of a people shouldn't be ignored so easily, it's a very powerful force psychologically if you have a hope of having a say in the direction of your countrymen even if you're not born to a very select cadre of aristocrats. And shitty, slow to move and prone to corruption as it is, we've had decent progress under it.
Universal suffrage very clearly has to go, though.
>>63724999
Do you not see how man has the tendency to re-create the same advancements at different points in different parts of the world?
>Also, note that I'm not a complete opposer of fascism. It is an impressive ideological product. But I'm currently not sure if I can identify myself with any school of it
You need not submit to a specific school, fascism is plastic all that you need accept more or less are the three core aspects.
Nationalism, Meritocracy and rejection of egalitarianism and it's implications.
>>63724906
>But socialism in a homogenous society seems okay. I mean, I wouldn't mind paying taxes to medicare if only people of my gene pool could use it, would you? It'd be like helping a family member
Yes I do in fact mind, if we help the lowest of our gene pool prosper we weaken the entirety of our gene pool, promoting inefficiency and degeneration.
>>63724192
>Wasn't it the free market
Fascism does not reject the free market, in fact pinochet's regime was considered both Fascist and Libertarian.
One must always remember the plastic nature that is inherent of the spirit of fascism.
I got to go guys, I'll either come back to this thread later or make an entirely new one.
Do keep the discussion alive, It'll only improve the quality of the thread.
Understanding the spirit of fascism is important, but I think a more pressing issue is how to manifest it in today's society in a way that allows for mass adoption.
In fact, still using the nomenclature can hold us back.
>>63725898
>If you mean biologically
It'd it take way too long to be a problem, natural selection happens in thousands of years, not in decades. We'd most likely have gene manipulation, by then
Simply retarded
>If you mean socially
Yes, abusing a socialistic system is possible. However, when you break down the data, it's the dindus doing the most damage, which would be non-existant in this fictional society we imagined.
Still, strong supervision and not encourage such behaviour should clear most of the scams
