Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Feel free to discuss appropriate non-BYU/Sports related topics here. We ask you to respect other users, the Church, avoid soapbox postings, and keep it clean.
User avatar
BoiseBYU
Pro
Posts: 3730
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:35 pm
Fan Level: BYU Fan
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by BoiseBYU » Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:46 am

snoscythe wrote:
Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:02 pm
BoiseBYU wrote:
Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:04 pm
Most I've seen define the term as a form of extreme authoritarian nationalism that uses dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce to further their goals.
And therein lies the problem -- the definition has been hijacked by the left to mean something entirely different in an attempt to pin Mussolini and Hitler on the right when both ascended from the left. What you describe is not fascism, that's authoritarianism.

Fascism is an economic philosophy.

Authoritarianism is a governing philosophy.

Ironically, neither find basis in the political right, but both fascism and authoritarianism are leftist ideologies.
Again it comes down to the way you want to define the term. The definition I used is common and links economic control and authoritarianism WITH an extreme form of nationalism. You apparently do not. It is not surprising then that we will not agree on what or who is a fascist. Your definition apparently sweeps in the Clean Air Act for example as fascist, while mine would not.

User avatar
snoscythe
Retired
Posts: 7677
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:52 am
Fan Level: BYU Fanatic
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by snoscythe » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:11 am

BoiseBYU wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:46 am
Again it comes down to the way you want to define the term.
I laughed out loud (literally) when I read this. The entire original post was about how the definition has been changed. We're on the same page, but evidently not in the same book.
The definition I used is common and links economic control and authoritarianism WITH an extreme form of nationalism. You apparently do not. It is not surprising then that we will not agree on what or who is a fascist. Your definition apparently sweeps in the Clean Air Act for example as fascist, while mine would not.
The entire point of the OP is that the left has changed the definition of fascism over the course of the last 30 years to pin Mussolini and Hitler onto the right, when in fact they were leftist leaders implementing leftist ideologies.

If you insist on using the altered definition to argue otherwise, what's the point? No one is arguing how the term is used today by most--that's kind of part and parcel of my argument. I'm simply arguing that this is an intentional bastardization of the term by the political left that incubated these regimes.

In 1944, you know, when fascism was an actual thing, they identified six traits of fascism:
1. Anti-capitalist, but with capitalist features;
2. Direct economic planning, reconciled with partial economic autonomy through corporatism;
3/4. Economic demand management through budget deficits;
5. Militarism and imperialism; and
6. Suspension of rule of law.

It's a definition that applied rather well to all the fascist governments of the time -- Portugal, Spain, Norway, and others in addition to Italy. Portugal and Spain were under fascist systems until the mid-70s, but were never really marked with the authoritarian nationalism that was not part of the original definition.

But since that time, the definition has moved from that initial reading of the commonalities of the fascist economies of Europe to a definition hallmarked with references to nationalism, which was never an element of fascism prior to the 60s. To further the point, this year, Google actually re-wrote the definition of fascism and inserted the words "right-wing" into both the primary and secondary definitions. You can pull old dictionaries at your local library and compare the definitions side-by-side and then ask yourself -- why is the definition of something that has been extinct for 40 years still evolving?

So yeah, you can throw around current understandings and definitions all you want, but you're not really participating in this conversation.

(and P.S. -- as someone who comes head-to-head with the CAA and the EPA's implementation of it on a daily basis, I stand by my assessment 1000% -- it's just as fascist and economically controlling as Obamacare is.)

User avatar
BoiseBYU
Pro
Posts: 3730
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:35 pm
Fan Level: BYU Fan
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by BoiseBYU » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:16 am

Sno, laugh all you want. Not as easy to have a discussion though, if you ask me, but I understand you're not. Nationalism as a component of fascism has been around and in the literature for over 100 years. SO your decision to decouple the two concepts is certainly your right, but it is just your view, just as my thought that fascism at least in the view of some has a nationalistic compotent to it is mine. If labelling the EPA's efforts as fascism makes sense to you, so be it. I don't support much of what the EPA does either, but I don't feel a need to label it fascism.

User avatar
snoscythe
Retired
Posts: 7677
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:52 am
Fan Level: BYU Fanatic
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by snoscythe » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:23 am

BoiseBYU wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:16 am
Nationalism as a component of fascism has been around and in the literature for over 100 years.
Okay--show it to me. Show me where nationalism is described or listed in literature as an essential component of fascism prior to 1917.

Be mindful, we're talking about fascism that includes all fascist systems including Spain, Portugal, Norway, and Hungary, not just Mussolini, and not Nazi (socialist, not fascist) Germany. If it doesn't embrace all fascist countries and omit Germany, it's not an honest assessment of fascism, but rather a description of one variation on the theme.

User avatar
BoiseBYU
Pro
Posts: 3730
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:35 pm
Fan Level: BYU Fan
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by BoiseBYU » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:48 am

snoscythe wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:23 am
BoiseBYU wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:16 am
Nationalism as a component of fascism has been around and in the literature for over 100 years.
Okay--show it to me. Show me where nationalism is described or listed in literature as an essential component of fascism prior to 1917.

Be mindful, we're talking about fascism that includes all fascist systems including Spain, Portugal, Norway, and Hungary, not just Mussolini, and not Nazi (socialist, not fascist) Germany. If it doesn't embrace all fascist countries and omit Germany, it's not an honest assessment of fascism, but rather a description of one variation on the theme.
I'm taxing my memory, but my memory of the history I have read ( and I'm no expert), is that in France and Italy in the early 1900's leading up to 1919 were people advocating nationalism as a component of the movement that came to be fascism. It was thus in 1919 that Mussolini declared:

"We declare war against socialism, not because it is socialism, but because it has opposed nationalism" I pulled this off of Wikipedia. So that at least is where I'm coming from in stating what I've said.

User avatar
BoiseBYU
Pro
Posts: 3730
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:35 pm
Fan Level: BYU Fan
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by BoiseBYU » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:50 am

PS. Did you change your post because since I started my response your post reads different? Not accusing but I think my response above now does not come accross as fully responsive?

User avatar
snoscythe
Retired
Posts: 7677
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:52 am
Fan Level: BYU Fanatic
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by snoscythe » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:56 am

BoiseBYU wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:50 am
PS. Did you change your post because since I started my response it reads different? Not accusing but I think my response now does not come accross a fully responsive.
I don't think I did--what you quoted matches the post. Feel free to revise your response if you want.

User avatar
BoiseBYU
Pro
Posts: 3730
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:35 pm
Fan Level: BYU Fan
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by BoiseBYU » Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:14 pm

snoscythe wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:56 am
BoiseBYU wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:50 am
PS. Did you change your post because since I started my response it reads different? Not accusing but I think my response now does not come accross a fully responsive.
I don't think I did--what you quoted matches the post. Feel free to revise your response if you want.
Ok. My bad. Sorry. Well, I think my post makes the point that nationalism as a component of fascism has been around for a long time. Fascism has many faces in different areas and is not so monolithic as some other ideologies. Not sure there's much left to say on this issue. Peace out.

User avatar
snoscythe
Retired
Posts: 7677
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:52 am
Fan Level: BYU Fanatic
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by snoscythe » Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:49 pm

BoiseBYU wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:48 am
snoscythe wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:23 am
BoiseBYU wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:16 am
Nationalism as a component of fascism has been around and in the literature for over 100 years.
Okay--show it to me. Show me where nationalism is described or listed in literature as an essential component of fascism prior to 1917.

Be mindful, we're talking about fascism that includes all fascist systems including Spain, Portugal, Norway, and Hungary, not just Mussolini, and not Nazi (socialist, not fascist) Germany. If it doesn't embrace all fascist countries and omit Germany, it's not an honest assessment of fascism, but rather a description of one variation on the theme.
I'm taxing my memory, but my memory of the history I have read ( and I'm no expert), is that in France and Italy in the early 1900's leading up to 1919 were people advocating nationalism as a component of the movement that came to be fascism. It was thus in 1919 that Mussolini declared:

"We declare war against socialism, not because it is socialism, but because it has opposed nationalism" I pulled this off of Wikipedia. So that at least is where I'm coming from in stating what I've said.
So, all you have is a Mussolini quote from Wikipedia that backs up your assertion that literature has acknowledged nationalism is an essential component of fascism for over 100 years?

No one is arguing that Mussolini is was a nationalist. No one is arguing that Mussolini was a fascist. That does not mean that all fascists are nationalists, nor does it mean that all nationalists are fascists. Show me your literature -- you said it's out there and its more than 100 years old. Your statement -- just asking you to back it up.

User avatar
snoscythe
Retired
Posts: 7677
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:52 am
Fan Level: BYU Fanatic
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: Democratic Party = The True Fascists

Post by snoscythe » Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:50 pm

BoiseBYU wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:14 pm
snoscythe wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:56 am
BoiseBYU wrote:
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:50 am
PS. Did you change your post because since I started my response it reads different? Not accusing but I think my response now does not come accross a fully responsive.
I don't think I did--what you quoted matches the post. Feel free to revise your response if you want.
Ok. My bad. Sorry. Well, I think my post makes the point that nationalism as a component of fascism has been around for a long time. Fascism has many faces in different areas and is not so monolithic as some other ideologies. Not sure there's much left to say on this issue. Peace out.
All your post proved was two things = 1) Mussolini was a nationalist, which no one has argued otherwise, and 2) you're relying on Wikipedia....

Post Reply