Fascism: Right or Left?

[Ninjask Is Bae]

The right is more against regulations in business related matters, while the left is willing to plaster regulation after regulation upon companies. (For examples, look to California, arguably the most liberal state in the united states, and has incredible levels of restrictions upon businesses) for better or worse, control of industries, at the current moment, is indeed more left than right, if you look on a state by state basis, the redder the state, the fewer the regulations, and the bluer the state, the more the regulations.  Fascism, would be more aligned with the left here as well.

But so are most fascist parties though. Like I said. The Nazi's privatised all stateheld companies and all the regulations they placed on them had to do with tradionalism and for the sake of the state, not protection of the customer, which is the end goal for the left leaning parties.

Again, the right wishes for a smaller government, (even if they desire a larger millitary). That puts them at direct odds with a core desire of fascism, that desire being authoritarian control. It doesn't have to be a murderous or destructive regime, but even you would agree that a fascist regime would be an authoritarian regime right? How exactly can that be done by shrinking the government? there may be right wing tenets and influences within fascism, but it definitely holds more sway from the left. At least as far as modern politics is concerned.

I'm obviously not saying the Republican party is fascist. This argument assumes I am. I am not. I am simply saying that the Republican party has more in common with fascists than the Democratic party.

 

The current right wing pillars are clearly against suppressing anything within the country by force. Military does not count in this instance, because military relates to out of country matters. Fascism is not (completely) a stance on the military policy, it's an internal policy of how to run the country.

Military does count. Look at the civil wars in the Middle East.

Fascism not a stance on military policy? Flat out wrong. Fascism was founded on the idea of Total War. It's not a coincidence that both Germany and Italy were very expansionist. And a part of fascism is the praise of the military.

 

Traditional values are, as far as the right wing goes, more related to family than to policy. It's the belief in the standard household. it does not say anything about the collective, but is more of a take on the individual (household). Family traditions are not fascist, any more than they'd be communist or socialist, or capitalist. it's an invalid comparison.

Again, this is something I just did not say. I didn't argue that family vallues are fascist. I said family vallues are one of the many thing fascist strive for.

 

 

Religion is separate from state, by law, and modern republicans have made no overt efforts to change that, but let's say it were connected. What does religion do for fascism? If we've learned anything from past religious regimes, it's that the religion, if taken too far, will eventually overpower the regime in question. Fascism and religion are not the same thing. Hell, even two religions under the same deity can be leagues apart in practice. Putting any of them to fascism inevitably puts fascism at odds with every other remaining religion simply because the question becomes: Which ideology is fascism going to align with more, and thus favor more heavily (notice how this still ignores the individual, and thus remains a valid complaint.) so with all that said, I'm gonna have to say separation of church and state makes that clusterfuck of an equation null and void (thankfully). there's far more i can go into to debunk religion+fascism=anything other than a complete mess, but i assume you get the point.

They have. They have very much made an effort to change that. The entire gay marriage thing, which is very much a partisan issue, is completely based on religion and traditional vallues. You also conveniantly forgot about the fact that religion was just an example of a traditional vallues which the Republicans hold.

Also, fascist don't just work on traditional vallues in law. But they also just propagate total return to it on your own merrit.

Forcible suppression of opposition, as far as fascism would be directly related, is something that is currently more of a left wing stance than a right wing stance. The current right wing pillars are clearly against suppressing anything within the country by force. and in that facet, the current left (especially Europe, with it's budding "free speech" laws at the moment) would fit that bill far more then the right.

I already granted you this one. No need to hammer down on it.

 

Also, what left wing parties are you seeing in Europe? I can name exactly 1 party in my country (out of, like, 20 something) that wants to "prevent rascism" as they call it. And they didn't even get enough votes to show up on the show up on the vote count charts. And it is heavily ridiculed by both left and right for being "cringy".

 

In fact, over here in Europe, the left is actively trying to unban things like "Mein Kampf" but the RIGHT is stopping them.

 

And if you think that SJW's are trying to take your freedom of speech away. Well, some of them are. But that's a VERY small minority. The ideology of Social Justice is actually to not censor but simply speak out and actively oppose what they view as "hatespeech". And its not like the right doesn't actively oppose what they view as the wrong opinions.

[vla1ne]

But so are most fascist parties though. Like I said. The Nazi's privatised all stateheld companies and all the regulations they placed on them had to do with tradionalism and for the sake of the state, not protection of the customer, which is the end goal for the left leaning parties.

I'm obviously not saying the Republican party is fascist. This argument assumes I am. I am not. I am simply saying that the Republican party has more in common with fascists than the Democratic party.

 

Military does count. Look at the civil wars in the Middle East.

Fascism not a stance on military policy? Flat out wrong. Fascism was founded on the idea of Total War. It's not a coincidence that both Germany and Italy were very expansionist. And a part of fascism is the praise of the military.

 

Again, this is something I just did not say. I didn't argue that family vallues are fascist. I said family vallues are one of the many thing fascist strive for.

 

 

They have. They have very much made an effort to change that. The entire gay marriage thing, which is very much a partisan issue, is completely based on religion and traditional vallues. You also conveniantly forgot about the fact that religion was just an example of a traditional vallues which the Republicans hold.

Also, fascist don't just work on traditional vallues in law. But they also just propagate total return to it on your own merrit.

I already granted you this one. No need to hammer down on it.

 

Also, what left wing parties are you seeing in Europe? I can name exactly 1 party in my country (out of, like, 20 something) that wants to "prevent rascism" as they call it. And they didn't even get enough votes to show up on the show up on the vote count charts. And it is heavily ridiculed by both left and right for being "cringy".

 

In fact, over here in Europe, the left is actively trying to unban things like "Mein Kampf" but the RIGHT is stopping them.

 

And if you think that SJW's are trying to take your freedom of speech away. Well, some of them are. But that's a VERY small minority. The ideology of Social Justice is actually to not censor but simply speak out and actively oppose what they view as "hatespeech". And its not like the right doesn't actively oppose what they view as the wrong opinions.

Correct that the nazis privatized for the sake of the state.  The right though, leans more towards capitalism as their argument than the state. The actions taken resemble each other, but the causes are different.

 

Not saying you are claiming that. I’m saying that even though some things line up next to fascism on the right, it is for arguably different reasons than fascism possesses. Not claiming that you believe fascism is a right wing thing, I’m simply saying that fascism is not a fully compatible ideology with the right, even in places where they overlap. though the millitary point you happened to make definitely has more than enough merits.

 

You missed the wording there. I said fascism wasn’t completely a military stance, I didn’t say it had nothing to do with the military. But I agree, I was wrong to say that fascism was not more militant.

 

Fascism does strive for family values, but it can easily be said that family values are never a bad thing to advocate, and have been one of the cornerstones of all successful civilizations (be it the neighborhood family values, where everybody in in tightly knit communities, the standard family values, wherein it’s mother, father, kids, grandparents, and extended relatives.) it’s harder to find successful cultures without familial values than it is to find those without, so that’s a point worth dropping.

 

Yes, the gay marriage thing was religious in nature, and had more solutions than those of us on the left saw at the time, being blinded by the whole marriage thing. That’s an entirely different discussion though. On the point directly, it was seen as an attack on family values, and looked at as a slippery slope where anybody and everybody would be trying to jump through the gate should gays be granted the same title (many were indeed fine with granting the same rights, but the title was what they were hung up on), looking back at it and to the current climate, no matter the political stance, they were arguably right.

 

I wasn’t talking about just the parties; I am talking about the laws as well. As far as inner country suppression, There is a new law attempting to head towards the books that prevents anybody from making an attempt to gain leading political seats, if they’ve ever been (for lack of a better word this late at night) an online “troll” which we currently know they are including youtube, twitter, and facebook critics under said blanket. Though I suppose that’s probably less fascist than communist.

 

There are anti-blasphemy laws on the books in many European countries, where blasphemy is anything even remotely critical of Muslim ideology, if that’s not cutting free speech up, then count dankula’s trial fits the bill perfectly. If that doesn’t fit the bill, the consistent attempts to shut down platforms across America for having even remotely controversial people on stage can fit the bill. The list can go on longer, but this isn’t the main topic.

[Ninjask Is Bae]

I wasn’t talking about just the parties; I am talking about the laws as well. As far as inner country suppression, There is a new law attempting to head towards the books that prevents anybody from making an attempt to gain leading political seats, if they’ve ever been (for lack of a better word this late at night) an online “troll” which we currently know they are including youtube, twitter, and facebook critics under said blanket. Though I suppose that’s probably less fascist than communist.

 

There are anti-blasphemy laws on the books in many European countries, where blasphemy is anything even remotely critical of Muslim ideology, if that’s not cutting free speech up, then count dankula’s trial fits the bill perfectly. If that doesn’t fit the bill, the consistent attempts to shut down platforms across America for having even remotely controversial people on stage can fit the bill. The list can go on longer, but this isn’t the main topic.

That isn't right/left though. You argued left leaning parties in Europe were doing that. Not true. Our extreme right wing parties wants to ban Islam and old fascist literature. Our extreme left wing parties want to ban racism. Banning either are wrong (at least in my oppinion). But its not split right wing/left wing. And in fact the censorship proposed by the right wingers has far more traction. I only know about anti hate speech laws in my country and they only count if you are insiting violence against a people. We've had exactly 1 entire person convicted for "blaspheming" against Muslims and he got an antire 0 euro fine. Count Dankula was arrested in a country that currently has a right wing party in charge and that was right wing law making.

[vla1ne]

That isn't right/left though. You argued left leaning parties in Europe were doing that. Not true. Our extreme right wing parties wants to ban Islam and old fascist literature. Our extreme left wing parties want to ban racism. Banning either are wrong (at least in my oppinion). But its not split right wing/left wing. And in fact the censorship proposed by the right wingers has far more traction. I only know about anti hate speech laws in my country and they only count if you are insiting violence against a people. We've had exactly 1 entire person convicted for "blaspheming" against Muslims and he got an antire 0 euro fine. Count Dankula was arrested in a country that currently has a right wing party in charge and that was right wing law making.

 

the ban on islam is in response to the no-go zones, and the severe spike in violence from the muslim areas, among other things. banning racism, from what i've seen, is not based upon actual racists committing crimes on that level, but to silence opposition that claims mass immigration from 3rd world countries is proven harmful to European culture and people. the censorship issue holds more traction because of the damage that islam has wreaked across the country. they count criticism as inciting violence. they count satire as inciting violence, they count many things as inciting violence, or at least have attempted to apply them as such across the country. the short of it though: https://www.businessesgrow.com/2018/01/31/why-you-should-worry-about-europes-new-hate-speech-laws/  

 

the right wing in europe is far to the left of the american right wing. also, the party in question was the Scottish national party {https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party}who describe themselves as social democratic. that's more left than right  wing where i'm looking in from. in addition, the funniest thing was the cops asked the jews if any of them were offended, and they couldn't find a single one who was (they ended up using a jew they had on the payroll to testify, which tells you everything you need to know about that case in general)

[Ninjask Is Bae]

the ban on islam is in response to the no-go zones, and the severe spike in violence from the muslim areas, among other things. banning racism, from what i've seen, is not based upon actual racists committing crimes on that level, but to silence opposition that claims mass immigration from 3rd world countries is proven harmful to European culture and people. the censorship issue holds more traction because of the damage that islam has wreaked across the country. they count criticism as inciting violence. they count satire as inciting violence, they count many things as inciting violence, or at least have attempted to apply them as such across the country. the short of it though: https://www.businessesgrow.com/2018/01/31/why-you-should-worry-about-europes-new-hate-speech-laws/  

 

the right wing in europe is far to the left of the american right wing. also, the party in question was the Scottish national party {https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party}who describe themselves as social democratic. that's more left than right  wing where i'm looking in from. in addition, the funniest thing was the cops asked the jews if any of them were offended, and they couldn't find a single one who was (they ended up using a jew they had on the payroll to testify, which tells you everything you need to know about that case in general)

The way those German laws are currently "enforced" is just Twitter and Facebook deleting everything they are scared might get them a fine. They get cencored by Twitter and Facebook, not by the justice system. Not saying I agree with the law that "forces" them to do so, but still. Germany has also had censorship laws for a hecka long time, why do you think Nazi stuff is deleted in multiplayer games? They have simply started applying them more effectively to social media with this new law.

 

Reddit or 4chan, for example, doesn't censor these kinds of thing but they haven't been in trouble with the German law at all. So it's also just Twitter being Twitter.

 

You really have to take that German law out of the context of it being a German law to see it as what you say it is. Facebook and Twitter are just applying it very litterally and they were censoring people far before this law. Same with that law people said would bann memes, it really wouldn't in practice. (Not that I want that law, Imma be in the street if that gets passed)

 

Other than that this discussion is not that relevant anyway. Censorship is not an ideal of fascism anyway. Simply a means to an end. We got really of topic here, lol.