'But but but socialism is when the bad guys win.
Fascism is when the... uh.
Communism is for crazy peop- ... hmm.
Maybe I ought to look some of these words up'
My new thing I started doing is telling them is:
CONGRATS! You just won the dumb dumb award🏆🏆🏆
sometimes I tell them the difference between the two, regardless I have been handing out a lot of awards lately.
"C"ommunism is demonstrably the perverted child of Marxism and 19th century Russian nihilism.
Fascism is straight-forward perversion of public fears and resentments, economic crises, promotion of a mythic past and promise of rebirth to suppress dissent, promote militarism, and rule via dictatorship.
Marx was the one who used big-C communism, though. He often capitalized it to refer specifically to his political movement to distinguish it from communists in general.
I've fallen into using "C"ommunism for Bolshevism and its various progeny. Marx using "Communism" to distinguish from communists seems a bit of petulant branding.
If you are speaking fascism, IMHO it's nothing more than a totalitarian power grab that perverts fears et al. to fuel that grab. "Divine ..." and "... rationalism" are mutually exclusive.
First name averaged out in two languages, not plural. The "J" is for my middle/dad's name and how I commemorate and honor him. Last name is from where my ancestors lived for centuries.
Why are you being an ass? That's a rhetorical question. I don't care why you are, I already know you are.
I guess this raises the question of what “proper” communism is supposed to look like. Would there be any legislature? Any chief executive? Courts? Ambassadors? Coinage? And so on. I think one shortcoming of the literature on communism is no clear model for the details like this!
There isn't a universal model of development. Every country has different circumstances and has to figure out their development path independently. If you blindly copy another country's development path then it is bound to fail.
I am sure it can come in many forms. I just want some kind of book that explains one form. A model for it I can read about. Like a “nuts and bolts of a genuinely communist government and how it works” manual.
Implementing Communism for Dummies, I'll stick a Post-It somewhere to remind me to start working on it, perhaps. No one has actually implemented a genuinely communist government.
All the papers I can find examine existing implementations of political stepchildren.
Lenin rises from his first quickening, sitting bolt upright after falling in battle against the Tsar's forces.
Marx is waiting, smiling, a sword at his hip: "Why do you think we call it the 'Immortal Schiensch', lad? Now get up, we muscht schtaht your training."
Okay I’ve ridded my mind of all presupposed ideologies and began applying a rational analysis of economic movement throughout the annals of history, and now I- aw fuck
Hooray you have attained enlightend centrism. Join me comrade as we use ground news, and Ai, to average the articles from both sides to achieve the correct stance. We have found that all prior systems have not worked, surely this one will..
Ah. Let me explain. You see everyone agrees fascism is bad, and I think that communism is also bad. And by the transitive property of badness they are functionally the same.
Now go away while I'm busy getting all the woke out of government.
People who keep saying that America is a republic and not a democracy, hate the whole idea of democracy. They want minority rule by a very few people who they agree with.
You see according to liberalist ideology socialism is when the government does things and fascism is when the government does things I don't like and since they both involve the government doing things they are therefore the same.
The point is to understand why.
Trotsky wrote about the ‘permanent revolution’ partly as a strategy to prevent that very thing of so-called communist dictatorships. What happened to him after Lenin’s untimely and premature death and Stalin’s power-grab. 🤔
if they mention molotov ribbencock just apply the same logic to the munich agreement. britain signed a pact with germany to allow them to annex czechoslovakia and commit atrocities in their territories.
They are easily conflated seeing as every country that adopted Communism turned into a fascist state. Capitalist countries have a lesser degree of turnover to fascism. The US is bucking the trend.
They are the two biggest bullies on the block and like to beat each other up. They are both collectivist ideologies. And collectivism is immoral at its foundation because it abolishes individual responsibility, replacing it with group responsibility. And groups aren’t and can’t be moral agents.
Liberalism is objectively the biggest bully on the block. The US spends more money on the military than the next several countries combined, and we've used it to bomb the ever loving shit out of the rest of the world. Everything else you said is also wrong and stupid.
Of course fascism is collectivism. It is group empowerment over the individual. Corporations, unions, associations (and their leaders specifically) gaining power and wealth via legalized government coercion. That is fascism. Obamacare is fascist.
Just read a few reviews and it doesn't sound like this book reinforces any of your points. The Nazis were primarily middle class business owners who hated the labor movement and the unemployed and wanted violence to restore order.
How did unions benefit from the Nazis? They killed unions!
Immoral is when you build community and have empathy for those around you, which removes all individual responsibility to not be a shithead, somehow. 🤡
Free market capitalism doesn’t have a powerful government to bribe buy and co-opt for its power. A small government would not be an attractive target. A powerful government is an attractive target to control. Fascism requires a powerful government. So make government small. Fascism is limited
You can't compete in the global market without centralized planning. And the way that china does when a very few in the country suck up all the benefit
You know, the market doesn't allocate resources where society needs it in allocates. Resources where it's most profitable for those who have them
That's why they're not doing anything about climate change. They came up with a math formula to arbitrarily discount our lives in the future so that they could justify letting us all die from it
Google discounting 101
There is no free hand of the market. It's a visible hand of the bank n the state
Collectivism is not “immoral”. People have personal responsibility AND responsibility to the collective. But in this instance “personal responsibility” doesn’t mean “make enough money to not be a burden on society.”
BlueSky intellect is tough to fathom. Let’s try. Who makes the decisions between right and wrong in a group? When the AMA says this is right and that is wrong, who is determining that?
the poster is extrapolating his own poor character to mankind writ large. i can see how one would reach that conclusion when the only person you are sucks
This reads like you dug up Ayn Rand’s corpse and are trying to figure out how to molest it. Take some individual responsibility and stop it; it’s disgusting!
What’s even funnier is that the Babylon Bee article is basically poking fun at calling everything “nazi”, while he himself is basically calling everything nazi or fascist.
Rightwingers really are incapable of introspection.
I always find appeals to individual responsibility pretty funny because like… alright, where?? That sounds like a good idea, are we ever gonna try it??
So the alternative is coercion? People have to be forced to be good? And what sort of people end up getting the positions to do the forcing? The best people? Do good people rise to power in politics? Or is it the worst sort of people who end up getting the political power to coerce?
There’s no such thing as a non-coercive model of society, by the very interaction with others, you coerce them in ways both big and small even if your heart is pure. Just the name of the game, no right or wrong to it. What CAN be given “right” or “wrong” is what the coercion is aimed towards and how
it polices and refines its OWN practices. If we agree that society is a good thing, we have to agree on a way of coercion that makes sense and provides the most possibility for individuals within it to do what they may. If not, the only non-coercive alternative is dissolving society and living in
Gentile argued explicitly against the idea that fascism is collectivist. It was individualist, and the statism becomes an “expression of the individual.”
Political prisoners were like 2% of the inmates of a system with a 5 to 15 year maximum sentence for the worst crimes in a country where the population and life expectancy only went up after WWIII
You are a big dumb dummy. I say this as someone who is not a die-hard communist. I am a militant antifascist and I can give you 100% guarantee they are no where near the same.
Were you shoved into a locker by a communist? It feels like you have.
Voluntary associations are one thing. But each individual should still be held responsible for the decisions they make, even if they are executives at a corporation. Communism socialism fascism are coerced and therefore wrong.
If the corporations don’t have much government to buy, they can’t use government to coerce their will on us. Because only government can legally coerce. Corporations can persuade and manipulate and cajole. But they aren’t allowed to coerce except via co-opting government (aka fascism).
Comments
Big brain: "The authoritarian leadership style of fascism and certain communist societies makes distinguishing between them irrelevant"
Giga brain: "erm, the Nazi party was called the national SOCIALIST party"
Fascism is when the... uh.
Communism is for crazy peop- ... hmm.
Maybe I ought to look some of these words up'
"Hitler was a socialist" you don't know what socialism is
"economic inequality is good" I don't like it when people starve because they are poor
CONGRATS! You just won the dumb dumb award🏆🏆🏆
sometimes I tell them the difference between the two, regardless I have been handing out a lot of awards lately.
Fascism is straight-forward perversion of public fears and resentments, economic crises, promotion of a mythic past and promise of rebirth to suppress dissent, promote militarism, and rule via dictatorship.
"The Communists do not preach morality at all."
That would be a silly statement to make about communists generally. He was talking specifically about the Communist League.
Why are you being an ass? That's a rhetorical question. I don't care why you are, I already know you are.
All the papers I can find examine existing implementations of political stepchildren.
Marx is waiting, smiling, a sword at his hip: "Why do you think we call it the 'Immortal Schiensch', lad? Now get up, we muscht schtaht your training."
He just used his normal Scottish accent to play a Spanish nobleman, so I figured he wouldn't change it for a German philosopher either.
Now go away while I'm busy getting all the woke out of government.
a democratic republic?
They want minority rule by a very few people, who they are greedy with.
Reason is the centralization of power that plays a key role in comunism. tends to be taken advantage of by leaders with fascistic tendancies.
... Just like Trump.😁
It started with the state deciding everything and it ended up with one guy deciding everything.
Just like the US these days🤷
Fascists: "We did a coup and are now shipping people to illegal death camps, even as the courts try to stop us."
Liberals: "Both are law-breakers, and I will not support them. 😌"
Look what has happened to every emerging "communist" state; they all turn into dictatorships.
Trotsky wrote about the ‘permanent revolution’ partly as a strategy to prevent that very thing of so-called communist dictatorships. What happened to him after Lenin’s untimely and premature death and Stalin’s power-grab. 🤔
Not sure why i didn't go on to mention that too.
I meant to!
- is the default "comeback" of I ended mention the Munich agreement.
Most assuredly not even similar.
Is there a reason they are 2 different words?
How did unions benefit from the Nazis? They killed unions!
Decision between right and wrong?
The long answer is yes, obviously.
Hopeless stooges, every one of you.
You're not free when you're constantly coerced to have to work for slave wages to not die
You don't have liberty when everything you do is surveilled
You know, the market doesn't allocate resources where society needs it in allocates. Resources where it's most profitable for those who have them
Google discounting 101
There is no free hand of the market. It's a visible hand of the bank n the state
Collectivism is not “immoral”. People have personal responsibility AND responsibility to the collective. But in this instance “personal responsibility” doesn’t mean “make enough money to not be a burden on society.”
Rightwingers really are incapable of introspection.
Lenin:
Western media called it a "controversial" memorial, I think it was hilarious.
Were you shoved into a locker by a communist? It feels like you have.
Go read a funny page or something and leave people alone on the good app.
We couldn't have survived if we never worked together.
Stop being ridiculous.