• czech@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fascism:

    a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

    Yea wow, we’ve never seen that in the last 7 years!

    I can see I really triggered you with that word. It’s hilarious that you self-identified with it and got defensive.

    • 10A@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It certainly does sound like typical leftists if you squint. Everyone in this thread opposing free speech is an authoritarian. But if you actually read that definition word for word, it’s a position almost nobody supports. What’s more, the definition has been changed from the original political affiliation. I’m not surprised Miriam-Webster’s open to redefining words, but try as they might, words still mean what they originally meant. Still, their definition is close enough to the original to demonstrate my point that there are no fascists left, unless you squint and look at modern leftists.

      • czech@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ah, right- There are no fascists but if there are it’s the leftists! Thanks for a good laugh today. Don’t ever let facts get in your way, bud.

        • 10A@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hmm, let’s break it down:

          a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti)

          Could be leftists, conservatives, or any other political group.

          that exalts nation and often race above the individual

          Well that excludes conservatives, because conservatism celebrates rugged individualism.

          Leftism, by contrast, embraces groups above individualism. This is what conservatives usually refer to as neo-Marxism. It’s also known as identity politics. It’s this idea that we’re all members of a group, and that group gives us our identity. Then with intersectionality, you have multiple groups defining identity.

          Two caveats:

          1. Christians are the exception to the rule, where many conservatives do embrace an identity that can be defined as a group.
          2. Leftists do exalt groups above the individual, but those groups are not normally the nation (at least not in the US).

          and that stands for a centralized autocratic government

          Yes, in general, conservatives support small government, while leftists prefer government regulations over private business, government handouts for the poor, government taxation of the wealthy, and government control of every little thing in life — basically big government.

          Centralized? In the US, centralized means federal control whereas decentralized means State and local control. Leftists generally prefer the former, whereas conservatives generally prefer the latter.

          headed by a dictatorial leader

          Not applicable in the US, but I wouldn’t put it past the Left in the near future.

          severe economic and social regimentation,

          Yep, see this thread for instance. Leftist love regimented control over what we’re allowed to think, and they love silencing the opposition.

          and forcible suppression of opposition

          Oh, you mean like when Biden has his primary opponent, Trump, tied up in court with accusations and a threat of imprisonment? Or, you mean like this very thread where leftists are trying to silence the TERFs? Yes, leftists absolutely love the forcible suppression of their opposition.

          In conclusion, no, it’s not a perfect fit for leftists, but it’s loosely close — and it certainly doesn’t fit conservatives even slightly.

          • czech@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Great theory, but lets take a look at reality.

            that exalts nation and often race above the individual

            Have you heard of MAGA?

            and that stands for a centralized autocratic government

            While Trump announced he “plans to eliminate executive branch constraints on his power if he is elected president in 2024”

            headed by a dictatorial leader

            See the last point…

            and forcible suppression of opposition

            Like Jan 6th.

            You can’t just make up whatever you want when you’re not in /r/conservative. You are constrained by reality. Nobody is here to delete my posts and ban me for you.

            • 10A@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Yes, well the MAGA crowd isn’t very conservative if you ask me, and personally I support DeSantis. I think Democrats are strongly pushing for a Trump nomination because they know he’s unelectable, and it’s an easy play.

              But to your point, I concede that most people do consider MAGA to be right wing, and that Trump has on several occasions said things suggesting he’d like an autocracy. I think we can agree that’d be undesirable. I just don’t think it’s very conservative.

              Like Jan 6th.

              All that was, was a group of jaded voters who believed (rightly or wrongly) that there was election fraud. Personally I see no evidence of fraud substantial enough to change the election. But at the same time, I recognize that for someone who truly did believe there was election fraud, they were upset and they wanted to protest about it. That’s all it was — a protest that was legitimate based on what they believed.

              You are constrained by reality. Nobody is here to delete my posts and ban me for you.

              And I’m glad about that, 100%. I wouldn’t want you banned.

              But back to the definition, you can’t just pluck a couple of words out of there and say it’s a match. The whole definition fits the left way better than the right, and yet in truth doesn’t fit either completely.

              • danhakimi@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                “lol, I hate the main conservative group in the US because they’re not the right kind of Scotsman conservative. Instead, I love the guy who been pushing the most extreme book-banning policy in the US.”

                did you forget that this was a conversation about fascism when you brought DeSantis up, or do you not know who he is?

                (rightly or wrongly)

                lol no

                But at the same time, I recognize that for someone who truly did believe there was election fraud

                who do you think tricked them into believing that? or do you think it was all one massive coincidence?

              • czech@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                But back to the definition, you can’t just pluck a couple of words out of there and say it’s a match.

                That’s what you did. So I responded with actual examples, using the conservative front runner- and you replied with “no true Scotsman”.

                That makes absolutely no sense.

                Or, you mean like this very thread where leftists are trying to silence the TERFs? Yes, leftists absolutely love the forcible suppression of their opposition.

                Oh wow did somebody place you under arrest for posting your opinions online?? Or does this have absolutely nothing to do with free speech, again?

                • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Well, if he didn’t selectively edit reality, he wouldn’t be conservative but my money is on “this is how he stays mask on”.

                  He doesn’t truly believe anything he’s just said. That’s why if you check his history, it’s littered with examples of Fascist Brand™ nationalism that he’s just claimed conservatives don’t believe in.

                  He knows his peers and politicians fit the fascist label better than anyone. That’s why self-confessed, swastika-waving fascists support them and more than likely why he supports them.

                  It took decades to dawn on them, but nobody gives a shit what fascists and neo-nazis think about the way society is run. Their gold standard is a genocide.

                  And so the alt-right was born. They had the same opinions as neo-nazis, the same key figures as neo-nazis and the same solutions as neo-nazis but they staunchly insisted they weren’t neo-nazis.

                  That plausible deniability earned them a platform they’d previously only dreamed of. Not just social media and it’s endless pool of disaffected young men and unmedicated schizophrenics but actual international news networks who hadn’t handed a mic to a Nazi since Hitler.

                  Of course, they couldn’t keep it in their pants for long. They triumphantly ripped off their masks at the “Unite The Right”, proudly displaying their swastika tattoos, white supremacist chants and domestic terrorism against innocent people deemed “leftist”.

                  Their plausible deniability vanished, as did some of their biggest, violentest, most slur-friendly platforms. So they retreated, regrouped and came back with a new strategy.

                  They’re just “conservatives” now. Still the same neo-nazi opinions, still the same neo-nazi figures, still the same neo-nazi solutions. But if you state the obvious, they’ll deny it. They’ll try and shame you for saying it. They’ll claim over and over again that the alt-right never existed and they’re just average conservatives. Maybe even moderates.

                  Not because they believe it, but because they know that going mask off loses them platforms.

                  This guy definitely knows it. His tactics aren’t just rehearsed, but traceable back to brain-storming sessions held by racists, sexists and extremists where they openly try and figure out how best to “red-pill” vulnerable people like children, the lonely, the stupid and the mentally ill.

                  If your instance admin can’t see that, it’s time to find a new instance. That one has cancer and thinks they can stop it metastasizing with polite discussion.

                • 10A@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m not saying “no true Scotsman.” I’m saying Mussolini was a legitimate fascist, and his party died a long time ago. Some people today have similar traits, especially on the Left, but nobody is really part of his party anymore.

                  Free speech is a delicate principle. It requires everyone to firmly agree that everyone is allowed to speak freely, and we’re all prepared to fight to the death, literally, to defend their right to say it. It’s delicate because as soon as people abandon it, the entire project of western civilization can be destabilized. What we are permitted to say on kbin and every other online platform is the essence of free speech.

                  • danhakimi@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I’ve never heard anybody argue that fascism means “literally the Italian fascist party” before. Based on your previous comment, it seems that you’re unaware—many people consider the Nazis fascists, as well. Particularly, everybody who knows the first thing about fascism.

                  • czech@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Free speech is a delicate principle. It requires everyone to firmly agree that everyone is allowed to speak freely, and we’re all prepared to fight to the death, literally, to defend their right to say it

                    What? Says who? This only exists in r/conservative echo chambers. You’re free to say what you want but nobody has to listen.

                    The “prepared to fight to the death to defend it” is in reference to the “free speech” that the constitution protects. We literally had a war about it 300 years ago. You can’t have it both ways.

                    I’m not saying “no true Scotsman.” I’m saying Mussolini was a legitimate fascist, and his party died a long time ago. Some people today have similar traits, especially on the Left, but nobody is really part of his party anymore.

                    I’m saying Trump it the leader of the Conservative party in America and you are saying he’s not a true conservative. It’s the definition of “no true Scotsman”. Stating it’s not doesn’t actually change anything.