Why is fascism considered right wing when it's clearly a politically centrist ideology that's reacting against both...

It's a buzzword today, like Communism.

...

>Le NSDAP were left-wing meme
Fuck off ron paul

>Muh big gubmint boogyman

really people still think that fascism is right-wing or left-wing? fascism is third position
t. rexist fascist

what makes it "third" position

Because fascism is inherently morally conservative.

Because fascism decrees that everyone is who they were born to be and you cannot change that. Fascism defines you by your sex, race and religion and allots you a place in society according to that. This is a right wing concept.

Just because fascism is authoritarian doesn't mean it's left wing.

>still believing in the political compass

When will this meme end

>fascism is a left-wing collectivist big government ideology
>This is what people actually believe

>Fascism defines you by your sex, race and religion and allots you a place in society according to that. This is a right wing concept.
So SJWs are right wing now? Good to know.

From urban dictionary:

>Social Justice Warrior. A pejorative term for an individual who repeatedly and vehemently engages in arguments on social justice on the Internet, often in a shallow or not well-thought-out way, for the purpose of raising their own personal reputation. A social justice warrior, or SJW, does not necessarily strongly believe all that they say, or even care about the groups they are fighting on behalf of. They typically repeat points from whoever is the most popular blogger or commenter of the moment, hoping that they will "get SJ points" and become popular in return. They are very sure to adopt stances that are "correct" in their social circle.

>The SJW's favorite activity of all is to dogpile. Their favorite websites to frequent are Livejournal and Tumblr. They do not have relevant favorite real-world places, because SJWs are primarily civil rights activists only online.

So to answer your question; No.

Fascism is the final boss of Capitalism.

Fascism is a reactionary ideology,hankering back to a time when warlords and tribes ruled.

Actually...

>mfw I realize /pol/ types are SJWs
Really makes ya think.

Everyone else hit this realization in like 2012.

GG catching up.

Remember the backbreaker that started all this shit

No they where Futurist, but also primitivist, but also socialist, but also ecologist but also insdustrialist but also [insert word].
FAcism never been a defined ideologie so they weren't Right or Left, they're were a mess of idea and clashing interest.

Facist werent all Nazi,
>Race
Italien fascisme was nation based, the race was added much latter.
>Sex
At this time feminisme was first wave, you can't say that gender inegality was a facist thing when France didn"t give vote right to woman.
>Religion
Also false, see the Nazi.

So no Facist was the 3e way, between the "degenerate" democrate and the "degenerate" bolchevik.

>reacting against both communism and capitalism in equal parts?

Because fascism doesn't really react against capitalist markets, they just want to control the capitalists.

Truth

Basically the political spectrum has more than one axis but the establishment want to keep it into only one axis : comunism-capitalism.

They just dub as extremists whoever they want to ban from power.

other axis : Nationalism-Internationnalism
I guess other axis may be found.

>Italien fascisme was nation based, the race was added much latter.
Nationality is just another way of segregating people. You cannot discount it.

>At this time feminisme was first wave, you can't say that gender inegality was a facist thing when France didn"t give vote right to woman.
Fascists actively opposed feminists and women's rights.

>Also false, see the Nazi
If anyone segregated people based on religion, it was the nazis. Rosenbergs trite is about nothing else.

I'm not suggesting that Fascism is set, it is different in every country. But an important part of fascism is the division of people into different groups, who are all treated according to their sex, race or religion.

jesse cox is a pretty cool guy desu

>Nationality is just another way of segregating people.
So are unions. Man, that pesky working class trying to advance its own interest, am I right?

Unions are voluntary.

You're free to emigrate to another nation if you don't like one that acts in the interests of its citizenry first and foremost.

No they aren't, only some are.

tbqh, if you haven't read anything from Ironmarch you have no room to speak about anything involving Fascism/Nazism as your opinion is literally based upon regurgitated memes and media telephone games without a shred of actual ideology, philosophy, or history to backup your views.

>Nationality is just another way of segregating people. You cannot discount it.
It a sound division at this time for me.

>Fascists actively opposed feminists and women's rights.
All anti-feminist weren't nazi, french Republican oppose feminist and yet aren't facist, so my point still tend, they're were in accord with their time.

>But an important part of fascism is the division of people into different groups.
Judaism with the concept of Chosen, Islam with the concept of Ouma lot of religion, Marxism and the concept of class, feodalism, indian caste system, division between us and them is the begining of group identity, it isn't a purely fascist ocurrence .

What does that have to do with anything?
My views on fascism is based on actual fascist states, not some internet forum where nobody can agree with anyone else.

I'm not saying all anti-feminists are fascists, I'm simply defining one trait of fascim which places it in the right.

>My views on fascism is based on actual fascist states
Then we can agree that fascism goes hand in hand with promoting worker's rights.

>Rexists
>Thinking Belgium is a real country

Because it focuses on extreme ultra-nationalism and scapegoating of minorities.

Because when people who don't have the first clue what they're talking about, like yourself, spew their misguided opinions all it does is lower the quality of public discourse and prevent us from taking away the good qualities of Fascism/Nazism.

Ostensibly, yes. But no fascist state I know of have improved the life of workers. Nazis forbade all unions except their own, lowered wages, gave immense power to employers and allied himself with the old money of Hugenberg.

Mussolini forbade demonstrations and protests and limited workers freedoms.

Ok.

the good qualities of Fascism/Nazism.
Nazi were one of the most failed state ever, they're how you don't run a modern state guide.
Turf war, misinformation and political complot was a daily occurence in War period germany.

Historically speaking there hasn't been any success for Fascism / Nazism.

It's consistently ended in epic failure.

Nazi also cause full employement, restore national pride, get vacancy center for working class(force through joy, something like that), they weren't rutless capitalist right wing, they were ultra nationalist corporatist socialist centrist, yep Right-left axi is ineficient to modelize politic.

fascism by defintion is right wing

fascism
ˈfaʃJz(ə)m/
noun
an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

So is national socialism

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

Full employement is not that great if employment is bad. Overall, all wages dropped during the nazi regime and the state elite lived well in luxuary. "Voluntary" charities sapped the remainder of the workers Pay. Not that there were any consumer goods to spend it on to begin with.

Robert Ley, the minister of work, was a corrupt drunk sex maniac.

Strength through Joy was a nice initiative, but ceased entirely when war broke out. The italians had a similar program. Both only applied to Aryan/Italian nationals, as per fascist doctrine.

>Italian nationals
Don't see why a nation should not prioritize it own national.

Because the right wing means different thing to different people. It refers to economic freedom and traditional values at the same time which dont necessarily have to go with one another. I dont like the Nolan chart but it does a good job showing how Fascism and Libertarianism can both be considered right wing. In many ways Fascism is considered right wing because nationalism is seen as the traditional antithesis to globalism.

>american education

Neither did the fascists.

Wait, the wages in Nazi Germany were lower than that in the Wiemar republic? This could only be possible if you weren't adjusting for the massive inflation when a reichmark was more valuable to burned than to be sold

There were no preceding statements.

:^)

Of course you have to adjust for inflation, otherwise the workers of the weimar republic were the best paid workers of all time.

That's what I meant, so those that were employed were actually making a decent amount of money? I'm sure the benefits of that were offset by the massive unemployment

Are you impling:
>Because you consider that a nation should consider itself fisrt you're a fascist.

Because Mussolini, Mosley and many other fascists were not racists. Hitler =/= all fascism.

If you accept that the Soviet Union was not communist (which it wasn't) you need to accept that Nazi Germany wasn't nationalist (because it wasn't).

>scapegoating
You mean populism? Yes, every political party ever does populism to some extent. Whether it's the 1%, jews or whatever

Both Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy followed fairly standard Keynesian economics, which was the dominant school of economic thought at the time. Neither Fascism or Nazism (if you consider Nazism separate) have left any useful body of thought behind about how to run an economy.

First of all, the hyperinflation occured during the early 20's and the economy stabilized log before the nazis came to power.
The major catastrophe was not the low quality of living for thr average employed, but for the Unemployed - of which there were Many. Social programs shut down and there were no unemployment benefits.

But towards the end, the Weimar republic workers were fairly well off.

Second, the workers of the

This is exactly the reason. Social marxists that infiltrated US academia have labeled it as right-wing to imply going far enough down traditionalist paths somehow magically leads to fascism.

No. Again, Im simply explaining what makes fascism right wing.

>If you accept that the Soviet Union was not communist

Eh? When did I remotely suggest I accepted that?

>you need to accept that Nazi Germany wasn't nationalist

I don't need to accept Nazi Germany wasn't nationalist under any circumstances, because it objectively was.

Fascism is not conservative. It's AGAINST reactionary politics and is in fact progressive and radical, considering it wants to create "new man" and "new society", rather than returning to status quo ante.

This is also why people like Evola or Franco cannot be called fascists.

Fascism is in no way progressive. Fascist culture is exclusively conservative. Operas and Classical beauty were cherished, whereas a-tonal music and abstract art was viewed as degenerate.

National preferency isn't right wing or left wing, it the base of a nation. Some french socialist(Joffre is thing) say that for the poor nation is the last refuge.
Also i use Nation not in the way of race related group but the French/American definition, citizen based nation.

It wasn't.

I'll tell this now and simply. You may wish to argue against me but it will only end in
a) you admitting you were wrong and using wrong terms
b) you shitflinging and starting to argue semantics because you were wrong

Nazi Germany was imperialist, not nationalist. Imperialism is the direct opposite of nationalist. Hitler wanted to create an pan-European state, and allowed such peoples as: Norwegians, French, Hungarians, some slavs, finns to operate under his empire.

A nationalist would have seen an influx of such foreign peoples as an threat to the homogeneity of the state and thus the stability of the state.

Hitler and Nazi Germany was not nationalist, even if they claimed to be. In the same way as The USSR wasn't communist even if they claimed to be.

Fascism is radical and revolutionary rather than conservative. You'll have to come up with some citations that suggest it has ever been labelled as "progressive".

And futurism, Fascist were not a coherent ideologie, but sure they ally with reactionary(Franco wasn't truly a fascist).

fascism doesnt exist. Its just a meme to describe an authoritarian regime you disagree with

>abstract art was viewed as degenerate
>Classical beauty

Look at this shit and tell me there's anything "classical" about it.

As someone that wrote a literal dissertation in the Fascist ideology I'm laughing at you.

Imperialism and nationalism aren't mutually exclusive concepts nor is the claim that Nazism was prepared to accept some other European peoples under it's ethno-nationalistic ideology an argument that it was not nationalistic.

Rambling on about the USSR is, again, just a random strawman that you have brought up.

That's not art, it's a propaganda poster.

>propaganda is not art

I've seen many things in my life.

But this is the first time I've ever seen anyone reject that nazism was a nationalistic ideology.

What the fuck. Do you even know what Nationalism means?

>Hitler wanted to create an pan-European state
I need a source for that, seems like brexiter bullshit
>Norwegians, French, Hungarians, some slavs, finns to operate under his empire
Wrong, he want to band together all percieved german, and add "race"stock that can benefit germany(Czech in example) he was clearly in the line of romantic pan-german.

Nationalism do not exclude Imperialism, see bismarck or the French Revolution(or hte french at all).

Even if it is, it's certainly not abstract.

I can't help myself but love Axi and URSS propaganda, they were just you know.. good at propaganda.

it takes a lot of things from different ideologies which is why it's called the 3rd way

Just accept you know fuck all about fascist art and that much of it isn't Classical at all.

>URSS
>United of Republics Soviet Socialist

???

Well, you have me convinced. I need to brush up on my Saffretti.

>Union des républiques socialistes soviétiques

Coюз Coвeтcких Coциaлиcтичecких Pecпyблик

>Coюз
Union

>Coвeтcких
(of) Soviet

>Coциaлиcтичecких
Socialist

>Pecпyблик
Republics

all art is propaganda

No, some art is advertisement.

cont

Some art are just Art for the Art see:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Void

>Imperialism and nationalism aren't mutually exclusive concepts
Yes they are. Under specific circumstances such as Bismarck it can be maintaiend as nationalist, (as stated) but in the end a maintained imperialist policy (the continuous extent of your states power) is unsustainable as nationalist. Soon enough Bismarck had united all the Germanic peoples, but German Imperialism didn't stop. They took African countries and islands from the pacific. The moment they did this, they seized to become nationalist.
>is the claim that Nazism was prepared to accept some other European peoples under it's ethno-nationalistic ideology an argument that it was not nationalistic.
But it literally is. Nationalism as all ideologies consists of two parts: The ideology and the method. The ideology of nationalism is that all languages, cultures and/or races deserve their own nation state. This can be extended to the idea that a homogeneous state is the most stable state. The methods of nationalism are things which maintain this, be it integration or assimilation programmes or in the case of ethnic nationalism genocide. Thus accepting foreign peoples into your empire makes it not nationalist.

>Wrong, he want to band together all percieved german, and add "race"stock that can benefit germany(Czech in example) he was clearly in the line of romantic pan-german.

This is very much circular reasoning. Nationalism can never be based on something that isn't real, such as the "aryan" identity Hitler envisioned. It always has to be based on something real, such as a real culture or a real a language. The Aryan race Hitler envisioned is not real, as he handed it out like candy to people who are quite different from Germans such as the Japanese and Finns.

>But this is the first time I've ever seen anyone reject that nazism was a nationalistic ideology.
It isn't as uncommon as you think when you go outside of History channel.

cont:
>Rambling on about the USSR is, again, just a random strawman that you have brought up.
Strawman

def:"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent."
Never did I claim that you argued anything about the soviet union.

I used the soviet union as a parallel, because it too was an institution that used some ideology to stir up the masses, and claimed to represent it but in the end wasn't anything like that

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Order_(Nazism)
Pan-European was probably the wrong word since it goes beyond europe but the point still stands:

Hitler wanted to rule an multicultural, multi-ethnic Empire.

>Yes they are.

Nope. In fact they usually go hand in hand.

>imperialism
>the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies..

dictionary.com/browse/imperialism

>The moment they did this, they seized to become nationalist.

I'm laughing at this on multiple levels.

Btw, why is it okay to hate some harful ideologies (nazism, communism...etc) while it's illegal to even criticize some others (islam)?

>Nope. In fact they usually go hand in hand.
Actually they don't. Germany is the only European empire that claimed to be ideologically nationalist. Other strongly nationalist countries like: Finland, Greece, Hungary and so on never maintained imperialist policies. Their thoughts on expansionism was always based on liberating their own peoples, Karelia for Finns, Western Anatolia for Greeks and so on.

Your entire idea of nationalism is based on Germany, and you ignore all other history behind the movement.

But again, your post lacks any argument. You aren't saying anything of substance, and essentially just repeating "Lol u wrong".

>Hitler wanted to rule an multicultural, multi-ethnic Empire.

No he didnt. Hitler wanted to colonize eastern europe+Russia and take all their resources so he could turn Germany into a completely self-sufficient super power.

He also had a very strick list of peoples to be done away with, particularly jews who were being killed off. He also planned to completely destory things like Polish identity. Polish culture, nationalism, history, architecture and language would be done away with. They were taking polish kids and putting them through a very strict "germinization" program. The persecution of the Poles got so bad, even Mussolini protested against it as completely unnecessary.

Hitler and nazism was about German superiority, not white power

I know. Hitler did maintain some nationalist methods, but nationalism as an ideology is absolutist.

There is no "partly homogeneous" homogeneity. Even if Hitler wanted to genocide poles, slavs and jews he still allowed plenty of other cultures to live in his Empire.

>honorary Aryans
Do you not know what this meant? Race is entirely real btw. Google Lewontin's Fallacy and learn why you're stupid.

It's anything. Strasser, Rohm, Hitler, Mussolini, Franco and Hirohito had far different political leanings all over the place. Fascism is a meaningless buzzword.

The fact it called itself the third way