So what exactly is fascism?

He was making a joke

>muh lefty boogeyman
You do realize the right wing has also called Obama and Clinton fascist as well? It's just another trendy hip buzzword thrown around with no meaning, and it's not just the raging liberals at huffpo.

Politically, the Manifesto calls for:

Universal suffrage with a lowered voting age to 18 years, and voting and electoral office eligibility for all age 25 and up;
Proportional representation on a regional basis;
Voting for women (which was opposed by most other European nations);
Representation at government level of newly created national councils by economic sector;
The abolition of the Italian Senate (at the time, the Senate, as the upper house of parliament, was by process elected by the wealthier citizens, but were in reality direct appointments by the king. It has been described as a sort of extended council of the crown);
The formation of a national council of experts for labor, for industry, for transportation, for the public health, for communications, etc. Selections to be made of professionals or of tradesmen with legislative powers, and elected directly to a general commission with ministerial powers.
In labor and social policy, the Manifesto calls for:

The quick enactment of a law of the state that sanctions an eight-hour workday for all workers;
A minimum wage;
The participation of workers' representatives in the functions of industry commissions;
To show the same confidence in the labor unions (that prove to be technically and morally worthy) as is given to industry executives or public servants;
Reorganization of the railways and the transport sector;
Revision of the draft law on invalidity insurance;
Reduction of the retirement age from 65 to 55.
In military affairs, the Manifesto advocates:

Creation of a short-service national militia with specifically defensive responsibilities;
Armaments factories are to be nationalized;

Fiscally liberal

Socially conservative

A peaceful but competitive foreign policy.
In finance, the Manifesto advocates:

A strong progressive tax on capital (envisaging a “partial expropriation” of concentrated wealth);
The seizure of all the possessions of the religious congregations and the abolition of all the bishoprics, which constitute an enormous liability on the Nation and on the privileges of the poor;
Revision of all contracts for military provisions;
The revision of all military contracts and the seizure of 85 percent of the profits therein.

And yet many defined by so called Fascist scholars as falling within the area (Evola, Dugin, de Benoist) do not advocate or oppose Organicist conceptions of statehood (or the concept of the nation-state itself)

In the popular conception, it is anything you want it to be. To the point where serious academics retweeting phrases like "Fascism is capitalism plus violence" with a straight face

Literally a social democracy except with nationalism.
Kok tep.

its almost as if all the shit that initially made it so appealing minus the warmongering was canabalized after the war

really makes you think

Government controls everything you do, fascism sounds terrible because humans are hedonistic apes that go insane if they cant get their dopamine rushs and one way to do that is act temporarily like an idiot(having fun) which is not allowed in fascist states at all because its not efficient.

>muh human nature

Fascism has a meaning. I'll stop trolling you, but you should realize when someone is joking about the amount of overuse of the word.

You do realize the part about fascism being a meaningless buzzword was copied verbatim from your own post?

Putting the will of the people above all else.

An emotional movement as opposed to an intellectual one. That's why a fascist regime can have genuine popular support.

It's basically the use of force and populism to seize command of the regime and then experimenting and using pragmatism to govern.

Both Mussolini and Mosley's views constantly flip flopped depending on which newspaper they were writing for and which audience they were talking to.

For instance Mussolini tried to co-opt Italian feminists and proclaimed that he was not like the Conservatives of Italy who wanted to keep them out of work, but instead bring them into the work force and make them equal to men.

Three months later and he's addressing a crowd of Conservatives in Rome about how women are the "pillars of the state" and must remain at home because she must have children and her only work should be household duties.

READ WHAT MUSSOLINI HAD TO SAY HIMSELF:

worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm

REMINDER THAT THE FIRST HALF WASN'T ACTUALLY WRITTEN BY MUSSOLINI BUT IT'S WHAT HE AGREED WITH, HE WROTE THE REST.

Militarism and ultranationalism opposed to communism and materialism.

>An emotional movement as opposed to an intellectual one. That's why a fascist regime can have genuine popular support.
Movements and all human thought is rooted in emotion though.

Corporatism in the literal and not political sense of the word. (it doesn't have much to do with modern corporations)
A view of the country/nation as an organic body mixed with militarism, syndicalism and a one-party (or no-party) state.

Not all of it is bad, which is why so many on both the Left and the Right adored it prior to the rise of the Nazis, but of course the war-time realities kind of conflated all the fascist movements (many of which were mutually incompatible ideologically) so they all get attacked collectively.
That the Communists considered the non-German strains of Fascism to be among it's greatest enemies (it was born among Socialists as a reaction to the anti-nationalism among the Left) probably didn't hurt either in their willingness to use it as a slur for anyone who wasn't on the Left. Orwell was decrying this tactic as outplayed and downright silly as early as 1944 in his essay "What is Fascism?".

If you look to Social Democracy around the 1930s to late 1950s, particularly around Scandinavia, you'll find a ton of similarities with this outside of the militarism and that comes down to similar roots. (which is why some have dubbed their brand "Social Corporatism")
Japan arguably does something similar, though more out of the realities of their largest party's political structures than the historical roots. (they have a very direct yet pyramid-like structure between locals, local political organizations, political organizations and national politicians)

>Literally a social democracy except with nationalism.
>If you look to Social Democracy around the 1930s to late 1950s, particularly around Scandinavia, you'll find a ton of similarities
>(which is why some have dubbed their brand "Social Corporatism")
This pretty much.
The long and the short of it is that Fascism is Social Democracy before the Marxists got to it.

Yep, and if you add identity politics you get nazism.
Really fires those neurons doesn't it?

What bothers me about people calling fascism nationalistic is the fact that the doctrine of fascism expressively refutes the most basic point of nationalism, that is the nations' law of self-determination, that the political nation is what creates the state.
As far as I know, this has been the basis of every movement that called itself nationalistic.
Yet in the doctrine it says:
>In so far as it is embodied in a State, this higher personality becomes a nation. It is not the nation which generates the State; that is an antiquated naturalistic concept which afforded a basis for XIXth century publicity in favor of national governments. Rather is it the State which creates the nation, conferring volition and therefore real life on a people made aware of their moral unity.

Nah, the SocDems talked about blood and ethnicity a lot. Particularly keen on eugenics studies. They never went much farther than not letting people in and a few cases of unethical medical practices on those with inborn genetic defects (sterilization basically).

What you need to get Nazis is that racialism combined with militarist revanchism and expansionism. The latter two are far more important imo, once you get used to death and genuine win-or-die situations it gets much easier to justify atrocities.
Germany unfortunately was a militaristic hard-on-for-war state due to Prussian culture and WW1's consequences.

>Particularly keen on eugenics studies.
Like american democrat/progressists in the 1910-1940s?

That's an important bit. Fascism expressively states that the State is the Nation and not that the Nation is the State.
The difference might seem minor put like that but it is actually a huge fundamental difference in ideology.
That way the Demos is defined as a creation of the Nation/State, rather than the creator of the Nation AND State.
Note that the first does not differentiate between the Nation and State and the latter expressively considers the two different with the State subordinate to the Nation which IS the collective Demos.

Like everyone on the Left and Right in the 1920s, yes.
Though they had the state of the art research facilities on the subject iirc. Actual research mind you, by actual serious scholars and academics.

>What you need to get Nazis is that racialism combined with militarist revanchism and expansionism.
I thought the thread was about italian fascism

Well Fascism in general, which Italian Fascism is the original of, but that post did ask about the Nazis in particular.

Reminds me, what am I?

>want a government with little bureacracy and small taxes
>most of it's focus is as a regultory body
>social programs are to help the ones worst off get access to basic services, but only to the ones in need
>generally liberate the citizens to do as they please as long as they don't impose things on other citizens
>descentralized governance, create a sense of community and have the local branches of government be tightly related and working together for the local's interests rather than a federal imposition of their will
>infrastructure let to private and local discretion, with federal aid at best if requested
And some other things

>1938599
>want a government with little bureacracy and small taxes
>most of it's focus is as a regultory body
>social programs are to help the ones worst off get access to basic services, but only to the ones in need
>generally liberate the citizens to do as they please as long as they don't impose things on other citizens
>descentralized governance, create a sense of community and have the local branches of government be tightly related and working together for the local's interests rather than a federal imposition of their will
>infrastructure let to private and local discretion, with federal aid at best if requested
Sounds like Agrarianism combined with Classic Liberalism. (buyer beware though, shittons of Neoliberals hide under the latter term. You can generally suss them out based on their views on national borders.)

What's the difference between classic and neo?
I generally think the borders should be up to popular discretion (as in, leave the policy to the people), though I do believe the massive influx of people can cause a strain on services I'm assuming a state that small wouldn't have as many problems mantaining itself or being flexible assuming it's descentralized and that it would mostly attract people who generally see it as a positive place to be in, so there should be little issue with having easy acces to the country.

access*

fpbp

wtf I love Fascism now

i Believe a classic liberal

A doctrine

Support of capitalism while being for heavy state intervention of the economy, being anti-democratic and ultra-nationalist. It doesn't necessarily include racism (Mussolini wasn't that racist before allying with Hitler) but does usually fetishize and call for a return to pre-Christian (Roman/old-Germanic) ideals and virtues.

Veeky Forums is he our guy?

You see, I've always thought some aspects of fascism were quite appealing but the military/"muh aryan" shit has always been offputting, but nobody ever meaningfully discusses it because "das Hitler". What kind of movements are like this, blending corporatism and workers' rights, but without the military/racial shit?

edgy communism

Fascism used leftist terminology to distract workers from the crisis of capitalism. Trump does the same thing when he talks about the working class.

It also involves heavy militarism, a mixed economy, racial nationalism, rigid gender roles, romantic myths and mass culture.

Fascism is ultimately the last gasp of a capitalist system in decay. Germany and Italy had huge communist movements. The old elites and businessmen funded fascism.

The complete formula is :
Nationalism + Socialism - Marxism + Butthurt = Fascism

Decaying capitalism
marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1944/1944-fas.htm

Classic Liberals don't subscribe to a ton of Marxist-derived ideology regarding internationalism, enforced by law social liberalism or the state operating hand-in-hand with corporations. Negative rights are a very key concept to their philosophy.
Neoliberals abuse the shit out of Burke and Locke who barely mention immigration at all and outside of Locke (who said nothing of restrictions, merely saying they shouldn't throw out half the country because muh economics) barely any of the Classic Liberals looked on it keenly as it just wasn't very relevant to their extremely restricted societies.

>What kind of movements are like this, blending corporatism and workers' rights, but without the military/racial shit?
Social Corporatism.

This is some hard Leftypol sliding tovarishch.

>unionism

Do you mean labor unions or all people of one ethnicity living in the same country?

I'm left wing sure, don't post on leftypol tho

Yes, but fascism has no intellectual authority. No 'official' philosophers or authors or even a basic set of rules. I guess it's why fascism was so short-lived when it occured, compared to simple military dictatorships.

A jolly good time.

The only country right now that has the necessary elements for fascism to manifest is Putin's Russia, and even then I'm doubtful.

How so? Last time I checked, Russia is still too dependent on domestic and international investors and markets.

True, but no other country is as close to the ideal position.

Good sir, have you heard of China? It is quite a nice country and even though they themselves are calling themselves something else, they are fascist as fuck.
>genocide of minorities in xiang and tibet
>intense government-corporation collaboration
>media censored to control immorality and cultural undermining
>government's sole goals are racial triumph and high economic growth
>strong nationalism and state

The cultural revolution was more fascist than China today.

Democracy: when the majority agrees with me.

Fascism: when the majority disagrees with me.

Indeed it was, but that doesn't change the fact that China is still fascist to some extent - and that seems to be quite large imho.
A lot of European states have traits of fascism as well, it's just that nobody wants to admit it.
Be it taking care of sick, supporting mothers and generally those with children, state controlling the crucial industries (be it owning the power plants or the biggest factories, at least partially), providing safety regulations to workers, etc.
The main thing lacking is the idea that state is the most important body and that nation derives from state, rather than the other way around.

But the majority agree with electing Clinton for president.

China only look like a totalitarian corporatism from the outside, but from the inside it's a free-for-all carnage capitalism, where people produce/trade/swindle each other for personal gains. It's a bizarre place, really. Probably the latest evolution of capitalism which doesn't need liberalism nor democracy anymore.

Except Mussolini and Hitler were both anticapitalist and heavily criticized the bussiness owners of their respective countries.
Do you even know what Mussolini did before becoming leader of the fascists?
Do you read anything other than propaganda?

W-Was destroying Nazi Germany a mistake?

That wasn't Real National Socialism, user.
Remember, Hitler betrayed True National Socialism when he allied himself with the capitalists and killed off the true social part of the movement in 1934.

>An emotional movement as opposed to an intellectual one

Evola, Giovanni Gentile, Mosley himself was a considerable theorist.

Eh I posted this a few times here already.

But in terms of just definitions, I can only give you the opinion of pic related

Namely, that fascism is palingenetic populist ultra-nationalism.

Basically, non-liberal non-democratic "from below" nationalism that portrays the nation as being reborn from a period of decadence and degeneracy.

A and not A

N-NO SHUT UP R-REMEMBER ETERNAL GO... I MEAN TEUTON DESTROYS EVERYTHING

BACK TO >>>>>/POL/
POLAND FRANCE MASTERRACE

>Usually (but not exclusively) a nationalist phenomena
Were there any non-nationalist fascists?

Hmm, isn't there another country that combines a 30 year slow motion deligitimation crisis, rampant militarism, 30 years of exposure to psuedo-fascist political rhetoric, increasing fusion of corporate and state power, and profound tribalism?

That also just elected an unabashed right wing populist, proving that right wing populism can come to power while making zero concessions to the hated other tribe?

Or is this a case of fish having a hard time sensing water?

thats how Mussolini saw it too

There is no "exactly" to fascism, because it took a different form wherever it sprung up and didn't spring from a cohesive intellectual background the way Marxism or Liberalism did. At its core, it's a form of militaristic despotism mixed with populism.

this
pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph5823831ee84b0

How can Antifa be real if Fascism is not real?

This. The justifications came after power was seized

It's an excuse for edgy people to go beat someone up. I really dislike Antifa and I think they are just violent thugs, not unlike some of the facists they like to beat up.

Yes, he is.

Soviets starting with Stalin, and ending with Gorbachev.

Stalin was a nationalist, it's just the nation that was supposed to be the subject of that nationalism (the soviet nation) was never created.

>Fascism
>voting

Corporatism with an element of nationalism

>tfw no qt mistress

actually NSDAP Germany and Italy had vots all the time.

Fascism in Italy were it not for the fault of the partisans traitors, l 'Italy today would have more power in europe and the respect in the world. Unfortunately the story is written by those who won the war, then from fucking traitors pseudocomunisti

Fascism in Italy were it not for the fault of the partisans traitors, l 'Italy today would have more power in europe and the respect in the world. Unfortunately the story is written by those who won the war, then from fucking traitors pseudocomunist