Trigger warning: fascism vs communism

He said it was communism you mong
And that is what it is

>progress of the state
State is just a vehicle, the people or race are the logical entity that Fascism projects on. This race thing is just as much bullshit as the class definition of Communism.

>Totalitarian state in which traditional values are exemplified.
Really? Because most people would consider Nazi Germany a fascistic country and they gave absolutely zero fuck about traditional values.

>in which all traditional social values, such as the nuclear family and the institution of marriage are broken down.

Sauce? I don't remember Marx or Engels having such extreme opinions about family and marriage.

Yes, there's massive ideological differences between fascism and communism.

Communists think democracy, class war, internationalism and anti-traditionalism are all good things (in ideology, how well communists live up to this in practice is a different matter).

Fascists think rigid state control, class collaboration, nationalism and traditionalism are all good things.

In ideology they couldn't be any further apart.

Nazi Germany did care about traditional values. They just had an extremely bastardized concept of what was traditional that had much more to do with nationalist romanticism than the actual tradition evolution of historical German states.

>Abolition [Aufhebung] of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists. On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution. The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital. Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime we plead guilty. But, you say, we destroy the most hallowed of relations, when we replace home education by
social. And your education! Is not that also social, and determined by the social conditions under which you educate, by the intervention direct or indirect, of society, by means of schools, &c.? The Communists have not invented the intervention of society in education; they do but seek to alter the character of that intervention, and to rescue education from the influence of the ruling class.
The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parents and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.

This is from the Communist manifesto. They opposed family as an oppressive structure, much like they opposed the employer-employee relation, the state (considered it tyrannical because man was subject to it), religion (authentic nature of man was subject to doctrine) etc.

People tend to forget that the thing communists valued most was freedom (equality is memed as their value in the US, because they chose to redefine freedom as 'economic freedom', which is really at odds with the view of the classical communists), which generally put them in the same camp with anarchists.

Not that user btw.

Not to mention how much at odds it puts them with fascists, who consider freedom solely within the spectrum of duty to the society.

>There is a Liberal theory of freedom, and there is a Fascist concept of liberty. For we, too, maintain the necessity of safeguarding the conditions that make for the free development of the individual; we, too, believe that the oppression of individual personality can find no place in the modern state. We do not, however, accept a bill of rights which tends to make the individual superior to the state and to empower him to act in opposition to society.

...

>Freedom therefore is due to the citizen and to classes on condition that they exercise it in the interest of society as a whole and within the limits set by social exigencies, liberty being, like any other individual right, a concession of the state. What I say concerning civil liberties applies to economic freedom as well. Fascism does not look upon the doctrine of economic liberty as an absolute dogma. It does not refer economic problems to individual needs, to individual interest, to individual solutions. On the contrary it considers the economic development, and especially the production of wealth, as an eminently social concern, wealth being for society an essential element of power and prosperity.

Implying Fascist shit like Lebensborn did not exists with he exact same goal.

Hahahahaha holy shit, they were even bigger cucks than I originally thought.

>the traditional family is the bedrock of society
>traditional role of women
Hahahaha, sure.

>Communism
>Power in the parties hands, no unionism allowed, collectivization ensues
>Fascism
>Power in the parties hands, corporatist councils of workers and owners exist (in theory)
Fascism, at least in theory, holds to more syndicalist views compared to communism

Socialism is not the same as communism. Get your concepts straghtened out.

Socialism isn't syndicalist either

Was literally going to say this

Is this a joke?

Communists believe a proletarian state should be used to establish a stateless, classless, and moneyless society.

Fascists believe the state should be strong, strictly-ordered, and permanent.

>OP ask about difference between commie and fascist
>user kinda answer

>socialist is not the same as communism

Engels had some libertine free love attitudes when he was younger, but Marx was never interested

>they gave absolutely zero fuck about traditional values.
>Women are for breeding
>Men are for fightin and winnin
Literally 40K Orks

Fascism is traditionalism through top-down enforcement.

Communism is traditionalism through bottom-up naturalism.

If you think of Stalinism as communism, then no. Stalinism is just red fascism for slavs. Mussolini said as much. Stalinism is only a little more socialist than Hitler's National Socialist party.

>Totally ignoring the regime itself
Hitler and Mussolini never collectivized farming for instance, you can't compare them, if you do you're no better than memes like "carl the cuck" and his "are you serious?" shit. You literally don't have an argument

Collectivized farming is not what making socialism socialism when real socialism is more concerned about industry than agriculture. This is some Mao tier revisionism.

>Orks
>traditional values
Also, Orks don't have sex and gender. Their reproduction is similar to fungi.

No. No and no. State is the core thing around which nation evolves and as such is the highest entity in fascist ideology.

t. Italian Fascists

Do you have that quote from Mussolini saying purity of race is but a delusion and race doesnt actually matter at all?

Not sure I heard that one before but it would fit pre-cucked Mussolini and fascism in general before so many fucks turned it into todays abomination.

Please explain

Race? It is a feeling, not a reality. Ninety-five per cent, at least. Nothing will ever make me believe that biologically pure races can be shown to exist today.… National pride has no need of the delirium of race.

Talks with Mussolini (1932)

this is what upsets me about fascism as it is discussed in the public eye