Its sad that people don't have an idea what fascism is

There's no such thing as an absolute definition of a nation.

It's a complicated concept, and it varies depending on the philosophical current you're based on.

As an example, look at France and Germany.
The modern concept of nation in France is based on the work of Ernest Renan, roughly, his theory is that a nation is made by people who have lived and want to live together, that's why the citizenship comes mostly by jus soli. In Germany, it was Johann Gottlieb Fichte who advocated the idea that a nation is made up by people who share an ethnic and/or a racial identity, and that why historically the citizenship came by jus sanguinis.

You seem to be a Fichte kind of guy, but as can see, minorities can exist in a nation, depending the kind of nation they live on of course. And contrary to what you said, a state cannot be nation, since a state is an artificial organization, while a nation is more of an abstract concept. Although, a nation can have a state of its own, and that's what we call a nation state, and, (to return to the subject) as a totalitarian state expands in every way, he tends to fuse with the idea of nation (while it cannot be possibly achieved).

Its alright, actual fascists love the idea that the masses have no idea what fascism is. Useful idiots are always useful.

Firstly this is a /pol/ thread.

Secondly not even Mussolini could properly define what Fascism was and his doctrines and speeches are so vague and full of fluff that he gives you even less of an idea than from where you started.

Seriously, try studying Fascism and you get the picture that Mussolini himself is simply a pragmatist who says the right things to certain people (or whoever may be listening at the time) in order to boost his own support and maintain in power.

The whole point to Fascism is remaining in power by all means possible. In this sense it is not an ideology but instead anti-ideology. It seeks only to sustain itself through populist policies rather than a clear and concerted plan.

For example Mussolini went to great lengths to please Feminist Futurists and Feminists in Italian society in the early years and then went to speeches rallying to refuse the vote for women and the allowing them citizen rights when he spoke to Conservatives.

His inconsistency to remain in power is also seen in his call to redistribute all land back to the farmers. In the North where land owners were considerably weaker than the South and where the workers held much more power than the landowners (through protesting) he redistributed the land amongst the farmers. In the South, however, he feared the Southern aristocracy so much that he cut them deals ensuring that they would support him whilst keeping Southern peasants under control.

Still to this day I've seen no satisfactory definition of Fascism.

>Still to this day I've seen no satisfactory definition of Fascism.
That is the whole point, to be able to mold it into something else whenever it was needed to to ensure economic growth. Mussolini's Intellectuals goes into this fairly deep.

>Fascism is an open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, the most chauvinistic, the most imperialistic elements of the financial capital... Fascism is neither the government beyond classes nor the government of the petty bourgeois or the lumpen-proletariat over the financial capital. Fascism is the government of the financial capital itself. It is an organized massacre of the working class and the revolutionary slice of peasantry and intelligentsia. Fascism in its foreign policy is the most brutal kind of chauvinism, which cultivates zoological hatred against other peoples."

t. Georgi Dimitrov, the guy who set the Reichstag on fire

So you'd vote for Californian succession, losing a third of the economy just like that?

Wtf I love fascism now

Mussolini was a monarchist, then a communist, then an anti-communist.
He was a catholic, then an atheist, then a catholic again.
He was a pacifist, then a soldier, then a deserter, then an imperialist.

The guy was whatever suits him best at the moment and had no ideology.

You do realise that most of the people back in Italy flipflopped back in forth in political ideologies from syndicalism to communism to nationalism to fascism?

Read up on the political climate of Italy in early 20th century.

When you are the leader of the socialist party, and writing anti-war propaganda in your newspaper, and then you move to praising the king, and fighting in the war, and then you fake injury to get off the front, and write pro-communist papers, and then you create a mob to storm the palace and request the king grant you power, and found the anti-communist alliance of Europe... it is more than flip-flopping.

He isn't just saying things, he is acting them out. In the space of 20 years he was all over the place, actively pushing conflicting ideas.

>forceful movement of people indifferent to the lives they've built in their current countries for possibly centuries

That's why Trump is the POTUS now.

Capitalism is fully anti-nationalistic by his nature. Capital owners do not care about nation, foks, ethnics, ets, if they can bring aliens from Mars, and they are seems profitable, they will do it, even betraying mankind.

>jump-cuts
fuck sake I hate this cunt already

Nowadays everything that isn't communism or liberal democracy is fascism.

Also real communism hasn't been tried so remember that

>Also real communism hasn't been tried so remember that
I unironically fully agree with this statement. USSR 2.0 when?

That is, a populist

Its is a sad world of leftist faggots we live in. sad sad world.

Don't you have a pizzeria to raid

In a heartbeat, Cali is a hellhole.

Cali is a stronger political entity than Russia.
If it was removed from the USA, then USA would INSTANTLY lose its world leader position, possibly its top 10 position.

I'm fine with that as long as that third world shithole gets removed.

Umberto Eco did a nice essay defining Fascism, pretty clearly imo

nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/

Cali is just farms and tech. Is it really that big of a deal?

Bay Area people are pretty nice gotta admit. They definitely have a much more open/friendlier culture than the one I was raised in (nyc).

Much likes Communism, Fascism sounds awesome on paper. When implemented in reality, it's disastrous and genocidal.

That's why Fascism is degenerated Capitalism.

When Capitalism functions purely as corporatism it means the normal means of production/exploitation that functioned in free market liberal democracy no longer work and state actors intervene to focus capital on specific aims. An example would be Hitlers re-armament program which gave exclusive grants to industries like Krupp. Companies like Krupp, IG Farben, Bayer, Volkswagen specifically standed to gain profits from a new European war.

>communism sounds awesome on paper

t. /leftypol/

yes, which is why I'm not a capitalist

yes

>forceful movement
nah, just giving them independence and autonomy in the places where they already live

>Cali is just farms and tech. Is it really that big of a deal?

We're talking about a good deal of billions, yes it is

It does. Who wouldn't want free shit?

Sorbs do fine one Germany. Minorties can and always will exist, an ethnic homogenous state is a meme.

Pretty sure whatever Comrad from Moscow was building industry gained from the war as well.

Also international Jewry of a financial equation.

Cali funds over 10% of the government (closer to 12%), while receiving only 1/3rd back of what they pay in. They also produce something like 80% of all non-grain crops the typical American eats. America has a lot more to lose than gain by cutting them loose, which is why they are laughing their asses off at Trump right now for threatening to de-fund them.

There's no reason the process through which Irishmen, Germans, et cetera turned "white" can't be repeated with other types of minorities. The problem is not the people, or even their culture; the problem is when you have two different nations in one state. Nations can be combined, it just takes some effort to do so.

This is why as a Fascist I actually support initiatives like affirmative action and school busing. Segregation is actually a problem.

Would you say you are authoritarian? What are your stances on freedom of expression?

>entire state wants to flout federal law
>thinks anyone's laughing that Trump threatened to cut federal funding

There was no private enterprise in Soviet Russia.

Also

>"international Jewry"

So when a Jew profits in the stock market, how is it different from a German profiting from millions of deaths?

Your fascist brain seems to have short circuited there.

This only appeals to subhuman brainlets. Smart people want a reward for their work.

>just giving them independence and autonomy in the places where they already live
And how exactly would you go about making that work then? Most of these minorities live in small enclaves scattered around the country. You either have to find a way to network them, which puts those networks at the mercy of the fascist nation, or you give each one individual autonomy, which guarantees that they have none because they wouldn't have the resources to defend themselves, militarily or economically, from your fascist nation.

Funny how as soon as any mentions Jews you instantly go into defense mode, unable to admit Jews have profited more than anyone else from the liberal capitalistic system you supposedly despise.

Because they have the political/economic power to do it. As I literally pointed out in the previous post, the government has more to lose from cutting them loose. If Trump goes through with de-funding them then they tell the feds to fuck off and pour their money back into themselves which is more than they get from the feds anyways.

Except Fascism proportioned a period of prosperity to almost every country it was applied in. Communism on the other hand only managed to industrialize a few agrarian economies at the expense of millions of deaths, and starvation. Nothing more. Fascism is decent compared to C*mmunism.

If America went by your logic we'de still have slavery in the South.

The south didn't have the political/economic power to carry out its plans though. There may have been wealth there, but it wasn't benefiting the nation as a whole.

No, except if you're a libertarian and think property rights are the basis for everything. I think there should be strong standards for public discourse to ensure the citizenry grows up loving each other, but I'd be leery of the government being the one to enforce it. However, I would be totally behind the government saying it likes certain conduct and doesn't like other conduct, as long as no actual action was done.

I do support mass surveilance though, as long as the surveilers had enough oversight to not abuse their position.

> unable to admit Jews have profited more than anyone else from the liberal capitalistic system you supposedly despise.
Not him, but where is the evidence for that?

Not him either but are you joking?

You people are fucking brain damaged, I hope some day eugenics does get implemented.

Facism has a great record as long as you ignore all the times it collapsed, which is all of them.

All from outside intervention.

Franco, Salazar and Pinochet regimes did not fall from outside intervention.

Also partisans were a decisive factor for the fall of Mussolini

>Pinochet
bait.

It's strange how fascism insists on totalitarianism when that's a utopian ideal in what's largely a pragmatic ideology, the state can never actually be all powerful and all-controlling, and it turns out disastrously every time it's tried.

A non-totalitarian fascism would actually be pretty sweet desu

>which is all of them.
No.

You'd be the first to go, Shlomo.

>Gives no example.

>Franco
He was so bad the monarch he raised betrayed his shitty cause. Also Francoism was sh*t in comparison to Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy. Nationalcatholicism is shit

>A non-totalitarian fascism would actually be pretty sweet desu
So austrofascism?

>Franco, Salazar
Not Fascist. Only allied with them.
>Pinochet
Aka "third world fascism." Its an entirely different ballgame.

I'm honestly split between Bonapartism and Fascism. I agree with the there core tenets of Fascism as said, but I also agree with Bonapartism.

Is there a way to incorporate the two into one?

You could make a 4th political theory which combines the two.

Even Nazism has nothing to do with being White though.

>Nationalism: There should be strong cultural bonds between the citizens of the nation, to ensure that no one is satisfied if they have a countryman in need. People should think of their countrymen as their extended family, not just random people they happen to share a government with.
Now how can a system like that ever function when you can have various different cultures and even language in one nation? If we do take Italy and Germany for example the people in the north part of those countries will punch you in the face for comparing them to the south part, or vice vera.

Where unity genuinely cannot be achieved, balkanize.

California isn't self-sufficient. They need the rest of the US much, much more desperately than the US needs them.

Like Charles Maurras?

>NO IT DOESN'T COUNT!

Okay then, communism has never collapsed either and has a great track record :^). All of the starving people was just America's fault.

>California isn't self-sufficient.

No state is self sufficient. All of the states take money from the government more than they give, and the government takes loans to give them.

If the USA was forced into self sufficiency, and no more loans, then California would easily transition. It is a huge market, producing tech, services and food.

>califaggots are this delusional
wew

The biggest problem is that California has no water. All the tech in the world isn't worth giving that up.

When was he a deserter, im familiar with the rest

Not OP but that just sounds like some kind of retarded lab animal.

Hey, I know that dude in the face paint.

Surprisingly chill dude, he pretty much only wears that if and when it will make conservacucks assmad.

>Franco
Did not collapse. He transitioned government power back to the monarchy of his own volition.

You think that's bad? I'm still trying to find some way to reconcile my libertarian/classical liberal beliefs with my authoritarian/fascist beliefs.

Communism almost exclusively collapsed due to internal factors. Fascism almost exclusively collapsed due to external factors. If you can't understand the difference between these two, then I really don't know what to say.

Lingual? Make sure national media keeps using several languages.
Ignoring is fine too, but only for extremely small languages, like Sami or Yiddish(less than 1-2% speakers)
Like... being 70% Spanish and 30% Polish fine, so long you don't make it a issue. Nation media remedies it even more, by suppressing the worst segregation tendencies.

Political? Accept that you can't marginalize everyone, so don't neglect everyone.
Neglect/abuse just leads to balkanization or permanent civil war.

Successor policy? Make sure there is one, and implement it before its too late.
Otherwise the state will just become Tito 2.0, Syria, Iraq, etc.
And not because your state is a monarchy/facisto leader/Russia, but because lingual pressure and abuse/neglect could force balkanization even when everything IS fine.

California will literally starve to death and get fucked in the ass by tariffs if they secede. Most of their economy even exists because theyre the part of the US. US will be less relevant sure, but they'll survive no problem.

>but as can see, minorities can exist in a nation, depending the kind of nation they live on of course
Except they can't because a nation is not lines on a map, something you yourself admitted. It's a people. A minority, even by the French concept, is not part of the nation. Minorities exist explicitly outside of the nation. Were they to exist inside of the nation, they wouldn't be minorities.

No thanks, senpai. I don't want to be a cuck for the state.

Offer them financial assistance in getting into their small nation-state, anyone who doesn't take is essentially asking to be a second class citizen so it doesn't really matter what happens then

Fascism turned politics into aesthetics and the ultimate fascist aesthetic experience was war.

It literally is.

This. The practical aspect of fascism is incredibly pragmatic.
The main goal is to achieve prosperity and progress of the nation.
Particular policies are just means to an end.

Fascism's very nature (authoritarian/militaristic nationalism) means that what's expected of it changes depending on the climate it's implemented in. Mussolini himself, the fucking inventor of the ideology, has been decried at times as not being a "true fascist".

Sure.

Just say that as long as you aren't a shitskin or degenerate that the gubbmint will leave you alone.

When he faked an injury to get off the front.

Pinochet was no fascist. He was your basic example of a libertarian dictator.

>libertarian
>dictator