Peron was a fascist or a commie?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogue
twitter.com/AnonBabble

There is no difference between a commie and facist.

Third position

PERON, PERON
GRAN CONDUCTOR

He was radical centrist.

Back then it was basically the same.

...

He was a populist. No real ideology but whatever will make the people rally behind him.
He did hate communists though, so if you want to label him, I'd use fascist before commie.

He was a Chad Nationalist

fascism is the opposite of populism, what you say doesnt really make sense

Being a communist doesn't really mean you know how to achieve it the quickest way. You can run a country like a dictator and still be communist

No it's not.

Facism is populism geared towards the middle classes. Socialism/Communism is populism geared towards the working classes.

Have you never heard of Strasser?

Fascism is the very essence of populism. A party is formed from the majority and anybody who is not a member of that party is pretty much shit out of luck. It's an extremely militant tyranny of the majority.

liberals detected

>I'm going to claim to know what fascism is and then call actual fascists liberal
Why would someone do this?

He was a chad strongman, Shame he lived in such hard times surrounded by weak men.

fascism assumes the proletariat does not know what it wants or needs, the state does. the people are to be guided by the leader of the state. the fascist ideology is really not conecieved to please the masses, it is concieved to give the people a higher spiritual purpose based on struggle

IL DUCE HA SEMPRE RAGIONE

Peron was a closet fascist masquerading as a social democrat. However he always ran for free elections, the press could criticize him even on the radio, he wasn't technically a dictator, though he would have loved to be.

>I'm going to use Reddit images and pretend to be a fascist when in reality I have a bank account and credit card ecks DEE

Hang yourself fat shit.

No, Fascism is recognized as a form of right-wing demagoguery by political science. Go larp somewhere else.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogue
>A demagogue /ˈdɛməɡɒɡ/ (from Greek δημαγωγός, a popular leader, a leader of a mob, from δῆμος, people, populace, the commons + ἀγωγός leading, leader) or rabble-rouser is a leader in a democracy who gains popularity by exploiting prejudice and ignorance among the common people, whipping up the passions of the crowd and shutting down reasoned deliberation. Demagogues overturn established customs of political conduct, or promise or threaten to do so.

>no
not an argument. if you cant come with a better argument than a copy pasted wikipedia archive please dont even botter.

>fascism assumes the proletariat does not know what it wants or needs, the state does.
And the state is totalitarian, it nothing is separate from it. The state is the people and the people are the state. If the state knows what the people want, the people know what the people want.

>the fascist ideology is really not conecieved to please the masses, it is concieved to give the people a higher spiritual purpose based on struggle
And that is what the people need. Fascism fills the whole that modernistic liberal democracy fails to fill with hedonistic materialism. It gives them what they truly need, as opposed to what modernity dictates they supposedly need.

You first sentence already contradicts what fascism is. Fascism is anti-democratic, fascism cannot be merely a rabble-rouser within a democracy because it is opposed to leading through democracy in the first place. Nice try though.

>Reddit images

what the people want is irrelevant, but you kinda corrected yourself in your second paragraph so whatever

I've brought three arguments already which you replied to with "lol liberals" (I'm a conservative btw). You add nothing to this discussion, just some edgy Italian faggot worshipping Mussolini who was an Africa-tier ruler and worthless in every respect. Even neonazis hate his guts.

>Fascism is anti-democratic
Once it gains power, yes.
You missed:
>Demagogues overturn established customs of political conduct, or promise or threaten to do so.

that nerd wasnt me
>even nazis hated his guts
germanics are subhuman

Fascism succeeds in aligning wants with needs, whereas in liberal democracy wants are not needs.

Replace in a democracy with in a monarchy and you've got a definition of what the original liberals did. You might as well just call them revolutionaries instead of trying to use very politicized words like demagogue.

Depend which liberals you are talking about.
Jacobins were left-wing demagogues, most political scientists will agree with you on that.

British Whigs however were not demagogues, quite the opposite.

The Whigs are classic demagogues, they supported the Glorious Revolution and held an essentially oligarchic rule over the country for over 50 years, fundamentally changing what was considered normal and within the window of discourse politically.

By that definition all democracy was oligarchic in nature until the 20th century when universal suffrage was introduced. That's not what demagoguery means though, they did not appeal to facile solutions or prejudice.

t. angry cathocuck

>By that definition all democracy was oligarchic in nature until the 20th century when universal suffrage was introduced.
I don't know how you infer that from what I'm saying, most democracies even in this period had fairly strong contention between at least two parties. In the early to mid 1700s the Whigs were pretty much the uncontested ruling party after the Tories were associated with the Jacobite uprising in 1715. The Septennial Act of 1716 passed by a Whig parliament more than doubled the maximum limit a parliament could stand, solidifying their control over government. They preyed on fears of Jacobites to discredit the Tories into irrelevance and it worked very well until the late 1700s.

I'm no dirty Papist, I just think demagogue is a pretty broad word that's use is generally political in intention and realistically can apply to anyone who wants to actually change how government is run.