What will be the historical ramifications of the November 4th leftist revolution?

>what is fascism
this country isn't nearly authoritarian enough to be considered "fascism" yet

it'll have the same amount of importance as a civil war reenactment or any other LARP fest

thats a poor argument
was mussolini not fascist until his march on rome? was the ndsap party not fascist until after the reischstag fire?

An attempted false flag by drooling retard neo-neo nazis.

>Fascism /ˈfæʃJzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism,[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and control of industry and commerce
To answer your question, mussolini was just a nationalist until he rose to a position, at which time his nationalism became fascism.

...

>leftypol subhumans trying to damage control this hard

>no pedo bashing
WTF I love the far-left now

>mussolini was just a nationalist until he rose to a position, at which time his nationalism became fascism
that facile definition totally discounts the unique ideological roots of facism and its appeal. fascists are nationalists but nationalists aren't necessarily fascist. there were fascist movements that never actually achieved power like falangist movement in spain who were ideological fascists but ultimately subsumed by the nationalist authoritarian Franco. to say the fascist movement wasnt fascist until it achieve power is a daft way of looking at a particular political movement

here's some better definitions of fascism that take into account its unique characteristics
anesi.com/Fascism-TheUltimateDefinition.htm#A._Scholarly_Definitions_of_Fascism

>here are some better definitions of fascism that take into account it's unique characteristics
Better how, exactly? Because you like that definition of fascism more? There isn't much consensus on what fascism actually entails. The definition you use doesn't even work for trump, considering that the majority of his power base isn't even the middle class, it's the uneducated lower classes.

It's better because it's a more specific scholarly definition from academics who've studied the question rigorously and not just the first sentence of a wikipedia article

>it's a more scholarly definition from academics who've studied the question rigourously
This Chuck Anesi guy is an academic? Because I googled his name and it appears that he's just some random guy on the internet. Or are you talking about the four guys he cites in his article? Because again, you're just arbitrarily selecting four people you happen to agree with and ignore all of the other scholars and academics who's definitions of fascism disagree with you.

Do you have an alternative definition that you didn't copy and paste from wikipedia or is that the gold standard for you?

the merriam-webster definition

If you were writing a paper on fascism for a college class would you use the merriam-webster definition as a source?

>writing a paper on fascism for a college class
I'd get a useful education instead

Yes, actually, i would, considering that the merriam-webster definitions are universally accepted among a bunch of academic debate formates. In fact, it's standard for lincoln-douglas debates to begin with someone reading off the merriam webster definition of a term being used in the resolved.

Also, if *you* were writing a paper on fascism for a college class, would you cite some random guy on the internet as a source?

>over the perceived terror of nonexistent right-wing death squads, the left engages in mass violence until RWDS are deployed to elinate the threat
it checks out

>Trump voters
>smart or white

do these people really think they're fooling anyone

Yes

Now I'm not a big fan of Trump, but Trump does not fit these definitions.

>Fascism is the pursuit of a transcendent and cleansing nation-statism through paramilitarism.
> Cleansing (ethnic): Favoring one or more ethnic or racial groups over others, either by granting special privileges or imposing disabilities; deportation of ethnic minorities, or worse.
>Cleansing (political): Silencing the political opposition so that the transcendent aims of fascism can be realized. Restricting the freedom of speech, outlawing opposition parties, imprisoning political opponents (or worse) and indoctrinating youth in fascist principles.

>"in which a massed-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion"

>"To be still more succinct, as Mussolini told Franco in October 1936, what the Spaniard should aim at was a regime that was simultaneously ‘authoritarian’, ‘social’, and ‘popular’. That amalgam, the Duce advised, was the basis of universal fascism.”

>All three authors agree that statism, nationalism , unity, authoritarianism, and vigor are essential elements of fascism.

Say what you will about Trump, but he ain't fascist.

>25 year Rule breaking agenda thread

Why even the point of having a history board when 80% of the posts are just trying to fish for (you)s or stir shit to start moronic arguments?

user, you're on Veeky Forums. There are plenty of other well-regulated history forums on the internet you could have gone to for discussion. We both know you only come to Veeky Forums out of all your other options because deep down you love the shitposting. You can't have pregnant anne frank and funny greentexts without incatards and turkposters.

not. your. safespace. leftypol. :).

I was on the debate team in high school don't pretend that LD debates are a comparable substitute for academic rigor. You're here trying to insist the formality of extra-curricular activities is the gold standard for academic discourse and thus merriam-webster is a superior source than scholarly nonfiction.

>I was on debate team in highschool
And I am currently on my universities debate team, and I can tell you that merriam webster definitions are still invoked regularly, and that the college debate teams are incredibly rigorous. Shit man, it's extremely common for fucking academic papers to cite merriam-webster's dictionary. What you're promoting as "scholarly nonfiction" isn't even that, it's some dude reading off actual academic definitions of fascism (definitions which trump doesn't even meet), and then coming up with his own interpretation of them.
TL;DR: MW IS at the very least equal to the definition some random guy on the internet throws out.

Wait did this happen?

I didn't hear anything about it on the news and /pol/ wasn't bitching about it so probably not, no.

You keep trying to compare the formalities of debate to genuine academic discourse--like preparing an LD debate is the same as writing a thesis. Mindblowing how you look at 3 separate academic definitions and reject all of them because you don't like the credentials of the guy who wrote the 4th definition beneath them, but the dictionary definition of the complex topic is untouchable.

>you keep trying to compare the formalities....
whether or not LD is comperable in rigor to writing a thesis is ultimately irrelevant, considering that MW is regularly cited in academic papers.
>mindblowing how you look at three seperate academic definitions
none of which trump even fits. He only fits the one by the guy interpreting the other three. You know, the guy with zero credentials.

where did you get the idea im calling trump a fascist. my first post was simply taking issue with your idea of what fascism means

Never mind, then.

And I think it bears mentioning that MW being cited somewhere isn't a blanket of authenticity or specificity for all MW definitions in all contexts. Nobody trying to have a scholarly understanding of what Fascism is or liberalism is or communism is by going to be looking at what MW had to say about it unless it was simply to demonstrate a common understanding of what it is to contrast or compare off of.

Ok there seems to be a lot of confusion about this but rest assured that it was a big online shitfest without real substance to it. Here's the story:

Some 74 year-old autistic maoist LARPer and cult leader by the name of Bob Avakin founded a movement called "Refuse Fascism" in order to piggyback off anti-Trump liberals who would rightly be offput by his existing Revolutionary Communist Party (USA). Now the RCP is completely fucking irrelevant, composed of a bunch of left-over radical 60's hippies, but somehow they got an ad in the New York Times, either through exhausting their annual budget in one go or from the backing of some rich but naive liberal.

Right-wing tabloids picked up on this ad and spun a small cult's protest into a "nationwide communist revolution" in order to get free clicks, and ll the baby boomers who read those shitty websites flipped their shit on twitter. Leftist twitter responded mockingly by shitposting about "antifa supersoldiers eating babies and beheading white business owners" which only fueled rightist twitter's alarm because they have no self-awareness and take everything uncritically and at face-value. Something similar happened on /pol/ where some dedicated baitmaster spammed "CAN'T WAIT FOR THE ANTIFA REVOLUTION NOV. 4 :^)))))" for a few weeks and everyone there took it at face value because it meshed nicely with their preconceptions. Thanks to this /pol/ blamed antifa despite the fact that antifa had LITERALLY NOTHING to do with it and if they had bothered to do even an ounce of research into Refuse Fascism they would have seen that it was a front made by the RCP. But I guess that /pol/ is eternally buttblasted by antifags for some ridiculous reason because very few if any anons actually made the connection.

Then the 4th rolled around and nothing happened except for a few geezers holding up signs. Sage for non-Veeky Forums material.

>mfw through this whole shitfest

>leftypol shill are THIS deluded
face it, your revolution failed, you anti white cuck

What credible evidence and sources do you have to support the idea that Antifa wanted to organize a nationwide violent revolt on November 4th?