[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.17007894 [View]
File: 123 KB, 230x358, 1568929270969.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17007894

>>17007837
Explain this, then.

>> No.14012549 [View]
File: 123 KB, 230x358, 1569777263773.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14012549

>> No.14000485 [View]
File: 123 KB, 230x358, 1569777263773.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14000485

>experts say

>> No.13964645 [View]
File: 123 KB, 230x358, Teddy.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13964645

>>13964541
>This is absolutely wrong because fascism and national-socialism required external forces to stop it. It didn't decay, it didn't became corrupt, it stayed true to itself until the end.

First of all, both national-socialism or italian fascism were a disrupted movement that spent half of their lives in a war economy.
Secondly, everything has it's downfall. You can't pretend immutable transcendence for something as mundane as a political movement.
The point that i'm trying to make out of this it's that both fascism and national-socialism would, eventually, had their own downfall as a movement, and we didn't saw how much it lasted because it was interrupted, so any point you try to make in this regard it's useless. You don't know if it would have worked, and everything you say about it it's still an historical conjecture.
The only "fascist" movement (if you can consider it like that) that lived until his end in Europe was, perhaps, Franco's Spain, and you can see how that went. The falange lived until Franco died; without the leader, Spain downfalled into degeneracy once again.

>This is neither left or right, it's not "capitalism" nor marxism. It's a different thing.

And that's where you're wrong. Fascism, as originally defined by José Antonio Primo de Rivera or Gabriele D'Annunzio, considered the socialist claim a right one, but they didn't believed in the concept of "class conflict" because that would go against the nationalistic principles of fascism. You're right in the fact that it's not capitalism or socialism, but it's still a synthesis of those two. It's hegelian dialectics.

>Is it utopic? Yes.

And there's where your modernist kantian framework reveals itself. To strive for something that it's useless just because it may lead you in the right path, that's an idea that appears often in Kant's political work. It sure is a noble idea, but it's idealistic. You're going to grow up depressed eventually when you realize that nothing of what you do works to change anything.
Same advice:accept the reality, become stoic, ride the tiger.

>> No.13905484 [View]
File: 123 KB, 230x358, 1568929270969.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13905484

>>13905480
Nagato is my waifu.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]