Is fascism capitalistic?

[Anonymous No.13930947]

Ive heard that fascism is a tool of the bourgeoisie to take control. A Marxist friend of mine define fascism as: "It is the phase of capitalism in which the bourgeoisie becomes so weakened it resorts to allying with the far right, the only force than can quell a revolution and preserve capitalism in the face of a socialist threat. In doing so, they grant them power and thus create an authoritarian hell-hole where everyone suffers."

I hope he doesn't get angry for me copying and pasting his post.

But i found this quote by nick land saying “Fascism is a mass anti-capitalist movement, when the word isn’t (more usually) simply a childish insult.” here nick is responding to the accusation that he is a fascist. Now, i just wanted to ask, is fascism and the corporate state capitalistic?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13930951]

Yes
Yes, very much so.

[Anonymous No.13930958]

According to my genius neet-lite russian friend, capitalism is fascism

[Anonymous No.13930968]

>>13930947
fascism is like communism's edgy little brother. communism is hipster fascism. they are very closely related.

these are clearly defined systems, you can draw the parallels yourself.

you can't go from capitalism to fascism at all without removing the components that make capitalism capitalist. you can go from communism to fascism almost too easily.

[Anonymous No.13930973]

>>13930947
All I know is that fascist balieve that "left and right" is outdated.
The fascist are against liberal capitalism, I believe.

[Anonymous No.13930983]

I believe Fascism is technically Corporatist.

[Anonymous No.13930986]

>>13930947
Define capitalism
Define fascism
Question is too vague; all of this boils down to semantics. Do you focus on historical facts and definitions? In this case, where do you draw boundaries? Do you use a more heavily ideologically tinted lens to look at the issue?

[Anonymous No.13930992]

>>13930947
yeah, fascism has been historically capitalism in a state of emergency. when shit gets into crises mode the nice liberal mask of capitalism is removed and the ugly (true) face of class domination is there for all to see

[Anonymous No.13930994]

>>13930947
Fascists usually subscribe to the idea of Corporatism, as in using guilds to organize different parts of society and treating it like different parts of the human body. But do most of these states actually follow through on this? Not really.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13930998]

Fascism is to capitalism, what jihadism is to Islam.

[Anonymous No.13931003]

>>13930998
Thank you so much.

[Anonymous No.13931010]

>>13930986
When i think of fascism im thinking of it at its purest. Before the introduction of race laws and instead a focus on national pride, common goals lead by an authoritarian leader. So mussolinis Italy.

And for capitalism i guess private ownership of the means of production.

[Anonymous No.13931014]

>>13930992
The fascists weren't ruled by corporations though, they were ruled by a political elite

[Anonymous No.13931015]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2ZR9a_vvfk

[Anonymous No.13931021]

If only there was a book with the doctrine of fascism, maybe we could all find out what its all about.

[Anonymous No.13931033]

>>13930947
No, its state corporatism ,nothing to do with capitalism (free trade), the trash it produce and degeneracy it promote.

[Anonymous No.13931038]

>>13930951
>>13930958
>>13930992
>>13930998
From what I've read the whole point of the corporate state was that it valued the group above the individual. So whenever issues would arise between workers and employers the goal of the state would be to find a option that was best for society as a whole as opposed to favouring worker or employer. In fact initially a lot of working class and moddle class italians were the first to hop on the fascist train and this would make sense in light of the socialist background of fascism.

[Anonymous No.13931046]

>>13931014
its the Bourgeoisie that authorizes the political "elite". in other words if the owners of industry, resources, manpower etc,, dont agree that X should be the head of state they will marshal all their might against him.

im not saying that socialism is better, in socialism a partisan group eliminates the Bourgeoisie and takes charge of their property in the name of the working class, but the foundation of capitalism persist nonetheless (wage labor, the value form, commodity production) so socialism is still a kind of capitalism

[Anonymous No.13931052]

>>13930998
pls be bait

[Anonymous No.13931057]

>>13930998
That's retarded.
>Libertarianism is to capitalism, what jihadism is to Islam.
There fixed.

[Anonymous No.13931060]

>>13931057
dude, Libertarianism is fascism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWnz_clLWpc

[Anonymous No.13931097]

>>13930947
> "It is the phase of capitalism in which the bourgeoisie becomes so weakened it resorts to allying with the far right, the only force than can quell a revolution and preserve capitalism in the face of a socialist threat. In doing so, they grant them power and thus create an authoritarian hell-hole where everyone suffers."
This sound more like a description of the current state of politic than fascism desu,
also Volkisch ideology is anti-bourgeois as there is no class but the volk(people).

[Anonymous No.13931099]

>>13930947
I think you're talking about Maoism

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13931100]

>>13931038
This is how the Muss sold it, I’m sure. He was an ex socialist. Fascism is also a repackaging of monarchy

>>13931052
Please try to understand the sense in it. Questions?

>>13931057
Read
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

[Anonymous No.13931114]

Fascism introduces the runaway of capital, however, fascism itself was an attempt at founding a human community.
There are only three main marxists you should read. Ignore anyone else (apart from the odd obscure writer who follows a similar understanding).

[Anonymous No.13931190]

>>13930998
Facial is to fascism, what fascism is to fascism.

[Anonymous No.13931195]

>>13930947
The socialism of today is not the socialism of 100 years ago so why should fascism be?

[Anonymous No.13931211]

>>13931195
This desu, it's not 1933 anymore.

[Anonymous No.13931220]

>>13931046
I dont think the bourgeoisie had any power to make Hitler or Mussolini do anything

[Anonymous No.13931224]

True fascism has never been tried

[Anonymous No.13931246]

Fascism is when the state does stuff that you don't like.

[Anonymous No.13931254]

>>13931010
>common goals lead by an authoritarian leader

You could define Salin's Russia with that same definition though. Try harder.

[Anonymous No.13931266]

>>13930947
But the Jews are part of the bourgeoisie...

[Anonymous No.13931269]

>>13930947
Its literally called "national socialism". Of course it is anticapitalist. Why do you think they hated jews so much?

Its really not very different from communism.

[Anonymous No.13931303]

>>13931224
lol nice one

[Anonymous No.13931309]

>>13931224
This. Fascism is so successful it’s absolutely frightening to the world banking system.

[Anonymous No.13931314]

>>13930947
Fascism is capitalism made honest.

[Anonymous No.13931320]

>>13930998
Holy shit...post your Wife's tits.

[Anonymous No.13931322]

>>13930947
The fundamental difference between fascism and communism is not economic. In both cases, the state assumes total control over all economic activity and tries to extract maximum value. The difference is that a communist state thinks it can eventually obtain absolute control just by ideology - the enormous security apparatus only a temporary bootstrapping measure, while a fascist state considers that an impossibility.

Under communism, the slaves are supposed to be inherently happy to serve and not capable of thinking thoughts contrary to the ideology. That's why the state immediately tries to extract everything above bare survival and considers any opposition to proof that the particular working unit is defective - thrown into a much less efficient traditional slavery system (forced labor camps) as a result, or just disposed of.
Under fascism, people are thought of as individuals, not as a uniform mass of slaves with a cloned mental state. This leads to a much more softer approach of carrots and sticks, with limited market and private property. Ideology is only utilized as a yet another tool to reduce the needed value of carrots. That's why even enemies of the state are treated much better (relatively to communism), as they are not viewed as inherently defective, but as an inevitable result of an imperfect motivation system.

Assuming total control (eg. cybernetic implants), both systems would become identical, extracting everything above the bare survival from the workers. Ideology would disappear, no longer needed.
The last live mutation of communist state is North Korea with its Juche. The idea that ideology is enough is empirically proven to be wrong - it didn't work even once. China is a fascist state, and the West is rapidly transitioning from capitalism into fascism.

[Anonymous No.13931325]

>>13930998
Facials are to faces, what fascism is to capitalism.

[Anonymous No.13931332]

>>13931325
BASEF

[Anonymous No.13931336]

>>13931269
national socialism is precisely derived from early capitalism, a large-scale industry, bureaucracy, etc. reminder that the nazis had emerged as a rebellion against the international marxist movement.

[Anonymous No.13931342]

>>13931220
they did had the power to install him in "power".

[Anonymous No.13931391]

>>this whole thread
Mostly this >>13930986

Everyone has equivocated fascism and capitalism with so many other things that you may as well be asking, "Does polemics require strawberry jam to function properly?"

Fascism is defined as absolute authoritarianism. It is a dictatorial authority. Morons define it as all sorts of pseudo liberal fantasies where they may have a voice, but that is a lie.

Economically, authoritarianism is interventionist, and has no need of a market. There is no ambiguity here in the definition, only sophists and con men who are too stupid to understand definitions.

The definition of Capitalism is also ambiguous in practice but at least pretends be a decentralized economic system, ostensibly relying on the Market to make decisions of distribution of goods and services, meaning it does not rely on a central authority, and, therefore by definition is NOT compatible with fascism.

That dictators understand that it is better to rob a store that is full instead of an empty one does not mean they support the market, only that with market economies there is more to steal.

[Anonymous No.13931576]

>>13931342
No they didn't. They didn't any more than Chinese companies have the power to do anything about the CCP. Because Chinese companies are not only completely subordinate on every level but are identified with and practically inseparable from the CCP. Just as the Chinese nation is (indeed, an invention by it). Socialism (historical examples) and fascism are the same in this, just different mythologies as their basis. Anything else is Marxist and Communist revision applied by Liberals (for different reasons) to associate fascism with capitalism and disassociate communism/marxism and fascism.

[Anonymous No.13931596]

>>13931342
You're merely acting like a retard, right?

[Anonymous No.13931602]

>>13930947
It's national socialist

[Anonymous No.13931604]

Why do anti-capitalists think they are so special? So you aren't good at making money; do you really have to make your entire political view based around that? Damn

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13931608]

>>13931602
Which is capitalist af

[Anonymous No.13931619]

>>13931608
I wish we could sit down and really examine this from your perspective cause I have no idea what you mean

[Anonymous No.13931620]

>>13931608
No, it's fundamentally opposed to capitalism.

[Anonymous No.13931631]

>>13931620
Nah. Capitalism is just the barter system scaled up for a larger society. Nothing about fascism states that bartering or owning property isn't allowed.

[Anonymous No.13931635]

>>13931608
It's not. There's a reason why the dominant neoliberal (capitalist) order sperged out at it so much.

[Anonymous No.13931639]

>>13930947
In theory fascism is anti-capitalist and anti-bourgeois, but in practice it has often allied itself with industry, enterprise and the power of the middle classes. The inherently syncretic nature of fascist movements (as well as the focus on "pure action" and "dynamism" and "political influence at all costs") allows them a certain amount of flexibility -- they do not place as much emphasis on orthodoxy as Marxists do, and so the pursuit of power is often allowed to supersede ideological purity.

Marxist analyses of fascism are limited by their ideological interest in ascribing the evils of fascism to a bourgeois as opposed to a radical origin. The problem is that fascism is not just a political phenomena but an ideology with intellectual origins. In its germ, fascism is a unification of the economic left and the nationalist right (see: national syndicalism, the Cercle Proudhon, the Faisceau, the PPF). It is a nationalist revision of Marxism. It is a socialism that rejects internationalism. Fascist corporatism is a phrase a lot of people misunderstand. When they say corporations they mean workers syndicates, not "corporation" in the sense of an enterprise or business.

In the early 20th century, and especially after World War I, a lot of intellectuals became disillusioned with the predictive power of Marxist historical materialism and with the revolutionary potential of the proletariat (the war had demonstrated that patriotism and other "irrational" drives were more significant historical forces than economic self-interest -- the proletariat had acted en masse as a fundamentally reactionary population). Freud, Darwin and Nietzsche came to be seen as better prophets and diagnosticians of the modern world than Marx.

It is true that when the conservative power structure is sufficiently weakened it will ally itself with fascism over socialism... however until such a desperate situation occurs, the conservatives are some of fascism's largest opponents (see: interwar France).

For more information on this topic, read Zeev Sternhell's 'The Birth of Fascist Ideology' and 'Neither Right nor Left: Fascist Ideology in France' as well as A. James Gregor's 'Mussolini's Intellectuals: Fascist Social and Political Thought'.

[Anonymous No.13931648]

>>13930992
Fascism has historically been Catholic monarchies trying to grapple with modernity, liberal parliament, and capitalism. Attempting to tie it to a strictly material Marxist analysis is slimy academics at best.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13931651]

>>13931620
Oh! You think “free market capitalism” is the only thing legitimately capitalist. Capitalism is more about labor relations, accumulative currency. If markets were all you were worried over, you’ve nothing to fear from socialism

>>13931635
Yeah, the socialists where about to take the whole continent. That’s why they let totalitarianism and war develop

[Anonymous No.13931652]

>>13931631
Capitalism is by definition a system under which the bourgeoisie control the means of production. Fascism is a system under which the fascist party seizes control of the state and rules over the nation as a martial class. Bourgeoisie only exist under a fascist system as a means to an end, when the bourgeoisie refuse to fall in line they're simply murdered and replaced. It's akin to the relationship the burghers and nobility had under feudalism. Bourgeoisie are no longer the highest material caste, and thus it is no longer capitalism but something entirely different.

[Anonymous No.13931656]

>>13931648
Fascism in Germany had a Protestant character and 'Political Catholicism' was one of its major adversaries.

[Anonymous No.13931657]

>>13931651
see >>13931652

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13931660]

>>13931656
It united the Protestants and Catholics under a secularist nationalism

[Anonymous No.13931664]

'Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power'

If that were true, it's important to point out who comes out on top in this merger. And it's not corporations. In fascist Germany the major private industries were subject to Gleichschaltung, forcible coordination in which all economic factors were to be put into the hands of the state. Most of economic investment was then directed to the military, with the industries having no autonomy to decide what to produce.

Capitalism as we know it behaves completely differently, the market --what people want and are willing to pay for it--determining what gets made. And by people, it means people, anyone, because anyone with money to pay for things is good for a market.

At the very least this is state capitalism, but it would be wrong to suggest that capitalism would thrive in this rigidly controlled format as a tool of the state. Capitalism in contrast much prefers to make a tool of the state. As capital's political power becomes fully realized, the state is increasingly subjected to becoming another one of its efficiencies, the government becomes a client. Indeed, Amazon for instance basically runs the government's internet, and in exchange receive benefits, no federal taxes, tax credits. Capital would rather drain the government and manipulate it to better support its efficiency rather than the other way around which is what happens in fascism.

In conclusion therefore while capitalism does have suspicious relations to fascism, this is a zombie capitalism with an illusion of autonomy and differentiation. The companies are not required to emblazon their logos with swastikas, and are allowed to keep an anodyne public face. However they are basically the machinery of the state and are tasked with executing the state's mandate. The are not, in fact doing what capitalism does, accumulate capital with unlimited freedom, they are instead functioning as the deep state, a military apparatus. There is no more market in those conditions, only the demands of the state.

[Anonymous No.13931671]

>>13930947
Fascism is based entirely on militancy, and all the supports that keep it aflot.
If a capitalist society turns militant in order to stop a revolution, it might employ some fascist tactics to do so, but as long as the whole society doesn't shift to valuing "soldering" over "commerce" then it really don't become truely fascist, it just uses fascist tactics.
That's why relatively socialist ideas and policies cropped up in Italy and Romania, as they were aimed at supporting the military's capabilities above all else.
If capitalism values merchants, and communism values workers, then fascism values the soldier,

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13931674]

>>13931652
>>13931657
Correct. Which is why I called it repackaged monarchy above.
It does maintain capitalism. As much as Leninism and current day China

[Anonymous No.13931676]

>>13931664
I should even point out that Nazi Germany privatized preciously state industries, but even if it seemed to make this pro-capitalist gesture, the nature of national socialism dictated that every German citizen was an organ of the state and tasked with doing the duties given to them by the Führer. Those newly minted private industries had no choice about how to run their business.

[Anonymous No.13931677]

here you go retards

[Anonymous No.13931679]

>>13931677
Fuck off you fat Italian liberal

[Anonymous No.13931681]

>>13931679
post physique bugman

[Anonymous No.13931682]

>>13931664
Well said. Do you think it's an absolutely new development of capitalism, this increasingly rigid control of company over government? Could we expect to see control of capital over nation growing to further resemble fascism by, for example, the company emblazoning the government with its own "swastika"? Or would public and symbolic control over government require the one thing which nation provides but capital does not: a military?

[Anonymous No.13931687]

>>13931677
Umberto Eco isn't exactly a representation of the best scholarship on fascism. A lot of these points are contentious and vague enough to be meaningless. Some academics even deny that a generic fascism exists -- the gulfs between Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany can be said to be as large as that between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. One thing it fails is fascism's rebelliousness, it's "anti-everything" nature, as well as its internal polarisation: on the one hand anti-modernist and yet on the other hyper-modernist. Fascism appropriates reactionary sentiments, but also doesn't really care about "tradition" and has no compunction about wiping out old beliefs and old ways of life. There is nothing reactionary for instance about Nazi Germany's breeding program and state-mandated prostitution, and some of its most vocal critics were moral conservatives.

[Anonymous No.13931689]

>>13931639
why do fascists all have cats?

[Anonymous No.13931692]

>>13931689
Hitler didn't.

[Anonymous No.13931697]

>>13931687
>state-mandated prostitution
source

[Anonymous No.13931706]

>>13931697
https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/holocaust-remembrance-day/.premium.MAGAZINE-the-nazis-tolerated-gays-then-everything-changed-1.6869815
control f: 'racial prostitution'

[Anonymous No.13931710]

>>13931674
No, China is capitalistic because their economy is driven by the bourgeoisie continually growing the means of production. They've merely taken the underlying material reality of capitalism and made enforced it with an authoritarian regime because ultimately everything still rests on the bourgeoisie. The fascist economy is not primarily driven by the bourgeoisie growing the means of production, it's driven by conquest and the looting of enemies. The German war machine was funded by the treasuries of Poland, Czechia, France, etc. The very raison d'etre of the german state was lebensraum, the seizure of Russian land. It is a martial government providing for its citizens through marital means. China is not driven by martial conquest and frankly I wouldn't call the Chinese ruling class martial either. It's not correct to call fascism a rehash of feudalism either because there is no serfdom or real feudal system at all. I don't understand why it's so hard for you stubborn idiots to admit that fascism is no simply a rehash of capitalism or feudalism.

[Anonymous No.13931716]

>>13931710
Stolen Polish artwork was responsible for the mass production of rifles and ammunition?

[Anonymous No.13931720]

>>13931687
>Fascism... doesn't really care about "tradition"
Fascism's authoritarian properties were at their essence overtures to 'traditional' means of leadership. Whatever did divide the fascisms of Mussolini and Hitler, reference to former civilizational glory as a result of compact and far-reaching leadership was one shared quality. Where fascism tended to wipe away tradition is only where those traditions appeared to get in the way of the original tradition which was to be restored: national glory.

[Anonymous No.13931726]

>>13930947
Fascism is not preoccupied with economics.

[Anonymous No.13931728]

>>13931716
No, their national treasuries were. Czech in particular had a ridiculous amount of gold, which allowed the ruling party to continue successfully managing class friction along the way to lebensraum.

[Anonymous No.13931735]

>>13931720
Hitler and Mussolini being in power in the first place was a blatant disregard for some of the most sacred traditions IE monarchy.

[Anonymous No.13931741]

https://www.reddit.com/r/nosleep/comments/dcidvv/i_know_why_kik_is_really_shutting_down/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

[Anonymous No.13931747]

>>13931720
You might as well say that any form of hierarchy is an overture to traditional forms of leadership. Mussolini coexisted with the monarch, but did not replace him: he was a new kind of leader. Hitler may have made symbolic callbacks to Frederick the Great, but he made no attempts to recreate the old Germany or even to dress his regime up in imperial colours. To reference the past is hardly a reactionary impulse because everyone on the political spectrum hearkens back to the past: there is little else tangible for people to make reference to. If you want to paint a picture of the future you must use elements that already exist. The fundamental difference is this: Hitler and Mussolini did not promise to restore an old order but to create a new one that would rival and surpass the glory of the old.

Fascism can be described as the negation of "all that is" and I believe many fascists said those very words. Rohm certainly did, at least. The fascists were the enemies of socialists, liberals, conservatives and reactionaries alike; content sometimes to use all of these different groups as tools or convenient accomplices but they never shared the same intentions with any of them. The conservatives made a grand mistake in allying themselves with Hitler, for soon their very power base was corroded and they found themselves impotent and irrelevant in Nazi Germany (or even dead, in the case of Edgar Julius Jung).

[Anonymous No.13931750]

>>13931682
It's hard to say computers really change everything. It's not a completely new development, but generally as capital's political power rises, the government weakens. The Dutch East India Company posits an interesting historical case, where capital essentially gained its own fortress, complete with military power. As states dilute under the influence of capital, they increasingly fall back on the sources of power denied to capital, such as standing armies, law enforcement and judiciary, which it still maintains control over. Letting go of these factors would mean letting go of the very concepts themselves, there would be no laws if corporations literally made laws, rather than merely influence them. The state zealously protects these final vestiges of its distinction from capital.

I think we are in phase where capital becomes self-limiting. Where capital concentration leads to too much internal conflict between companies for them to replace the state. States are notoriously bad business propositions, constantly running up debt, absorbing the costs of maintaining order.

If capital were to remove the state entirely it would negate itself, because it needs the legal infrastructure and currency of a state (usually) to function. If it were to replace the state, it would become a very bad state that would fail, because states have to do all the unprofitable things, that if capital were to provide would eat itself up. The US government spends trillions of dollars a year, it doesn't make trillions. That will always mean that capital will always keep it at arms length.

[Anonymous No.13931756]

>>13931728
Disnnigga

[Anonymous No.13931774]

Fascism is a national LARP that happens when everybody realizes that liberal capitalism sucks but would rather pretend to be a big tribe of Proud Volkish Warriors than do anything actually revolutionary.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13931808]

>>13931710
>an authoritarianism that maintains capitalism
>no, it’s an authoritarianism that maintains capitalism

[Anonymous No.13931810]

>>13931808
By martial means? No

[Anonymous No.13931814]

>>13931808
You win, Butterfly. I was just being silly. Are we cool?

[Anonymous No.13931819]

>>13931808

[Anonymous No.13931821]

Is this picture fascism?

[Anonymous No.13931828]

>>13930947
Politics has always been about increasing the power of the elite. Whatever means that power comes by, that's where we see the ruling class augmenting whatever machinations they use to manipulate the world. Machiavelli went into detail about getting the ruling class to fight with each other, to expose themselves to the people. We can see that happening in the political spectrum of the United States. But to answer your question, it's only about power. If fascism and capitalism leads to that, ok that's how it'll happen. Just remember it can happen from either side.

[Anonymous No.13931832]

This is Fascism

[Anonymous No.13931837]

>>13930947
Perhaps in fascist states in history can be interpreted as functioning to preserve capitalism, but I don't think fascism itself exists as a tool the bougeiouse or even explicitly intends to benefit them. Hell, lots of rich Jews were killed in the Holocaust just the same as the poor ones. Fascists do not share the same materialistic worldview as marxists. It doesn't make sense to evaluate the goals and intentions of fascism through the lens of an entirely different perspective.

[Anonymous No.13931838]

>>13931828
Retard

[Anonymous No.13931847]

define fascism.

[Anonymous No.13931852]

>>13930986
solid post

[Anonymous No.13931858]

>>13931325
>be fascist
>"hello capitalism - it is time for your chemical peel"

[Anonymous No.13931863]

>>13931342
Hitler's rise was a clownshow. Read the beginning of Shirer's Rise and Fall. They had a poison pill to dissolve the parliament if he was to assume power and the dude that held it unironically left the thing at home by accident.

[Anonymous No.13931865]

>>13931269
>hurr durr national socialism is socialism thats why it called the same
based retard

[Anonymous No.13931872]

>>13931677
We are too late in the game for your image to be taken seriously. Your hand has already been tipped. You made the long march and now it is time for you to step up to the plate.

[Anonymous No.13931874]

>>13931710
I like everything you said but I think you are making martial law look like something that works exclusively by plundering neighbors. A lot if not most of its power comes by the power and production of its own nation, and this by the seizing of all means of production by a single party and organizing them towards one common goal. Germany between 1933-1938 was something out of a science fiction movie. This is where others are confusing the means of production to do with capitalism whereas there is so free market, it is controlled and planned to the T, and confusing it for feudalism because it is controlled by a royal court, whereas in truth Fascism is inherently in the work of systems and discourses that weren’t around back then. Fascism in theory shouldn’t work, fascism in practice has had catastrophic results, but a conglomeration of brilliant, cultured and educated people taking into mind to control every aspect of a nation for the purpose of developing it from within by every means necessary sounds absolutely based. I don’t want the market “to be free” because it’s not, but whose gonna control it? A party with the audacity to even propose a proposition like that would sign me over before I knew why I would. Last thing I’ll add is it is right there for everyone to see. Within there are no secret wars, no two faced dealings, Fascism is right there on the stage of the world letting you know without shame what the fuck is up inside. The nation moves all together in one direction. That’s what is threatening the US right now, inside might self destruct like in Russia, that’s what Russia wants, they want to destroy the church. The point is British, divide and conquer. The US could put 6 mile high steel walls around the entire nation and develop ourselves into the next 10000 years. The US has to do the unthinkable, lead the world by example in how to be strong and independent. Our freedoms are only as real as they are upheld by the ruling party, and even further, involved in every aspect of society making sure of just that. Total control. That’s Facsim

[Anonymous No.13931911]

>>13931874
the third Reich was inherently a child of WW1. It was its response. Germany was blamed, inside it was crumbling from the inside. NS was made of ex military. They seized absolute power. Fascism didn’t just work, it put the world in danger like not any other political ism has before or since. The Manhattan project, operation paper clip, space travel, those are products of the situation growing from a political party who had seized and unified the entire nation. It wasn’t heaven, it wasn’t hell, it was Third Reich.

[Anonymous No.13931920]

>>13931747
>Hitler and Mussolini did not promise to restore an old order but to create a new one that would rival and surpass the glory of the old.
Hitler and Mussolini did not promise to restore an old order, but did endeavor to recreate an old 'essence' through a new order. Monarchy was ignored or overturned in the name of the new political structures of fascism, but only because both Mussolini and Hitler saw that monarchy itself could no longer produce empires that could viably compete with secular liberal ones. Especially under German fascism, the impulse was to identify the racial root, the religious, political tradition that made Germans unified as Germanic, and to enforce through totalitarianism the resurrection of those unifying qualities so that, it was hoped, the totalitarianism would be self-perpetuating. This would be the satisfactory competition to liberalism. I'm thinking here of some of the philosophies of Darré, and the unusual ways they played out with the feudalizing agrarian policies of the Erbhof system, which attempted to collectivize land, an overt attempt to recreate the feudal past. (See Farquharson's The Plow and the Swastika for more, it's an interesting case).

For both Hitler and Mussolini, it's hard to see past the fascist attempts to negate "all that is", because neither man ever achieved that state of negation to his satisfaction, and so never had the tabula rasa on which he could build the new thing he desired. But I believe, and maybe it's hard to prove, that the heart of each fascism was the thing that was to be built after the blank slate has been achieved, and that thing was to be a recreation of the old hierarchy, the old racial order.

[Anonymous No.13931926]

>>13931741
I wouldn't worry about it.

[Anonymous No.13931939]

fascism is oedipal and homosexual
fascism is a gay art movement
much like high fashion it relies on capitalism

[Anonymous No.13931976]

>>13931939
>fascism is oedipal and homosexual
sorry
>fascism is a gay art movement
yikes
>much like high fashion it relies on capitalism
despite your homosexual background I can see that a functioning economy for you synonymous with capitalism, it’s not

[Anonymous No.13932032]

>>13931976
how do you rationalize cardboard boots and hitler's foreign financial backers then?

[Anonymous No.13932064]

>>13932032
If you didn’t like the boots there’s really nothing left to discuss

[Anonymous No.13932083]

>>13930947

Things that make fascism "anti-capitalist":
>opposed to financial speculation
>against free trade between nations
>heavily regulated economy and workers relation
>business owners under threat of physical elimination if they do not colaborate with the government

things that make fascism capitalist:
>private property is a-ok
>promotion of industrial capital
>the very existence of capitalists

Lenin's NEP was fascist by strict definition, that's a hard truth communists have to swallow.

[Anonymous No.13932094]

>>13930998
It's funny. No matter the topic, your posts are, without fail, absolutely moronic.

[Anonymous No.13932111]

>>13930947
Yes, as a matter of fact every real system is capitalist in practice, just like USSR was capitalist and how all the so called communist countries are capitalist now.

[Anonymous No.13932112]

>>13931710
>The fascist economy is not primarily driven by the bourgeoisie growing the means of production, it's driven by conquest and the looting of enemies.

First of all, the war machine would not even be remotely possible if the economy was not previously developed. Second of all, you think fascism equals Nazi Germany, when in fact there have been many examples of fascist economies, such as Salazar's Portugal, Franco's Spain, Vargas' Brazil, Peron's Argentina, and many other examples in Africa and the Middle East, some of the time by people who call themselves socialists ironically enough.

[Anonymous No.13932128]

>>13930998
kek

[Anonymous No.13932140]

>>13932083
There is no such thing as economic plan being Fascist, Fascism isn't as much about economy, the economy is just adapted to the social policies they implement, state capitalism and corporatism pre-date Fascism.

[Anonymous No.13932150]

>>13932083
>>opposed to financial speculation
>>against free trade between nations
>>heavily regulated economy and workers relation
>>business owners under threat of physical elimination if they do not colaborate with the government
eeeh sound like any current goverment

[Anonymous No.13932164]

you are all goddamn retards

[Anonymous No.13932174]

Modern China is maybe the best example of Fascism, and it somehow calls itself Marxist

[Anonymous No.13932176]

>>13932083
Nothing you listed as "anti-capitalist" is inherently anti-capitalist. The deeper the crisis, the more drastic the steps that need to be taken to save bourgeois society. If the alternative is commies taking advantage of the situation and assuming power, then the fascist state taking over control from individual bourgeois, for whom it's no longer possible to get their shit together on their own, is the most pro-capitalist move there could be. Engels:
>If the crises demonstrate the incapacity of the bourgeoisie for managing any longer modern productive forces, the transformation of the great establishments for production and distribution into joint-stock companies and state property shows how unnecessary the bourgeoisie are for that purpose. All the social functions of the capitalist are now performed by salaried employees. The capitalist has no further social function than that of pocketing dividends, tearing of coupons, and gambling on the Stock Exchange, where the different capitalists despoil one another of their capital. At first the capitalist mode of production forces out the workers. Now it forces out the capitalists, and reduces them, just as it reduced the workers, to the ranks of the surplus population, although not immediately into those of the industrial reserve army.
>>13930947
It is. This is patently obvious from the history of fascist states. https://www.marxists.org/archive/bordiga/works/1922/bordiga02.htm

[Anonymous No.13932184]

>>13932140
ok, fascism is about a particular social order in which the capitalist elite, the worker's unions, the church, the military are tighly controlled by the anti-democratic state working for a common national goal, sounds a lot like Lenin's USSR to me, remember the Bolsheviks lost an election by a wide margin in 1917 and then threw a coup.

[Anonymous No.13932189]

>>13930973
This. The only non leftie propaganda in the thread thus far. It is an attack on the false dichotomy of capitalism and communism, two heads of a hydra called material liberalism.

The material part is especially important as fascism purports that the politics of today are rooted in a separation of the spiritual and physical life of the nation. Nations are now material entities with a geographic zone and a GDP. The result is inevitably, when this is what you value as the sum total of a nation, the fetishisation of GDP and economics. The capitalist fetishizes through private means and ownership, and the communist through public and production.

The fascist wants a third way, to make economics one piece of a nation. There is a spiritual element, an ethnic element (depending on which brand of fascism), a physical and health based element (hence youth societies and obsession with fitness). Together all classes (owner and producer, young and old, gold and god) work as an organic entity to create something new.

Realistically that looks like massive state oversight for I industries that could damage the nation (publishing and their production of pornography, pharmaceuticals and their production of addictive substances that knowingly fail to cure the disease) and plenty of freedom within that model to start a business, make a living, even get quite rich.

[Anonymous No.13932194]

>>13932164
Shit book

[Anonymous No.13932216]

>>13931322
>the West is rapidly transitioning from capitalism into fascism

How?
That doesn't seem true in the slightest.

>>13931710
>it's driven by conquest and the looting of enemies.
>China is not driven by martial conquest

These days wars are relatively cold. How is the massive IP theft coming from China not considered "looting"?
How is the debt colonialism coming from China's growing Belt & Road Initiative not considered conquest?

[Anonymous No.13932220]

>>13932189
>communism
>liberalism
rightards are funny

modern "nations" are products of the development of capitalism, mere means that capital used to reach world scale

[Anonymous No.13932264]

>>13931706
>tolerated gays
The nazis were gay, at the beginning, until the middle class with their middle class sensibilities took over.

[Anonymous No.13932307]

>>13930947

Actually go and read books from fascists like Codreanu, Ion Mota, Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera, etc.

[Anonymous No.13932359]

>>13932307
>Just as one does not judge an individual by what he thinks about himself, so one cannot judge such a period of transformation by its consciousness, but, on the contrary, this consciousness must be explained from the contradictions of material life

[Anonymous No.13932364]

>>13932184
It sounds like USSR, as much as it sounds like Rome, Alexander's empire, Seleukids, Fankish empire, Prussia, Russian Empire, Islamic empire, Chinese empire, japanese Empire etc. you get my point.

[Anonymous No.13932375]

Retard here. I've noticed that there is a connection between Indian spirituality and fascist doctrines. I'm specifically thinking about Evola but a lot of traditionalists and fascists seem to have taken influences from buddhism. Can anyone explain this link to me and why it exists?

[Anonymous No.13932399]

>>13932375
I can't tell if this is very good bait or a genuine sentiment. Either way read advaita vedanta and René Guenon.

[Anonymous No.13932400]

>>13930947
Maybe you should do some reading bro

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=895247

[Anonymous No.13932406]

>>13932184
Lenin's USSR didn't work for a common national goal, but for an international communist revolution. The degeneration of the Bolshevik party, its national turn, and the betrayal of the international revolution, happened after his death, but it also coincided with the end of the NEP.

[Anonymous No.13932416]

>>13932399
Yes it's true, I am a retard and I am genuinely curious. My understanding of buddhism is basic bitch level and my understanding of traditionalism is probably even worse. I think a lot of people myself included get the impression that buddhism is some shit gross hippies get into so it's fascinating to see it get namedropped as the basis of a lot of fascist thought.

[Anonymous No.13932466]

>>13932220
And where does the capitalism come from if not the birth of liberal democracies?

[Anonymous No.13932538]

>>13930947
Of course. Private property of the means of production, a market, wage labor.

[Anonymous No.13932544]

>>13932466
capitalism is primary to liberal democracy

[Anonymous No.13932545]

>>13930973
>The fascist are against liberal capitalism, I believe.
What does that even mean "liberal capitalism". There is only Capitalism.

[Anonymous No.13932548]

>>13930947
Fascists: lol who cares

[Anonymous No.13932614]

>>13932375
Aryanism isn't just wewuzing. At the time it was discovered, through linguistics of sankrit, that Aryans and Europeans in general share the same ancestor population, the Proto Indo-Europeans. Nowadays that's confirmed to be true through genetic sequencing.
As a group of shared traditional ancestry, Indo-European mythicism, spirituality and philosophy were a source until then almost untaped by Europeans.

[Anonymous No.13932649]

>>13931060
I hope you posted that video ironically

[Anonymous No.13932705]

>>13931639
>It is a nationalist revision of Marxism. It is a socialism that rejects internationalism. Fascist corporatism is a phrase a lot of people misunderstand. When they say corporations they mean workers syndicates, not "corporation" in the sense of an enterprise or business.
That's way better explained that the average natsoc retard. However, we Marxists don't care about socialism anymore. Socialism is a terrible lack of ambition, and doesn't solve the problem of alienation.

[Anonymous No.13932772]

>>13932544
It is one head of the hydra. The other, or one of them, is marxism. Marxism could not have existed without the presumptions of liberal democracy (individual worth of the person, separation of faith and the state, class being a result of society not an issue of "breeding" or "good birth").

Without the change from late Medieval thought to Enlightenment thought, Marxism would not of emerged.

All modernity comes from the Liberal Revolution. Fascism is not anti marxists or anti capitalist, it is anti modernity.

[Anonymous No.13932808]

>>13930947
> "It is the phase of capitalism in which the bourgeoisie becomes so weakened it resorts to allying with the far right, the only force than can quell a revolution and preserve capitalism in the face of a socialist threat. In doing so, they grant them power and thus create an authoritarian hell-hole where everyone suffers."
Your friend is a litteral drooling retard.

[Anonymous No.13932873]

>>13930947
>>13930951
>>13930958
>>13930973
>>13930983
>>13930992
>>13930994
>>13930998
>>13931046
>>13931100
>>13931314
>>13931336
>>13931342
>>13931608
>>13931631
>>13931651
>implying that fascistic nations allow private enterprise and free markets
How could there be so many retards in a single thread? There were so many of these posts that I gave up including them all. There's even a "national socialism isn't socialism" cumbrain in here lmfao

[Anonymous No.13932885]

>>13932772
That's right. But Hitler's and Musso fascism was fake. It was only a facade. In 12 years, nothing's changed really. They didn't have the balls to ablolish modernity. Just some nice flags, nice clothes, some songs and parades, and that's it.

[Anonymous No.13932891]

>>13932111
I wonder why it's so hard for most of the retards on this board and elsewhere to understand this. It is not THAT complicated.

[Anonymous No.13932969]

>>13932885
Perhaps, but one could say that they had much today before redefining society at its base. Hitler had the Weimar cancer to deal with. Benito was a lazy slob really and more of a Caligula figure in many ways. Franco was pretty interesting though. It is all a question of how far you want to go and how far can a single man go in a lifetime. Franco had 40 years and Spain remained peaceful and generally a decent place to live. Given another century would we have had something like medieval europe with state and faith once again intertwined? Would predator capitalism and revolutionary marxism both be obsolete?

[Anonymous No.13932971]

>>13931639
The only substantive post in this thread. People need to stop reading Marxist historians already. "Corporatism" is self-management and to the Fascist theoretician is the logical culmination of syndicalism.

[Anonymous No.13932980]

>>13932969
Spain did well because Franco wasn't full fledged fascist and instead was an statist with a boner for monarchs.

Also look at Spain now, all of his measures turned the country into unemployment the European state, and that just 2 centuries after being the biggest empire in the world and the richest.

[Tante Magnesia No.13933002]

Bolshie Germany's Institute ov Sexual Research was dhe world's first institution to promote transvestism and same-sex eroticism. It was founded in 1919 by two hyphenated-germans, dhe cross-dressing faggot magnus-hirschfeld and arthur-kronfeld.

Dhe Antibolshies sacked dhe institute and burned its entire library ov books in dhe streets.

>Transsexualism

[Anonymous No.13933009]

>>13930947
Fascism is inhibited synthesis. Which is why it is third position. Communism rejects the notion of synthesis and hypercapitalism is so globalistic that it kills the nation-state.