Whereas your use of “a group of people from multiple ethnicities, genders, sexualities and creeds” is code for:
> People who agree with my political ideology.
A woman of color that held heretical beliefs contrary to your orthodoxy would be no more welcome than anyone else.
It’s telling that you argue that your opponents are “people who want to silence, suppress and destroy anyone not part of the dominant group”, and then immediately turn around use that assertion to justify the necessity of silencing and suppressing those not part of your dominant group.
It would be extremely naive to think that fascism only happened in the 1920s-1940s.
Obviously, todays fascism looks nothing like that of the modern era, just as todays leftists are different.
But it’s back, poisoning our democracies and pushing the world into a new hell. Putin is a neofascist. I could tell you which Americans are fascists, but you all get touchy when anyone brings it up.
Ah yes, the crypto-fascism conspiracy theory - or the blackshirt scare.
There's fascists everywhere. They don't call themselves that, they don't organise under that label, and their views aren't particularly similar to historical fascism - but it's a serious threat! It's so powerful that they have to keep it a secret because they'll be cast out of polite society...
At least McCarthy actually found people spying for the USSR.
> They don't call themselves that, they don't organise under that label
Why would they? Much of our current mythology is based around slaughtering fascists in WW2. Why would anyone identify with that?
> their views aren't particularly similar to historical fascism
Hence the appellation of neofascism. There is a direct thread of political genealogy from the alt-right to the OG fascists, through the European Nouvelle Droite (inspired by Mussolini) and including figures like Steve Bannon who used to push the British BNP: a legitimately neofascist party. He also was buddy with Dugin for a while: a confirmed neofascist.
Read some fucking history and get stuck into the thought and theories of the far right if you want to play this game son.
> it's a serious threat!
Finally, we can agree! Look at the escalating far right violence in the US and Canada, and the erosion of the open society in Europe, and the current actions of Russia and China.
Or how about, instead of that, we recognize that the vast majority of people are not engaging in political violence, revolution, or physically attacking their political opponents, or any of these allegedly horrible things that you think are happening.
And instead of that, we should recognize that most people just want to do work at their workplace, have friends, and live their life, and are not apart of any neo nazi groups that are going to target minorities at the drop of the hat.
Most people, are just regular normal individuals, who are not engaging in horrible actions or attacks against others, and we do not need to be on a witch hunt to find the secret nazis that you think are hiding just around the corner.
My sibling in humanity. I beg you. Read about the history of fascism and its contemporary movements instead of just parroting ill informed bumper stickers, because you’re about half a step away from saying the that the Democratic Republic of Germany was democracy.
Piece of advice - if someone disagrees with you and you want to change their mind don't tell them they are ignorant of history and they get their ideas from bumper stickers.
> Remember, that the other word “nazism” is a short for National Socialism, a purely left based ideology. The two (fascism and nazism) had a good run together as the best friends since they didn’t have a lot of topics to fight about.
This is a grossly inaccurate framing. Hitler and his allies found the socialist party a convenient ladder to power, however were not themselves not particularly leftist. For them the ethno nationalist project was the focus, and eventually Hitler would consolidate his control over the party by literally stabbing to death the leaders of the worker centric wing of the party.
I wouldn't say National Socialism was purely left. It was economically extremely left-leaning and most of their social policies were extremely right-leaning. (Though, racism knows no political bounds... Stalin also practiced genocidal policies.)
It's true that Hitler thought the US's free market economy was a Jewish ideal, and he thought the economic free market incentives (in the form of huge government contracts) would only benefit Jews without efficiently producing war material. The Nazis did have a form of command economy as a result, which turned out to not be as efficient.
I mean, the economics of National Socialism aren't what people usually hate about it, they hate the authoritarianism where you were either their kind of socialist or they would beat you up and cast you out of society, even if you were some other stripe of socialist.
So they became nearly universally hated by fighting anyone who wasn't one of them.
It was ethnostate socialism. It was a command economy where industry was at the service of the people, but they had a perverse idea of who their people were and who they weren't.
It really was a left-wing economic model with extreme right-wing social policy, plus lots of genocide.
> It really was a left-wing economic model with extreme right-wing social policy, plus lots of genocide.
So it was a right-wing political model (with lots of genocide) that happened to have a somewhat left-wing economic model.
In economics, economics ranks above politics, but in politics, politics ranks above economics. And Nazism was (is) a political ideology, not a school of economics.
It's amusing to me that you comment complaining that fascists will seize power given the chance. I have seen the same thought process but pointing at wokism instead of fascism. The parallel is so strong I had to reread your post to double check which side you were arguing to support.
Well, you wasted no time whatsoever in playing the Nazi card.
If you're willing to hear a counterpoint: I disagree wholeheartedly with your worldview, and yet I support your right to express your views. See, I'm not looking to "silence", "suppress", or "destroy" you, even though I disagree with you. Please make a mental note that people like me exist and not everybody who disagrees with you is a fascist.
I’m not talking about silencing people I disagree with in terms of opinion. I’m talking about fascists disagreeing that certain ethnic/sexual/gender groups should be alive or allowed to thrive, or have certain rights.
If you think holding views like that is OK, you walk, talk and quack like a fascist.
> I’m not talking about silencing people I disagree with in terms of opinion. I’m talking about fascists disagreeing that certain ethnic/sexual/gender groups should be alive or allowed to thrive, or have certain rights. If you think holding views like that is OK, you walk, talk and quack like a fascist.
That's a nice motte-and-bailey lumping together "should be alive" and "have certain rights". The former is a very specific kind of extreme biggot, and the latter can mean almost anything. You know, words have actual meanings and not everybody who disagrees with you is a fascist. You can look up the definition of the word "fascist" in a dictionary. The definition is a lot narrower than you think. A religious person who opposes abortion is not a fascist. An athlete who opposes trans womens' rights to compete in womens' competitions is not a fascist.
> A religious person who opposes abortion is not a fascist.
I’d call them a theocrat, but lets not forget the close ties between fascism and the church/new political-religious movements in Germany and Italy.
> An athlete who opposes trans womens' rights to compete in womens' competitions is not a fascist.
This one is nuanced because transgender folks being allowed to exist openly is still fairly recent, and openly in sports is more novel still. There are fascists in that camp for sure, but also a lot of reasoned debate needed to work out the cultural niche for trans people in this area. Unfortunately the left will seek to stop any debate, and fascists will poison the debate until trans people are bludgeoned into silence once more.
Holding a view is different than thinking the view is OK to hold.
AND, most people (you'd accuse of thinking the view is ok to hold) don't think these views *are* ok to hold, but are caught in a purposefully wide net.
Like, often we hear that:
* proposition 8 was fascist
* brendan eich is a fascist because he donated to it
* supporting brendan eich is fascist
I agree with marriage equality. (it is actually good conservatism, even!) But I disagree that prop 8 was fascist (and according to some that probably makes me a fascist as well)
