Fascism IS a leftist ideology!

Going by most left an right standards, facism would be akin to right wing, due to being conservative, or preservative more like it. Mussolini an Hitler both wanted to bring back dead empires an past glories.

While Liberalism tends to lead to revolution against such archaic or tyrannical rule, which can be bloody, bled-less or bloodless revolutions.

Monarchies, might as well be a form of facism too, Capitalism could too but regardless of where one stands, murder is murder.

a reply to: chr0naut

The sources and references in that wiki are not verifiable and are just loose and weak opinion propaganda.

The refs lead back to dead ends that can't even be read 😃😃

a reply to: Joneselius

You can't just re-write history.

Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including
extreme militaristic nationalism,
contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism,
a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites,
and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation...

There has been considerable disagreement among historians and political scientists about the nature of fascism. Some scholars, for example, regard it as a socially radical movement with ideological ties to the Jacobins of the French Revolution, whereas others see it as an extreme form of conservatism inspired by a 19th-century backlash against the ideals of the Enlightenment. Some find fascism deeply irrational, whereas others are impressed with the rationality with which it served the material interests of its supporters. Similarly, some attempt to explain fascist demonologies as the expression of irrationally misdirected anger and frustration, whereas others emphasize the rational ways in which these demonologies were used to perpetuate professional or class advantages. Finally, whereas some consider fascism to be motivated primarily by its aspirations—by a desire for cultural “regeneration” and the creation of a “new man”—others place greater weight on fascism’s “anxieties”—on its fear of communist revolution and even of left-centrist electoral victories...

source

And your whole point is kind of mute because you can only see left & right instead of acknowledging that every political ideology has its own characteristics and history.
The current Republican and Democratic Party in the US are very different from the political climate in Europe etc in the first half of the 20th century.
I don't see what the point would be in arguing about who's more communist or fascist because both are technically neither.
If you want to have a meaningful discussion focus on how you want to shape the future.
Alas as conservative I understand that might be hard for you.

In my view the correct political scale would go from collectivism on one end let's call it the left and anarchy on the other let's call it the right.

What you call either end left right up down it does not matter. And no matter what form of government you may aspire towards you are either progressing towards collectivism or anarchy.

There is no center.

Let that sink In.......

There are only varying shades of anarchy and collectivism.

So when viewed from a total anarchist perspective fascism can be on the left, and when viewed from a total collectivist perspective fascism can be on the right.

Both arguments are valid only in the fact that they reveal the political perspectives of those making the argument.

Fascism, socialism, communism these in my opinion are just varying degrees of mostly collectivism with anarchy blended in. Much as federalism, antifederalism, and direct democracy are varying degrees of mostly anarchy with some collectivism sprinkled in.

In all of the sociopolitical systems I have listed above neither party "the anarchist, or the collectivist" is ever truely happy. They are just in varying stages of the never ending negotiation of social order as counter parties.

That in my opinion is just how it is.

No matter the current sociopolitical order you find yourself in or how you define it, you are either advocating for more collectivism or you are advocating for more anarchy.

It is the presence of a counter party that keeps us from realizing what I feel would be the horrible consequences of a sociopolitical order composed exclusively of either anarchists or collectivists.

I can at least aknowledge the need for a counterparty to keep me from the doom I aspire towards no matter what extreme I am ultimatley a proponent of.

To do otherwise would be to invite doom.

That to me is the only fruit of understanding such political arguments such as fascism being to the left or right of the pollitical spectrum can bring.

No matter how one answers the question one needs and therefore should encourage others to voice their opposition to ones own response.

So for me personally fascism is on the left, but I welcome and even encourage opposition to my point of view.

Not this nonsense and re-writting history again. I expect it from US posters but you're from the UK and have no excuse.

The first thing Nazis did was have all Communists or Socialists and anyone left wing put in Concentration Camps.

Long before any nation went to war with Italy or Germany - the International Brigades from around the world (made up of trade uniosts, communists and socialists) volunteered to fight against them.

Fascism stems from Roman Empire - Mussolini futher adapted it to far right ideals. It's a movemet of rabid nationalism and corporatism which are far-right concepts.

The Nazis were far-right wing - on the route to power they had a socialist centralist arm but these members were all murdered in the night of the long knives. The party name is a conjunction of nationalist to appeal to the right wing and socialist to appeal to the left- it makes no political sense but appealed to both left and right wing to gain votes and power.

It's about having a totalitarian police state and worship of the military, stautues, a false history, gaining and maintaining an empire and the belief the country is racially superior. - All of which are extreme-right wing concepts which thankfully bear no resemblance to any current political party (apart from Golden Dawn in Greece).

It's true that means of production were siezed and nationalised, usually this is a communist/socialist approach - but this was to support the war and empire building; not to improve conditions for the workforce or country.
-----------

It's all far right-wing but comepleteky off the scale of the political compass in 'extreme right ring and extreme authoriarian'

It has nothing to do with current or former US politics - The republicans are centre authoritarian, the dems are to the right of that but neutral on the authoritarian/libertarian scale.

If you want to see the evils of the extreme left then look at the millions killed in Communist and Socialist countries - but there's no need to completely rewrite history by pretending fascism is a left-wing concept.

Bottom line?

Forget the labels.
Ignore what people say.

Watch what people DO.

Their behavior tells you who and what people are.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: ketsuko
"Fascism is an ideology of the left" isn't just aimed at the current admin.

We've gotten to the point where they are blurring the lines between government and business.

You can look at the naked collusion between government and Big Tech or government and Hedge Funds on Wall Street now. Of course, the "cute" excuse is that 'they're private companies, so it's technically not illegal or unconstitutional', but look at the definition of fascism again "A political system in which government controls business and labor". Government doesn't have to own it in order to control it.

Look what happened as soon as other business entities tried to act against what government wanted (or had users acting in defiance of government/business preference) - they used the levers of business in alliance with them to shut those entities down. That's fascism.

It is going on right now. I am referring to Parler and Robinhood. Both are examples of government/business alliance in defiance of stated spirit of the constitution and principles of American freedom in different ways. Both are nakedly acting in coordinated fashion against those principles.

And in order to really see how it's going you have to understand there are major government power players on both sides of the aisle standing behind it. Yes, the left is in control, but the left encompasses more than just Democrats.

a reply to: bastion

You're coming from a European perspective where left/right is between communists and fascists. Both end of that spectrum lead to authoritarian rule and you end up squeezed to death either way.

The US is a bit different.

Our spectrum of left/right is supposed to go more authoritarian/libertarian where you can never go full libertarian because that's full-on anarchy which is not exactly good either. In this case, both fascism and communism are on the left spectrum because both end up at full authoritarian.

So in this case and from an American perspective, YES, fascism is leftist because it ends up fully authoritarian. You can't look at me and argue that one style of complete authoritarianism is better than the other. To me, all kinds of authoritarian rule are completely evil and end up slaughtering the people and plunging them into hopeless poverty for the enrichment of the privileged few.

a reply to: ketsuko
What does any of that have to do with the OP gunning for leftists?

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: ketsuko
What does any of that have to do with the OP gunning for leftists?

I can't help it if your reading comprehension is impaired.

a reply to: ketsuko
You do know that isn't the US left/right?

Some US conservatives look at it the way you described and other americans see it in the european perspective.

a reply to: ketsuko
It isn't impaired.

I called the OP out on blasting leftists in the OP, and other posts and you jumped in trying to say he was only talking about the "current regime" and then meander off into what was in that post, which has nothing to do with the original point.

originally posted by: strongfp
Considering "left" ideology is based on the collective individual efforts of the common people, and democracy

Really? It does?

Rhetorical question, since it is obvious on its face that it does not.

it doesn't make sense to pin it as 'fascist'.

Except it does, because your claim was patently false.

The left claim that their ideology is based on 'collective individual efforts', but it is a bald faced lie. It is based on the iron fist of imposed solidarity - or else.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: ketsuko
You do know that isn't the US left/right?

Some US conservatives look at it the way you described and other americans see it in the european perspective.

Even you admit that those Americans are not thinking like Americans. Hence the reason we call it "anti-American". Pretty sad too when you consider and admit that the fight is always and ever between two kinds of authoritarianism where you get crushed like dirty peons.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Even you admit that those Americans are not thinking like Americans. Hence the reason we call it "anti-American".

Maybe it is the other americans not thinking like americans? Cuts both ways.

The point is that right = freedom is a skewed view of what left/right means.

No, fascism is not left wing. It’s not right wing either. Fascism is extreme statism and totalitarianism. It cares only in the State, and will use whatever politics benefits it at any given moment in order to further its progress. It was first and foremost anti-democratic, anti-socialist, and anti-liberal (in the classical sense).

In the main, they were activists without any coherent political doctrine beyond subservience to the State.

Right wing revisionism at its best.

It shows a level of wilful ignorance that beggars belief and a desperate urge to apportion all of the world's ills, both current and historic, on those pinko, commie bastards.

How someone could display such a lack of understanding of the core political ideology that lies at the heart of this thread is unbelievable.

Anyone who has taken the time to study the relevant ideologies and historic FACT would know that this is one of the biggest load of bollocks being peddled on the internet - and that says something.

We have people blatantly cherry picking, ignoring large volumes of contradictory texts and quotes, misrepresenting and simply twisting and manipulating in order to confirm their own personal bias, locked in perspective and viewpoint in a revisionist attempt to rewrite history, political science and study.

Incredibly ignorant and dare I say disingenuous and highly inaccurate.

But of course the usual suspects will choose to ignore this and continue in their desperate attempt blame anything and everything on 'the left'.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Vroomfondel
Would you consider a monarchy dictatorial?

The whole left/right thing started in a national assembly in France during the revolution when those supporting the king sat on the right and those who wanted change sat on the left.

What to Know About the Origins of 'Left' and 'Right' in Politics, From the French Revolution to the 2020 Presidential Race

One of the main issues the assembly debated was how much power the king should have, says David A. Bell, a professor of early modern France at Princeton University. Would he have the right to an absolute veto? As the debate continued, those who thought the king should have an absolute veto sat on the right of the president of the assembly, and those who thought he should not — the more radical view — sat on the left of the president of the assembly. In other words, those who wanted to hew closer to tradition were on the right, and those who wanted more change were on the left.

Where do you think the FF of the US would have sat?

If your goal is a purely philosophical discussion then monarchs, France, etc, are fair play and any division of a body of people into two sides is exemplar of the theme. However, I was under the impression that you wanted a real life assessment of fascism as it applies to our current political conditions. In which case, I stand by my convictions.

originally posted by: Joneselius
The left has more in common with fascism than they like to admit.

When you brand yourself as anti-fascism and anti-racist then you can do anything and it is all good.

a reply to: daskakik

Being American is about freedom from intrusive, authoritarian government control of ourselves, our lives, and our systems of all kinds.