Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

The secret history of fascism


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#16    Attemped Human

Attemped Human

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 63 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2010

Posted 06 February 2010 - 03:26 AM

View PostEldorado, on 05 February 2010 - 05:00 PM, said:

I suppose it's a back-door kind of imperialism.  Help other countries, offer them trade and expertise, make them reliant on you.  In return, they can host your military bases and you have a say in the running of their country. Slowly introduce your culture, and pretty soon those countries are well on the way to being Americanised

Not even in a short time. It happened in Iraq and its already been happening in Haiti. In the case of Haiti, aid was made conditional and private companies (which may not be American Imperialism but it is certainly capitalist imperialism) have already targeted Haiti as a site for profiteering. Naomi Klein calls it the Shock Doctrine.

http://en.wikipedia...._Shock_Doctrine


#17    fatchance2005

fatchance2005

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 65 posts
  • Joined:18 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 November 2010 - 02:56 AM

This idea-- that you can fold the political spectrum in the middle and place all of history's bad guys at one end and yourself at the other is one of the more dangerous inventions of the political Right in America in the late 20th and early 21st Century.  

It ranks alongside "The Holocaust Never Happened"; "The Scientific Discoveries of the 1830's-1850's, like Evolution and Global Warming, are Hoaxes perpetrated recently for economic gain by contemporary Liberals"; "All Our problems can be blamed on the Mexicans and Moslems (and fixed by their destruction)".  All of these concepts depend on the principle that you can totally reinvent history at will to support whatever Tomfool idea one is promoting and if you put it on the internet millions of people will think it is true.

" It isn't the things you don't know that will trip you up, it's the things you know for certain that aren't true"  -- Mark Twain

#18    Cradle of Fish

Cradle of Fish

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,583 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Australia

  • "He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." - Dr. Johnson

Posted 18 November 2010 - 06:09 AM

Sorry, Fascism is, and always has been, right wing. Stalinist Russia was not fascist, it was totalitarian.

And I don't know why there's such a big attempt to paint communism and fascism as the same thing. They are not. The history of Fascism is one of opposition to Communism. The thing that fueled the fascists in Germany and Spain was the threat of communist revolution.

I am not a man, merely a parody of one.


#19    fatchance2005

fatchance2005

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 65 posts
  • Joined:18 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 November 2010 - 09:09 PM

" The thing that fueled the fascists in Germany and Spain was the threat of communist revolution. "

Well exactly, Cradle of Fish.  Fascism is also fundamentally Capitalist, advocating a powerful coalition of  Industrialists in full partnership with the Government, as someone else pointed out.  No room for Labor Unions, 40 hour week, 8 hour day, overtime, workplace safety rules, Employee Health, etc.  Communism is fundamentally anti-Capitalist, idealizing a society where the workers owned the means of production. Fascists believed that the Military was the only necessary form of diplomacy, not unlike some people we hear today.  The third key principle of Fascism was the absolute authority of State over the individual citizen, leading to the term "Authoritarian", or the "Leader Principle" as Hitler called it.  Again that's diametrically opposite to the Marxist ideal where the need for government and government leaders would theoretically "wither away".

Much of the basis for the notion that Fascism and Marxist-Leninist Socialism are the "same thing" comes from the fact that in some cases they achieved similar results.  Orwell attempted to make that point in "1984", but he never suggested they were "the same".  Rather he pictured them as eternally at war.  Critics like to point to examples of failure such as the former Soviet Union as representative of the Marxist State being "proven" unsuccessful.  That analysis conveniently overlooks the fact that the Czarist Russian Empire was an utter economic and social failure when the 20th Century dawned.  It also overlooks the fact that in the 21st Century Communist China has economic success that dwarfs anything seen by the titular Capitalist countries, and it is just now entering the steep portion of the growth curve.  We see poor old Cuba limping along as an example of failure, overlooking the fact that they are in most ways better off than many non-Communist countries in Africa, the Pacific Rim and Central America.  Then you have Viet Nam, still recovering from a century of insurgent warfare against colonial occupation, but with a respectable economy and standard of living. Arguing that "similar results"="the same thing" is childlike at best.  By that reasoning one can argue that mining, manufacturing and agriculture are "the same thing" as chemical warfare because they have sometimes achieved the same results.

The failure of Soviet Communism can mainly be attributed mainly to human weakness and corruption.  Orwell described that too, in "Animal Farm", noting that although theoretically "all pigs are created equal, some pigs are more equal than others".  That points to a weakness Communism sought to deny, but one that is hardly unique to it.  I've discussed this odd notion of Fascism and Communism being the "same thing" with people from Eastern Europe who lived under both systems.  While most of them are staunchly anti-communist, they make no bones about their far greater hatred of the Fascists.  What they will tell you if you listen to them is how the Communists brought rigid social regimentation and impossibly inept inefficient bureaucracy that stifled growth and innovation, while the Fascists rounded up and machinegunned whole villages and dumped the bodies in mass graves.  This history is still too recent for them to accept a reinvented version no matter who is promoting it.

Edited by fatchance2005, 18 November 2010 - 09:12 PM.

" It isn't the things you don't know that will trip you up, it's the things you know for certain that aren't true"  -- Mark Twain

#20    dekker87

dekker87

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,369 posts
  • Joined:08 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:england

Posted 23 November 2010 - 10:34 AM

View PostOen Anderson, on 16 January 2010 - 10:33 PM, said:

one definition of liberty is the ability to choose.  We are losing our ability to choose be it health care insurance or our freedom of speech.  Choose your next words carefully for this is Sparta.  America has become the new Sparta from the most powerful military to the discarding of unwanted babies by abortion.  This was a good article Bill, keep up the good work.

it's called positive liberty and it's opponent is negative liberty....first mentioned by the philsopher isiah berlin:

My link


#21    Solipsi Rai

Solipsi Rai

    ...from the Desert...

  • Member
  • 2,865 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm Desert, Cal US America

  • he's Native and Indio-geneous to the Americas.

Posted 23 November 2010 - 06:44 PM

Apparently, the political scale has changed and modified for the current times we live in. To measure fascism and communism into one single left side of the spectrum indicates similar authoritarian and tyrannical methods (i.e. Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's USSR) and the right side emphasized liberty not basic anarchy, but more of an anti-authoritarian democratic system. Where does liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans now fit in the updated model? Glenn Beck's chalkboard segments on political history places the neo-conservatives and Libertarians on the "right" instead of anarchists he said are too "left" having radical or self-centric tendencies to become another form of totalitarianism.

:innocent: The Truth is Out There - the X Files. :alien:

#22    fatchance2005

fatchance2005

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 65 posts
  • Joined:18 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 November 2010 - 09:30 PM

View PostDesert Man, on 23 November 2010 - 06:44 PM, said:

Apparently, the political scale has changed and modified for the current times we live in. To measure fascism and communism into one single left side of the spectrum indicates similar authoritarian and tyrannical methods (i.e. Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's USSR) and the right side emphasized liberty not basic anarchy, but more of an anti-authoritarian democratic system. Where does liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans now fit in the updated model? Glenn Beck's chalkboard segments on political history places the neo-conservatives and Libertarians on the "right" instead of anarchists he said are too "left" having radical or self-centric tendencies to become another form of totalitarianism.

There is no "updated model".   Glenn Beck is a shameless self-promoter with no education.  The Left and Right have had definitions for hundreds of years.  They are based on the idea of mutually exclusive economic and social theories.  The idea that the Baby Boomers can redefine them at will to support their own self-interested politics of the moment is fatuous even by their standards.

Edited by fatchance2005, 23 November 2010 - 09:31 PM.

" It isn't the things you don't know that will trip you up, it's the things you know for certain that aren't true"  -- Mark Twain

#23    Solipsi Rai

Solipsi Rai

    ...from the Desert...

  • Member
  • 2,865 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm Desert, Cal US America

  • he's Native and Indio-geneous to the Americas.

Posted 26 November 2010 - 10:47 PM

In response to the post above (fatchance): Baby-boomers or those born from 1943 to 61 and the generation born from 1961 to 75 (Glenn Beck) have different ideas of political morality and ethics based on their youth at the time (pre-WWII/ Cold War) than their parents or grandparents and including the children or grand-children. Their political views, opinions and beliefs are shaped by the era they grew up in and Beck stated he dreaded living through the 1970s as much I had felt as a teenager on "the 1990s sucked".

I happen to love an argument of how similar the "Tea Party"/neocon Republicans in 2007 to 2010 and the "New Left"/liberal Hippies in 1966 to 1969 are: Against "Big government", corporate elites and oppression of the under-represented: In the 1960's they were racial and sexual minorities such as African-Americans in urban ghettos, but in this time they are blue-collar rural whites with strong religious values who finds socialism to be inconsistent in American political life.

Also Glenn Beck and FOX News assumes they're acting in populist overtone in the same manner like Walter Cronkite and CBS News done in the '60s to challenge the so-called "Corporate-Industrial-Military complex" the term coined by president Lyndon B. Johnson for those not familiar with history. The comparisons of 1960's radicalism and 2000's reactionaries to ironically share the same side of the political spectrum on "Anarchism and Populism" away from the opposite side of "totalitarianism or authoritarianism" that Progressives were placed in, is a highly questionable proposition.

:innocent: The Truth is Out There - the X Files. :alien:

#24    elijahcolorado

elijahcolorado

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2010

Posted 11 December 2010 - 05:25 PM

The American Form of Government
My link

from an old John Birch Society Film


#25    Superglobe

Superglobe

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 333 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Angkor Wut

  • [insert snarky comment here]

Posted 11 December 2010 - 06:53 PM

Here's the thing about the political spectrum.

It's a spectrum. It's a terrible model for any practical political state, and this kind of thing is the reason we have a political world run almost entirely by buzzwords and labels.

nothing to see here, folks.

#26    elijahcolorado

elijahcolorado

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2010

Posted 11 December 2010 - 07:13 PM

View PostAttemped Human, on 06 February 2010 - 03:26 AM, said:

Not even in a short time. It happened in Iraq and its already been happening in Haiti. In the case of Haiti, aid was made conditional and private companies (which may not be American Imperialism but it is certainly capitalist imperialism) have already targeted Haiti as a site for profiteering. Naomi Klein calls it the Shock Doctrine.

http://en.wikipedia...._Shock_Doctrine

     This has been going on longer than many people realize. I worked for a plumbing and heating firm in Germany (while stationed there in the military. I asked my colleague what "zoll" meant one day when we were picking up supplies. In German it basically means SAE or standard american engineering sizes......Germany has used SAE plumbing parts since the conclusion of WWII when we rebuilt the German infrastructure. Yes, corporate imperialism at its finest.

    For an analysis of where the world is heading I would recommend Robert Kaplan's "The Coming Anarchy, Shattering the Post Cold War Dream"





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users