Quote:
Originally Posted by 97240sx
Fascism can come from either side, right or left--induced by a majority or a small dictatorship.
Radical liberal fascism can occur when majority rule imposes itself on the minority by taking wealth and redistributing to achieve some sort of collective equality, sometimes manifesting itself in the form of socialism or communism.
Laissez-faire capitalism taken to the extreme could be called corporate fascism, where a marriage between government and corporations create a system of economic slavery where the minority imposes itself on the majority.
Or a despot could simply seize power militarily or by other means and institute a totalitarian regime.
There is no 100% true definition of the word today. It has become a pejorative or derogatory description for antagonists. That said, it wasn't very smart of Goldberg to title his book as such.
|
If a corporation tried to take over the government, or if someone in government changed their policies to a position that favored corporations, than that would represent an overthrow of the government in effect. Capitalists want government to prevent monopolies from restricting competition in the market. If a government stopped this policy and started to support corporate monopolies for their own benefit, it would be a rejection of this policy and a
change to a new policy. While it is true that this type of fascist government would not be socialist, it would also not be capitalist, or , as I would argue, right-wing. The socialist element of Italian Fascism and Nazism is partly just a populist appeal to the masses in order to get the leaders of the fascist movement into power, which is their main goal. It also happens to be one of the few ways in which a socialist economy can function. The seizing of the government by a military dictator would also be a radical change in the system of government. I see the overthrow, subversion, and change in the government as left-wing.
__________________
The White Fox Uncertainty Principle states that:
You can never know the position of a liberal and the logic behind it at the same time,
because the closer you get to finding one, the more unknown the other one becomes.
I offer you proof that my uncertainty principle stands true:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foolosophy
Logic is for heartless cowards and deluded ideological iconoclastic mathematicians
|