Fascist ideology - what's it really about?

If most common people become 'middle class' under the current capitalist system than that system can become 'fascist'.
So economic classification is part of the current capitalism.
A free society could have no single fundament, it can work in many ways (energy, trade and minerals can be used as fundaments) In the current system the fundament is always capital. Taxes, transactions, monopolies, gold, markets, all are imperialistic in nature, part of an ideology, because all help a system heading in a certain direction (a power structure) So 'fascism' is about systematics.

 

Please indicate your source? "You can see the Soviet invasion of Poland as a continuation of negotiations between the Soviets, France, and Britain for a military alliance against Germany that had been going on since before the Sudetan crisis. These talks had stalled over Soviet desire for French and British recognition of a "cordon saniaire" between the Soviet UNion and Germany, which implied a Soviet sphere of influence in the Baltic states, Finland, Poland, Greece, and Turkey. Germany invaded Poland during this impasse. The Soviets wanted their invasion to be regarded as defensive by the French and the Brits. Their lack of response against the Soviets meant that they did regard it in that manner and signaled that they thought that the German invasion of Poland did prove that the Soviets did really need and deserve their cordon saniaire after all. Hell, the Russians invaded Finland too and France and Britain did essentially nothing.

Other relevant contextual matters include the British-German anti-aggression pact that existed since the resolution of the Sudetan crisis (that is, the Brits couldn't complain too much about the Nazi-Soviet pact when they had one of their own),and the Russo-Japanese border war in 1939 (France and Britain understood the need for Russia too have peace wit Germany at least for a short while.)"

Source:
http://en.allexperts.com/q/European-History-670/WW2-TREATY-POLAND-FRANCE.htm

 

Fascism is a post WW1 ideology founded on radical nationalism. Communism is charecterised by economic conflict on a global scale and as such its system of government is the exact opposite of a capitalist democracy that dismisses collective ownership. Fascism accommodates private ownership only in as far as it advances the "national" cause.

 

The fabled famine in Ukraine actually occurred during the civil war.

 

Not ten years after the civil war then?

 

No. They were pictures from the civil war. Ukraine was used as an example of agricultural success ten years later.

 

Family is all and good in the small town, village scenario - but less important in large urban areas.

The modern man does not need a family.

 

You do realise we were talking about Nietzsche, not Marx??

come on John, get with the program, lol

 

Nietzsche and Marx were both leftists.

Did you see that anti Jewish Marx essay? Hitler cited it. This is a few days later but I think the argument in this thread was that fascists are left wing.

 

In my experiences...and they are extensive...I have heard people and groups champion their political socio-economic systems such as how the Communists would decry the abuse of the worker by the Imperialistic Capitalist Pigs and the Fascists or as they called themselves... Social Democratic Party screamed about about how the impure races such as the Jews were tearing the fabric of the German People apart....or actually a Jew in Nazi Germany could be blamed for everything from Economic woes to a Foot Fungal Infection....and then there are the KINGDOMS where people so long indoctrinated into believing that their Emperor was a GOD....would use this to bring their people to war with...well just about anyone who had something they wanted.

But when it comes right down to it any Government that is controlled by a Ruler that does not have TERM LIMITS...whether that ruler was elected originally into office or not....is just a DICTATOR....and that is what Putin is showing himself to be now.

It is the GREAT LIE of those who desire CONTROL AND POWER to wrap their reasoning of retaining power in the bow of a NAME OF A POLITICAL SYSTEM....such as Communism, Social Democrat....etc.

AboveAlpha

 

The sun is shining, looks like we agree on something at last

Marx blamed the Jews for generating bourgeoisie values, Hitler for them simply being Jews.

Scapegoats either way.

 

You know that is nonsense. This is a common lie.

I do agree that the Jews were used as scapegoats in Nazi Germany, but they weren't completely innocent of the crimes charged against them.

 

Democratically elected governors are dictators because no term limits?
I am expecting you to post that governors that don't speak English are tyrants anytime now .

 

during holodomor, really? I'm not that great on eastern european history, but this doesn't seem right.

 

My point was specific to any country where the top leadership position no longer has term limits usually is the place a DICTATOR exists.

Putin for example went and changed the Russian Constitution to allow him to continue to maintain control of Russia and regardless who is President in today's Russia it is PUTIN who is in CONTROL and holds the POWER.

His very existence is a stain upon Russian Democracy.

AboveAlpha

 

well, it depends on how you view it. Democracy, as in the people rule, could certainly be said to still exist strongly in russia. Just that they, as a people, seem to value a strong leader more than our western freedom. The government is a reflection of the people you know?

 

This is why the United States is not a true Democracy but a Democratic Republic.

In a Democracy the Majority rule and this can lead to the oppression of the Minority....which as anyone can see is happening right now in the Ukrainian situation.

In a Democratic Republic the rights of BOTH the Majority and Minority are protected.

AboveAlpha

 

This thread got boring and mediocre fast.

 

no.. not that republic vs. democracy (*)(*)(*)(*) again.. Will it suffice to say that you're using a somewhat confusing definition of democracy? Or do you really want me to explain all this? Well, I just need to find the post in which it it last time..

 

What's a "democratic republic"? Or perhaps a "republican democracy"? I am so confused. Who can I vote for that doesn't belong to the corporate puppets?

 

Let's spice it up!

If you were in power, how would you solve, "the jewish question"?

 

Complicated. It would depend on a lot of different factors that aren't always easy to predict. I suppose much of it would hinge how cooperative Israel was willing to be in a new transfer agreement.

Obviously they would have to leave.

 

Which Jewish question? The one much loved by AIPAC and fawned upon by Americans presidents? Or the one that is an infestation, created by Britain and the US, in the Middle East?

BTW, why don't you Swedes let Assange alone. It was consensual sex. And not, by all accounts, that good.

 

And you'd remove anyone with jewish blood I suppose? And there'd be no way for them to stay, even though they might be loyal, even though they perhaps are a scientist, or something other useful? Would you remove all other non-whites in a similar manner? What'd happen if the other country doesn't accept them?

- - - Updated - - -

uh well, (*)(*)(*)(*), that jews exist, and are conspiring against us all, or something along those lines.

 

Confusing definition of Democracy?

I think it is very cut and dry.

In a true democracy Majority Rule upon all issues....and the last True Democracy existed in Greece thousands of years ago.

A Democratic Republic and using the U.S. as an example....allows the Citizens to vote to elect their leaders both on a state and federal level but the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights guarantees rights to all Citizens and thus the Majority cannot vote an referendum into becoming a Law or Decision that would harm the Minority and thus any law deemed UNCONSTITUTIONAL is removed.

AboveAlpha