I think there are as many people uneducated about fascism in America as anywhere else. It's not on the curriculum in the USA any more than it is elsewhere. In order to learn about fascism you will have to study it. Given how popular it was, it should be pretty obvious to you that there is something more to it than the simplistic demonisation of our enemies in war. Socialism is very popular. There is no getting round it.
I tend to go with Mussolini's Fascist Manifesto to define it. A lot of which most moderate left leaning people will go along with. Workers rights. Minimum wage and mandatory holiday for example. State regulation of capitalism and so on. Essentially, looking to the state to provide solutions. Collectivism and a workers people's movement. A school of socialism. As a liberal it rubs me up the wrong way. But despite my concerns, minimum wage has not turned out to be an economic disaster. Nor has mandatory holiday and most of it I am able to swallow even if I reject the fundamentals.
Mussolini's workers rights were strictly subject to the good of the state. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Charter_of_1927 However this is not a definition of fascism. As a whole social construct it includes an unelected head of state, strong nationalistic impetus and racist targets. Not I might add, anything like left leaning social constructs until you wander into strong elements of communism. Not socialism.
Communism is a rival school of socialism. There is nothing about race in the Fascist Manifesto. And yes, they are statist. The people are the state and the state is the people. As opposed to liberalism where the state and the individual are separate entities often considered to be in direct competition with each other. The social structure proposed is an end to aristocratic appointments to the senate, to be replaced by meritocratic appointments. Councils formed by experts from the working class. Proportional representation. Reduction in voting age to 18 and woman's suffrage. Giving the vote to women. They were progressives. Progressive taxation. Equal rights. An end to the aristocratic dominance over political institutions. That sort of thing. Popular stuff. Stuff that loads of people buy into.
First when you cut and paste it is appropriate to indicate by speech marks. You are copying what the fascists say and like to believe. In practise it does not work like that. In practise there isnt meritocracy. There is dictatorship. There are no elections. No voting age. No working class experts on councils. Councils are chosen by the dictator. Enterprise is free to operate if it works for the good of the state. If not it is terminated. And the idea that the poor sods who were put to work un fascist factories had any rights is laughable. And there may not have been reference to ethnic cleansing. But you aren't seriously going to tell me is didn't happen! There is a long thread full of unspeakable cowdung discussing that endlessly. As for not being nationalist, "Italian Fascism was rooted in Italian nationalism, national syndicalism, revolutionary nationalism and the desire to restore and expand Italian territories, which Italian Fascists deemed necessary for a nation to assert its superiority and strength and to avoid succumbing to decay.[1] Italian Fascists also claimed that modern Italy was the heir to ancient Rome and its legacy, and historically supported the creation of an imperial Italy to provide spazio vitale ("living space") for colonization by Italian settlers and to establish control over the Mediterranean Sea.[2]" WIKI Not racist? "Mussolini himself, held racist ideas (specifically anti-Slavism[10]) that were enshrined into law as official policy over the course of fascist rule.[11] As fascist Italy and Nazi Germany grew politically closer in the latter half of the 1930s, Italian laws and policies became explicitly antisemitic due to pressure from Nazi Germany (even though antisemitic laws were not commonly enforced in Italy), including the passage of the Italian racial laws.[12] When the fascists were in power, they also persecuted some linguistic minorities in Italy.[13][14] In addition, the Greeks in Dodecanese and Northern Epirus, which were then under Italian occupation and influence, were persecuted.[15]" WIKI. Further: In a 1921 speech in Bologna, Mussolini stated that "Fascism was born ... out of a profound, perennial need of this our Aryan and Mediterranean race".[51][52] In this speech, Mussolini was referring to Italians as being the Mediterranean branch of the Aryan Race, Aryan in the meaning of people of an Indo-European language and culture.[53] Italian fascism emphasized that race was bound by spiritual and cultural foundations and identified a racial hierarchy based on spiritual and cultural factors.[53] While Italian fascism based its conception of race on spiritual and cultural factors, Mussolini explicitly rejected notions that biologically "pure" races were still considered a relevant factor in racial classification.[54] He claimed that italianità had assimilatory capacity.[54] It used spiritual and cultural conceptions of race to make land claims on Dalmatia and to justify an Italian sphere of influence in the Balkans based on then-present and historical Italian cultural influence in the Balkans.[55] The fascist regime justified colonialism in Africa by claiming that the spiritual and cultural superiority of Italians as part of the white race justified the right for Italy and other white powers to rule over the black race, while asserting the racial segregation of whites and blacks in its colonies.[56] It claimed that fascism's colonial goals were to civilize the inferior races and defend the purity of Western civilization from racial miscegenation that it claimed would harm the intellectual qualities of the white race.[56] It claimed that the white race needed to increase its natality in order to avoid being overtaken by the black and yellow races that were multiplying at a faster rate than whites.[57] I didn't mention the element of fascism having to do with ethnic history and the revisionist reconstruction of an extinguished empire, which also figured largely in both Italy and Germany. This became the principle excuse for Italian expansionism into the Baltics and surrounding areas. If you want to criticise those who don't learn about fascism, how about YOU learning first?
Yes, the practise of well intentioned progressive policies will not result in a socialist utopia. That is a lesson of history we have all learned. Or at least, that is a lesson from history that most of us have learned. But that is to miss the point. They are popular. As popular today as they ever were. Mainstream. They tap into a genuine social desire that is widely felt. There are enough people out there who believe that pursuing the same social goals the same way won't result in an authoritarian state. But all the evidence suggests that it will. Instead many of us prefer liberalism. A system that recognises that hierarchies will always manifest and seeks to place limitations on their power over others. Small government. Low taxes. Separated jurisdictions. National borders. What our dear cousins in America refer to as checks and balances to power.
Is using such wide diversionary tactics supposed to excuse your lack of understanding about what you accused others of not understanding??
Socialists will never willingly understand that the practise of socialism produces autocracy. You know what fascism is. You choose to ignore all the great many aspects of it that you advocate for and approve of. But most people don't even know what fascism is. They just think it is throwing jews into ovens. Which is after all, all you wish it to be portrayed as. Since the essence of fascism is the very same progressive socialism you yourself advocate for. The political ideology that provided the social environment where this kind of despicable behaviour was able to prosper.... is your own. I'll stick with liberalism. It's not perfect. But.. I prefer it to yours.
To the point. Relevant and the very reason why fascism is still a force to be uncomfortable about. Until those who share the ideology are willing to own the results of practising it, they will continue to advocate for the very same policies that created the environment we seek to avoid. So you could say... fascism was popular because everybody wanted to have **** work conditions and genocide the Jews. The uneducated view. Or you could instead realise that everyone supported fascism because they wanted equality, better work conditions and saw the government as their medium for getting it. You know. Free schools. An NHS. Offered the state more authority in return for a greater good that they would be the beneficiaries of. What could go wrong?
So what? Life is how you see it. Are you trying to expound some new universal truth here or just repeat what is already universally recognised?
I'm just educating you. Fascism is not about racism. It's about socialism. That is why it was so popular. The road to hell being paved with good intentions, not bad.
Yyouur role is not to educate me. Your role is to read factual information and understand it. And not ignore it, divert from it, or , dare I say it, lie about what it says. Not about racism? Go back and read my link that proves you wrong. Then post something that disproves what I posted. See, chuck, that is how debating works. Not by cognitive dissonance, or nosedive into some inane general knowledge. One if the identifiers of fascism is racism. Another is nationalism. Another is elitism. Usually defined by race of ethnic origin. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism_and_ideology Perhaps you should do some learninng. Then when you properly understand fascism, start learning about socialism. Then you can discuss and compare the two.
I also like Hungary. I even started to learn Hungarian. But I do not like Hungary's present government.
