Question Regarding Fascism

Discussion in 'Political Science' started by KillUncleSam, May 11, 2011.

  1. ZSwierczynski

    ZSwierczynski New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hitler was a National Socialist = A right wing fascist under the disguise of a left lending party.

    "I am not a Labor Leader; I do not want you to follow me or anyone else; if you are looking for a Moses to lead you out of this capitalist wilderness, you will stay right where you are. I would not lead you into the promised land if I could, because if I led you in, some one else would lead you out. You must use your heads as well as your hands, and get yourself out of your present condition."
    -- Eugene V. Debs 1912

    A lot of Socialist believe to an extent private property, they ask though what are you using that property. For your own gain/Society gain/Employment/Just owning it? There is a difference. (My political science teacher is ex-military from a conservative family and he is a socialist. More of a Libertarian Socialist(There is such a thing believe it or not).)

    Actually was in prison under President Wilson for protesting against WWI.

    Men/Women in any high political office will do anything to keep in power. But destroying what most Americans use daily to keep wages afloat is scary to some. You cannot have the casino capitalism(if you want that, move to Hong Kong), nor you can have full blown socialism. You need a mix between capitalism and socialism.
     
  2. dixiehunter

    dixiehunter Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    3,341
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Fascism ....who needs it?

    Keep it in those ignorant 3rd world tribe rulled countries and islands.

    Maybe one day someone will show them the exsistance of electricity.
     
  3. JavaBlack

    JavaBlack New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2005
    Messages:
    21,729
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Right-wing and left-wing are not defined by the ludicrous variable of "size of government."
    The philosophies are placed more on the basis of egalitarianism and individual freedom.
    Obviously American conservatism embraces more personal freedom than fascism and is thus not as far right.
    Likewise American liberalism embraces less individual freedom than anarcho-socialism and is thus not as far left as possible.

    When you really look at someone like Ayn Rand, you'll notice that despite being for "small government", her philosophy supported high amounts of hierarchism, elitism, and few protections for weaker members of society-- like fascists.
    In the meantime, New Dealism is very "big government", but focused on empowering the weak, fostering more equality between classes-- like most left-wing ideologies.

    What's peculiar is the way today's right focuses almost completely on the variable of "size."
    The more cynical among us see this as a sleight of hand.
    Personally I think that ship has sailed and people just don't think about it... that's why the elite "centrists" seem to embrace the "size of government" measure of the political spectrum.
     
  4. ZSwierczynski

    ZSwierczynski New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    You nailed it.
     

Share This Page