This thread needs a reminder of the definition of facism:
Mussolini defined it as "The merger of government with corporations"
Which would apply to quite a lot of countries these days.. i wont name names....
The ANTIFA is hardly better, a bunch of violent thugs that offer no meaningful solutions to society.
CHEEZMO;58216348 said:
This thread needs a reminder of the definition of facism:
Mussolini defined it as "The merger of government with corporations"
Which would apply to quite a lot of countries these days.. i wont name names....
Why does it seem like I hear a story daily about some European praising Hitler, or giving the Hitler salute, or praising Nazism?
How could people have nostalgia for any of that?
CHEEZMO, if you agree that certain parties should be illegal then where do you draw the line? Define "destructive to society"? Many would argue that a party of anarchists or communists would be "destructive to society" if elected. Would you agree if say KKE was outlawed as well? Especially considering the human rights violation during their attempted coup some decades back?
You know damn well that killing them will most definitely have the opposite effect and there will be plenty of new recruit to their cause, especially when they have this big public support.
CHEEZMO, if you agree that certain parties should be illegal then where do you draw the line? Define "destructive to society"? Many would argue that a party of anarchists or communists would be "destructive to society" if elected. Would you agree if say KKE was outlawed as well? Especially considering the human rights violation during their attempted coup some decades back?
CHEEZMO;58217468 said:Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense.
CHEEZMO;58218098 said:First they came for the anti-Semites,
Good, fuck Nazi scum
Then they came for the Racists
Fuck those racist pieces of shit
Then they came for the ultra-Nationalists
But I did not speak out, because ultra-Nationalists are dangerous cunts
Then things were quite a bit better, actually.
If the government starts targeting radical groups do you really think that you and your fellow far-leftists will remain untouched?
If the government starts targeting radical groups do you really think that you and your fellow far-leftists will remain untouched?
CHEEZMO;58218098 said:First they came for the anti-Semites,
Good, fuck Nazi scum
Then they came for the Racists
Fuck those racist pieces of shit
Then they came for the ultra-Nationalists
But I did not speak out, because ultra-Nationalists are dangerous cunts
Then things were quite a bit better, actually.
No, i would not join, but the Greek populace is desperate, that´s why they have voted them in the first place. You are comparing people who live in prosperity and safety to people who live in despair and economic meltdown. What i said is supported by facts all over the world.CHEEZMO;58217468 said:Would you join a political party if you knew people were out to kick the shit out of you for it? Would you attend their rallies and street marches (that are by their very nature and intent intimidating to the minorities they oppose) if you knew they were regularly broken up by Antifas?
Like I said before, this is basically the "your intolerance of my intolerance is intolerance" bullshit magnified to fucking actual factual NAZIS! Nazis who act on their rhetoric and assault and extort and intimidate people (who often have no means of immediate defence and no means to pursue justice thanks to the complicit police). Are these people who should get their way simply because some people vote for them?
No it´s not, and your logic belongs in the dark ages not in in a modern society.Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense.
Most idiotic false equivalence ever?
Yeap.
Of course they should not get their way, and not all the police support them, but to say just kill them is the only solution would have the opposite effect as it´s proven world wide.
It´s funny how you avoided answering my question when i asked if you wanted to kill their supporters as well.
Some would argue that wouldn't be a great loss...
Nope. They are pretty much the same shit. The same sort of people divided into different sides. No different from football thugs at the core. Yoof with a taste for violence.
No wait - much worse than football hooligans, at least they don't make excuses for their violence, since they admit they just do it for fun.
edit: and i can't roll my eyes enough when they start to spout nonsensical bullshit like "we tolerate everything except intolerance". Simply vomit inducing.
Which is exactly my point.
woah there, that's over-simplistic definition. Perhaps on economics, yeah but fascism is also more than just that
Fascism also promotes ubber nationalism, whether it be culturally, ethnically, linguistically over minorities. Fascism also promotes strength and might over the weak of society.
When Republicans spout out ''Real Americans'' ''un-American'' and ''Small town values'' those are shades of ubber-nationalism that are hallmark traits of fascism.
When the Ultra-Right spout shit like being against Universal Healthcare, that is trait of economic fascism, letting corporations dictate the health of citizens for profit over the state.
Just like when Quebec nationalists spout ethnic-linguistic purity nonsense and trash Canada's multiculturalism nature. That's an ubber-nationlistic trait of fascism
I don't get antifa violence.
You're on the right side, you got all the arguments. AND you are almost always part of the majority. If you need to attack physically, it's either a personal failure or a sign of an underlying violent streak.
The only thing you do is validating their "fight".
So basically, a real life Galactic Empire.
Of course, because being an authoritarian, warmongering and racist piece of shit is the same as trying to oppose those any means necessary. Comparing political ideology to football thugs is also up there in the list of top horrible false equivalences btw.
The Galactic Empire was largely based on real life fascist movements, so yes?
From my experience normal people in stable countries see all forms of violence as an expression of authoritarianism. At least in Sweden, both sides are made up of thugs that throw rationality and any form of democratic thought out of the window.
woah there, that's over-simplistic definition. Perhaps on economics, yeah but fascism is also more than just that
Fascism also promotes ubber nationalism, whether it be culturally, ethnically, linguistically over minorities. Fascism also promotes strength and might over the weak of society.
When Republicans spout out ''Real Americans'' ''un-American'' and ''Small town values'' those are shades of ubber-nationalism that are hallmark traits of fascism.
When the Ultra-Right spout shit like being against Universal Healthcare, that is trait of economic fascism, letting corporations dictate the health of citizens for profit over the state.
Just like when Quebec nationalists spout ethnic-linguistic purity nonsense and trash Canada's multiculturalism nature. That's an ubber-nationlistic trait of fascism
Of course, because being an authoritarian, warmongering and racist piece of shit is the same as trying to oppose those any means necessary. Comparing political ideology to football thugs is also up there in the list of top horrible false equivalences btw.
Yes, this. I've actually heard that political thoughts should not be thought of as lines but circles, since the far, far right and left wings loop around and end up looking very similar. A lot of people think of the DPRK as a communist country, and it was for a long time. But these days it is a military-dominated, totalitarian government that trades on racist nationalism. In other words, it's something closer to what we would think of as an ultra-right wing fascist nation.
Yes, this. I've actually heard that political thoughts should not be thought of as lines but circles, since the far, far right and left wings loop around and end up looking very similar. A lot of people think of the DPRK as a communist country, and it was for a long time. But these days it is a military-dominated, totalitarian government that trades on racist nationalism. In other words, it's something closer to what we would think of as an ultra-right wing fascist nation.
Horst Mahler (born 23 January 1936 in Haynau, Lower Silesia, Germany, now Chojnów, Poland) is a former German lawyer and political activist.[1] He once was an extreme-left militant, a founding member of the Red Army Fraction. Subsequently he became a Maoist and later shifted to the extreme-right. He was for a time a member of the National Democratic Party of Germany. He has been repeatedly convicted of Volksverhetzung ("incitement of popular hatred") and Holocaust denial and is currently serving a 12-year prison sentence.
I actually recall some North Korean expert stating that North Korea today represents Nazi Germany more so than the Soviet Union.
Everywhere from the Palestinian territories where most Palestinians rallied around Hamas, to Hezbollah were most Lebanese rallied against Israel in 2006, to the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt where the more they were persecuted the more followers they got. Same with he beginning of Christianity and Islam.CHEEZMO;58220126 said:Proven where?
No. Although they shouldn't be exempt from few slaps if they attend rallies/marches etc. The people on the bottom rung often turn to Fascism as a scapegoat for problems. It gives them things to blame that can be "fixed" easily and appeal to baser human fears of the Other and things that are different. It also gives people a feeling of power and strength. A large-scale intensive education programme would be a good way to deal with these sorts of people, especially before they fall too far down the hole.
As for the more typical GD street thug? Boots to the face. See how willing they are to beat up some Turk shopkeepers when the last time they tried it they lost some teeth.
I'm not saying immediately line everyone up against a wall and shoot them. Just that violence is not only a legitimate means of combating Fascism, but one of the few effective ways of doing so. Like I said, Fascism relies on a projection and image of strength and superiority. What better way to tear down this illusion than humiliating them and directly, physically showing it to be false.
Minority should be protected by the government, unfortunately the government is not functioning well right now.This also has the effect of alleviate the intimidation and fear the targeted minority groups will be subjected to - they know they have people willing to protect them.
Educating people is much more effective than killing the ones people voted for and radicalizing them.Smashing Fascism is not an anti-social crime, it is a social duty.
CHEEZMO;58220126 said:Proven where?
No. Although they shouldn't be exempt from few slaps if they attend rallies/marches etc. The people on the bottom rung often turn to Fascism as a scapegoat for problems. It gives them things to blame that can be "fixed" easily and appeal to baser human fears of the Other and things that are different. It also gives people a feeling of power and strength. A large-scale intensive education programme would be a good way to deal with these sorts of people, especially before they fall too far down the hole.
As for the more typical GD street thug? Boots to the face. See how willing they are to beat up some Turk shopkeepers when the last time they tried it they lost some teeth.
I'm not saying immediately line everyone up against a wall and shoot them. Just that violence is not only a legitimate means of combating Fascism, but one of the few effective ways of doing so. Like I said, Fascism relies on a projection and image of strength and superiority. What better way to tear down this illusion than humiliating them and directly, physically showing it to be false.
This also has the effect of alleviate the intimidation and fear the targeted minority groups will be subjected to - they know they have people willing to protect them.
Smashing Fascism is not an anti-social crime, it is a social duty.
I'm with Cheezmo, fascism shouldn't be tolerated. The comparisons with the far left are not equal as socialist/communist parties don't advocate/support exterminating races.
The left has very much shifted to the anarchist side since the fall of the Soviet Union, and so their platform is now most often more freedom, more rights, more opportunity and so on. We may still hate bourgeois rich cunts but money/property isn't a race, gender, or sexual orientation. There's no comparison with the Hitler parties.
Still, in the Nordic countries the extreme far leftists have far more in common with the extreme rightists than they have with the average person. I have zero respect for both sides.
As long those who participate in marches and rallies don´t hurt others, they should not be touched.
Freedom of speech is tested when someone you severely don´t agree with have the same right to express their opinion as you. What you are proposing is making a police state against certain individual or organisations that don´t agree with you. People who break the law should be punished by the law. Yeah, i understand that in Greece right now the law might be absent in places but that does not justify vigilante behavior by the people who have not lost reason yet.
Education works, but you have also to understand the circumstance of why people voted that way. It was a desperate call from desperate people. I am pretty sure that the majority who voted for the Nazis would have never voted for them unless they were extremely desperate and thought that it´s the only way out.
Look, i am not saying that one should not fight fascism even physically, but that´s only if the government is fascist or about to be taken by fascists. The ones in Greece are still minority and can´t possibly posses a big threat.
Minority should be protected by the government, unfortunately the government is not functioning well right now.
Educating people is much more effective than killing the ones people voted for and radicalizing them.
Can you explain further? What would you say are the things they hold in common?
Freedom of speech cannot be allowed to apply to Fascism.
They are both anti-democratic and propose the use of violence, which I see as expressions of extreme authoritarianism regardless of your label, humans are better than that.
On top of that they are irrational and destructive, they are just the worst form of egoists.
I think at the moment I disagree with Cheezmo on freedom of speech though, I think that should apply even to fascists, but they shouldn't be able to have politicians imo, that shouldn't be tolerated. Neither should the religious but that's another debate. I think you should be allowed to espouse wrong, idiotic, evil beliefs in books music and so on, but it cannot be used to directly influence laws. I think preventing speech creates dilemmas later on though (ie banning fascists because they're racist, but if a comedian says something that could be interpreted as racist then what happens, who decides what's a joke and what isn't, so on and so on.) Sometimes people need to hear bad things anyway, if only to rile up a resistance to it.
There are plenty of authoritarian measures taken in 'free' democracies. Taxes can be argued to be authoritarian but we recognize it's a good thing because it helps everyone and creates an actual society instead of a place of warlords and serfs. The community need overcomes individual gain.
So the question becomes how much authority is justified, and what kind of freedoms are relevant. The left says freedom in the workplace, education and healthcare for all yes, freedom to accumulate individual wealth at the expense of others, not so much. But I'm sure capitalists would say this is anti-democracy, anti-freedom and so on, so it depends what your values are, and some values happen to be correct, provide happiness for the vast majority, and on the right side of history (anti-racism, anti-sexism etc.).
As for violence, is that really an issue in Nordic countries? Does the left in Finland advocate taking up arms against the state? I'm not trying to be sarcastic I'm genuinely wondering if that's the case. Violence may be necessary against an oppressive state, but Denmark, Sweden is not France/Germany during WW2...