[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I see. You’re attempting to use the revisionist definition of fascism as a “liberal” ideology. They were totalitarian, authoritaian, nationalistic, militaristic, and moralistic. They were right wingers to the core.
[/QUOTE]
Please don’t take this the wrong way, because it’s not meant as such (even though this is the Pit) but I believe you are allowing your personal partisanship to blind you to what people are really saying here. Nobody is suggesting (in this thread, at least) that fascism is liberal. Fascism, however, is not necessarily conservative. In terms of what Mr. Moto is saying, he’s not arguing Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini were liberals, he’s arguing they were radicals.
To say that FDR was more conservative than Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini is, to my eyes, so obviously true as to make me wonder why anyone would say otherwise. Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini were RADICALS - they were exactly the opposite of conservative. Hitler was probably the most radical, unconservative head of state in the entire history of the nation-state. Each dictator was completely dissatisfied with the status quo of his state (the world, actually, esp. in Hitler and Stalin’s cases) and completely changed their states in an effort to destroy the old order. They wanted change to an extent that no U.S. President has ever attempted - indeed, I’d argue George Washington was less radical in his desire for change than Hitler or Stalin were. And Washington rebelled against his King, so that’s saying a lot.
Conservative does not equal right wing, nor does radical equal left wing. Hitler was right wing, but obviously not conservative. A conservative does not want things to change; he wants things to stay as they are, or as they very recently were, or at least to change only cautiously. Hitler changed EVERYTHING about the governance of the state he led - its structure, almost every area of policy, and even the very core concepts of law, justice and the civil compact between rulers and ruled. Hitler was probably the most radical, unconservative head of state in the entire history of the nation-state. His positions were totally alien and incompatible with liberal democracy and even with the Western tradition of objective morality; no leader I can think of has changed his country as much, as quickly, as Hitler did. Right wing and fascist to be sure; conservative, not at all. FDR, for all the New Dealing, didn’t change the way the United States works; he inherited the executive of a 144-year-old Constitution and handed it unchanged to his successor. Social policy initiatives like the New Deal are order of magnitude smaller changes than what Hitler or Stalin did.
Perhaps not “Conservative” in the sense of the people who you don’t personally like. However, the USA has been admirably conservative, in the small-c sense of the world, in terms of its manner of structure and governance. The U.S. had a Constitution and a structure that worked, and chose to basically stick with the program in the belief that it would continue working, which as it turns out was the correct move. That’s a “conservative” decision, in the central sense of the word. Other nations tear themselves apart in an effort to fix problems, which is inherently unconservative, even if (as with Nazi Germany) it’s reactionary and fascist.
