fas·cism (fshzm)
n.
often Fascism
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
Oppressive, dictatorial control.
Erek
Um…does it apply to what?
Fenris
Personally, I thought existentialism applied. However, I could be wrong.
No, the mod’s aren’t Fascists. They are very clearly predominantly Commies! (Or am I getting the two reversed?)
Sorry my computer crashed as I was posting this. Does it apply to the US.
Erek
Nope, the US does not fit the definition of Fascist/Fascism.
The U.S. is a federal republic, not a centralized or unitary state; furthermore, authority in the federal government itself is divided between several branches of government, all of which except the judiciary (and including the executive branch) are directly accountable to the people through regular elections.
The U.S. is notable among industrialized democracies for its relatively laissez-faire economic system. There are some issues (drugs or pornography) on which “social” controls by the state in most or all of the country are maybe more stringent than those of, say, the Netherlands or Denmark; then again, there are issues where our state-sanctioned social controls are less stringent (i.e., private gun ownership, or freedom of speech with respect to “hate speech”).
The U.S. has a viable two-party system and an independent media. Even critics of the two-party system and corporate media would have a hard time showing evidence that third parties or alternative media outlets are suppressed by terror, official state censorship, or any application of police power.
The U.S., despite going through an understandable spate of flag-waving right now, and despite being The World’s Only Remaining Superpower[sup]TM[/sup], has a pretty strong isolationist tendency. We also tend to exercise global predominance through indirect means, especially economic and cultural influence, rather than by direct military conquest.
The U.S. is also one of the more multiethnic societies on Earth, with a population made up of immigrants from just about everywhere on the planet. Human nature being what it is, this inevitably causes tensions and various outbreaks of stupidity and evil, but we’ve come a long way from the officially sanctioned racism found in large areas of the country in past decades.
So, let’s see, I’d say the U.S. fails to qualify as a “fascist” society on every count.
In other words, Erek, quit jacking off and make a goddamn point already. Or get off the pot. Either one’s fine by me.
Fascism, with a capital F, properly refers to the government of Mussolini. Otherwise “fascist” is a general term for any authoritarian regime. If you feel that the United States is overly oppressive, “fascist” would apply in that sense.
Of the top of my head, here are some other regimes that have been labelled fascist…in descending order from most totalitarian to less totalitarian and more populist.
Hitler, Germany 1933-1945
Antonescu, Romania 1940-1944
Horthy, Hungary 1919-1944
Franco Spain 1939-1975
Salazar, Portugal 1924-1968
Peron, Argentina 1945-1953
Franco and Salazar are not easily categorized; both started out firmly in the fascist camp and moderated their rule as they grew older.
Pinochet in Chile was definitely right wing, and is often labeled a “fascist” by his many detractors. But his almost radical laissez-faire economic policies distinguish him from a true fascist.
Interestingly, the Soviet Union and Mainland China once fit as neatly into that definition of fascism as many “right wing” regimes. This alone makes the label “fascist” a bit suspect. “Totalitarian” is probably a better label, except fascism implies an added emphasis on nationalism or racism.
But “racism” of the Hitlerian variety is not necessarily part of fascism. Many fascist regimes were opposed to genocidal Nazi “race” policies. But they practiced milder forms of racism. For example, Portugal maintained colonies in Africa and Asia long after the rest of Europe decided to pull out. Latin American dictatorships treated the indigenous peoples with at best, benign neglect.
Now does the present day American government fit into this “fascist” pattern? Economically and politically speaking, the United States is fairly removed from fascism. And while racism against certain groups is a fact of life, it can be argued that much racism occurs in defiance of the current political and legal system. The United States combines entrenched socio-economic racism with some of the world’s most sweeping anti-racism legislation in world history. So it’s a very mixed picture.
Now we are seeing a surge in patriotism, increased restrictions on civil liberties, and sudden government intervention into the economy. But lets put this into perspective. The greatest national emergency since 1941 occurred. In the Civil War, Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, a very fundamental civil right, yet the government did not become less democratic as a result. In many ways the changes that are occurring are long overdue, and are still far less stringent than security policies in Western Europe, Japan, or Israel. I mean you can still buy a rifle at a Wal Mart can you?
You got your point across with a lot less words than mine
People who try to compare the government of the United States to fascism either don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about or are intellectually dishonest (to include trolling). Is anyone going to try to make that case?
Why yes, the US govenment is fascist, provided you manage to redefine fascistinto “a govenment which fails to conform its actions to mswas’ opinions.” Otherwise, it’s a remarkably stupid question.
Thank you to those that responded with actual responses. They were pretty interesting. I just hear the term fascist bandied around all the time. I was just curious as to what people think on the subject.
To the rest of you, thank you for making me right to put this in the Pit rather than General questions.
Another question I have is, what are the differences between “Right” and “Left” wing. Like I have heard Fascism referred to as a right wing government, but libertarianism is also considered to be right, so where lies the distinction? Also, there is communism which is pretty totalitarian, or has been thus far, which is considered the left, and then there are the left hand in Israel which believes in giving more and more freedoms to the Palestinians and giving up a lot of the fundamentals within Israel. How do both of those jive as left?
Erek
Your problem is that you’re trying to fit everything on a single horizontal axis running from 0 to 10, with “socialist/communist” at the left extreme (at 0), “fascist/totalitarian" at the right extreme (at 10), and “moderate/middle-of-the-road” in the center (at 5). That’s a simple one-dimensional model that works for simple comparisons, but more complex models can be created for more complex comparisons.
Try this:
Set up a horizontal axis running from 0 to 10 and a vertical axis running from 0 to 10, and have them cross each other where they’re both at 5. So you have a standard x- and y-axis chart, but with the centers of both axes at 5.
The vertical axis is the level of economic control by the government. At 0 (the very bottom of the vertical axis), the government doesn’t exert any control of the economy (i.e., few taxes and few social transfers = economic libertarianism). At 10 (the very top), the government controls every aspect of the economy (i.e., huge taxes and social transfers = economic socialism/communism).
The horizontal axis is level of social control by the government. At 0 (the very left-most extreme), there is no social control (i.e., total social freedom = left-wing social liberalism). At 10, the government regulates every aspect of social policy (i.e., lots of social controls and a rigid caste system, which is traditionally the hallmark of religious fundamentalism).
So what do you have? A two-dimensional model that gives you four quadrants (and a center) with which to measure governments.
The lower left quadrant (low social control and low economic control) would be libertarianism in nearer to the center of the chart and anarchy (basically, lack of a government entirely) further away from the center of the chart.
The upper right quadrant (high social control and high economic control) would be populism near the center and totalitarianism out at the fringe of the chart.
The upper left quadrant (high social control and low economic control) would be conservatism near the center and right-wing dictatorship at the fringe
The lower right quadrant (low social control and high economic control) would be liberalism near the center and left-wing dictatorship (socialism) at the fringe.
The very center of the chart would, of course, correspond to a centrist government–not too hot, not too cold.
This model would give you a more sophisticated way to measure governments. For instance, you could take a so-called “fascist” government and measure the degrees of economic control and social control and conclude that it’s really a right-wing dictatorship or a left-wing dictatorship or an outright totalitarian government (i.e., complete control of all aspects of society).
If you wanted other ways to measure governments and societies, you could re-label the two axes and measure other aspects of how the government operates (degree of social inequity inherent in society; degree of economic inequity; degree of military influence). Or you could even add a third axis to the two already-existing axes and create a three-dimensional model for additional complexity.
This model isn’t a new idea. The World’s Smallest Political Quiz ( http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html ) uses this same two-dimensional chart with the axes that I’ve already described. It just rotates the chart 90 degrees and provides simpler labels for the quadrants. It’s just a minor variation on the same idea (see http://www.self-gov.org/cgi/sec.cgi?quiz=quiz&p1=1&p2=1&p3=1&p4=1&p5=1&e1=1&e2=1&e3=1&e4=1&e5=1 )
In any case, this two-dimensional model should answer your question. It distinguishes religious fundamentalists from libertarians (rather than dumping both on the “right”) and totalitarian communists from liberals (rather than dumping both on the “left”).
Shit. I got my axes switched around. I knew that would happen even as I typed the message.
So let me make a correction. Given the way I labeled the axes, the two paragraphs above should be changed to read:
The lower right quadrant (high social control and low economic control) would be conservatism near the center and right-wing dictatorship at the fringe
The upper left quadrant (low social control and high economic control) would be liberalism near the center and left-wing dictatorship (socialism) at the fringe.
There. I think I have it right now. But hopefully you get the idea in any case…
It’s not a matter of opinion, Sparky. You know the definition of fascism. You can do the math very well on your own, I’m sure.
(And yes, JTR, you’re all set now. Great post.)
Bullshit.
I have a few questions of my own.
Troll. Does it apply to mswas?
Asshole. Does it apply to mswas?
Bigot. Does it apply to mswas?
Anti-American. Does it apply to mswas?
Racist. Does it apply to mswas?
Hypocrite. Does it apply to mswas?
Now, I hear these terms bandied about quite a bit, and I’m not quite sure what they mean. Mind you, I’m just looking for discussion. Let’s keep this discussion at General Questions level. After all, we wouldn’t want to make this into a Pit rant-fest, now would we?
Wow, what a jackass, posting a flame and telling me this should be in general questions level. Go fuck yourself. Now who is bandying about the term hypocrite? Now in my mind, Anti-American is the administration we currently hold, the one that thinks we should be able to hold immigrants indefinitely without trial and the one that thinks that we should be able to listen in on people’s phone calls, and thinks that encryption is a national security threat. Or maybe it’s the media that doesn’t tell us jack shit about what is ACTUALLY going on. Maybe it’s the airlines that kick arabs off of their planes.
But oh, yeah, but posting a flame to your flame I am obviously NOT keeping this in the general questions level.
In my mind, the people who are saying we aren’t secure enough and the ones that want to bomb the fuck out of Afghanistan are the anti-americans. And I do believe that Fascism is the road that we follow if we follow the path that has been outlined by the current administration, but as many so eloquently pointed out, that’s not the state we are in currently, yet.
So I’ll help you.
Troll - maybe, and maybe even in this case. I posted this right after reading some articles that about the atrocities some American leaders are attempting to commit.
Asshole - definitely
Bigot - No (I am American btw)
Anti-American - Not by my definition of American which can be best illustrated by reading Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson but maybe it is by yours. And it definitely fits by all the psychotic patriots who think bombing afghanistan to the stone age is a good idea.
Racist - Most definitely not.
Hypocrite - Yeah sometimes, but in this case are you implying that I am a fascist because I asked about the US’s level of fascism?
Or maybe you were implying not that I AM these things but I’m on the ROAD to these things. Or maybe you didn’t have a real point and just liked jumping on me because you’ve seen things you didn’t like that I’ve said in the past. Or maybe you are completely accurate and astute in your observations of me.
Erek
Well then, mswas, state your fucking opinion rather than playing stupid little games and pretending to ask questions. If you wanna whine “Bush is a fascist!” do so, but knock off the trolling.
From the evidence I have seen, yes. Without a doubt.
Quite clearly mswas is a smug, supercilious, trolling asshole. (Hey, you don’t like it, get out of the Pit).
I cannot tell from his/her postings whether any of these adjectives apply to mswas.
Now, go back and read that again,mswas…
The lesson for you here is: When you are completely ignorant on a subject, it is best to refrain from posting opinions on it. Thank you.
Fucking ignorant troll asswipe.