this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
166 points (67.9% liked)
Fediverse
28716 readers
71 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I generally regard people who perform apologetics for fascist states and insist that anyone who doesn't agree with them isn't left-wing while simultaneously decrying sectarianism as "tankies".
I called you a tankie because tankies tend to refer to people as "fascist" wantonly and haphazardly. You even admitted that you consider people who disagree with what you refer to as leftists to be fascist, which lends credence to my assessment. I actually can't say that you really are what I would consider a tankie, and I'm certainly willing to admit that I was wrong.
My definition of fascism is as such: Fascism is a political strategy that seeks to preserve, create, and entrench structures and relationships of power imbalance by means of promoting and facilitating mass, broad-spectrum chauvinism in ways that are likely to encourage widespread individual and systemic violence. "Chauvinism" here-in refers to an irrational belief that one's own identity makes them superior. Note that this definition essentially covers the 14 characteristics of fascism as detailed by Umberto Eco, and generalizes them. It is not a type of governance nor is it a coherent political philosophy.
I'm not afraid that I may be a fascist because I constantly analyze my own thoughts and I'm very critical of myself. I also don't really care if you think I'm a fascist or not, because I already believe that your opinion on the matter isn't valuable given what you've already said.
Now if you answer the question I already asked instead of playing this game, I'll be happy to address the rest of your comment. So, again: What definition of fascism are you using?
I asked you about tankies, not fascists.
Going on a witch hunt against tankies and calling tankies everyone who disagree with you is not really showing you under a good light. As you said, referring to people as tankies want only and haphazardly will make you called a fascists, because only the fascists are hunting down tankies with definitions known to them only.
Again, throughout history the leftists are the first to fight and to be hunted down by the fascists. And as a matter of fact, the fight and the hunt has started in the western world.
Sure, Russia and China are fascists countries and bad in many ways. But USA and Europe are turning fascist too. That is what concerns me. And turning fascist in order to fight Russia or China is just stupid.
You asked me why the fight against tankies was so much more prevalent, and my answer was:
And that's my answer. My answer is that you're wrong to call liberals fascists, and if you can't get along with someone you disagree with to fight against someone who's trying to kill you your ideology is going to fail. Tankies have historically betrayed Anarchists and allied with fascists to secure power, and liberals have historically been far more tolerant of differing views. I'd much rather be friends with an honest liberal than a tankie, because the liberal is far less likely to stab me in the back and put my friends in a goddamn camp.
Edit: I'm sorry, I was arguing with someone else and didn't realize it, my bad.
Edit2: actually, I'm done with this conversation now. You're not answering my question and demanding that I answer yours instead, so I'd rather be left alone.
Sure, so tankies are everywhere on lemmy, and I'm probably one apparently, but no definition will be given...
>Fascism is a political strategy that seeks to preserve, create, and entrench structures and relationships of power imbalance by means of promoting and facilitating mass, broad-spectrum chauvinism in ways that are likely to encourage widespread individual and systemic violence.
fascism is a social theory that elevates the interests of the state above all else, bringing all other institutions into line with the goals of the state.
sometimes, this will require strict stratification. people will not support the state while thy don't believe in the fairness of the stratification.
chauvinism may be a useful tool to some regimes, but it's not necessary or sufficient to identify a society as fascist.
imho.
You're defining fascism as an organizational structure? So an island nation that's able to be efficiently organized from the top down due to its small size is fascist, regardless of other considerations?
it has to do with the primacy of the state. if the society is built around the supremacy of the state and all of the institutions serve the interest of the state... that's exactly what mussolini was trying to build.
I mean, sure, but I don't think we should base our definition off of Italian fascism per-se. It just doesn't capture modern notions of fascism. Most obviously, it doesn't include contemporary American fascism, which openly derides the state as an institution.
>, it doesn’t include contemporary American fascism, which openly derides the state as an institution.
i would say that's not true. i'd say the democrats are fantastic fascists who laud the state as the panacea for all of society's ills. but even the republicans would never try to degrade the military and policing power of the state.
Democrats aren't generally fascists.
Liberals aren't usually fascists.
Calling these groups fascist is an ✨ a m a z i n g ✨ way to dilute the potency of the label, and thus has negative utility. Any definition of fascism that includes the DNC and excludes the RNC entirely fails in providing a useful foundation, be it for reasoning about the nature of fascism or creating propaganda.
>Democrats aren’t generally fascists.
i'd disagree, but, again, i'm consulting mussolini for my definition, not 21st century vibes.
The reason that people fight against tankies more than what you call fascists is because tankies are far more prevelant than what I and most other people on the platform consider fascism. That is to say, your definition of fascism entirely fails to encapsulate what most people mean when they use the word, and so you shouldn't be surprised that they don't complain about fascism as much as you do. It's like if you went camping and then started screaming about how everyone's suddenly saying that arson isn't a big deal.
English has descriptive definitions; we look at what people mean when they say a word and then base our definition on that, rather than having an official definition that everyone is required to use. If you call liberals fascists, you are alienating a potential ally, and you're going to be called a tankie because that's the kind of backwards shit that Tankies do.
Liberals and fascists are different. You can disagree with liberals, but calling them fascists just lets fascism hide more easily.
>If you call liberals fascists, you are alienating a potential ally
leftists have a saying:
scratch a liberal, and a fascist bleeds.
if liberals want to be my ally, they will abandon liberalism.
Try going outside; the sun is good for you.