- #106
WheelsRCool
OrbitalPower said:Scholars have said no such thing. Fascism is the opposite of socialism, closer to capitalism and conservatism. Hitler and Mussolini despised Marxist doctrine, and anybody advocating Marxism in their society was murdered (whereas the capitalism were from to run wild in Nazi Germany, and Fascist Italy).
Yes, they did despise Marxism. they also despised capitalism. Fascism was to be the balanced in-between version. Fascism cannot be capitalist. Capitalism requires on natural fluctuations in the price system. Fascism allows for no such thing. Fascism controls prices, wages, quotas, etc...
Furthermore, Fascism generally protects the very institutions Libertarians and conservatives favor, such as corporations and so on, while de-emphasizing things liberals believe strongly in, such as Civil Rights and Liberties, free-speech and so on.
Libertarians and conservatives very much believe in freedoms and free-speech. And Libertarians and conservatives do not favor corporations, as I have explained.
Fascism is often said to be an "extension of capitalism" (economics for everybody) and the Online Dictionary of the Social Sciences defines fascism as follows:
"A political doctrine opposed to democracy and demanding submission to political leadership and authority. A key principle of fascism is the belief that the whole society has a shared destiny and purpose which can only be achieved by iron discipline, obedience to leadership and an all-powerful state. Fascism first developed in Italy, under the leadership of Benito Mussolini (dictator of Italy from 1922 to 1943) and later influenced the development of German fascism in the Nazi movement led by Adolf Hitler (dictator of Germany from 1933-1945) . While fascism increases the power and role of the state in society and suppresses free trade unions and political opposition, it preserves private ownership and private property. "
Hmm...sounds, pretty anti-capitalistic to me, since capitalism abhors the power of the state and believes in the rights of the individual, not that the individual is best expressed through the state.
The military, for example, is very much anti-individualist. And any soldier will tell you that "Defending democracy requires un-democratic means." Certain forms of fascism, as stated above, attempt to turn the entire nation into a military state.
Fascism does preserve private property ownership, on paper. That was part of its appeal. No matter how appealing socialism can sound, the one thing people still don't like about it, is that it takes away private property. People want all the free stuff socialism promises. But they want to keep their own property. Fascism promised both.
It was this core difference in beliefs regarding property that made the Marxists hate the fascists. To a Marxist, if you believe in private property, you are an enemy. No matter how similar your other beliefs may be, you are an enemy. Private property is the main core belief for them.
Two things we learn from this definition:
#1. We learn that fascism is a belief that a society has a shared destiny and purpose, and we know that conservatives often dictate such a thing when they talk about America being a "Christian" nation and so on. Fascism wasn't so much of a change in structure as it was a change in how to protect a hierarchical society. A constructivist would point that out.
America is a Christian nation so far as that is was founded based on Christian values. Even secular and atheist Americans, still have many of the Christian values ingrained in them, even if they do not believe in the religion.
But, America has freedome of religion. Those Christian conservatives who want to shove religion down everyone's throat are hypocrites.
Conservatives believe in protecting the social order, by any means necessary (definition of conservative), liberals believe in advancing society, so that is a fundamental difference.
Conservatives believe in protecting the classical values of private property rights, limited government, free-markets, capitalism, free-trade, and so forth. Liberals believe in advancing society socially in certain ways, but economically, they are actually very conservative. Their so-called "Modern," "Progressive" views are really the same old re-hashed ideologies of the Nazis and Italian fascists.
#2. Fascists believe in preserving the private ownership of property. There is nothing socialist or liberal about this concept. Liberals favor private property, only because they deem it a better form of living, but it should still be regulated (like what Thomas Jefferson advocated).
It is not an "absolute right" like it is to many capitalist economists and fascist dictators.
Fascist dictators do not consider it an absolute right; they threatened certain businesses with outright nationalization if they wouldn't go along with them.
And yes, private property is a right. It is one of the most fundamental rights of a free society.
If I have to explain to you again why Wilson wasn't a fascist we're going to go round-and-round in circles here.
You give no quotes, historical evidence, or anything else that confirms Wilson was a fascist, or that he supported some abject tyranny of the state. You do not explain rationally how the "American left" has generally favored war when every historian knows that Socialists and so on were opposed war.
I explained this already. If you want to see that Wilson was a fascist, who abhored the Constitution, read his own works.
Who do you think was challenging even the idea of World War I AND World War II, but socialists (the American far left, hundreds of socialists were even in various low-level positions in government at the time)?
Goldberg explains this in detail in his book, far better than I can here. Like I said, socialists and fascists tend to dislike each other - A LOT.
Why didn't America become fascist if Woodrow Wilson was a fascist? Who reversed it?
Because America was a country founded by an individualistic, Christian-based people, and although it is willing to become semi-fascist in times of war temporarily, afterwards, the culture always reverts back to the capitalist, individualism society.
I'd say Coolidge was closer to fascism, who widened the gap between the rich and the poor and who's policies contributed to the great depression. Not to mention he attacked third world nations like Nicaragua under the rubric of national security, the same type of nonsense that fascists pull.
FDR's policies and the Federal Reserve are what mostly contributed to the Great Depression.