Orwell's 1984 becoming real in the US?

[Gokul43201]

There seems to be a presumption that socialism is right-wing with a negative sign in front of it.

In my post?

No - to make this clear if I left room for misinterpretation - but I do consider Socialism better described as a subset of left-wing political thought.

 

[kyleb]

With regards to fascism being classified as right wing I disagree.

Right wing is conservatism.
Left wing are those ideologies that have "answers" for humanity. Plans that "will make the world a better place". "Modern solutions", "Education" programs the "teach" people the right way of thinking.

And fascism says that the liberal ideologies are corrupt and we should move back towards feudalism. That puts fascism way out on the right-wing which is conservatism.

 

[russ_watters]

Yes --Mussolini, was involved in a socialist party in Italy
Yes --Mussolini was the fascist dictator of Italy

Thank you. Jeez, was it so hard to admit that simple historical fact?

Anyway, ok: So then it follows logically that Mussolini's fascism grew out of his socialism, right?

And again, we don't have to use logic here - the article we've both read is quite specific about that point: Mussolini's fascism did grow out of his socialism. [edit, expand] Mussolini broke with the socialists because they weren't radical and militant enough, not because he suddenly flipped ends on the political spectrum:

A section of revolutionary syndicalists broke with the Socialists over the issue of Italy's entry into the First World War. The ambitious Mussolini quickly sided with them in 1914, when the war broke out. These syndicalists formed a group called Fasci d'azione rivoluzionaria internazionalista...

Just to be clear, the "syndicalists" are closely related to socialists - the Wik article linked even defines them as a subset of socialism.

Russ I have made my argument already, I have outlined what Socialism entails and what Fascims entails...

Sure - but based strictly on your own mind and devoid of the historical facts.

You are the one making the statements, which I have yet to see any backing for.

I provided the links, not you, Anttech.

 

[russ_watters]

Adding to this:

In The dictators own words:

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm

The quote does not appear in that link.

 

[russ_watters]

As for your opinion of 1984 and that Orwell "missed the reality that leftist ideas more easily lead to totalitarianism," I would prefer a credible source for this. I stated that totalitarianism can evolve from any form of government or ideology such as radical right-wing populist movements, and while liberal ideology may be used initially to gain support, the ultimate result of totalitarianism (often a dictatorship-style police state) is considered to be the extreme right.

The source is just simple historical fact. I and others have given major historical examples of totalitarianism arising out of socialist ideas. Do you have any examples of, say, a fascist folower of Adam Smith?

Would you describe Nazism (which included racism), or fascism, etc. as left or right? It is extreme right.

Naziism is the tough one. As someone (perhaps you) pointed out, devious dictators manipulate labels and so the National Socialists weren't necessarily actually socialists. But at the same time, just because Hitler made socialists his enemy doesn't automatically mean that he was against the ideas. Hitler did, after all, build up Germany via government control of the economy - a very socialistic idea.

But like I said, Hitler is a toughie - he may be an entire discussion unto himself. I'd very much like to get into a debate about that. Heck, I'd like a reasonable debate on whether or not totalitarianism can grow out of rightist ideas. Even a hypothetical one if there are no good historical examples.

 

[russ_watters]

There seems to be a presumption that socialism is right-wing[you mean left?] with a negative sign in front of it. But there are non-socialist varieties of left wing belief. Populism for example. Anarchism for another. The world just is not well described by Boolean Algebra 101.

Again, I think it should be fairly obvious from my specific statement that *I* hold some socialistic ideas that I am not saying all socialistic ideas are a bad thing. You are right, however, that the corollary is a generalization - but I'm comfortable with that. The ideas are closely enough related that it doesn't detract from the main point and sometimes a label has to be applied for grammatic simplicity. As I said before, communism and socialism are related because both are about government control. And that's what most leftist ideas have in common. It also seems - and Mussolini is again a good example - that people who become fascist dictators often start off with idealistic socialistic views.

Frankly, there is a good discussion to be had about the political spectrum issues that you brought up. I'd really like to get into it, and it really annoys me how we get bogged down in arguing over relatively straightforward points of fact in this forum.

 

[russ_watters]

In my post?

sA was generalizing, but probably referring largely to me, since I'm the most active here.

 

[russ_watters]

I would like to get into a theoretical debate about this:

Fascism = Less government
Socialism = More government.

Add to that, for completeness:

Conseravative/right leaning = less government (this is about social and economic influence, btw).

But here's the problem: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/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.

How can fascism be about less government when by definition it is about strict - brutally oppressive social and economic control?

This is why, to me, the idea that fascism could arise from rightist ideas is simply a contradiction in terms. I don't see how such a thing could be even theoretically possible.

Look, Anttech, there are reasonable arguments to be made in favor of your point. If you look further down on that Wik page, it talks about just how muddled Mussolini's views became. He, like Hitler, kinda did his own thing in a lot of ways. If you want to argue that fascism is rightist, argue that stuff. Quit it with the arguing against the straightforward historical facts about Mussolini's origins in socialism.

 

[kyleb]

Thank you. Jeez, was it so hard to admit that simple historical fact?

Anyway, ok: So then it follows logically that Mussolini's fascism grew out of his socialism, right?

It grew out of his rejection of socialism.

As I said before, communism and socialism are related because both are about government control.

Only in the same sense that socialism and capitalism are related as they both offer private control.

I would like to get into a theoretical debate about this: Add to that, for completeness:

Conseravative/right leaning = less government (this is about social and economic influence, btw).

That isn't conservatism, it is libertarianism.

 

[Anttech]

It grew out of his rejection of socialism.

Correct:

Mussolini was always anti-authority (unless he was the authority) and so though he initially joined the socialist party when he realized these were not going to help him fulfill his personal ambitions he jumped ship and joined the syndicalists. He used their organisation to achieve publicity and support and then started his own party the Fasci di Combattimento. He set up a military style organisation and set about attacking anarchists, socialists and communists.

King Victor Emmanuel III chose Mussolini as prime minister in 1922 as the king feared otherwise there would be a civil war between the fascists and the socialists. Hitler (10 years later) modeled his party on Mussolini's both in structure and in ideology.

Russ you will find the quote from Mussonlini here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

 

[Anttech]

It also seems - and Mussolini is again a good example - that people who become fascist dictators often start off with idealistic socialistic views.

Sorry Russ, Just don't aggree with you. Mussolini was a meglomanic. He was after power lots of it. He wasnt a Socialist, he belived in order, the elite ruled everyone else. Everyone worked for the goals of the elite, not for the people. Its a right wing ideal, Mussolini was brought up by Socialist, but he never himself, as far as I see or read about the man, prescribed the socialist ideas.

 

[Anttech]

Mossolini was a Socialist!

Yes we have already been over this. Mossolini was a member of a Socialist party. In his life he is defined as a Fascist, however he was brought up by a socialist, and was a member of a socialist party. However it didnt suit his needs, he wasnt interested in helping the people against the elite of the time. He wanted to be the Elite, the very top. He was and will always be a Fascist!

 

[SOS2008]

The source is just simple historical fact. I and others have given major historical examples of totalitarianism arising out of socialist ideas. Do you have any examples of, say, a fascist folower of Adam Smith?

Naziism is the tough one. As someone (perhaps you) pointed out, devious dictators manipulate labels and so the National Socialists weren't necessarily actually socialists. But at the same time, just because Hitler made socialists his enemy doesn't automatically mean that he was against the ideas. Hitler did, after all, build up Germany via government control of the economy - a very socialistic idea.

But like I said, Hitler is a toughie - he may be an entire discussion unto himself. I'd very much like to get into a debate about that. Heck, I'd like a reasonable debate on whether or not totalitarianism can grow out of rightist ideas. Even a hypothetical one if there are no good historical examples.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Fascism

Neo-fascism is the term used to describe a range of movements emerging after the Second World War... This usually includes nationalism, nativism, anti-communism and various oppositions to parliamentary system and liberal democracy.

Aside from Italy, Greece, Turkey, and Latin America for example:

Argentina (1946-1955 and 1973-1974) - Juan Perón admired Mussolini and established his own pseudo-fascist regime, although he has been more often considered a right-wing populist.

There have been movements in the U.S. -- The American Fascist Movement, the National Alliance, and American Nazi Party. Though these movements are not directly related to someone like Adam Smith (does it have to?), and have not been prevalent since WWII, nonetheless

Noam Chomsky has warned that people in the U.S. need to remain vigilant to keep America from drifting towards fascism.[5]. Some link growing corporate power to fascism.[6].

So fascism could likewise grow in the U.S. due to support of big business by the government and blind pro-capitalism ideology of the conservative right -- and with the right conditions and a strong charismatic leader it could really take hold. Indeed there already are right-wing populist movements such as the militia or "Patriot" movement (that inspired Tim McVeigh). They're not active much in militias anymore, but they're still with us. They've been absorbed by the Republican party. They haven't changed, but they are changing the party, in which hate (against "baby killers," gays, Jews, or what have you) is becoming mainstream.

You can google on "populist parties of the right" and find many sources discussing the relation to totalitarianism, fascism, and even communism.