Fascism is notoriously an intellectually and philosophically inconsistent world view who's primary purpose is to validate racism and violence.
There's no world where the fascist checks sources before making a claim.
Just like ole Elon, who has regularly been proven wrong by Grok, to the point where they need to check what he thinks first before checking for sources.
A core aspect of fascism is finding as scapegoat to blame societal ills on in order to avoid introspection of said society. The scapegoat is in danger in this regard.
Combined with a strong nationalistic and militaristic tendencies, this combination doesn't end in a way other than violence against the scapegoat.
Because fascism is incoherent, there's little to be gained from arguing with their adherents.
You subbed in "ends" for "purpose to is to validate." They're different. Without the seduction of violence and racism, fascism is a much less convincing argument.
Facism is a paranoid carnival that feeds on fear, scapegoating, and blood. That’s the historical record.
Fascism needs violence and racism as tools and moral glue to hold its contradictions together. It’s the myth-making and the permission slip for brutality that gives fascism its visceral pull, not some utopian goal of pure violence, but a promise of restored glory, cleansed nation, purified identity, and the righteous right to crush the other.
Fascism doesn’t chase violence like a dog after a stick. Im fact, it needs violence like a drunk needs a barstool. Strip out the promise of righteous fists and pure-blood fantasies, and the whole racket folds like a bad poker hand. Without the thrill of smashing skulls and blaming ‘the other guy,’ fascism’s just empty uniforms and a lousy flag collection.
Look at Mussolini: all that pomp about the Roman Empire while squads of Blackshirts bashed heads in the streets to keep people terrified and in line. Hitler wrapped his genocidal sadism in pseudo-science, fake grievances, and grand promises of ‘racial purity'...the point was never a coherent plan beyond expansion and domination.
> I don’t know of any ideologies whose ends are simply violence. Fascism is definitely not one of them.
You don't know much about the EU nor about fascism, why do you feel the need to opine on both while clearly showing you have no idea what you are talking about.
Educate yourself, it will make you a better person :)
That or, more likely, we don't have a complete understanding of the individual's politics. I am saying this, because what I often see is espoused values as opposed to practiced ones. That tends to translate to 'what currently benefits me'. It is annoying to see that pattern repeat so consistently.
In the Netherlands we have this phenomenon that around 20% of voters keep voting for the new "Messiah", a right-wing populist politician that will this time fix everything.
When the party inevitably explodes due to internal bickering and/or simply failing to deliver their impossible promises, a new Messiah pops up, propped by the national media, and the cycle restarts.
That being said, the other 80% is somewhat consistent in their patterns.
In the UK it's the other way round: the media have chosen Farage as the anointed right-wing leader of a cult of personality. Every few years his "party" implodes and is replaced by a new one, but his position is fixed.
The problem is more nuanced than that. but not far off.
The issue is that farage and boris have personality, and understand how the media works. Nobody else apart from blair does(possibly the ham toucher too.)
The Farage style parties fail because they are built around the cult of the leader, rather than the joint purpose of changing something. This is part of the reason why I'm not that hopeful about Starmer, as I'm not acutally sure what he stands for, so how are his ministers going to implement a policy based on bland soup?
His party didn't implode, and he didn't have one every few years.
He succeeded with UKIP as the goal was Brexit. He then left that single issue party, as it had served it's purpose and now recently started a second one seeing an opportunity.
In Ireland, every four years the electorate chooses which of the two large moderate parties without clear platform it would prefer (they’re quite close to being the same thing, but dislike each other for historical and aesthetic reasons), sometimes adding a small center-left party for variety. This has been going on for decades. We currently have a ruling coalition of _both_ of them.
Is being a tax haven and doing propaganda to tell your citizens how virtuous you are economically (what NL has been doing for several decades) not right wing populism?
Fascism is notoriously an intellectually and philosophically inconsistent world view who's primary purpose is to validate racism and violence.
There's no world where the fascist checks sources before making a claim.
Just like ole Elon, who has regularly been proven wrong by Grok, to the point where they need to check what he thinks first before checking for sources.
A good rule of thumb: If your theory of mind for literally anyone is "they just want to hurt people", you are repeating propaganda.
A core aspect of fascism is finding as scapegoat to blame societal ills on in order to avoid introspection of said society. The scapegoat is in danger in this regard.
Combined with a strong nationalistic and militaristic tendencies, this combination doesn't end in a way other than violence against the scapegoat.
Because fascism is incoherent, there's little to be gained from arguing with their adherents.
So naive.
1 reply →
[flagged]
Today is probably a good day for you to learn the definition of fascism, then. The axe in the fasces isn't a symbol of cutting firewood.
3 replies →
You subbed in "ends" for "purpose to is to validate." They're different. Without the seduction of violence and racism, fascism is a much less convincing argument.
Facism is a paranoid carnival that feeds on fear, scapegoating, and blood. That’s the historical record.
Fascism needs violence and racism as tools and moral glue to hold its contradictions together. It’s the myth-making and the permission slip for brutality that gives fascism its visceral pull, not some utopian goal of pure violence, but a promise of restored glory, cleansed nation, purified identity, and the righteous right to crush the other.
Fascism doesn’t chase violence like a dog after a stick. Im fact, it needs violence like a drunk needs a barstool. Strip out the promise of righteous fists and pure-blood fantasies, and the whole racket folds like a bad poker hand. Without the thrill of smashing skulls and blaming ‘the other guy,’ fascism’s just empty uniforms and a lousy flag collection.
Look at Mussolini: all that pomp about the Roman Empire while squads of Blackshirts bashed heads in the streets to keep people terrified and in line. Hitler wrapped his genocidal sadism in pseudo-science, fake grievances, and grand promises of ‘racial purity'...the point was never a coherent plan beyond expansion and domination.
1 reply →
> I don’t know of any ideologies whose ends are simply violence. Fascism is definitely not one of them.
You don't know much about the EU nor about fascism, why do you feel the need to opine on both while clearly showing you have no idea what you are talking about.
Educate yourself, it will make you a better person :)
8 replies →
That or, more likely, we don't have a complete understanding of the individual's politics. I am saying this, because what I often see is espoused values as opposed to practiced ones. That tends to translate to 'what currently benefits me'. It is annoying to see that pattern repeat so consistently.
In the Netherlands we have this phenomenon that around 20% of voters keep voting for the new "Messiah", a right-wing populist politician that will this time fix everything.
When the party inevitably explodes due to internal bickering and/or simply failing to deliver their impossible promises, a new Messiah pops up, propped by the national media, and the cycle restarts.
That being said, the other 80% is somewhat consistent in their patterns.
In the UK it's the other way round: the media have chosen Farage as the anointed right-wing leader of a cult of personality. Every few years his "party" implodes and is replaced by a new one, but his position is fixed.
The problem is more nuanced than that. but not far off.
The issue is that farage and boris have personality, and understand how the media works. Nobody else apart from blair does(possibly the ham toucher too.)
The Farage style parties fail because they are built around the cult of the leader, rather than the joint purpose of changing something. This is part of the reason why I'm not that hopeful about Starmer, as I'm not acutally sure what he stands for, so how are his ministers going to implement a policy based on bland soup?
3 replies →
His party didn't implode, and he didn't have one every few years.
He succeeded with UKIP as the goal was Brexit. He then left that single issue party, as it had served it's purpose and now recently started a second one seeing an opportunity.
This is almost 40% in Slovenia, but for a moderate without a clear program.
Every second election cycle Messiah like that becomes the prime minister.
In Ireland, every four years the electorate chooses which of the two large moderate parties without clear platform it would prefer (they’re quite close to being the same thing, but dislike each other for historical and aesthetic reasons), sometimes adding a small center-left party for variety. This has been going on for decades. We currently have a ruling coalition of _both_ of them.
1 reply →
> That being said, the other 80% is somewhat consistent in their patterns.
Yes very consistent in promising one thing and then doing another.
Is being a tax haven and doing propaganda to tell your citizens how virtuous you are economically (what NL has been doing for several decades) not right wing populism?
We haven’t had a left-wing parlement for some decades now
2 replies →
Many people are quite inconsistent yes but musk and trump are clear outliers. Well, their axiom if any is self-interest, I guess.
<citation needed>