Why are there so many fascists?

[Whisper]

You sound like my dad now lol where did the Daoist vigor for anarchy go? I'm joking of course.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Socrates]

I'm sure I will revive my enthusiasm for anarchy soon, it's just some people are really stupid.

[Whisper]

Leadership and mentorship can provide education in disciplines that people desire is another point I'd like to make.

[atreestump]

Yes, mentorship is something I advocate. I have been looking ito Diogenes who was being hit with the stick of his mentor and he said 'I will not go away, you can hit me all you like' because he knew his mentor had something to tell him! lol

There was an interesting dialogue between Adam Weishaupt and Kant too about teaching vs. personal intuition I found a while ago.

[kFoyauextlH]

Sounds like his mentor was Yoda:



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apt_Pupil









https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z ... revision/6

https://heimbergecon.substack.com/p/fis ... he-rise-of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austerity

"
The origin of modern austerity measures is mostly undocumented among academics.[11] During the United States occupation of Haiti that began in 1915, the United States utilized austerity policies where American corporations received a low tax rate while Haitians saw their taxes increase, with a forced labor system creating a "corporate paradise" in occupied Haiti.[12] Another historical example of contemporary austerity is Fascist Italy during a liberal period of the economy from 1922 to 1925.[11] The fascist government utilized austerity policies to prevent the democratization of Italy following World War I, with Luigi Einaudi, Maffeo Pantaleoni, Umberto Ricci and Alberto de' Stefani leading this movement.[11] Austerity measures used by the Weimar Republic of Germany were unpopular and contributed towards the increased support for the Nazi Party in the 1930s.[13]
"

"
Joos, Vincent (2021). The struggle of non-sovereign Caribbean territories: neoliberalism since the French Antillean Uprisings of 2009.
"

https://www.britannica.com/place/German ... leonic-era

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z ... revision/2

France was not brought up here for no reason, and neither was Yoda!

https://www.ewadirect.com/proceedings/l ... view/15292

These sh*tty events have had a horrific rippling effect reaching out to this day, and even many of these articles are recent.

Added in 1 minute 50 seconds:
https://www.open.edu/openlearn/language ... aitre-yoda

Added in 8 minutes 16 seconds:
Also a secret theme running through Scheissen over Oblivion and why those two words were chosen.

viewtopic.php?t=403

[kFoyauextlH]

[atreestump]

Mnquotes Hitler snd says Reform UK aren't ethnic Nationalist enough

[kFoyauextlH]

That is so weird that people have been using the internet to look up Hitler for quotes lol.

[kFoyauextlH]

https://faustusnotes.com/2010/09/24/the ... st-reader/

Added in 24 minutes 30 seconds:
https://faustusnotes.com/2009/06/06/tol ... -theories/

"
I’ve said this to you before, but a lot of people don’t see “conservatism” as something to be liberated from, and I find it weird that you seem to think fantasy writers should have liberation from conservatism as an explicit goal, separate from just, you know, writing good fantasy stories.

If anything I’d much rather be liberated from the cloying, unthinking, banal soft-leftism that so many supposedly educated people espouse and which dominates not only the fantasy genre but European intellectual life in general. Speaking as somebody who couldn’t care less about labels and thinks politics should mostly be about empiricism and common sense.
"





https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/show ... ks-library

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_neo-Nazism

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/ab ... 847FE870E3

https://www.salon.com/2018/02/10/33-13- ... vid-bowie/

https://lithub.com/the-dark-magic-of-wo ... o-writers/

Added in 7 hours 15 minutes 45 seconds:


https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA ... -web-entry

"
The dense, ornate composition of E. R. Eddison's Zimiamvia cycle has long obscured its ideological content, leading to errors in the scholarly reception of these books. Written with close reference to the working papers for the first Zimiamvian novel, Mistress of Mistresses, this article seeks to correct those mistakes. Although verbose, Eddison's novels are shown to have been anything but gratuitous, being composed in strict accordance with an extensive, dearly held, deceptively humane reworking of moral philosophy. Rather than being the reactionary hedonist some commentators have painted him as, Eddison is revealed to have been a very disciplined writer given to connecting thought and feeling in ways for which he has not yet been properly appreciated.
"

"
While those who disbelieved were setting up fanaticism, the fanaticism of Ignorance in their own hearts, God sent His serenity down upon His messenger and on believers, and obliged them to respect the formula of heedfulness. They were truer to it and much more entitled to it. God is Aware of everything!
" - Qur'an 48:26

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styrbjarn ... 3%ADakappa

Spoiler Alert:

"
Styrbjörn goes back to Sweden to take the Swedish throne. Styrbjörn has sacrificed to Thor, but Eric the Victorious has sacrificed to Odin and has promised to belong to Odin within ten years if he wins.

When the forces meet, Þorgnýr the Lawspeaker has created an ingenious war machine by tying horses and cows together with spears and spikes. This war machine wreaks havoc among the Jomsvikings. After three days of battle, Eric throws his spear over the Danes and cries "I give you all to Odin", and a landslide and a rain of Odin's arrows kill Styrbjörn and his men.
"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jomsborg# ... pontificum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curmsun_Disc

"
After its original discovery the hoard was left in the crypt until 1945, when an officer in the Polish Wojska Lądowe (Land Forces), Major Stefan Sielski, and his brother, Michał, entered and seized what was left of it. The disc did not appear to be made of gold so it was placed in a box with old buttons. In 2014, Michał Sielski's 11-year-old great-granddaughter showed the disc to her history teacher and it was reported in the press on 5 December 2014.
"

"
The Curmsun Disc underwent electron microscopic analysis at Lund University in Sweden. The analysis showed a non-homogeneous alloy with a gold content ranging between 83.3 and 92.8%. The surface and alloy showed characteristics typical for artefacts created during the latest part of the Early Middle Ages. No traces of modern processes or chemicals were discovered. Surface analysis by a gemologist, Jonny Westling, appointed by the Swedish Chamber of Commerce in Stockholm and Lloyd's/Brookfield Underwriting, showed natural inclusions[clarification needed] and patination.[6]
"

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... prov=rarw1

"


The extant poetry on Styrbjörn is found in Styrbjarnar þáttr Svíakappa, where the following lausavísa (about 985) mentions him:

Eigi vildu Jótar
reiða gjald til skeiða,
áðr Styrbjarnar stœði
Strandar dýr á landi.
Nús Danmarkar dróttinn
í drengja lið genginn;
landa vanr ok lýða
lifir ánauðigr auðar.

The Jótar were not willing to pay tribute for ships before the beasts of Strǫnd <river> [SHIPS] of Styrbjǫrn stood by the coast. Now the lord of Denmark [DANISH KING = Haraldr] has joined the troop of warriors; he lives oppressed by fate, deprived of lands and people.[5]

The contemporary skald Þórvaldr Hjaltason also described the Battle of Fyrisvellir in the following pair of lausavísur, for which Eric rewarded him with two rings both worth a half mark, one for each stanza:

Fari* til Fýrisvallar,
folka tungls, hverrs hungrar,
vǫrðr, at virkis garði
vestr kveldriðu hesta.
Þar hefr hreggdrauga hǫggvit
— hóll*aust es þat — sólar
elfar skíðs fyr ulfa
Eirekr í dyn geira.

Guardian of the sun of battles [SWORD > WARRIOR], let every one of the horses of the evening-rider [TROLL-WOMAN > WOLVES] who is hungry go west to Fýrisvǫllr, to the enclosure of the stronghold. There Eiríkr has cut down the storm-logs of the sun of the ski of the river [SHIP > SHIELD > BATTLE > WARRIORS] before wolves in the tumult of spears [BATTLE]; that is without exaggeration.[6]

Illr varð ǫlna fjalla
auðkveðjǫndum beðjar
til Svíþjóðar síðan
sveimr víkinga heiman.
Þat eitt lifir þeira,
— þeir hǫfðu lið fleira —
— gótt vas her at henda
Hundings — es rann undan.

The vikings’ surge from their home to Sweden turned out afterwards [to be] disastrous for the wealth-demanders of the bed of fish of the mountains [SNAKES > GOLD > MEN]. Only that part of them survives, that ran away; they had the more numerous force; it was good to catch Hundingr’s army.[7]

Hundmargs ("of a myriad") in the second verse has also been read as Hundings, referring to a chief of the Jomsvikings named Hunding, but there is no other record of such a historical figure, so the argument that this disproves Styrbjörn's historical existence has been generally set aside in favour of the evidence of the other contemporary poem.[8]
"

https://www.academia.edu/7934811/The_ly ... and_Seiten

https://www.facebook.com/brenda.sutton1/



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell,_Book_and_Candle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell,_book,_and_candle

"
Wherefore in the name of God the All-powerful, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, of the Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and of all the saints, in virtue of the power which has been given us of binding and loosing in Heaven and on earth, we deprive him and all his accomplices and all his abettors of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Our Lord, we separate him from the society of all Christians, we exclude him from the bosom of our Holy Mother the Church in Heaven and on earth, we declare him excommunicated and anathematized and we judge him condemned to eternal fire with Satan and his angels and all the reprobate, so long as he will not burst the fetters of the demon, do penance and satisfy the Church; we deliver him to Satan to mortify his body, that his soul may be saved on the day of judgment.[1]

After this recitation the priests would respond: Fiat, fiat, fiat ("So be it! So be it! So be it!"). The bishop would then ring a bell, close a holy book, and he and the assisting priests would snuff out their candles by dashing them to the ground. However, the rite of anathema described in the Pontificale Romanum calls only for the candles to be dashed to the ground. After the ritual, written notices would be sent to the neighbouring bishops and priests reporting that the target had been anathematized and why he had been anathematized; subsequently the bishops' and priests' constituents would hold no communication with the target.[2]

This form of excommunication was inflicted on Robert II of France by Pope Gregory V for his marriage to Bertha of Burgundy in the year 996, because Bertha was his second cousin. He was later reconciled with the Church after negotiations with Gregory's successor Pope Silvester II.[3]
"

"
Bertha first married Count Odo I of Blois in about 983.[2] They had several children, including Theobald II and Odo II.[1]

After the death of her husband in 996, Bertha's second cousin Robert, the eldest son of King Hugh Capet of France, wished to marry her. He had recently repudiated his first wife, Susanna of Italy, who was many years his senior. The union between Robert and Bertha was opposed by King Hugh, who feared that political problems could be caused by religious authorities due to their consanguinity. In addition to being related in the third degree, Robert was also the godfather of one of Bertha's children.[3] The marriage nevertheless went ahead, officiated by Archambaud, Archbishop of Tours, around the time of Hugh's death in October 996, which left Robert as sole king. Pope Gregory V and his successor Pope Sylvester II pronounced anathemas against Robert for his "incestuous" marriage and the pair were forced to separate, but Robert several times attempted to rejoin her.[4][5] The marriage was formally dissolved in 1003 or 1004 and produced no children.[6]
"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_II_of_France

"
In these troubled times (10th–11th centuries), there was the revival of monasticism which was characterized by the desire to reform the Church, a return to the Benedictine tradition, and a fleeting revival of the days of Louis the Pious by Benedict of Aniane. Their role was to repair "the sins of the people". The monks quickly met with great success: kings and counts attracted them to them and endowed them richly in land (often confiscated from enemies), in objects of all kinds, and the great abbots were called to purify certain places. Thus Guglielmo da Volpiano was called by Duke Richard II of Normandy to Fécamp (1001). Under the aegis of Cluny, the monasteries were increasingly seeking to free themselves from episcopal supervision, in particular Fleury-sur-Loire. Moreover, abbots went to Rome between 996 and 998 to claim privileges of exemption from the Pope.[101] In the southern regions of the kingdom, Cluny and other establishments, peace movements were disseminated with the help of certain ecclesiastics who hoped for a strengthening of their power: Odilo, supported by his relatives, worked in close collaboration with the bishop of Puy to begin the Truce of God in Auvergne (ca. 1030). Nevertheless, in the northern provinces, Cluny did not have good press. Here the bishops were at the head of powerful counties and the intervention of the Cluniac movement could harm them. Ascelin of Laon and Gerard of Cambrai did not like the monks whom they considered to be impostors. Moreover, on the side of the bishops, there was no lack of criticism against the monks: thus they were accused of having an opulent life, of having unnatural sexual activities and of wearing luxury clothes (the example of the Abbot Mainard of Saint-Maur-des-Fossés is detailed). On the side of the regulars, examples against the bishops abounded: it was said that the prelates were very rich (trafficking in sacred objects, simony) and dominated as true warlords. Abbo of Fleury, the leader of the monastic reform movement, set an example by trying to go and pacify and discipline the monastery of La Réole, where he would be killed in a fight in 1004.[s]

The strength of Fleury and Cluny were their respective intellectual centers: the first retained in the 11th century more than 600 manuscripts from all walks of life, and Abbot Abbo himself wrote numerous treatises, the fruit of distant trips, notably to England, upon which he reflected (for example, on the role of the ideal prince); the second, through Rodulphus Glaber, was a place where history was written. Hugh Capet and Robert II, solicited by the two parties (episcopal and monastic), received the complaint from Abbo who denounced the actions of a layman, Lord Arnoul of Yèvres, who would have erected a tower without royal authorization and above all would have submitted by force the peasant communities that belong to the Abbey of Fleury. Bishop Arnoul II of Orléans, the uncle of Arnulf of Yèvres, said meanwhile that his nephew (???), for the King needed support to fight against Count Odo I of Blois. Finally, a negotiation took place under the chairmanship of Robert II and a diploma dated in Paris in 994 temporarily put an end to the quarrel.[104][105] Abbo was then denounced as a "corrupter" and summoned to a royal assembly. He wrote a letter for the event entitled "Apologetic Book against Bishop Arnoul of Orléans" (Livre apologétique contre l'évêque Arnoul d'Orléans), which he addressed to Robert II, reputed to be literate and steeped in religious culture. The Abbot of Fleury seized the opportunity to claim the protection of the sovereign, who responded favorably. The traditional Carolingian episcopate then felt abandoned by royalty and threatened by the monks. This situation would be reinforced with the death of Hugh Capet in the fall of 996.[t] Robert II was now more tempted by monastic culture than by episcopal and pontifical power which still remained largely the servant of the Holy Roman Empire. In parallel with these factional struggles, we also know that bishops and abbots found themselves alongside the counts to ensure that their legal immunities were respected.
"



"

Are there any example of fascism from before the French Revolution ?
Discussion/Question

Traditionally the history of fascism as an idea starts whit Arthur de Bobbineau who wrote in reaction to the revolutions of 1848, but is there any earlier example of Fascist thought.

i know that development fascism as ideology that is inherently tied to the changes brought about by the enlightenment, but so is socialism and we can find plenty of examples of people calling for a more egalitarian society through history (the Grachi, Mazdak, the anabaptists, the Ikko-Ikki). so why cant we do the same for Fascism?

i know that there are lots of definitions of fascism but four our purposes fascism is anything that includes these 3 aspects

Authoritarianism

Reactionary/Revanchist ideology

A belief in racial/ ethnic supremacy

Mkedartgw
•
5y ago

Using those three criteria, it’s hard to find a non-fascist state prior to the French Revolution. Egyptians, Chinese, Mongolians, Greeks, etc all were authoritarian, all had a pretty rose-colored view of the past, and all thought extraordinarily highly of themselves compared to the people beyond their borders. I think “fascism” has to involve additional elements, including not only the use of violence to undermine the legitimacy of an existing regime and the systemic use of violence against political opponents once power is obtained, but also in the context of an existing system that allowed for some set of citizen participation beforehand. The essence of fascism is the call to be bound together (hence the origin of the word, “fasces”) as one nation against others, as opposed to calls based on class, caste, or religion. I impose these additional criteria because there has to be a way to distinguish fascism from simple warlordism, monarchy, or empires. Given that the concept of a “nation” in a general sense didn’t really exist until the Treaty of Westphalia and only really acquired its racial or ethnic-origin overtones in the 19th century, I’d argue that there was no “fascism” before the French Revolution.
29
u/AnaphoricReference avatar
AnaphoricReference
•
5y ago

additional elements, including not only the use of violence to undermine the legitimacy of an existing regime and the systemic use of violence against political opponents once power is obtained, but also in the context of an existing system that allowed for some set of citizen participation beforehand.

You need media to organize a nation and citizen participation. Fascist thinking in political circles in the city of Rome makes sense as a concept, but fascism as an analysis for the Roman Empire does not. Rome lacked the control to do that.
9

It’s interesting if violence is necessary for fascism. I think without violence, a fascist state implodes in on itself. The unifying of the nation/volk requires an existential enemy threat, but if people for too long are kept without a release against that threat, the impulse withers. For an example, I’d point to Mussolini’s Italy. He came to power in 1922 campaigning against communists and capitalists and the Versailles Treaty; they probably peaked in terms of relative military power in 1930, and then after that declined. The military just began promoting lackeys and throwing parades and the internal state just became engrossed in pursuing their own ends. Even Hitler’s Germany was showing signs of it — the endless infighting amongst Goering and Himmler and others for control of the economy, the secret police, and the military. Without violence, the fascist state can’t help but show its true self, a facade consisting of unaccomplished men raving against a complex world. Indeed, the fascist state seems to inevitably be dominated by the very thing it said it was against — weak, sycophantic yes-men who have no value to offer the real economy or society. The counter example would be Franco’s Spain after the Civil War, but that might have just been the result of at first population exhaustion at the prospect of violence and then an ideology more attuned to an older authoritarianism with a yearning for a settled way of life rather than the fascist totalitarianism, which strives towards some miraculous yet always-future utopia.
"

Added in 13 seconds:
"
u/georgiosmaniakes avatar
georgiosmaniakes
•
5y ago

To say anything meaningful on the subject, one obviously must define fascism, and this is where it gets interesting. In my opinion, fascism is so poorly and loosely defined so that anyone fills in the blanks to make it an antipod - antireflection of his/her own beliefs, with the constraint that it needs to fit 1930's Germany somehow, which is not that big of a restriction for most people. In this way, some people put accent on authoritarianism because they are self-identified as democrats (lowercase "D"). Others would focus on racism, militarism etc. As such, this definition itself reveals person's own defining beliefs and it becomes almost the thing to study. In my view (and I don't pretend it is any better than any other definition - again, it's precisely because I define my core views as an exact antipod of it), fascism in its essence is exceptionalism - belief that your group is inherently better than another, typically one you're interacting with on a regular basis. Is this because of race, level of civilization, "better" religion, or paradoxically "humanity" and devotion to human rights as is typical today, or any other, it doesn't matter whatsoever. Acting on this belief is the next level - opression, willingness to wage a war against, to willingness to commit crimes against the group, and it helps to identify it but is by no means required to qualify as fascist.

If you use this definition, one quickly reaches a depressing conclusion that most of human history, with still many exceptions, is - fascist.
7
"

"
It doesn't matter how Nazis called themselves. Ancient Spartans never called themselves fascists either, yet they fit even the most narrow description one could come up with quite well. I disagree the definition I was using is meaningless; broad, yes, to the extent that fascism under most other definitions would fall under, but to me that is the essence of it - without this exceptionalism it's hard to imagine that a society could be called fascist, and with it, it would invariably have a kernel of traits that would enable it, although not necessarily, to exhibit the characteristics that would be classified as such. Of course, this is, as I said, personal view reflecting my own values more than anything else, as is the case with these loosely defined stuff in general.
"

"

poster4891464
•
5y ago

Well I don't think it's entirely irrelevant as other movements at the time *did* openly call themselves fascist; also it's not just a question of nomenclature as I think National Socialists (who didn't call themselves Nazis either btw) may have had more working-class priorities especially in their early years (think SA versus SS) while classical fascism tended to focus on the lower-middle class? The main variations (to me) are that classical fascism is a political ideology of the hard Catholic right, and fascism is not a synonym for totalitarianism.
1
"

"

sitquiet-donothing
•
5y ago

I agree with other comments about defining fascism, its really important. Absent from the original definition given was the concept of "Blood and Country" or, IIRC, what has been referred to as the "corporate state" where all individual needs are suborned to the state. Not through economics or liberty will we flourish, but through the strong state.

I think that the first Chinese Empire may be a candidate. It was a police state under a legalist/authoritarian philosophy that revised histories and created a cult of the leader and the underpinning motivations for this empire were possibly "Unity against barbarians".

Overall I feel fascism should probably be seen as a 20th century phenomenon. Looking for it earlier in history will show various strains of influence, but without the reactionary nature against communism and capitalism as a "third way", its usage of mass media, and its need for clearly delineated ethnic/religious/linguistic lines, it tends to get muddled.
2
"

"

[deleted]
•
5y ago

For opponents of fascism, Umberto Eco put together 14 common features of fascism, which he labeled ur-fascism, as follows:

The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”

The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”

The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”

Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”

Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”

Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”

The obsession with a plot. “Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged.”

The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”

Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”

Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”

Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”

Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”

Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”

Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

Read the whole essay - but as you can see, many of the elements are more modern (like the rejection of modernism itself, as well as its use as a mass political movement to appeal to a frustrated middle class.

In more ancient times, there was almost no middle class to appeal to; just the rich and the nobles, and efforts to keep the poor repressed and in their place. There wasn't a need to appeal to populism, for the most part - even in Rome, voting was fairly restricted.

You would, however, see some of the elements expressed in more authoritarian regimes, like the criminalizing of dissent and fear of outsiders.
4
"

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/

"

u/nemuri_no_kogoro avatar
nemuri_no_kogoro
•
5y ago

While that is true, Roman (of the city) Romans had a very supremacist/condescending view of at first other Italian tribes (to the point of denying them of many citizenship rights which led to a war) and in the era of the Empire this evolved into a supremacist/condescending attitude towards any non-Italian Romans (see their annoyance at Hadrian's reformation of Italy into basically just another province, which they hated and had reverted immediately after his death).
1
mhem7
•
5y ago

Interesting, the more you know. In this light, I will also note, contradictory to my statement, that it did in fact seem like Caesars syncretism in Gaul seemed more of a political and public order movement than anything. I don't know if Caesar actually cared about the nations he conquered or if he was simply a generous conqueror.
1
"

"

sitquiet-donothing
•
5y ago

We in the USA misuse "authoritarian" all the time. It is a personal adjective that means the described person believes the authorities are always right. If something is against the law it is wrong or evil.

So, for instance, Rudy Giuliani (not beating up on him, he is the first person to come to mind) spoke out about legalizing marijuana when running for the Republican nomination for POTUS. His only reason is that "its wrong to use marijuana" when pressed as to why its wrong he responded "because it is illegal", this is authoritarian thinking.

There are no authoritarian "systems", an authoritarian is someone who thinks the right thing to do is comply to the government's wishes. There are systems that require authoritarian people, but any system can become "authoritarian" if filled with authoritarian personality types.

One idea that does not appear in the authoritarian's lexicon is "liberty" or "freedom" etc. What the government says is right is what is right and ethical and your job is to do it. For the record, an authoritarian can also end up supporting many positive things if the government is so inclined. If the government says it will help the poor, then the authoritarian would say that helping the poor is good and right.

People doing things because the government said to and/or taking moral guidance from the government is not a very strong theme in American history. In fact just about every episode in American history was started in response to what the government wanted the people to do.
1
Montagnagrasso
•
5y ago

Again, slavery and the genocide of the indigenous was a state-sponsored in every way and at every turn. Not sure what you mean by your statement or how it relates to what i’m saying, that just sounds like the propaganda history that’s so hegemonic here
1



You are missing the point and using a description for a human attitude and applying it to a system of government. Authoritarianism is a belief the government is always right, this belief is not something produced by an abstraction but held by people. People can be authoritarian, governments are not, although the government can be full of authoritarians.

Throughout American history there have been prominent call outs against the government actions towards Native Americans and there have been abolitionists since the 1640s, and both were very popular opinions shared by many Americans. How can you then say the entire country is authoritarian when there is plenty of evidence that plenty of people disagreed with the government's actions?

Authoritarian only describes people, the evidence shows that plenty of people think the government wrong, the conclusion should be that America isn't very authoritarian.

If governments are "just people" then the American government is the American people who have been proven not to be of one opinion on these actions. Thank you for showing how the USA is not an authoritarian country.
"

"
Montagnagrasso
•
5y ago

Lmao that’s blatantly not what the American govt is but if you’re that high on propaganda, I’m just gonna say have a nice day
1
"

"

u/no_username-01 avatar
no_username-01
•
5y ago

I would agruably say that Spain during the rule of Ferdinand and Isabella comes the closest to fascism using those criteria. They were not only authoritarian as an apsolute monarchy but also by trying to directly control the religion and the lives of their subjects via the inquisition. That comes pretty close to totalitarianism when compared to the rest of Europe. They also had a very reactionary ideology of fanatical catholicism which they used to justify their actions. Of course, there was a belief in racial supremacy of the Europeans(the Spanish), especially after the discovery of the Americas. Their colonial policy was based on a caste system of races, with the white Europeans being on top.
1
"

"

u/Noble_Devil_Boruta avatar
Noble_Devil_Boruta
•
5y ago

Not really. This is caused chiefly by the fact that fascism is in its core a republican form of political system what significantly lowers the possibility of it developing in continental Europe before the second decade of 20th century, until which time substantial part of the country was dominated by more or less absolutist monarchies. In general, fascist governments that appeared in Europe were sometimes referred to as a 'third way' as another possible political solution that was to replace absolutist monarchies that were phased out in the wake of the Great War along the popular representative democracy that prevailed in Europe until today and radical socialism veering into the territory of communism that gained the upper hand in Russian Empire.

In other words, fascism was a political movement that was, in essence, opposed to three dominant political movements. First, the traditional authority derived from supernatural elements and grounded in strict class divisions as typical in classical monarchies. Second, popular, egalitarian democracy considered unstable, chaotic and prone to external influences. Third, to all forms of statewide communal ownership of the property, typical for communism and various forms of early socialism. Fascists proposed an approach that merged some elements of all three types of the governance mentioned above, creating something different - a corporativist, elitist system where the citizens were free and the economy was based on private ownership, but the internal politics were tightly controlled by a relatively small yet open group of administrators with very wide prerogatives. But such a system required already existing idea of republican government, common participation in governance and statewide political identity what was brought in Europe only in 19th century, with the Revolutions of 1848-1849 (commonly referred to as Spring of Nations) and were, of course, present in USA since the second half of 18th century.

An additional insight into the nature of fascism was proposed by David Griffin who suggested that fascism in its theoretical form can be defined as an organic nationalistic ideology aimed at the 'reconstruction of the former glory' by the nation considered to be in the state of enslavement, decadence or degeneration, depending on particular circumstances. Thus, it this approach, a sine qua non condition for a fascist ideology to appear is the strong, popular nationalist identity that started to appear only in mid-19th century (this is not to say that nationalism was not present earlier, but it became common only only in the wake of the republican movements in the aforementioned period). Please note the theory of 'return to the former glory' (called 'pallingenesis' and considered the indispensable element of fascism by Griffin) can be observed in countries with the Imperial traditions that lost their prominence.

Please note that revanchist elements and the racial or ethnic supremacy are generally not important for the fascist form of government, being largely associated with one country, that is Germany, but even then they were not specific to fascists, as they could have been found among supporters of various political movements, from monarchists to democrats, although they were most prominent among Pan-Germanist and volkist circles that majority of National Socialists recruited from.
1
"



Fascism in usage today for a great many people just refers to any belligerent bullying from "authorities", or really anyone at all who might try to "boss" people around as their superior or wielding threats and power and "rules" to create terror, also creating terror of an "other" and paranoia about both external and internal threats "everywhere" and accusations that if you don't do the things they want, you might be "one of them", as in "the enemy" or "working in their cause, against the cause of the favored in-group, us".

Just annoying pieces of sh*t.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_racket

"
A protection racket is a racketeering scheme, usually perpetrated by a criminal organization, that coerces payments on a regular basis from an individual or group in exchange for agreeing to not harm them (or for supposedly "protecting" them). The threat of harm may be indirectly communicated or implied, and it may include violence, robbery, ransacking, arson, vandalism, etc. The payments are called "protection money" or a "protection fee". An organized crime group determines an affordable fee by negotiating with each of its payers to help ensure a consistent and punctual payment. Protection rackets can vary in terms of their levels of sophistication or organization.

The perpetrators of a protection racket may protect vulnerable targets from other dangerous individuals and groups or may simply offer to refrain from themselves carrying out attacks on the targets, and usually both of these forms of protection are implied in the racket. Due to the frequent implication that the racketeers may contribute to harming the target upon failure to pay, the protection racket is generally considered a form of extortion. In some instances, the main potential threat to the target may be caused by the same group that offers to solve it in return for payment, but that fact may sometimes be concealed in order to ensure continual patronage and funding of the crime syndicate by the coerced party. In other cases, depending on the perpetrators' level of influence with authorities and the legality of the business being protected, protection rackets may also offer protection against law enforcement and police involvement, especially if the perpetrators bribe or threaten local law enforcement.

The protection racket mostly sells physical security. Through the credible threat of violence, the racketeers deter both third-party criminals and people in their own criminal organization from swindling, robbing, injuring, sabotaging, or otherwise harming their clients. The racket often occurs in situations and places where criminal threats to certain businesses, entities, or individuals are not effectively prevented or addressed by the prevailing system of law and order or governance, or in cases of inadequate protection by the law for certain ethnic or socioeconomic groups. Protection rackets tend to form in markets in which the law enforcement cannot be counted on to provide legal protection, because of incompetence (as in weak, corrupt, or failed states), illegality (when the targeted entity is involved in black markets), and/or because forms of government distrust exist among the entities involved. Hence, protection rackets are common in places or territories where criminal organizations resemble de facto authorities, or parallel governments. Sicily, Italy is a prominent example of this phenomenon, where the Cosa Nostra collects protection money locally and resembles a de facto authority, or a parallel government.

Protection rackets are often indistinguishable in practice from extortion rackets, and generally distinguishable from social service and private security by the degree of implied threat; the racketeers themselves may threaten and attack businesses, technological infrastructure, and citizens if the payments are not made. A distinction is possible between a "pure" extortion protection racket, in which the racketeers might agree only not to attack a business or entity, and a broader protection racket offering some real private security in addition to such extortion. In either case, the racketeers generally agree to defend a business or individual from any attack by either themselves or third parties (other criminal gangs). In reality, the distinction between the two types of protection rackets is dubious, because in either case extortion racketeers may have to defend their clients against rival gangs to maintain their profits. By corollary, criminal gangs may have to maintain control of territories (turfs), as local businesses may collapse if forced to pay for protection from too many rackets, which then hurts all parties involved.

Certain scholars, such as Diego Gambetta, classify criminal organizations engaged in protection racketeering as "mafia", as the racket is popular with both the Sicilian Mafia and Italian-American Mafia.
"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying

"
Bullying is the use of force, coercion, hurtful teasing, comments, or threats, in order to abuse, aggressively dominate, or intimidate one or more others. The behavior is often repeated and habitual. One essential prerequisite is the perception (by the bully or by others) that an imbalance of physical or social power exists or is currently present. This perceived presence of physical or social imbalance is what distinguishes the behavior from being interpreted or perceived as bullying from instead being interpreted or perceived as conflict.[1][2] Bullying is a subcategory of aggressive behavior characterized by hostile intent, the goal (whether consciously or subconsciously) of addressing or attempting to "fix" the imbalance of power, as well as repetition over a period of time.[3]

Bullying can be performed individually or by a group, typically referred to as mobbing,[4] in which the bully may have one or more followers who are willing to assist the primary bully or who reinforce the bully's behavior by providing positive feedback such as laughing.[5] Bullying in school and in the workplace is also referred to as "peer abuse".[6] Robert W. Fuller has analyzed bullying in the context of rankism.[7] The Swedish-Norwegian researcher Dan Olweus stated that bullying occurs when a person is "exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other persons",[8] and that negative actions occur "when a person intentionally inflicts injury or discomfort upon another person, through physical contact, through words or in other ways".[8] Individual bullying is usually characterized by a person using coercive, intimidating, or hurtful words or comments, exerting threatening or intimidating behavior, or using harmful physical force in order to gain power over another person.[9]

A bullying culture can develop in any context in which humans regularly interact with one another. This may include settings such as within a school, family, or the workplace,[10] the home, and within neighborhoods. When bullying occurs in college and university settings, the practice is known as ragging in certain countries, especially those of the Indian subcontinent.[11] The main platform for bullying in contemporary culture involves the use of social media websites.[12][dubious – discuss] In a 2012 study of male adolescent American football players, "the strongest predictor [of bullying] was the perception of whether the most influential male in a player's life would approve of the bullying behavior."[13] A study by The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health medical journal in 2019 showed a relationship between social media use by girls and an increase in their exposure to bullying.[14]

Bullying may be defined in many different ways. In the United Kingdom, there is no legal definition of the term "bullying",[15] while some states in the United States currently have laws specifically against it.[16] Bullying is divided into four basic types of abuse: psychological (sometimes referred to as "emotional" or "relational"), verbal, physical, and cyber (or "electronic"), though an encounter can fall into more than one of these categories.[17]

Behaviors used to assert such domination may include physical assault or coercion, verbal harassment, or the use of threats, and such acts may be directed repeatedly toward particular targets. Rationalizations of such behavior sometimes include differences of social class, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, appearance, behavior, body language, personality, reputation, lineage, strength, size, or ability.[18][19][20]
"

The problem is that manipulative techniques and docility turn into the same things, one becomes the predatory coercive group, the other the victim of such, and "beating them back" seems to be the only solution to ape aggression.

https://www.ericconn.com/blog/violence- ... f-problems

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/hellbound ... y-problem/

[kFoyauextlH]

Added in 2 days 21 hours 23 minutes 58 seconds:


This guy is trying to crawl back into being a mainstream commentator online after a major decline.

This guy is trying to crawl up into being a mainstream commentator online:





Added in 2 days 10 hours 25 minutes 4 seconds:


Added in 1 day 17 minutes 40 seconds: