23 Aug 14
1 edit
Originally posted by normbenignOriginally posted by normbenign
Perhaps you might clear up the difference between fascism and socialism. There really is very little.
"Perhaps you might clear up the difference between fascism and socialism. There really is very little."
"11. fascism. Extreme right-wing ideology where the existing social
order is protected by the forcible suppression of the working class."
"20. socialism. Left-wing political system where the principle means
of production, distribution and exchange are in common ownership."
http://www.quick-facts.co.uk/politics/ideologies.html
norm, according to the text these two ideologies/isms appear to be diametrically opposed. Please clarify.
23 Aug 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyFascism forces a social order. The bit about the working class is all secondary since we all work.
Originally posted by normbenign
"Perhaps you might clear up the difference between fascism and socialism. There really is very little."
[b]"11. fascism. Extreme right-wing ideology where the existing social
order is protected by the forcible suppression of the working class."
"20. socialism. Left-wing political system where ...[text shortened]... ording to the text these two ideologies/isms appear to be diametrically opposed. Please clarify.[/b]
Socialism controls production, distribution, and exchanges. In and of itself, it is a social order.
The commonality is collectivism. Create a central government whose main job is to regulate every facet of society. Once created, this central government will know no bounds. It will eventually intertwine itself in every facet of your life since it's main goal is control and "order".
As for fascism, most regard the Nazi regime as anything but socialist because they did not own industry. However, they still controlled it through various means of coercion. They just went about socialism in a new way, which is probably why they referred to themselves as socialists.
23 Aug 14
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraHell, I only need one word, control.
One cannot hope to capture the essence of a complex political ideology in a single sentence, although those descriptions are more accurate than whodey's or normbenign's.
Government is merely an exchange of freedom for safety. To do this, people have to surrender certain freedoms of their own. The biggest problem is that at times there seems to be a never ending surrender for seemingly never ending threats. Ultimately, we are then faced with when to draw the line in the sand when it comes to freedom and personal safety.
After all, the safest place is behind bars, assuming you are all alone in a cell. You are then provided with food, water, shelter, and guards to protect you, but at what cost?
So choose your illusion. Which utopian centralized plan will help us reach nirvana and at what cost?
25 Aug 14
Originally posted by whodey"one word" replies are rare; remember Sake's "He who knows does not speak. He who speaks does not know." -Lao Tzu.
Hell, I only need one word, control.
Government is merely an exchange of freedom for safety. To do this, people have to surrender certain freedoms of their own. The biggest problem is that at times there seems to be a never ending surrender for seemingly never ending threats. Ultimately, we are then faced with when to draw the line in the sand when it c ...[text shortened]... oose your illusion. Which utopian centralized plan will help us reach nirvana and at what cost?
29 Aug 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyThose definitions defy simple logic and the reality of both systems. What truly was the difference between the governmental systems, and economics of Stalin (Communist), Hitler (Socialist), and Mussolini (Fascist)?
Originally posted by normbenign
"Perhaps you might clear up the difference between fascism and socialism. There really is very little."
[b]"11. fascism. Extreme right-wing ideology where the existing social
order is protected by the forcible suppression of the working class."
"20. socialism. Left-wing political system where ...[text shortened]... ording to the text these two ideologies/isms appear to be diametrically opposed. Please clarify.[/b]
All three share the common denominator of extreme governmental control over the means of production. Fascism and Socialism leave some small portion of the control of production in the hands of private owners, although in them the ownership is in name only. They remain one tyrannical order away from total communism.
The common factor is tyranny, and suppression of individual ownership of property. All require heavy doses of governmental control, supposedly for the benefit of the worker. Each in one way or another supports the established order of elites in control. Each of the three dresses up governmental control in different disguises, but putting lipstick on a pig doesn't change it from what it is.
29 Aug 14
1 edit
Originally posted by normbenignIt's not just the benefit of the worker, it's the benefit of the poor, and the environment, and the nations without "democracy" etc. Why without Big Brother, we would all be dying in the streets! 😲
Those definitions defy simple logic and the reality of both systems. What truly was the difference between the governmental systems, and economics of Stalin (Communist), Hitler (Socialist), and Mussolini (Fascist)?
All three share the common denominator of extreme governmental control over the means of production. Fascism and Socialism leave some s ...[text shortened]... control in different disguises, but putting lipstick on a pig doesn't change it from what it is.
29 Aug 14
Originally posted by KazetNagorraPlease, if you disagree with my definitions you can offer an alternative, or a reason why my descriptions aren't valid.
One cannot hope to capture the essence of a complex political ideology in a single sentence, although those descriptions are more accurate than whodey's or normbenign's.
29 Aug 14
Be serious a moment. There is commonality among the various forms of collectivism. It is a tactic of the left to confuse and to steal the language by mislabeling some forms of collectivism as "right wing".
All forms of collectivism, because they violate human nature require extreme amounts of central government control.
This is true of the three 20th century government forms, and will always be true when some are asked to pay for the lifestyles of others.
29 Aug 14
Originally posted by normbenignCollectivism works because its organized mob rule.
Be serious a moment. There is commonality among the various forms of collectivism. It is a tactic of the left to confuse and to steal the language by mislabeling some forms of collectivism as "right wing".
All forms of collectivism, because they violate human nature require extreme amounts of central government control.
This is true of the three 2 ...[text shortened]... vernment forms, and will always be true when some are asked to pay for the lifestyles of others.
All but the Nazi regime, that is, so as not to offend the Godwin gods.
29 Aug 14
Originally posted by whodeyCollectivism has a short shelf life if it ever works at all. It is tyranny and is as Charles Peguy wrote, "better organized than liberty".
Collectivism works because its organized mob rule.
All but the Nazi regime, that is, so as not to offend the Godwin gods.
Liberty can prevail, but only with constant vigilance, and with a people willing to take actions to keep it.
Originally posted by normbenignNorm, your succinct distinctions with a significant difference breathe life into this stale list of online definitions. Thank you. Alexander Fraser Tytler's gradual dialectic progression from bondage to freedom and back to bondage is alive and well.
Those definitions defy simple logic and the reality of both systems. What truly was the difference between the governmental systems, and economics of Stalin (Communist), Hitler (Socialist), and Mussolini (Fascist)?
All three share the common denominator of extreme governmental control over the means of production. Fascism and Socialism leave some s ...[text shortened]... control in different disguises, but putting lipstick on a pig doesn't change it from what it is.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyThank Ayn Rand. She cleared my head on these things years ago despite the attempts of leftists to redefine and confuse.
Norm, your succinct distinctions with a significant difference breathe life into this stale list of online definitions. Thank you. Alexander Fraser Tytler's gradual dialectic progression from bondage to freedom and back to bondage is alive and well.
06 Sep 14
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby3)5)7)12)16)17) and I didn't vote for any of it.
[b]Quick Reference to Political Ideologies "Ideologies are the sets of basic beliefs about the political, economic, social and cultural affairs held by the majority of people within as society.
1. absolutism. System where the rulers have unlimited control.
2. anarchism. Society without government, laws, police or other authority. ...[text shortened]... nty three political ideologies best describes the policies of your country's government in 2014?[/b]
06 Sep 14
Originally posted by normbenignA chair is almost the same as a quarry. If you disagree with this definition, can you offer an alternative or a reason why my description isn't valid?
Please, if you disagree with my definitions you can offer an alternative, or a reason why my descriptions aren't valid.