When things get extreme they get similar.

‘Extreme’ is a vague word, but when you’re talking about communism and fascism (or more generally ‘far-left’ and ‘far-right’ ideology), that’s a false generalization known as ‘horseshoe theory’.

There are many clear counter-examples when talking about communism, like the entire school of anacho-communist ideologies and the existing societies stemming from them (including the Zapatista territory in Mexico with a population of around 360,000, or the FEJUVE federation in Bolivia, or the many anarchist communes around the world).

As for the more authoritarian versions (Stalinist, Maoist and related ideologies), despite their strong one-party systems, they are still extremely different to fascist ideologies in their goals and how they use their strong state to achieve them. To say ‘they are the same in many respects’ would apply just as equally to liberal capitalist states like the USA and allies, with their infamously militarized police, constant wars and imperial militarism, strong cult of nationalism (for the US, it’s centered on the Founding Fathers), mass imprisonment and state interference in bodily autonomy.

If the citizens weren’t tacitly benefiting, in any way from the resource extraction of the bourgeoisie, maybe you’d have a point there; but since they do, you don’t

Someone tacitly benefiting from a state’s imperialism doesn’t stop them simultaneously being victims of the absolute horror that is capitalism. That’s a big part of why even in the most exploitative regimes there are millions of anti-capitalists who engage in international solidarity. The capitalist class like to pretend there’s some national unity at play when they screw over the proletariat, but it’s all clearly bullshit.

Just fuck off if you’re gonna go to bat for a settler before you waste any more of both of our time.

I don’t bat for settlers. I’m publicly replying to your public reply, because it was sectarian in a way which is harmful to the international socialist movement. If you think this conversation is wasting your time, then just ignore it.

If I remember correctly, the admin (a US Lolbertarian) finally closed it down, among other reasons, when they realized the resident nazis there were not just joking to troll da libs and actually believed the things they were saying about ‘jewish shapeshifters’. They wanted a free speech haven, and so they got the people we collectively told to shut up.

Why would it? It seems like it would just be similar to the circlejerk forums they’ve have for decades, alienated from the mainstream and unable to normalize their ideas and recruit so easily.

It sounds as if you’re using the atrocities of the French bourgeoisie as a way to excuse nationalist bigotry against a people. The French state is imperialist and colonist, the French citizens are mostly victims of capitalism, not the settlers.

Obviously it’s a different situation with French people overseas, but we’re not in that context.

Don’t know why you’d give a joke answer at all, but there’s nothing wrong with unsweetened yogurt (e.g. greek) on potato. Put chives on there, maybe some zataar. Or use it to offset a chilli sauce, make a barbecue sauce creamy. I’d even just have it by itself on fries.

How is that Stalinist? Censorship isn’t some unique rare policy, even 5EYES countries regularly challenge the legality of E2EE.

This is a good point. The pseudonymous internet is like a confessional booth. I can bluntly say all my political beliefs here with little-to-no consequence that I can’t solve by registering a new account. There’s no risk of alienating a friend or family member who disagrees. As an extreme case, I’ve met a couple of people online who can be legally killed for their political views (e.g. not following the state religion). So the internet can provide more comfort in free expression and therefore more people arguing over differences.

I’m starting to feel like all this hate and division is manufactured

Even putting aside biases or conspiracies, mass media and (for-profit) social media has an economic incentive to get people passionate and interested and viewing more ads. So there are systematic factors at play, which I’d say are enhanced by digital technology.

This is authoritarian nationalism, not fascism.

They’re not defining fascism, they’re listing the consistent components. Their post is completely agreeing with your statement: “All fascism is nationalist and authoritarian, not all nationalism or authoritarianism is fascist.”

The post you replied to has serious issues, please see the other replies for more info.

This is just false. There’s no interpretation of ‘communist economies’ that applies to any fascist state ever. Two of the core characteristics of fascism are anti-liberalism and anti-Marxism, which covers basically all socialism. Fascist leaders (even the national-syndicalism types like Mussolini) have an odd relationship with capitalism, but ultimately I don’t believe they moved towards socialism either.

Historically, more fascist governments have developed from socialist nations than capitalist.

Apart from Francoist Spain, I can’t think of a single example of a fascist government which succeeded a socialist government.

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

In fact, fascism often gains support from middle class desperation, with the blessing of the booj who prefer it over communism (which tends to rise from the lower classes during similar times of desperation)

That’s not what fascism is. Fascism isn’t “when there are shitty strict rules”. In fact, classical fascism is a (failed) class collaborationist ideology where the state was supposed to mediate between interest groups of workers and bosses. protip: it didn’t. workers got screwed. (see corporatism, from the root word corpus, not corporation). Nazism didn’t do any of that but even they had their own garbage state-run labor front.

But the point being, those business are beyond even fascism. It’s straight-up pure raw capitalist dictatorship.

That’s the point of having two similar yet distinct characters. Most people don’t look at capitalism and see fascism, they appear distinct to most, so having them both be Homelander would be a poor visual analogy.

Surely it was a tough pick between using Superman or Captain America in the top panel.

what was that ideology again? Oh that’s right, it’s Marxist socialism

Marxist socialism isn’t idealist. In fact, it’s one of the few ideologies which isn’t idealist. It’s based on an scientific economic analysis of capitalism. Contrast this against our current system, liberalism, which is the failed idealization of liberty. Liberalism neglectfully kills hundreds of millions even in developed and politically-stable countries, but it’s just normal at this point.

You’re not morally superior to fascists

Morality is idealism.

If Marxist socialists had a similar movement in size and influence to Trump and MAGA and were in a position to win, the sane majority would be just as terrified

Oh no, they’re going to improve life expectancy and stop billionaires wasting all our hard work! The terror!

If anything, you, SleezyDizasta, should want Marxists to be in a position which threatens the ruling parties, because them being threatened is the only way you will ever get any of that big list of reforms you posted, bargaining to try and deradicalize the masses away from unrest. We saw this happen in Western bloc countries near the USSR such as the Nordic countries, considered the most progressive but gradually sinking back in line with the rest of Europe now.

dissolution is genocide

Dissolution doesn’t even suggest killing, at all. I don’t think you know what words mean.

This is the type of [whole paragraph]

I was referring to Palestine. Perhaps I should have specifically said ‘the region of Palestine’ but I didn’t want to be condescending by stating the obvious.

How dumb do you have to be to think that Americans in America would cheer on for idiots that think their country is evil, illegitimate, and should be destroyed?

How dumb do you have to be to think that most Americans like their governments?

[skipped over a lot of obvious bad-faith bullshit lol]

My mistake, I heard about those but assumed it only applied for state-level politicians, not federal politicians they elect. Thanks for letting me know!

@[email protected] This highlights the problem with using relative terms like ‘left’ and ‘center’ and ‘far’. They’re subjective, and in my opinion, shouldn’t be used.

I don’t know what country or society you’re in. “Left” can often mean anything from centrist liberalism (Democrat Party) to nothing less than socialism (socialists often consider liberalism to be in the center). Then you get literal Fascists (as in, Mussolini and Mosley types, unlike Nazi fascists) who throw a stone in the whole thing: their heritage comes from both the traditional left (namely syndicalism) and the right (ultranationalism), and don’t neatly fit into progressive or regressive (BUF notably gained many women supporters for their pro-suffrage policies, progressive at the time).

One can avoid arguments like in the OP just by learning the proper terms for political views and ideologies. Are you a progressive liberalist? Are you a social democrat? Are you a democratic socialist? (yes unfortunately those two get confusing)

For more information about the political compass and examples of why it’s not a useful tool, I recommend this video.

Definitely, and for most people (there are rare exceptions, like seats which aren’t just Dem vs. Rep as the only viable candidates) I’d assume it’s the pragmatic choice for now given the broken system.