View Poll Results: Which is worse in your opinion?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • Fascism

    22 62.86%
  • Communism

    13 37.14%
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 60

Thread: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Communism, without a doubt.

  2. #32
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Canell View Post
    Wow, I see decades of propaganda (the evil Russian commies will come to America to eat you with your clothes altogether) has worked. The irony is that due to American economic, foreign and most of all financial policy the yellow commies (i.e. the Chinese) might do exactly that.
    The Chinese haven't been proper Communists in several years now-- they've been liberalizing their economic sector and privatizing more and more industries since before I was born. Even as Communists, they never abandoned their nationalistic core and their government has tried to maintain many (if not enough) of their pre-Communist cultural traditions. If anything, I would say that they are on my side of the fence already-- and frolicking deeper and deeper into the tall green grass there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    I know you're a fascist, but you can't seriously believe that fascism "can work" because it is grounded in "human nature". Maybe at the level of ethnic groups living in complete isolation (good luck finding one) and owning every square inch of their own land (once again, good luck finding one that does). But in most countries (and even the city states of old) there are usually a half dozen ethnic groups sharing the land in one way or another. All of who can have equally legitimate claims to the nation. So how could fascism possibly work if there isn't a single ethnic group that can lay claim to the nation?
    By abolishing ethnicity within the nation-- assimilate or exterminate. As long as the members of every so-called "ethnic group" within the nation consider themselves members of the nation first, and puts the interests of the nation first, then Fascism works as intended. This is what Roosevelt meant when he campaigned against ethnic discrimination: no more discrimination between German-Americans and Italian-Americans and Irish-Americans, no more division on ethnic lines, but a simpler system of ethnicity in which there were Americans, immigrants who wished to be Americans, and immigrants who knew which way the border was and were welcome to start walking that way.

    A "legitimate claim" to a territory is nothing more than having both feet on the territory and a weapon to defend it with. The only illegitimate claims are from those whose blood fertilizes the soil, making it richer for the legitimate sovereign. And you may have trouble with this, because it is alien to liberal systems of diplomatic relations and international law, but that is also Fascism functioning as intended. Nations are supposed to rise and fall, in accordance with the cycle of life, and thereby promote the natural evolution of the human species and human culture on the whole.

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    Now let's take a look at fascism.

    Fascism is uses nationalist dogma to unite a group of people under a leader of the state. The appeal of fascism is that the whole nation can be directed by its leader to pursue singular goals without opposition and attain them.

    The problem I have with fascism is that it is a philosophy of exclusion. Because of the nationalist doctrines fascism espouses, it excludes the ideas and discoveries that other nations think up. It even excludes new thinking from within itself. Because of this, fascist countries are unable to adapt quickly when its leaders are opposed to the changes that must be adapted to.
    If you are going to analyze Communism in its ideal state, I think it is only fair that you analyze Fascism in the same fashion. Ideally, Fascist nationalism learns from other nations and adapts to them by watching them from the outside, and seeing the results of their new ideas. Ideally, Fascism promotes innovation by encouraging people who love the State to improve upon it-- criticism without disloyalty. In practice, it does fall short of these ideals because leaders are not perfect and because-- surprise-- the people most critical of the State are often not people who wish to improve the State, but people who are opposed to the State.

    In the ideal Fascist government, the Leader is surrounded by intelligent and loyal advisers-- whose egos and ambitions are only partially tempered by love of nation-- and he listens to them because he knows that's why he picked them. In the ideal Fascist government, everyone fights to win both because they know they're right and because they're jockeying for favor, and they're focused on proving the merit of their own ideas rather than discrediting and sabotaging the ideas of others.

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    Also, while communist ideology is revolution from the bottom-up, fascist ideology is revolution from the top-down. Fascism, by its very ideology, holds that a small group of people should have power over a larger group of people, usually justified by racial superiority but nowadays may be justified by economic superiority - that is that the wealthy deserve to run things because they have wealth.
    Ideally, Fascist hierarchy is a matter of meritocracy-- superior loyalty and superior prowess-- in which the few given power to rule the many are chosen on the basis of proving worthy to do so. In practice, racial purity too often substitutes for loyalty and wealth too often substitutes for prowess, but is that not also too often the case within the supposed liberal democracies as well? These are problems that the visionary Fascist must seek to overcome, but they are hardly unique problems to Fascism itself.

  3. #33
    Educator Black_Zawisza's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    12-20-13 @ 04:15 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    604

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktyr Korimir View Post
    An interesting analysis
    While as a libertarian I am vehemently opposed to fascism, I still think it gets an unfairly bad rap relative to other ideologies just because of the whole 'sterilization and murder of Jews' thing.
    Last edited by Black_Zawisza; 02-16-12 at 05:12 PM.

  4. #34
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    Communism, without a doubt.
    Explain further, please.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  5. #35
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,213

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Fascism...at least ideologically the idea of equality is moral. The implementation (or lack of) has been atrocious and really a way for egomaniacs to gain the support of people.

    Fascism is at it's core a belief in national an racial/cultural superiority. There's no reedeming qualities about fascism or even ideologically attractive views.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  6. #36
    Sage
    German guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 06:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    5,187

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    Ideologically speaking, I'm more opposed to fascism and have more sympathy for communism.

    When communism gets talked about, it's all too easy to focus on Stalin and Mao, as they were the leaders of communist nations, the USSR and the People's Republic of China.

    But it's important to remember that there were a lot of individual communists who were so because they were seeking power or because they wanted to be authoritarian. Rather, they were communist because they believed that Marx was right in many of the ideals of class conflict that Marx brought to light in his writings.

    There have been a lot of communists who were so because they wanted greater racial equality, greater gender equality, safer working conditions, better living conditions, and improvement of quality of life for as many people as possible.

    In fact, (and this is mentioned little in her biographies when we learn about her in school) while Helen Keller was an advocate for the disabled, she was also a socialist who lobbied to end all the reasons why people became disabled in the first place.

    And when United States President Dwight D. Eisenhower uses his farewell address to warn the American people about consumerism as well as the military-industrial-congressional complex, I think it's easier to understand communist rhetoric about how wars between nations are fought by the poor of the world so that the businessmen of the world may profit.

    So, ideologically speaking, communism is a philosophy of inclusion and it seeks to use break the traditional barriers - gender discrimination, racial discrimination, physical disabilities - that groups have used to oppress each other.

    Now let's take a look at fascism.

    Fascism is uses nationalist dogma to unite a group of people under a leader of the state. The appeal of fascism is that the whole nation can be directed by its leader to pursue singular goals without opposition and attain them.

    The problem I have with fascism is that it is a philosophy of exclusion. Because of the nationalist doctrines fascism espouses, it excludes the ideas and discoveries that other nations think up. It even excludes new thinking from within itself. Because of this, fascist countries are unable to adapt quickly when its leaders are opposed to the changes that must be adapted to.

    Also, while communist ideology is revolution from the bottom-up, fascist ideology is revolution from the top-down. Fascism, by its very ideology, holds that a small group of people should have power over a larger group of people, usually justified by racial superiority but nowadays may be justified by economic superiority - that is that the wealthy deserve to run things because they have wealth.

    But the problem with that thinking is that not all wealth is created by virtuous means, or by means that a businessperson controls. A person of wealth can be utterly inept but that doesn't mean anything if his property has gold or oil underneath it. That wealth is from the land - not from the competence of the landowner.

    So, ideologically speaking, I am more opposed to fascism.
    Another point is that in the past, communism was even a more attractive alternative to Western systems than it is today -- because Western systems were less open, less inclusive and more oppressive than today. Think of the horrible working conditions and lack of democratic participation in much of Europe (certainly in the German Kaiserreich 1871-1918), or segregation in the USA. Social mobility was low, maybe even almost impossible for significant segments of society. And working conditions were really bad, the workers had not much chance to participate. In some countries, you even had strong aristocraties.

    So when you compare an authoritarian, discriminating republic with low social mobility on one side, and the promise of at least filling your belly and participation in society's wealth (even when this comes with authoritarian government), of equality, the choice isn't as easy anymore as it is today. So I understand why so many were fascinated by communism in the late 19th and early 20th century.
    "Not learning from mistakes is worse than committing mistakes. When you don't allow yourself to make mistakes, it is hard to be tolerant of others and it does not allow even God to be merciful."

  7. #37
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktoria View Post
    Consumerism is a problem, but consumerism isn't about profit. It's about compulsive consumption where consumers sacrifice self-control just to keep moving.
    I know. I mentioned consumerism more for completeness of the subject of Eisenhower's farewell address than to make it a point of debate in this thread.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    I know. I mentioned consumerism more for completeness of the subject of Eisenhower's farewell address than to make it a point of debate in this thread.
    It's actually rather relevant. Not only does fascism embrace consumerism (because consumerism can encourage the national myth) while communism does not, but fascism is more embracing of technological revolution as well considering how communism is all about the working class laboring to death.

    Like I said before, the real difference between the two is proactive versus reactive militarism. They're both terrible ideologies, but fascism is more overt and short term while communism is more covert and long term.

  9. #39
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktyr Korimir View Post
    If you are going to analyze Communism in its ideal state, I think it is only fair that you analyze Fascism in the same fashion. Ideally, Fascist nationalism learns from other nations and adapts to them by watching them from the outside, and seeing the results of their new ideas. Ideally, Fascism promotes innovation by encouraging people who love the State to improve upon it-- criticism without disloyalty. In practice, it does fall short of these ideals because leaders are not perfect and because-- surprise-- the people most critical of the State are often not people who wish to improve the State, but people who are opposed to the State.

    In the ideal Fascist government, the Leader is surrounded by intelligent and loyal advisers-- whose egos and ambitions are only partially tempered by love of nation-- and he listens to them because he knows that's why he picked them. In the ideal Fascist government, everyone fights to win both because they know they're right and because they're jockeying for favor, and they're focused on proving the merit of their own ideas rather than discrediting and sabotaging the ideas of others.



    Ideally, Fascist hierarchy is a matter of meritocracy-- superior loyalty and superior prowess-- in which the few given power to rule the many are chosen on the basis of proving worthy to do so. In practice, racial purity too often substitutes for loyalty and wealth too often substitutes for prowess, but is that not also too often the case within the supposed liberal democracies as well? These are problems that the visionary Fascist must seek to overcome, but they are hardly unique problems to Fascism itself.
    That's very fair to look at fascism ideologically.

    Even so, and I do say this respectfully, I think that the ideals of fascism are more unrealistic than the ideals of communism.

    That is I think it is more realistic for people to work together to mutual aid than for a benevolent autocrat to guide a nation into prosperity.

    The reason why is because if a group fails then only that group fails. If an autocrat fails then the whole nation fails.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  10. #40
    Sage
    Medusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Turkey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    38,081

    Re: Which is worse IYHO: fascism or communism?

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    That's very fair to look at fascism ideologically.

    Even so, and I do say this respectfully, I think that the ideals of fascism are more unrealistic than the ideals of communism.

    That is I think it is more realistic for people to work together to mutual aid than for a benevolent autocrat to guide a nation into prosperity.

    The reason why is because if a group fails then only that group fails. If an autocrat fails then the whole nation fails.
    in fact , human nature is selfish and will never let communism be more realistic..

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •