Why do conservatives call the far-left fascists? (KKK, education, government)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They were far off from each other even if they had ideological roots. You're being dishonest or just intellectually lazy.
Nazis and Fascists were right wing in the European sense. They were anti-Enlightenment, anti-Democracy, anti-Republicanism. They were for monarchy, authoritarianism, etc.
Communists believed they were taking the Enlightenment principles to the fullest extent. They thought they were creating the ultimate democracy. Think the French Revolution taken to the tenth degree, to it's most logical extent. Of course it ended up in tyranny.
So fascists did with their eyes OPEN, what Communists did with their eyes CLOSED.
They're not kin. I don't know why American conservatives are so terrible with this part of history. We have everything going for us because we believe in Republicanism and conserving the liberal ideals of the Enlightenment.
I honestly think many conservatives in America DO NOT know or at least understand this part of history.
Stalin and Hitler were allies, before Hitler went into Poland. They were both socialist nations.
Rambler, I am conservative myself, and I can understand these concepts. BUT I think the disconnect may be that I was a left winger in college and actually studied socialism and communism, and understood the differences between socialism and fascism. I think perhaps many conservatives have never truly studied socialism and communism so they're just going by third hand stuff.
That is the only reason I can understand the baffling take conservatives have on this issue.
Stalin and Hitler were allies, before Hitler went into Poland. They were both socialist nations.
"Stalin and FDR were allies, before the Cold War. They were both socialist nations."
Hitler railed on about the Bolsheviks being the supreme evil he was defending Germany from (besides the Jews). He made an anti-aggression pact with Stalin to avoid war. Hitler also had agreements with Allied countries too.
This is getting utterly embarrassing. Please stop Bent Bow.
What? No. That is utterly wrong. They are acting "fascist" like but these people if you understand their ideological roots aren't Fascist. Suppressing free speech isn't just fascist and wasn't just done by fascists and didn't start happening until fascists did it. Communists did this too and way before Mussolini or Hitler stepped foot into office.
Are you guys using fascist as a verb? That their actions are "fascistic"? That to suppress free speech is to be a fascist? So any suppression of free speech is fascist? I can kind of understand where you're coming with this but it lacks nuance.
So the Communists in Maoist China were fascists? And do you mean that they were ideologically fascist or behaving like fascists?
You are arguing against the facts based on your own interpretation. Once you decide to interpret things (law, history, facts) anyway you deem, you become an ideologue. Once that happens, the conversation is over. That's how fascism operates. Closed-minded tunnel vision by people who believe they and nobody else but those who agree are correct.
THAT is what political correctness is... fascism.
So go pat yourself on the back for being better than everyone else, because your opinion is the only one that counts in the world of fascists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99
This is getting utterly embarrassing.
Yep, you are. I wish there was a cure, but there is none.
You are arguing against the facts based on your own interpretation. Once you decide to interpret things (law, history, facts) anyway you deem, you become an ideologue. Once that happens, the conversation is over. That's how fascism operates. Closed-minded tunnel vision by people who believe they and nobody else but those who agree are correct.
THAT is what political correctness is... fascism.
So go pat yourself on the back for being better than everyone else, because your opinion is the only one that counts in the world of fascists.
Yep, you are. I wish there was a cure, but there is none.
Steven H, far left wing groups aren't ideologically fascist. That is a fact. When you say that they're fascist you're using a butchered slang version of it. It basically means to just act narrow minded and shout or shut others down. That's simplistic. Fascism has a history and real meaning. It doesn't just mean to behave narrow minded. I think you guys use it in place of authoritarian or totalitarian, which under that umbrella you could fit both fascism and communism.
But this foolish and ahistorical interpretation of a real political movement and reducing it to a buzzword to use as a slur against a political opponent who's ideology is anti fascist is the most embarrassing thing on this thread.
I've never understood why conservatives call knee jerk reactionary far left agitators such as Anti-FA (Anti-fascist) fascists. I mean is that the only word conservatives know to use against such people?
Have they ever read George Orwell's Homage to Catalonia? Hemingway's For Whom the Bell Tolls?
Have they ever read Animal Farm? Do they not know the history of the Soviet Union and suppression of thought?
The Cultural Revolution under Mao? In Maoist China intellectuals with different opinions to the state were hunted.
I believe Pol Pot thought eyeglasses were a sign of western intellectualism. The Cuban Revolutionaries supposedly outlawed the saxophone in Havana nightclubs because it was invented in Belgium and it represented western imperialism. I doubt that last story is true but it wouldn't surprise me.
Point is, why don't conservatives just call them what they are? Communists and Anarchists? They're extremely authoritarian and knee jerk and will shut down opposition they deem offensive. You don't need to call them blackshirts or fascists. That distorts history because people won't look into the crimes and history of communism which made the blackshirts look like choir boys.
Do conservatives do this because they assume people won't understand the history and thus resort to a quick buzzword because fascists are more well known for shutting down dissent?
Because the far left demonstrates precisely the behavior you attributed to Mao, Pol Pot, and others in your post. Zero tolerance for opposing opinions, suppression of thought, etc. Seems obvious. Not sure why you don't get it.
The word 'fascist' like the word 'socialist' has become essentially a meaningless trigger word far removed from its actual definition but still engendering the strong emotional reaction desired by those who use it.
Wouldn't it strengthen the conservative case to call these people, and the "regressive left SJWs", communists and anarchists? I mean the history of anarchism in the US alone was really violent. The anarchists of the 1920s were as radical as Islamic jihadists today.
There is more history of thought control and repression by communist countries, why not just expose them as such. It would help make the case than conjuring up the boogeyman of blackshirt fascists or brownshirts which paled in comparison to communists and it would keep things logically consistent.
You don't have to do mental gymnastics to try and paint people who claims to be anti-fascist as fascists. The communists were anti-fascist and were ten times more reactionary and lethal than the fascists.
Anarchists are further right than fascists. If Conservative want to label the Left as socialist or communists, let them. It doesn't have the same ad hominem value as it did in the 80s. Mid people are self identifying as that or at least viewing those labels positively.
This is just confusing. A neo-nazi or neo-fascist group would side swipe you if you called them a leftist. They don't identify as conservative in the American sense either. They consider themselves against both liberalism and conservatism.
So if a neo-nazi or neo-fascist was getting beat up by an Anti-Fa, the neo nazi can call them fascist?
I've never understood why conservatives call knee jerk reactionary far left agitators such as Anti-FA (Anti-fascist) fascists. I mean is that the only word conservatives know to use against such people?
Have they ever read George Orwell's Homage to Catalonia? Hemingway's For Whom the Bell Tolls?
Have they ever read Animal Farm? Do they not know the history of the Soviet Union and suppression of thought?
The Cultural Revolution under Mao? In Maoist China intellectuals with different opinions to the state were hunted.
I believe Pol Pot thought eyeglasses were a sign of western intellectualism. The Cuban Revolutionaries supposedly outlawed the saxophone in Havana nightclubs because it was invented in Belgium and it represented western imperialism. I doubt that last story is true but it wouldn't surprise me.
Point is, why don't conservatives just call them what they are? Communists and Anarchists? They're extremely authoritarian and knee jerk and will shut down opposition they deem offensive. You don't need to call them blackshirts or fascists. That distorts history because people won't look into the crimes and history of communism which made the blackshirts look like choir boys.
Do conservatives do this because they assume people won't understand the history and thus resort to a quick buzzword because fascists are more well known for shutting down dissent?
Doesn't really ring true to me. I don't know any conservatives who call them fascists. The far left reminds me of something Maoist or Orwellian. Not just the violent ones ... I'm talking about the ones who belong to a culture that doesn't support free expression and tries to suppress it. Those who believe that "hate speech" is theirs to define and punish. The PC adherents who have deemed certain lines of social and political inquiry as out of bounds and have shameful labels they use to silence discussion. Of course they don't see it in themselves. Their self-image is one of altruists trying to make a kinder more egalitarian world but it's not a world where they will tolerate points of view that differ from theirs. Why should they? If you don't agree with them lock-step it's because you must not want a kinder more egalitarian world and who could those people be other than racists or fascists or __phobes? This is social engineering and speech and thought modification are part of their means to an end. That's Orwellian. The shaming and hounding for having politically "impure" thoughts and speech is something straight out of the Maoist Red Guard playbook.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
