and again, this is by design

Fascism didn't accumulate theory because it resented it

it was much more about action than thinking

And to be fair, Fascism was able to spread very fast because its adherents were effective in waging action in service of their ideology

Yes fascism was always more concerned with social aspects rather than economic, I'll give you that.

Mhm

Most fascists I've met don't really bother to talk about Fascist economics, as they see it as hardly important

what else is there to talk about, protect your product and don't allow other countries to undercut ur own product in ur own country

Total Autarky is a meme

its pretty funny, considering how economics and politics are joined at the hip

do you want me to invite you to a server to talk to a guy who is rly into fascist economics? @Spookaswa

Eh

Sure why not

so ignore economics and you will fail your society in literal sense

his name is Absalon, I don't like him, think he's retarded, but he's very into economics

oof

harsh words

I've already delved a bit into Fascist economics

he is @Xinyue

its basically "Corporations get to remain private as long as they allow us to intervene to keep them on track"

"Fascist economics" is basically just protectionism

From what I understand

? @Spookaswa what?

Also yes

lul no?

like socdem + protectionism + ultranationalist rhetoric

@Xinyue this is also a no

That's what I got from Cultured Thug

its fucking pathetic it does nothing

://// @Spookaswa

oh fuck

oh god

miss him, don't watch him anymore

Cultured Thug

the man who thinks DPRK is fascist or something

a lot of Fascists view DPRK as being very fascistic

Its difficult to find books that talk about Fascist economics

I've only found one so far

DPRK is literally socialist

this is the thing about fascism

its so vague

so insubstantial

that you can basically project it onto anything

jfc

DPRK isn't fascistic, its socialist autarky

>its so vague

this is why you call China fascist and Golden Dawn fascist but absolutely zero fascists (people who know the ideology) would say it isn't.

Its not Marxist anymore

but its not fascist

And he says it's fascistIC, not fascist

If anything calling DPRK *monarchic* would make more sense

because tbh its monarcho-socialism 😄

Baste

@Spookaswa https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateFascism/comments/3xkisa/fascist_book_reading_list/

>plebbit

PLEBBIT

HAH

Rekt

you understand what separates Monarchism from Fascism is mostly just the head? @Xinyue

@Spookaswa it doesn't matter, you wanted books on economcis of fascism, there you go

well tbh I subscribe to different view on fascism than you do probably, and indeed the fascists themselves. You are probably aware of the Marxist view on what fascism is @aymem

We all know Marxists and Fascists love each other like the brothers they are

😉

.....

not cool

😦

Tbh though

Fascism and Marxism did stem from Socialist thought

One just became Nationalist

Not ebin

Fascism made a break with socialism though. It did emerge from socialism, but branched off to its own thing

>Marxist view on what fascism is

No, I'm not, but I don't think the Marxist view should be the view set in stone of an ideology that most people use as an ad-hom whilst having absolutely zero clue of what Fascism is, like jesus christ people are calling Catalonians national-socialists because they're nationalist and "socialist", and calling people who want a blue fucking stripe on the valencian flag a fascist

like you have to admit, it's ridiculous

@Xinyue It would've been more socialistic but Mussolini did change his ideology more for the right wing of Italy

Fascism is when the government does things

don't know why so many fascists don't know this

This @Spookaswa

Basically all fascists governments in the 20th century did that @aymem

@The Big Oof give me the mercenary role or I will personally rape your eye sockets

The Marxian view on fascism is that it is the ultimate reaction by the capitalist class to stop the withering away of their class power by the masses. When the destruction of the capitalist class becomes too eminent a possibility in the eyes of the capitalists, they will fund and back anticommunist reactionary movements to take control of the government (as in Germany) and prevent the further intensification of class war. In this sense, as Marxist have put it before:

```Fascism is capitalism in its decay phase```

And sure enough, wherever fascism rises, it rises in opposition to socialism and communism. Never does it rise without these other forces being present. And almost always is it supported by the elite classes. The capitalists have to make a compromise though, and essentially become hostages to the fascist, but this is a decision that many capitalists willingly take because it allows them to retain something at least rather than nothing.

All this talk from facists about "third position" and they end up moving towards some form of prussian socialism(which isn't really socialistic in any sense)

it rises as a solution to the degeneracy of capitalism and socialism dichotomy

It rises primarily to prevent socialism and communism though. Lets be honest, this is what fascism has historically done. Whether in Spain, whether in Germany, whether in Italy or China.

a breaking of the cycle of the wrong and ineffective thinking

>The Marxian view on fascism is that it is the ultimate reaction by the capitalist class to stop the withering away of their class power by the masses. When the destruction of the capitalist class becomes too eminent a possibility in the eyes of the capitalists, they will fund and back anticommunist reactionary movements to take control of the government (as in Germany) and prevent the further intensification of class war. In this sense, as Marxist have put it before:


Do you agree with this though? I don't see Fascists reacting to Communism currently, I see it more with immigration, like I won't lie, I became interested in fascism because of immigration and anti-american sentiments.

>And sure enough, wherever fascism rises, it rises in opposition to socialism and communism. Never does it rise without these other forces being present.

I don't think it's rising in opposition to socialism...

>It rises primarily to prevent socialism and communism though. Lets be honest, this is what fascism has historically done. Whether in Spain, whether in Germany, whether in Italy or China.

Kuomintang wasn't Fascist, Franco wasn't a Fascist, you only have Germany and Itlay as your examples and I think this is extremely cherrrypicked

Lots of them do this though. Lots of them blame the "secret communist" as being the one responsible for the degeneration of the Western society; that, surely enough, the Marxists in the shadows are the ones doing the damage. A

> Kuomintang wasn't Fascist

*Chiang was*

> Franco wasn't a Fascist

*Falange was, and he utilised this*

> Germany and Italy only examples

Kinda relevant ones, don't you think?

I think the current bump in fascism in the last 20 years is a direct reaction to the rise of leftwing identity politics which encompasses communism

Sun Yat Sen was a socialist, but Chiang was a fascist

the purging of the left-wing of KMT which led to 10,000 deaths kind of was a turning point

Don't forget

Romania

Hungary

yeah

>Chiang was

Since I'm uneducated on Kuomintang I won't talk about Chiang

>Falange was, and he utilised this

The Falanage were, but Franco was not, also I'd like to know why you say he utilised it, why do you not think he was a Fascist

Austria

Portugal

Brazil

Greece

and I left out Italy and Germany because they were fascist

@Spookaswa list every single country with a socialist and nationalist party, wp