But that was just one aspect. You can throw that one out if you disagree

I'm going to respond to this in about 2 hours

Sure take your time.

Mobile isn't exactly the optimal debating device

Haha no rush, you can dm too if it gets crazy here

Ok so first off I'm going to have to object to the term "entomological fallacy" itself, because this is something that has an entirely subjective an nebulous basis. Words are made to have very explicit meaning and are often tied to an expansive history, like the word "fascism" in the context here referring to an ideology that first came around in the '20s (so essentially what you were referring to earlier). Nationalism in and of itself is an ideology centered simply around the support of your nation's interests. Fascism, on the other hand, involves an authoritarian government or regime that forcefully suppresses people, along with a complete rejection of democracy and a lack of individual rights; the only thing that is intrinsically shared with nationalism is the support for the nation and the view that your nation is superior, though this varies in degree as well. Nationalism often does lead into Fascism but it also does not, like with the United States in WWII (and even though there may be fascists in the United States, this does not mean that the United States itself was a fascistic society or even that the majority of people were). With this in mind, to synonymize the two is fallacious as there are very clear criteria in the definition of the word "fascism" in order for something to be counted as such. The conflation of these two terms you engaged in prior is actually an example of another fallacy, that being a false equivalency.

Note that I am not giving any positive opinion towards either thing though, I am opposed to both.

The term left and right are totally dependent on context and public perception. Something considered radically left in US could easily be considered right or center in Sweden.

And it wasn't liberals that pushed the US away from isolationism, it was mostly the work of progressive and those two things are very very different.

Shit, I forgot about that as well. Political spectrums vary from country to country, so reporting of another countries political dynamics will likely have the politics of that country applied to it.

*realized I said "entymology" instead of "etymology" lol

Also, isolationism has a very specific definition as well, that being a policy that involves a country not involving itself with affairs with or between other countries. Quite literally the opposite of the Nazis.

So, an etymological fallacy is relying heavily on the derivation of a word rather than its current usage

I really think that’s what you’re proposing here.

But nationalism, remember is devotion to the “nation” not to the “state”

What I am opposing is the usage of a definition that does not belong to a specific term simply because of popular use.

While those things have become largely synonymous, even going back to the original definition of nationalism, we’re not talking about a fervent devotion to the state, but to the culture, and a movement to align culture with state

Liberal and progressive were certainly synonymous in the 30’s and 40’s

And I would also argue they’re largely synonymous now

Is it your belief that FDR was not a liberal president?

I would argue they're not, and conflating terms is basically going to muddy the waters to the point where an argument here is pointless

Ok, we can get to that in a bit, let me just finish responding to your points

I concede the isolationist point, but I’ll revise my list then

And replace it with a disregard for treaties and preference for working unilaterally

Except that they are not synonymous. I gave very specific definitions for these terms, of which are corroborated in dictionaries and search engines today. Are these sources of information not better to go off on instead of popular, often misinformed usage?

Of which terms

Fascism and Nationalism (and I guess by proxy Isolationism, but that's not exactly related right now).

Specifically, fascism in the context of the ideology prevalent in countries during WWII.

I think your definition of fascism is incomplete

Fascism always includes all the things I laid out, including a commitment to conservative social values

I mean it isn't though. If anything, your application of the term is far too broad.

Nationalism is, in a political sense, synonymous with fascism

My application is more narrow than yours

For instance, the Modi government is a fascist government, the BNP is a fascist party

Because again, conservatives are not the individuals who would overthrow the preexisting government.

That is simply not a part of conservatism.

Conservative social values? Do you mean conservative in the context of the US or conservative in the since of preserving existing policy?

I’m talking about conservative social values, not conservatism, though fascism/nationalism is of course on the far right of the conservative spectrum

And is within conservative movement’s, as it is in the US and as it was in Germany in the 30’s

The KKK is a fascist organization for instance

As was the silver legion