like the serbs, turks and germans

but the more nationalistic one gets; people start following their state no matter what it does

The defining characteristics of fascism are supremacy of the state over individual (in particular surveillance and pop movement control), supremacy of the military and military fetishism, isolationism, typically protectionism, promotion of an ethnostate, promotion of specific ideas of public virtue based on the good of the state or religion or conservative values

@3v6en8 yes, those are all examples of nationalism and fascism.

Oh and aggressive military posture

And generally vilification of the press

Nationalism by definition is not intrinsically authoritarian or racial, while fascism is authoritarian and also involves forcible suppression of people (although even this isn't intrinsically racial either). These two can overlap and be conflated as the same thing but to use this as proof of them being synonyms is fallacious.

And besides virtually every fascistic state has come to power by overthrowing the previous system, which is the opposite of what conservative beliefs are.

I agree that by pure dictionary definition what you’re saying is true. But for 100 years or more it has been true, and to say that these terms which have been synonymous for 100 years are not is an etymological fallacy

And no, isolationism is not a defining trait of fascism; just look at the Nazis and Mussolini

Most fascist movements grow out of conservative movement’s

The Nazis were isolationist, the Italians less so

That is not actually true

It really is. It’s not international relations when you’re conquering them

You can be an isolationist conquerer

The Nazis were anything but isolationist

They were- they locked themselves off from the international community and broke off treaties and acted unilaterally

They were supremely isolationist

So like, “left” and “right” come from the French assembly

And where people sat

No one in that assembly was in favor of executing the king

To say that overthrowing the king was not a left wing position, however, would be an etymological fallacy

Because the strict definitions of these things shift to fit the current political environment

Maybe in 100 years, there will be some sort of nationalism that isn’t fascist

Right now, that is not the case

Their campaign to take over Europe and the world is literally the antithesis of isolationism

By that logic the United States in the 30s-early 40s would be fascistic because they were isolationist

I didn’t say that was the only definition

GG @Platinum Spark, you just advanced to level 14!

I said that was one of the defining characteristics

Certainly the fascists in the US wanted the US to remain isolationist

But I don’t think being a conquering power is exclusive with isolationism

Because it still means you’re not negotiating or participating in the international community

No, the US was isolationist because they didn't want to be embroiled in WWII

There are different reasons for becoming isolationist, and it is not synonymous with fascism by definition

And I am arguing by the definition and not an incorrect interpretation of it

You cannot be isolationist and fight every country around you.

Yes the US was isolationist and the liberals dragged the US out of isolationism

The fascists in the US (silver legion) wanted the US to remain so

Sticking to an old dictionary definition is an etymological fallacy

The modern usage of “nationalist” is synonymous with fascist