It’s funny that somebody who has made his account on here entirely to spread anti-communist propaganda calls other people a fascist. You’re equating the people who built Auschwitz with those who liberated it, you’re effectively a holocaust denier and a nazi. Eat shit and die, you fascist pig with your transparent wrecking attempts.

strike two

What makes them a fascist, genuine question? I looked through their profile but couldn’t find anything that would make me think they’re fascist, just edgy Leftist humor. Do you say that simply just because they’re on hexbear?

And what do you politically identify as? I could find even less about you to understand any of your politics.

I haven’t seen any fascists, as far as I’m aware, on hexbear but I hate fascism so I’d be willing to agree with you if you can explain.

Slow down there buddy

NCDer

What does this mean I’ve never heard of it

Don’t even get me started on the ones who try to argue that “North Korea is more free and democratic than the US”.

Ahh thanks for the great reminder for all the tankies about communism failing for China and all these nations so they had to incorporate capitalism and allowed privatization of industries.

USSR did it, China did it, Vietnam did it, Cuba is doing it.

At the moment I’m writing this, 7 tankies have seen your comment

also the people that say socialism is fascism are the ones slowly taking our rights away.

You want to read what book? No we don’t like it. Who are you gonna have sex with? No we don’t like that…

Socialism can be good if the government doesn’t have to resort to totalitarianism to enforce it - and when has that ever happened? Rarely. Rarely.

Lol what, no that’s just the standard for communism lol

Specifically “dictatorship of the proletariat”, which was basically an 1800s gothic way to say “direct democracy for poor people”. Marx is somewhat infamous for the way he makes his ideas sound scarier than they are

And to clarify, most revolutions fail or adopt bureaucracy primarily to defend themselves from outside, capitalist influence, power corruption probably plays a part too but state power used by socialists is actually part of the plot

The vast majority of (Let’s use Vietnam as an example) is proletariat. So the vast majority of people are dictating terms to a small subset with different class interests. It’s nothing like the dictatorship in, let’s say the Netherlands, where a small group of capitalists dictate terms to the large body of proletariat, and the bourgeois political apparatus mediates in favour of bourgeoisie class interests. There’s no corruption taking place, just the necessities of market economics.

This dictatorship will naturally “dissolve” when there are no more other classes (bourgeoisie et all) to oppress, since it will no longer serve the proletariat’s interests.

hexbear was unfederated for three years, are you saying they just sat around all that time pretending to be queer communists to each other with no audience? Would thousands of people really check in to a website daily or weekly for years just to do that?

It’s such a fucking pain in my ass to have to block every single community from Lemmygrad and Hexbear. I’m so tired of seeing their dumbass 7th grade love of fascists and racism.

It’s coming, likely in the next Lemmy update.

deleted by creator

On sync for Lemmy you can block instances by putting it in it’s filter list.

Or simply choose a instance that defederates fascists and authoritarian loving dipsshits. Never had a problem here with far right or tankie content.

In Connect it gives you the option of banning the instance. It will block out comments with a message that is was filtered. You get the option of viewing the content anyway, If you feel like it.

The connect app allows you to block instances. Not the same as defeding obviously, but it helps.

To summarize: More tankie bullshit

Replace the word race with party

That’s a pretty significant difference, don’t you think? Exalting racism and exalting a political organization that opposes racism are diametrically opposed things, not equivalent.

Replace the word race with party and you’ve got an incomplete yes, but not necessarily inaccurate description of Stalins USSR.

Replace the Sodium in Sodium Chloride with Hydrogen and OH GOD IT BURNS IT BURNS OW OW OW OW!

You can’t just swap words out and assume the framework is the same. It literally makes no sense. Changing one word can, and does, have a huge effect on overall meaning of a sentence.

I don’t want to dogpile and axont already pointed out a pretty good scholar who talks about the subject, but I did want to add for clarity the reason that it’s important to have a precise definition: We could look at, say, Victorian Britain, Ancient Egypt, the Roman Empire and Suleiman the Magnificent and argue that they were all unquestionably ruled by either a single or a small handful of rulers with no real checks on their power, that they oriented the economy and society around themselves, that they suppressed dissent etc. and conclude, from Webster there, that basically every government except modern American government is fascism. Simply in historical terms that would be an enormous problem, because it collapses all the nuance and distinctions that exist, obviously, between these extremely diverse forms of government.

When people talk about fascism, there’s a reason they think of Hitler and Mussolini (who self-described, which makes that a bit easier I guess) even if it’s hard to put a finger on exactly what the unifying factors are. Very clearly, Mussolini and Hitler thought their projects were incompatible with communism/socialism, it’s why their first steps upon achieving power in their countries were to purge the left and ensure that left resistance couldn’t be organized against them. Even if you have critiques of Stalin (I certainly do) I think there are pretty obvious differences between the USSR and the fascist axis that it ended up fighting against, reasons that were ultimately persuasive to Roosevelt and Churchill despite their own misgivings about communism. Everyone at the time understood there was a difference, and we need to be able to distinguish if we’re going to talk intelligently about forms of government that western countries don’t themselves use.

So in short, I’d say that definition from Webster is too vague to be useful, I’d say there are factors like palingenetic ultranationalism and hostility to the left that seem to be constant in any real fascist regime that should really be a part of a definition of the term. Otherwise ‘fascist’ just means ‘mean’ or ‘bad’ because all of its distinctives are gone.

Personally I like the definition that the historian Robert O. Paxton uses. Now, he’s a liberal, but he does have good insight into fascism and he doesn’t fall into that trap of deciding that communists and fascists must be the same thing. His definition isn’t materialist, but it’s a good start.

To paraphrase, his definition is “a suppression of the left among popular sentiment.” By left he means things like socialists, labor organizations, communists, etc. Fascism is a situation where a country has found its theater of democracy has failed and the capitalists need anything at all to keep themselves in power, even if it means cannibalizing another sector of capitalists. The fascists are the ideological contingent of this, who put forward a policy of class collaboration between working class and capitalist, instead of what socialists propose, which is working class dominance in the economy. Fascists exalt nationality or race because that extends through class sentiments. It brushes aside concerns like internal economic contradictions. I once had a comrade say something like “Fascism is capitalists hitting the emergency button until their hand starts bleeding.”

Communists using a vanguard party is to defend their own interests against capitalists or outside invaders. The praise of the CPSU in Stalin’s era was precisely because it acted as a development and protection tool for the working class. It did its job and people were wary of any return to the previous Tsarist or liberal governments. Women began going to school, women were given the vote for the first time. Pogroms ceased. In less than one lifetime of the CPSU administrating the country, people went from poor farmers to living in apartments with plumbing, heating, and clean medical care. That’s why there was such praise of the party, because they actually did things people liked, and they didn’t want anything to threaten them.

Also, what does it matter if there’s one party or two? The working class have a singular, uniting interest to overthrow capitalism. Why are multiple parties needed? Anything the working class needs to negotiate for can be handled within a socialist, democratic structure, not two or three competing structures against one another. Take a look at Cuba, which has one party, but doesn’t use their party to endorse candidates. Everyone’s officially an independent in the National Assembly.

“Replace the word ‘pollution’ with the word ‘jews’ and captain planet looks pretty fascist!”

I’m sure a lot of people will chime in, I just want to add this short vid with Domenico Losurdo.Here.

A different response, which comes from a different angle to those pointing out that Marxism-Leninism is not fascist:

The word ‘fascism’ is used so fast and loosely outside of a technical context that I wouldn’t say one interpretation is necessarily right or wrong. It depends on context. (Incidentally, same for ‘socialism’, even principled well-read communists can’t agree on a definition.)

For example, if we’re talking about the actual Fascist ideology (think of Mussolini and associates) then I would even hesitate to include Nazism due to the very different roots: they’re both nationalist anti-liberal anti-democratic, anti-socialist ‘third way’ ideologies and they did ally in the war, sure, but to group them both as ‘fascism’ trivializes core differences in how they formed, why they successfully formed, how they appealed to their followers (fascism actually recruited many self-identifying socialists in Italy and its important to recognise why to prevent it), and why they were ultimately antisocial and unsuccessful in their goals.

This isn’t just some academic masturbation nitpicking or anything: I believe that the ignorance of Classical Fascism by lumping it in with the far more obvious and baseless idiocy of Nazism makes it harder to recognize and counter, especially when neo-Nazis are such ridiculous cartoonish farces. Fascism stemmed from National Syndicalism and has core economic ideas like corporatism (from ‘corpus’) that could fool people, and sounds much less stupid that Hitler’s bizzare esoteric fantasies about Aryan racial supremacy: even Mussolini considered Hitler crazy.

The point of me making this distinction is that the dictionary definition you gave isn’t even wrong in describing fascist ideologies, but, I don’t think that list of common traits should be mistaken for a definition. Those traits are the results, not the foundation of the ideology, and a neo-liberal state like the USA can easily match many of those traits despite being a very distinct ideology. Any you will absolutely see people saying ‘USA is fascist’ as a shorthand for nationalist, racist, imperialist, oppressive, blah blah blah, but it’s definitely not post-National-Syndicalist faux-socialist corporatist collectivism. We should obviously fight both but they are not the same and manifest differently.

deleted by creator

This is what I’m expecting from them.

Better than the US that’s for sure.

Why is Cuba a failure in your eyes? It seems to be doing better than other countries in the region. It has a higher life expectancy than the US even, and standards of living have risen dramatically since the revolution.

Wtf does “Cuba if failure” mean? What a bizarre thing to say.

Also telling that you spent 95 percent of a comment that was supposed to be about Cuba ranting about China.

Educate yourself with blowback season 2.

https://blowback.show/Season-2