Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

yeahIsupporttrump OP wrote

sorry to keep replying, but this is fascinating to watch. i have a core problem however -

hitler was a socialist. it was Mussolini that was a fascist. and fascism has nothing to do with "pro-toxic masculinity" as per 10:27 of the video or any other of those points.

fascism is the political viewpoint that the nation is like that of a body - and the people are individual cells. if a cell is doing good for the body then it is preserved; if not then it is removed. it is a harsh viewpoint and one that requires the marriage of government to the captains of industry in order to accomplish.

it has nothing to do with pro-toxic masculinity, whatever that is. im still watching. sorry if im annoying you with the feedback


jadedctrl wrote

hitler was a socialist.

The definition of socialism:

social ownership and democratic control of the means of production

Emphasized the relevant bits. Hitler's brand of fascism literally didn't meet any qualifier there!

social ownership

Capitalists still owned private property, although they were in almost all cases directly controlled or influenced by the state-- but the point is that private property and the social relations that come with it remained in tact. Under socialism, private property and it's related social relations would be abolished. If anything, you could claim that Nazi Germany operated under a form of State Capitalism.


Nazi Germany + democracy

lol nope

democratic control of the means of production

The means of production/capital (like a factory) were still controlled by the capitalists-- and through them, the state. There was no democracy, no worker control of capital. Again, social relations were the same.


matches_malone wrote

Hi, I'm a dragonfly.

hitler was a socialist

Hitler wasn't a socialist any more than I'm a dragonfly.


yeahIsupporttrump OP wrote

if im not mistaken, it was under hitler that the following happened:

  • the creation of the peoples car, or volkswagon, as a cheap means of transport for the german people

  • the creation of the autobahn, a massive social labour project that helped the economy

  • the creation of the very first animal abuse laws. hitler was a massive animal rights advocate.

im NOT trying to defend hitler here, im simply pointing out that hitler was indeed a socialist by actual definition, and re-writing history because it doesnt fit the current worldview you might hold doesnt change that.


matches_malone wrote

how the fuck is that socialism? next time read a dictionary before you open your ignorant mouth


not_AFX_lol wrote

Eisenhower built the interstate system. Doesn't make him socialist.


yeahIsupporttrump OP wrote

no but it was a socialist act. a common act of government to bring the economy up is to massively spend on infrastructure. its what hitler did too in an effort to bring his own economy up. this does not change the fact that the act was socialist in nature, and that hiter identified himself as a socialst and did other socialist things (he was the first to create anti-animal cruelty laws on the planet which is a good thing) so we have to accept him at his word when he both acts and says he is a socialist.

im sorry, but thats history for you. its a bitch. it doesnt mean you guys are wrong, it means that we need to be accurate about history in order to create proper arguments about the present.


Defasher wrote

Hey fashface - I'm not a socialist. But in order for me to not be a socialist, I actually learned what socialism means. You should do that too before you start telling a bunch of socialists what socialism is.


not_AFX_lol wrote

I understand what you're saying, but "the government does stuff" just isn't socialism. And calling yourself a socialist doesn't really mean anything. The Democrats aren't in favor of a democracy, they're in favor of a republic. It's branding, nothing more. Calling yourself socialist in an era where capitalism is at its worst failure in modern history is sensible branding, but it doesn't mean you're actually a socialist.


not_AFX_lol wrote

Hitler and Mussolini were both authoritarian leaders who sought to create a state that, with corporate assistance, would be capable of dominating the people.

As for the notion of fascism relating to 'toxic masculinity': while traditional fascism (to the best of my knowledge) only goes as far as establishing and enforcing gender roles, most modern fascists are affiliated with alt-right beliefs, MRAs, and other ideologies that are misogynist and 'pro-toxic masculinity'.


yeahIsupporttrump OP wrote

interesting. im curious, given the definition above, what is it about a person that lets you identify an individual as a fascist in the first place?

noting that it is only in the western world that women not only can vote but have the same opportunities as men (despite certain drawbacks which are too complex for this venue), how is it that this civilization more than others is misogynist?


not_AFX_lol wrote

I don't think it's a matter of "western society is more misogynist than any other", but a recognition that while societies like, for example, Saudi Arabia (to whom the United States sells weapons and from whom oil is purchased) are far harsher on women's rights, that doesn't mean that Western society is perfect.

As for what defines a fascist - in the modern day there is generally a sense of authoritarian politics (ex. militarization of the police, intensification of surveillance programs), intense nationalism and corresponding xenophobia (ex. anti-immigrant, anti-Islam, or anti-Semitic rhetoric or policy), anti-feminist and anti-LGBT views, etc. To some extent fascism can be correlated and overlapped with right-wing authoritarianism.


matches_malone wrote (edited )

Do exact definitions really matter?

If someone is a) far right authoritarian, b) a proudly bigoted white supremacist and c) a filthy rich corporatist - then who cares what label you put on them? They're straight up dangerous for anyone who isn't also a rich white bigot.


yeahIsupporttrump OP wrote

it does, because logic like yours confuses the situation.

if the label doesnt matter than neither do words in general. I could call you a "quadrofugitarian" whatever that means and it would be an insult.

what is the point of that?


matches_malone wrote (edited )

trump's biggest fan talking to us about logic. after a year of trump's rule.