-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/01/2017 11:34 PM, jim bell wrote:
I looked up the (Google?) definition of "fascist", and it stated:
/ fas·cism //ˈfaSHˌizəm/ //noun //an authoritarian
and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social
organization./
1. /synonyms:/ /authoritarianism
/(in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant
views or practice./
But that seems to be a circular definition: It refers to
"right-wing", but doesn't explain why (other than common usage)
"fascism" is thought to be "right wing". I was under the impression
that 'traditional' fascism involved government control (but not
ownership) of the means of production. But Socialism, I thought,
amounted to heavy taxation of the means of production, which is
tantamount to government control, too. And Communism might simply
be labelled a form of extreme Socialism. So why isn't "fascism"
merely seen as being another form of "Socialism"?
My preferred definition of fascism describes it as rule by a wealthy
oligarchy composed of industrialists and financiers, a.k.a.
capitalists, under a veneer of pretended "democracy."
On the domestic front, fascist States consolidate and expand the power
of a ruling elite through a propaganda regimen presenting an
existential conflict between the country's racial and ethnic "rightful
owners" and selected racial, ethnic and foreign scapegoats.
On the international front, fascist States wage aggressive wars to
further the commercial interests of their ruling elites, under the
pretext of national self defense against notional existential threats
to the State's racial and ethnic "rightful owners."
Today, I view U.S. Progressive Liberal and Conservative Right
constituencies as products of marketing campaigns respectively
promoting covert and overt, or soft and hard, fascist values and
agendas to the public. I view the political conflict between the
nominal Left and Right at the national policy level as a friendly
competition between financiers (Left) and industrialists (Right) for
dominance in setting national policy for their own benefit.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYk2f8AAoJEECU6c5XzmuqXfcH/38DCslWU8jQgdrvOud9lulg
ICOfW8x4+exsSh219n8okLtJ+zQxRD6yMF+4On44Eur7VDSAON5n9SLevwzujsCF
/ut5LocisehG5n3YF+J49C0EL+7MCaCSBuDmW75eTuBorwO3L35fBy8t7yLhiTzc
nB9Pu7MoZDz8+rFCWb9f32EuVljn8aJjlDEWceJxLM3Q7Wjh7Z2MtQrL/BslqMwn
TjeyM8Bvl+KHmfRBK1JwTyHM9cKExRbSE7dDmdGAPuZmCdj3sQJ53tUnHQUOGdpj
l/sn0JxD9FsqWO8/zusUBOqT9HQP2PI0S6C8K2GoJjGKvTIHAGRB7mvc518xvVc=
=6JtU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----