-----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-----