Re: CNN - asking the right questions
a more reasonable right-wing definition of fascism is one offered by the guy who invented it, Benito Mussolini (actually mostly by his court philosopher Giovanni Gentile). Here's just one important part (more here: http://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/mussolini-fascism.asp): For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the
nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. Fascism is the doctrine best adapted to represent the tendencies and the aspirations of a people, like the people of Italy, who are rising again after many centuries of abasement and foreign servitude. But empire demands discipline, the coordination of all forces and a deeply felt sense of duty and sacrifice: this fact explains many aspects of the practical working of the regime, the character of many forces in the State, and the necessarily severe measures which must be taken against those who would oppose this spontaneous and inevitable movement of Italy in the twentieth century, and would oppose it by recalling the outworn ideology of the nineteenth century - repudiated wheresoever there has been the courage to undertake great experiments of social and political transformation; for never before has the nation stood more in need of authority, of direction and order. If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it.
notice all that emphasis on "decadence," on the expansion of Empire, on the "strength" of "the nation," on militarism? it's pretty hard to make that work with the creation of social security and welfare programs (aka The New Deal), or FDR's patent lack of interest in the kind of militaristic nationalism that -- oh, he eventually went to war against, but only after being dragged kicking and screaming, mostly through the US being attacked directly. but what did Mussolini know about fascism (despite being the leader of the actual movement that gave us the word)? On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:26 PM, z9wahqvh <z9wahqvh@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:37 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
I wonder what an 'updated' new deal is considering that the Original New Deal was chemically pure fascism...
in which Juan-who-swears-he's-not-an-authoritarian-right-winger demonstrates that he gets his analysis of fundamental political categories from authoritarian right wingers (the only people--especially Hayek himself and National Review editor Jonah Goldberg--who describe the New Deal as having anything whatsoever to do with fascism, which it did not).
I refer to Umberto Eco as the (snigger) "Authority" It doesn't take much to understand fascism. 9 pages and 14 ways of looking at a Blackshirt is plenty. http://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/eco_ur-fascism.pdf z9wahqvh:
a more reasonable right-wing definition of fascism is one offered by the guy who invented it, Benito Mussolini (actually mostly by his court philosopher Giovanni Gentile). Here's just one important part (more here: http://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/mussolini-fascism.asp):
For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the
nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. Fascism is the doctrine best adapted to represent the tendencies and the aspirations of a people, like the people of Italy, who are rising again after many centuries of abasement and foreign servitude. But empire demands discipline, the coordination of all forces and a deeply felt sense of duty and sacrifice: this fact explains many aspects of the practical working of the regime, the character of many forces in the State, and the necessarily severe measures which must be taken against those who would oppose this spontaneous and inevitable movement of Italy in the twentieth century, and would oppose it by recalling the outworn ideology of the nineteenth century - repudiated wheresoever there has been the courage to undertake great experiments of social and political transformation; for never before has the nation stood more in need of authority, of direction and order. If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it.
notice all that emphasis on "decadence," on the expansion of Empire, on the "strength" of "the nation," on militarism? it's pretty hard to make that work with the creation of social security and welfare programs (aka The New Deal), or FDR's patent lack of interest in the kind of militaristic nationalism that -- oh, he eventually went to war against, but only after being dragged kicking and screaming, mostly through the US being attacked directly.
but what did Mussolini know about fascism (despite being the leader of the actual movement that gave us the word)?
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:26 PM, z9wahqvh <z9wahqvh@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:37 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
I wonder what an 'updated' new deal is considering that the Original New Deal was chemically pure fascism...
in which Juan-who-swears-he's-not-an-authoritarian-right-winger demonstrates that he gets his analysis of fundamental political categories from authoritarian right wingers (the only people--especially Hayek himself and National Review editor Jonah Goldberg--who describe the New Deal as having anything whatsoever to do with fascism, which it did not).
-- RR "You might want to ask an expert about that - I just fiddled around with mine until it worked..."
Authority indeed. Thank you :) On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 04:55:00AM +0000, Razer wrote:
I refer to Umberto Eco as the (snigger) "Authority"
It doesn't take much to understand fascism. 9 pages and 14 ways of looking at a Blackshirt is plenty.
http://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/eco_ur-fascism.pdf
z9wahqvh:
a more reasonable right-wing definition of fascism is one offered by the guy who invented it, Benito Mussolini (actually mostly by his court philosopher Giovanni Gentile). Here's just one important part (more here: http://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/mussolini-fascism.asp):
For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the
nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. Fascism is the doctrine best adapted to represent the tendencies and the aspirations of a people, like the people of Italy, who are rising again after many centuries of abasement and foreign servitude. But empire demands discipline, the coordination of all forces and a deeply felt sense of duty and sacrifice: this fact explains many aspects of the practical working of the regime, the character of many forces in the State, and the necessarily severe measures which must be taken against those who would oppose this spontaneous and inevitable movement of Italy in the twentieth century, and would oppose it by recalling the outworn ideology of the nineteenth century - repudiated wheresoever there has been the courage to undertake great experiments of social and political transformation; for never before has the nation stood more in need of authority, of direction and order. If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it.
notice all that emphasis on "decadence," on the expansion of Empire, on the "strength" of "the nation," on militarism? it's pretty hard to make that work with the creation of social security and welfare programs (aka The New Deal), or FDR's patent lack of interest in the kind of militaristic nationalism that -- oh, he eventually went to war against, but only after being dragged kicking and screaming, mostly through the US being attacked directly.
but what did Mussolini know about fascism (despite being the leader of the actual movement that gave us the word)?
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:26 PM, z9wahqvh <z9wahqvh@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:37 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
I wonder what an 'updated' new deal is considering that the Original New Deal was chemically pure fascism...
in which Juan-who-swears-he's-not-an-authoritarian-right-winger demonstrates that he gets his analysis of fundamental political categories from authoritarian right wingers (the only people--especially Hayek himself and National Review editor Jonah Goldberg--who describe the New Deal as having anything whatsoever to do with fascism, which it did not).
"Nr. 5 is the Fascist" cartoon: http://www.radioaryan.com/2016/11/the-daily-traditionalist-hit-them-with.htm...
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 04:55:00AM +0000, Razer wrote:
I refer to Umberto Eco as the (snigger) "Authority" It doesn't take much to understand fascism. 9 pages and 14 ways of looking at a Blackshirt is plenty. http://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/eco_ur-fascism.pdf
Re the discussion of fascism, I particularly like the thought catalytic arising from extract point 6 below. The Fight for the Alt-Right: The Rising Tide of Ideological Autism Against Big Tent-Supremacy https://atlanticcenturion.wordpress.com/2016/03/05/the-fight-for-the-alt-rig... Posted on 2016-03-05 Extract: " So what are the tenets of the big tent? I believe they are as follows: 1.) People are different. Human inequality is a fact of life and belief systems that deny this lead to distortion and oppression. Both individuals and populations vary in their characteristics in meaningful ways, such as intelligence and social behavior. One size does not fit all, not comfortably at least. 2.) Our world is tribal. The struggle for survival which has produced all life on earth extends into biological human races, which both exist and matter to their members. Such conflict is neither immoral nor moral, but a condition we must engage with in order to develop any meaningful philosophy or ideology. It can be found on the streets, in the human resources department, at the ballot box, or in the trenches. Even something as trivial as the Oscars is fought over. Though it is currently politically incorrect to acknowledge that races and their national subdivisions exist and compete for resources, land, and influence over one another or over themselves, that does not mean the struggle has stopped. That one side has been cajoled into not struggling does not mean it is left alone. 3.) Our tribe is being suppressed. The new left doctrine of racial struggle in favor of non-whites only, a product of decolonization and the defeat of nationalists by egalitarians after WWII, must be repudiated and Whites must be allowed to take their own side in their affairs. A value system that says Whites are not allowed to have collective interests and literally every other identity group can do so and ought to do so is unacceptable. 4.) Men are not women and women are not men. Men and women have roles to fulfill for the species to persist in a stable and healthy way. Feminism and the sexual revolution, by destroying the conditions that promoted and sustained heterosexual monogamy, have had disastrous implications for the sexes and relationships between them. (I highly recommend F. Roger Devlin’s Sexual Utopia in Power here for those interested in more). No viable society can exist where the long-term union of one man and one woman producing a replacement level of offspring is not the norm. Some Western countries have obscured the impact of sexual degeneracy on birthrates by importing foreigners, but such measures only further the destruction of nations; they do not sustain a people but keep a state’s balance sheets in order. 5.) Freedom is a responsibility and not a right. The freedom of too many incompetent people to make too many bad decisions is harmful to society and constrains the freedom of virtuous and responsible people. There are externalities to most actions and when these are harmful to non-actors it is a kind of injustice. These need to campaigned against, or suppressed by force or the threat of force—the basis of the rule of law. A virtuous society is an ordered one that provides freedom from anarcho-tyranny. 6.) If we must be a democratic society, the franchise should be limited. Universal democracy is a bad system. It gives power to the worst and shackles the fittest. It is a degenerative institution in which the weak and unproductive collaborate against the strong and sustainable. "
On Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:42:52 +1100 Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
2.) Our world is tribal. The struggle for survival which has produced all life on earth extends into biological human races,
what the fuck is this?
3.) Our tribe is being suppressed.
what the fuck is this?
4.) Men are not women and women are not men. Men and women have roles to fulfill for the species to persist in a stable and healthy way. Feminism and the sexual revolution, by destroying the conditions that promoted and sustained heterosexual monogamy,
what the fuck is this?
5.) Freedom is a responsibility and not a right.
what the fuck is this?
6.) If we must be a democratic society, the franchise should be limited.
Right, to no one. Universal democracy is a bad system. It gives power to the
worst and shackles the fittest. It is a degenerative institution in which the weak and unproductive collaborate against the strong and sustainable. "
What this is, is what appears to be driving a lot of Trump supporters.
From an intellectual point of view, it's rough, but lack of rigour never stopped a movement based on emations, false perceptions, some facts, overwhelming sense of impending disaster, disempowerment and a desire for change.
This is part of the world we live in ... a view into many humans currently involved politically in the USA. This is the actual think and talk of that group. On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:17:15PM -0300, Juan wrote:
On Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:42:52 +1100 Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
2.) Our world is tribal. The struggle for survival which has produced all life on earth extends into biological human races,
what the fuck is this?
3.) Our tribe is being suppressed.
what the fuck is this?
4.) Men are not women and women are not men. Men and women have roles to fulfill for the species to persist in a stable and healthy way. Feminism and the sexual revolution, by destroying the conditions that promoted and sustained heterosexual monogamy,
what the fuck is this?
5.) Freedom is a responsibility and not a right.
what the fuck is this?
6.) If we must be a democratic society, the franchise should be limited.
Right, to no one.
Universal democracy is a bad system. It gives power to the
worst and shackles the fittest. It is a degenerative institution in which the weak and unproductive collaborate against the strong and sustainable. "
Ahh, thanks to the soul who spent the effort - the first vid had bad audio, and and .... transcript, yay! For those wanting a little more on alt-right history, ideology and etc, the transcript is a preferred format :) http://www.radixjournal.com/blog/2016/12/9/spencer-speaks-the-transcript -- * Certified Deplorable Neo-Nazi Fake News Hunter (TM)(C)(R) * Executive Director of Triggers, Ministry of Winning * Weapons against traditional \/\/European\/\/ values: http://davidduke.com/jewish-professor-boasts-of-jewish-pornography-used-as-a...
Angling for a cabinet post Zen? On November 24, 2016 8:42:52 AM EST, Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
Re the discussion of fascism, I particularly like the thought catalytic arising from extract point 6 below.
The Fight for the Alt-Right: The Rising Tide of Ideological Autism Against Big Tent-Supremacy https://atlanticcenturion.wordpress.com/2016/03/05/the-fight-for-the-alt-rig... Posted on 2016-03-05
Extract: " So what are the tenets of the big tent? I believe they are as follows:
1.) People are different. Human inequality is a fact of life and belief systems that deny this lead to distortion and oppression. Both individuals and populations vary in their characteristics in meaningful ways, such as intelligence and social behavior. One size does not fit all, not comfortably at least.
2.) Our world is tribal. The struggle for survival which has produced all life on earth extends into biological human races, which both exist and matter to their members. Such conflict is neither immoral nor moral, but a condition we must engage with in order to develop any meaningful philosophy or ideology. It can be found on the streets, in the human resources department, at the ballot box, or in the trenches. Even something as trivial as the Oscars is fought over. Though it is currently politically incorrect to acknowledge that races and their national subdivisions exist and compete for resources, land, and influence over one another or over themselves, that does not mean the struggle has stopped. That one side has been cajoled into not struggling does not mean it is left alone.
3.) Our tribe is being suppressed. The new left doctrine of racial struggle in favor of non-whites only, a product of decolonization and the defeat of nationalists by egalitarians after WWII, must be repudiated and Whites must be allowed to take their own side in their affairs. A value system that says Whites are not allowed to have collective interests and literally every other identity group can do so and ought to do so is unacceptable.
4.) Men are not women and women are not men. Men and women have roles to fulfill for the species to persist in a stable and healthy way. Feminism and the sexual revolution, by destroying the conditions that promoted and sustained heterosexual monogamy, have had disastrous implications for the sexes and relationships between them. (I highly recommend F. Roger Devlin’s Sexual Utopia in Power here for those interested in more). No viable society can exist where the long-term union of one man and one woman producing a replacement level of offspring is not the norm. Some Western countries have obscured the impact of sexual degeneracy on birthrates by importing foreigners, but such measures only further the destruction of nations; they do not sustain a people but keep a state’s balance sheets in order.
5.) Freedom is a responsibility and not a right. The freedom of too many incompetent people to make too many bad decisions is harmful to society and constrains the freedom of virtuous and responsible people. There are externalities to most actions and when these are harmful to non-actors it is a kind of injustice. These need to campaigned against, or suppressed by force or the threat of force—the basis of the rule of law. A virtuous society is an ordered one that provides freedom from anarcho-tyranny.
6.) If we must be a democratic society, the franchise should be limited. Universal democracy is a bad system. It gives power to the worst and shackles the fittest. It is a degenerative institution in which the weak and unproductive collaborate against the strong and sustainable. "
-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Thanks for link, I rather liked it =) I always liked what Eco I've read (only Foucault's Pendulum, and the Name of the Rose...) John On November 23, 2016 11:55:00 PM EST, Razer <rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
I refer to Umberto Eco as the (snigger) "Authority"
It doesn't take much to understand fascism. 9 pages and 14 ways of looking at a Blackshirt is plenty.
http://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/eco_ur-fascism.pdf
a more reasonable right-wing definition of fascism is one offered by
guy who invented it, Benito Mussolini (actually mostly by his court philosopher Giovanni Gentile). Here's just one important part (more here: http://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/mussolini-fascism.asp):
For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of
nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a
decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. Fascism is the doctrine best adapted to represent the tendencies and the aspirations of a people, like the people of Italy, who are rising again after many centuries of abasement and foreign servitude. But empire demands discipline, the coordination of all forces and a deeply felt sense of duty and sacrifice: this fact explains many aspects of the
working of the regime, the character of many forces in the State, and the necessarily severe measures which must be taken against those who would oppose this spontaneous and inevitable movement of Italy in the twentieth century, and would oppose it by recalling the outworn ideology of
nineteenth century - repudiated wheresoever there has been the courage to undertake great experiments of social and political transformation; for never before has the nation stood more in need of authority, of
and order. If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by
that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it.
notice all that emphasis on "decadence," on the expansion of Empire, on the "strength" of "the nation," on militarism? it's pretty hard to make
z9wahqvh: the the period of practical the direction the fact that
work with the creation of social security and welfare programs (aka The New Deal), or FDR's patent lack of interest in the kind of militaristic nationalism that -- oh, he eventually went to war against, but only after being dragged kicking and screaming, mostly through the US being attacked directly.
but what did Mussolini know about fascism (despite being the leader of the actual movement that gave us the word)?
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:26 PM, z9wahqvh <z9wahqvh@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:37 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
I wonder what an 'updated' new deal is considering that the Original New Deal was chemically pure fascism...
in which Juan-who-swears-he's-not-an-authoritarian-right-winger demonstrates that he gets his analysis of fundamental political
categories
from authoritarian right wingers (the only people--especially Hayek himself and National Review editor Jonah Goldberg--who describe the New Deal as having anything whatsoever to do with fascism, which it did not).
-- RR "You might want to ask an expert about that - I just fiddled around with mine until it worked..."
-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
participants (5)
-
John Newman -
juan -
Razer -
z9wahqvh -
Zenaan Harkness