Explain a fascism system to me

as far as i can tell it's a system where only the best of the tribe can have power with some objective pre requisites to vote and they have control over the economy culture laws and military. is that right?

Attached: 1330308429670.jpg (620x545, 78K)

Other urls found in this thread:

conservapedia.com/Fascist_Manifesto,_1919
worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm
reakt.org/fiume/charter_of_carnaro.html
uploadmb.com/dw.php?id=1389982155
youtube.com/playlist?list=PLA97A5AzLGUKn6fMsVdfjTwGBuk6DPAeO
twitter.com/AnonBabble

jews

fascism is jew repellent

quite simply, fascism is an economic system similar to socialism or communism, however instead of direct state control of business business is allowed to operate in a free market capitalism-like model.
the only difference is that the business must demonstrate their business model is explicitly beneficial to the people of the nation to be permitted to operate

"Facism" is a leftist propaganda term.

Pretty much this.

and who has power and how do they get it

depends on the specific implementation.
both nazi germany and fascist italy used a parliamentary system.
hitler and mussolini were both elected into their positions.
japan however was still using a system of hereditary rule.
look at some other examples throughout history and you will see the specific implementation of the fascist system typically follows cultural traditions of the region

I think he meant how/who get the power within an already fascist system.

and again, it depends on the system.
fascism =/= authoritarianism.
fascism is an economic system, not a political one

did any country ever have a system of like a stringent direct democracy fascism where the best of the tribe would have power instead of 1 elected guy in the tribe?

you are mixing a lot of terms there and not all of them are compatible.
if you are trying to get at the racism of nazi germany that was a separate issue entirely stemming from teutonic supremacy.
governments with all manner of financial systems have had different concepts of citizenship, and political enfranchisement.
historically direct democracy is pretty rare.
only the greeks really practiced it and they were never more than a league of independent city states that often fought amongst themselves.
rome had citizenship but citizens who actually had a vote were a minority.
they kept a senate even during the imperial days.
the actual power of the roman senate depended on how actively engaged the emperor was.
in the early days of america everyone was a "citizen" in that they were protected by certain enumerated rights, but voting was restricted to only white males who owned land.
India has traditionally practiced a caste system where democracy was practiced but only among a certain class of highborn elites and intermarriage between castes was strictly forbidden.
the concept of political enfranchisement is a complicated one with a long history and a wide spectrum of different implementations

This isn't true though
Fascism is staunchly anti capitalist because it is against competition between firms, which is seen as national infighting and therefore against the interests of the state.
Fascist economies use a system called corporatism, which is basically state run guilds for certain industries, read Mussolini, he doesn't shut up about it
t. polisci student

Attached: 1478901205730.jpg (655x1024, 152K)

i agree i think part of fascism is basically just thinking about every single tiny situation in a nation and thinking about how to make it benefit the tribe whether it regards to culture laws economy etc
and only certain people will have that mindset and be able to prove they have it and they will be able to rule

Fascism is a word that is not well understood by most people, even on pol. The Left also uses it to refer to so-called "Nazis" and so that's what Joe Normie thinks of when he hears the word "fascist."

seems like a subtle distinction.
the bottom line is that fascism requires all economic activity be actively beneficial to the state.
a good parallel would be the modern chinese system in hong kong

you are trying to make fascism into something it simply isn't.
stop

>Fascist economies use a system called corporatism, which is basically state run guilds for certain industries, read Mussolini, he doesn't shut up about it
>t. polisci student
I saw this posted on Reddit a year or two ago, and when someone posted that it was basically "Corporatism", they freaked out. I forget the details, but you had a few know-it-alls say that it was not "corporatism" and that it was authortarianism, etc.

yeah.. that's why we hate reddit.
those people are fucking morons who just regurgitate the shit they see on TV ad infinitum

how am i wrong?

A Fascist general for Fascists and those interested


conservapedia.com/Fascist_Manifesto,_1919

worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm

reakt.org/fiume/charter_of_carnaro.html


uploadmb.com/dw.php?id=1389982155

Be respectful and please try to keep conversations relatively "intellectual"

[Discord link] - Fascism General server discord gg/GcdEcpE


Good fascists/similar or influential people to get an introduction

Oswald Mosely
Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera
Benito Mussolini
Adolf Hitler
Stepan Bandera
Corneliu Zelea Codreanu
Salazar
Ramiro Ledesma Ramos
Ettore Ovazza
Gaetano Mosca
Friedrich Nietzsche
Charles Maurras
Enrico Corradini
Filippo Tommaso Marinetti
Johann Plenge
Alceste De Ambris
Gabriele d'Annunzio
George Lincoln Rockwell
Juan Perón
Giovanni Gentile
Julius Evola

Types of Fascism

Italian
Falangism
National-Syndicalism
British Union
National-Socialism
Strasserism
Meme futurism
Clerical Fascism
Brazilian Integralism
Peronism

"[Fascism] was an explosion against intolerable conditions, against remediable wrongs which the old world failed to remedy. It was a movement to secure national renaissance by people who felt themselves threatened with decline into decadence and death and were determined to live, and live greatly."~Oswald Mosel

>Oh yeah

youtube.com/playlist?list=PLA97A5AzLGUKn6fMsVdfjTwGBuk6DPAeO

you are trying to insert a concept of tribalism which while often present in fascist governments is not an integral part of the fascist system.
tribalism and fascism are entirely different things

correct, so which versions of fascism have integral tribalism as part of the system? i don't want a fascist system without the tribalism.

Attached: 974BFAA2-CEE0-4754-8571-F08D5DDA7108.gif (237x240, 3.23M)

Being against certain economic competition does not equate to being staunchly anti-capitalist. Maybe what you're saying applies to Italian fascism, but when you say "fascist economies" it makes it seem like you're also trying to apply it to German National Socialism. German Nazism did nationalize certain aspects of corporations, but it was more akin to a state-mandated union than direct control.

Nazi Germany is the obvious choice.
They had strict racial requirements for party membership

National Socialism
Now start reading.

Attached: The Literate NatSoc.jpg (628x1195, 270K)

Modernization of the (idealized) feudalistic Weltordnung.

/thread

Attached: main_screen_turn_on.jpg (320x240, 22K)

One very common concept in fascist regimes is nativism. this is logical given that the system is oriented toward the people.
Nativism simply means the system is designed to favor the native born citizens as opposed to immigrants or ethnic minorities within the nation's borders (Jewish diaspora, Basque, Tibetans, African Americans, etc.)

i dont like the 25 points of the nsdap though

It's citizenship nationalism.
They don't care about race.

Yeah, Germany was not really fascist per we, they were natsoc which is a similar but distinct system more closely related to state capitalism or socialism.
OP seems really uneducated on the subject though so the distinction would probably be lost on him

Ever heard of juche?

It's not like people should be blamed for thinking that National Socialism is fascist. The term will constantly come up in your research and it's constantly used in real life to refer to Nazism. The definition of fascism is ambiguous and controversial.

Attached: Screenshot_2.png (863x334, 34K)

It doesnt help that the very discussion of it from an academic perspective is taboo.
People get assaulted for conversations like this one

yea it seems my options are
juche
natsoc
strasserism
hungarism
maybe eco fascism based on the fact nature is also tied to genetics and therefore also the tribe so those genetics would be valued and protected

Attached: 26336566_2057473791203388_1797487587682680832_n.jpg (1080x849, 103K)

Eco fascism is a meme ideology.
Maybe in the future it might coalesce into an actual ideology but at the moment it has no real intellectual substance

Which points do you disagree with?
If it's only like 1 or 2 of them, it's not really worth adopting a meme ideology like eco-fascism, Strasserism, Juche, etc., which don't have broad support even online, over it.

Attached: 1559687099702.png (748x1068, 318K)

Just because it hasn't ever been put into use by a nation doesn't mean there is not objective reasoning behind it.
i think its intellectually lazy and narcissism of small differences to just call anyone who identifies themselves as eco fascist as just being dogmatic brenton tarrent followers.

That one point that says that the penalty for all crime shall be death is pretty objectionable.

>national socialism
>Fascism

9 i believe in taking away womens rights
12 feel like this is a slippery slope to demonize weaponsmiths
14 i want the tribe to make atleast the minimum amount to have all the essentials and afford having kids. anything more than that i think is liberal entitled modern socialism or stepping into communist policy
15 fuck boomers unless they were veterans.
18 i prefer public beatings and forced labor to benefit the tribe over death
also im just in general more in favor of direct pre requisite democracy of a selected few in the tribe, or a kindof aristocracy as opposed to an elected dictator

Attached: Fascism.jpg (850x400, 91K)

It is not a democracy. Or any type of thing where your opinion matters.
Fascism is when the "hivemind" mentality is so strong that absolute trust is placed in one man for a leader.
The leader is expected to do what needs to be done, and is blameless for he is still just a man.

What it seems like what you want/are-explaining, is a type of feudal control in it's early stages before corruption sets in.
>The "tribe" also being militarized in this case.

Attached: Recent Fascism History Redpill.png (1443x528, 389K)

i have that same hivemind trust that you're saying but just in a select few instead of one man.
and let me be specific that i would want the system to be sort of decentralized and anonymous non electric voting so people cant be targeted and a coup d'etat can't happen.
what im trying to do is turn several minds into one safely because i feel i could trust that even more.

I think the political system you are looking for is something totally different than "fascism".

I guess you could argue it's fascism still, but it sound like you want something similar to;
>Corporatism
>Gang
>Insurgency
>Shadow government

Basically the root of all governments, but instead of confining your ideas to a close knit group of like minded people and keeping it relatively secret, you instead tried to decentralize it so hard you are posting on a chan that is basically a giant honeypot.

two woodworkers will compete against eachother no? I don't understand how fascism is opposed to that

Real fascism has never been tried

it's just i guess a purist standpoint form of collectivism vs a individual representing a collective.
when i want the best for the tribe i literally mean have the chosen best of the tribe decide what that is. Not a hopeful imitation / reflection of that system by a elected individual.

Attached: 1550597905706.jpg (225x224, 5K)

i agree, atleast with the way i logically think fascism is.

Attached: fig-l.png (354x540, 302K)

"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
-fascism

I think you could have that with democracy or most political systems, even in a Monarchy. It doesn't depend on your 'tribe' or your political pov. Fascism is tribal political choice in hard times because we need a leader. But if we're in good times, that is if we're living in an ethnically homogenous society, then democracy or things of that nature ought to properly represent (somewhat) the best of our tribe

i think there should be mutual benefit. we arnt bug men chinks who die in factories to benefit the countries industry.

Attached: 000Take the fascism pill.png (804x1239, 817K)

but democracy lets just anyone vote, i think only certain people who are invested in the county and have roots and who understand all the facets of society should have that power.

Attached: 94a55154b1135c2bea3d7e7839162cff--just-because-wise-words.jpg (736x784, 69K)

Just view how portugal, spain, germany, and italy worked before thier collapse
You dumb fuck

The Nazi Party system was to select extraordinary individuals with personality and talent and put them in charge; this is called Führerprinzip and it worked exceedingly well. Internal challenges to authority would be the way most positions changed hands.

Well, if we look at the cycle of history, systems vary but are still relatively the same.

The stage we are at, we basically have to have some sort of communist/socialist collapse before we can move on to the next stage.
Germany had this, but quickly recovered by trying a "new" form of fascism based around race as the family.

Sadly, fascism, or any system where the "radical right" start to fix things, tends to be condemned by the moderate right.
In fact, nothing to the left of the moderate right is capable of defeating the radical right.
This is why we see in history, a repeating cycle.
>Radical right wing create and build nations/strong-societies
>Moderate right typically goes to war with the radical right after a while, typically wins.
>Centrists slowly erode the Moderate right
>Moderate Leftism starts to grow
>Radical Leftism destroys the society
>Radical Right wing destroys Leftism
>Repeats...

The biggest annoyance here, that everyone keeps trying to fix, is the moderate right refusing to attack the radical left. They never do it. Not once in history has it been done. The moderate right only attacks the radical right, after the radical right literally fixes the problems.

We could go really deep into this, and explain why and how this cycle is a thing, but it's mostly irrelevant at this point. The only important thing to know, is that this exists and no one has been able to stop this cycle (at least that we know of in the past 12k years).

This isn’t accurate. A lie and truth are the closest in this list to being clearly defined, but truth is biased by perspective.

Right, wrong, good, evil, these cannot easily be defined. These are opinions. However you can define these by other criteria. Example: good or evil could be judged against wether an action results in the species increasing or decreasing in population, but this isn’t clear either.

OC

Attached: 000fascism nigger.jpg (959x1088, 505K)

The benefit of fascism to the citizen is living in a prosperous, healthy, poverty and crime free society.

fascism is the product of socialists who realize they were wrong and that marxism is jewish subversive poop

Attached: 1557647761132.jpg (1268x639, 76K)

What a shitty rebuttal. Just say yes, you believe yourself to be made of finer clay. Jesus fucking christ.

but it's not a pride thing at all though it's just there are certain people who can prove they understand and objectively and logically know whats best for the nation based on wisdom and statistics and history and functionalism and doing what needs to be done and self / tribal preservation regardless of peoples feelings etc. you have to admit not everyone has or cares about these things. people who care about those things and can prove it should have power and those who don't should not.

Attached: 000yeah dumb niggers.png (702x401, 10K)

>but it's not a pride thing
I didn't say it was.
>there are certain people who can prove ahead of time how they will act in power but they're not the finer clay Bastiat referred to.
You have the reading comprehension of a nigger and think like a kike.

Also, remember to sage so this gay shit doesn't get bumped anymore

if you want to lazily minimize all those objective qualities and turn it into like a ad hominen comparison argument then that's fine we can do that too i suppose. But sounds to me like you're the one thinking like the kike
>wahhh i'm white too so let me vote goyim also let tannies and infants and whores and communist vote because muh clay argument

Attached: 1553644841306.png (944x736, 88K)

Bastiat: "Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind?"
You: b-but that's a strawman
Also you: ">wahhh i'm white too so let me vote goyim also let tannies and infants and whores and communist vote because muh clay argument"

sauce on pic? Very cool and spare.

you're trying to pigeon hole me into some dumbass supremacy pride logical fallacy but you can't faggot.
its like trying to fault someone who would choose a professional world fighter to defend you instead of choosing an average person. it's just fucking logic and reasoning and applying that knowledge to be most beneficial. Move on. You are fucking wrong faggot boomer.
reverse google search it

Attached: 1556324674820.jpg (2880x1600, 1.02M)

Basically how America is operating right now.
Where the government works closely with the private sector to police it's citizens.