Why does the majority of users here support fascism?

the communists of the time did not just "have a different opinion" they were very violent people who attacked, and attempted violent revolution.
dont be so stupid to deduce an entire political ideology to simply the ideas by removing the actions. especially if you do so only for communists but not for the fascists.

this

There's nothing wrong with hanging communists.

Western civilization wouldn't be in the sorry state it currently is if they'd gotten rid of them when they had the chance.

there is literally no way to avoid this outcome. the only thing that can be changed is who controls it.

Shhh nobody tell him

Attached: fasces.jpg (3200x1800, 1.25M)

>the communists of the time did not just "have a different opinion" they were very violent people who attacked, and attempted violent revolution
Sounds just like what the black shirts and brown shirts did in Italy and Germany huh. Kinda hypocritical to say they are "violent" when they did the same thing

>Believing the kike lie

Attached: Goyim, I....jpg (677x995, 104K)

>hang dissidents
anti-social kikes should be hung, otherwise your society implodes. look at the west falling apart now
>no free speech
wrong. no seditious speech

You need to read some real scholarship. Start with Icebreaker by Suvorov.

most americans are fascist and dont even know it.

Attached: icke110_01a.jpg (1000x692, 193K)

everyone is fascist on the inside, we just tolerate one another because it beats hunting for food all day

>Kinda hypocritical
That's true and I can't defend that, I can only say "to the winner, the spoils".

They won the political struggle and after that you have the job of securing society and ending the violence and terror.

Canadian Satan gets it.

Because the majority of users here are 14.

I’m not a Fascist because Fascism will still suffer from the possibility of corrupt bureaucrats selling the nation out, a great example would be the USSR. I’m personally a semi-constitutional monarchist, though the state should enforce ideas of nationalism and strength. Think of it as a similar system to the Roman Empire, but the leader achieves power through inheritance, and the senate is elected by the people, (though the monarch sets up their privy council)

>t. soon-to-be-dead millennial
this generation does not like yours.

Because they're not yet fully redpilled and therefore, are still on the path towards Christian Monarchy. They'll learn in time, like the rest of us did.

Attached: Alfred the Great.jpg (220x293, 19K)

In communism and Marxism, fascism is defined as the most reactionary anti-communist political system or something. That's why the left has no idea what actual fascism is/was, they only imagine stuff they think is the most anti-communist and say it's fascism.

Why is a literal faggot on that flat?

>semi-constitutional monarchist
Your royal family just watched and laughed in their golden palace as your countries daughters were raped by Pakistani gangs and the streets became no-go zones.

>Hereditary leadership
>Removes the possibility of corrupt leaders selling the nation out
You're a total rube if you think the royal family wouldn't immediately sell Britain down the river if they were handed absolute power. By all rights the lot of them should hang.

Attached: cromwell.jpg (203x248, 6K)

that's why they claimed that fascism is the final stage of capitalism, which is such a weird claim because fascist movements always started out as anti-capitalists (or at least highly critical of capitalism)

Oh for fucks sake, every single time I mention monarchy, someone declares ‘hur dur, Britbong cucked monarchy’

How many times need I say this. The Queen is a figurehead with very limited responsibilities, they have been prepped up to never rule, and thus, never rule.

oh? no the fascists just "had a different opinion"

So? You would just give her more governmental powers? How would that change anything? They are YOUR hereditary royal family, there is no way around it.

Or you want a whole other dynasty?

I don't care what you call it, I'm not going to let you control and oppress me, I will support an administration that will control and oppress you to avoid it.

that needs to change.

Oh, I’m not referring to the current monarchy, god know. I’m merely talking about the value of inheritance. Inheritance keeps a nation stable as it limits the possibilities of other people wanting leadership as there is a far clearer line of succession. Also, a monarch would be more inclined to not screw over his nation because his child will inherit, whilst a politician could do it because their children will inherit nothing, and before you say that there are examples of monarchs selling out their nations, of course they can, but inheritance makes it far less likely they will. It is the most natural form of succession, practiced for thousands of years.

the roman empire was bretty gud
a modern version be much better

I would want an entirely different dynasty, a dynasty that has lead the ethno-nationalist revolution and understands what they have inherited

ok, fair enough. I could see and get behind that.

plus monarchy, like a dictatorship, means there is usually a handful of people to point at when things go wrong rather than a never ending blame shifting.

To be fair, it was the parliament, and therefore their financial backers, responsible for that. The crown was only symbolic be the time those policies were past.

Attached: Longshanks.jpg (246x320, 38K)

>reads Hobbes once
Christian Monarchy is just cuckservatism rebranded

you should educate yourself because you look ignorant as all hell
you dont know what fascism is. youve learned lies from movies and tv
fascism is simply a people banding themselves together and protecting what threatens them.
its reprisented by the fasciio you posted
anything on top of that isnt fascism and has its own name
fascism betters the state, which betters the individual, which betters the state, and so on
thinking that youre more important than the group is selfish and will never lead to anything but decay

Attached: TMNT.jpg (703x703, 35K)

>toppled by a rabbi on a stick

Lurk for more than 2 years faggot.

Attached: Natsoc isn't Fascism.jpg (672x789, 223K)

Glad we can agree with eachother. Sorry for sounding angry in my first reply to you, I just get that response all the time, have a good one krautbro.

True.

Attached: Fascism-Definition-Codreanu.jpg (3840x2160, 2.19M)

yes, no problem.

>have a good one krautbro.
you too.

Yeah, you are pretty much a clueless idiot.

They dont. You're either being memed by alphabet or you're a shill yourself.

it is the basis of liberalism, and freedom is a foundational principle

>t. Retarded 14 year old zoomer faux nazi talking out of his ass with sugarcoated buzzwords
Literally none of what you said was any relevant to the conversation. The national socialist government will be on your ass and will legally fuck you over for any act of jewish degenercy or free think that they deem non accapfable. All your faggot friends will be executed and all your nigger degeneracy entertaintment will be removed, rightfully so. The internet will be massively censored and there will be no creative or free speech outlets besides few government approved ones with heavy monitoring You judaized golem american zoomers will be fucked in a national socialist society and you’re working for something completely out of your interests.

Attached: 4L_fpX6xtKi.jpg (434x767, 62K)

What you're describing is communism.

Funny quote from an Austrian Jewish Marxis psychanalistt. Basically, the original "have sex". Fuck leftists.

Attached: Inceldom.jpg (3840x2160, 2.46M)

>citation: (that's what I think)

>but inheritance makes it far less likely they will.
Only every monarchy to ever exist did exactly that, some held out for longer than others but inevitably power wound up in the hands of a workshy idiot that would rather outsource their responsibility to bureaucrats than actually put up with the effort of ruling.

Even look at the monarchies that exist today, even the most socially conservative, absolutist ones on the planet. They're either constitution-cucked European style "monarchies" like our own, or third world shitholes that let foreign investors completely plunder their natural resources so that the royal houses get fat while their people remain ignorant sandnigs.

If the government is to be more authoritarian it must also be more meritocratic, and there's nothing less meritocratic than hereditary rule. This is why dictatorship is superior in all cases to monarchy. It'd be better if each dictator appointed his own successor personally than if we followed arbitrary feudal bullshit like his firstborn son inheriting and we just had to hope he actually gave a shit.

he's not wrong.
why do you think the left attacks incels so much?
the truth is that when you have enough young men who can't find a wife, you either get a revolution, or wars of conquest.

Sounds like the UK

Unironically quite true. I don’t think anyone truly wants totalitarianism. The people need representation. I am personally an authoritarian as I believe in a strong ethnic monarch supported by a parliament.

Anyone over 35 has clearly seen a good faith attempt at multiculturalism yield a horribly dysfunctional society. We anticipated all of this but politely kept quiet and went along. Some of you may be satisfied with it, and why wouldn't you be? You're being spoiled by the largesse of your betters who've patiently waited for wanting merit to catch up with over-promotion. Of course you like it, but the men who know there's a better wold just onbe solid bitch-slap away aren't negotiating anymore. We want structure, hierarchy, predictability, safety, family, community. We don't care about capeshit and gadgets and NBA and dragondildos and free weed. We just want the phone to stay connected when we make a call, we want our food to not be contaminated by niggers, we want our kids to be able to return to the library without sodomites looming. This things seem so reasonable but hey've proven out of reach without the remedies of fascism. Even if it's an utter failure, at least the niggers, kikes and faggots get what's coming to them, right? What's not to like?

You literally have no arguments to back yourself up. Go and head how society was in Germany back when hitler was in power. It would be nothing like an all white america, you faggots would perish.

Attached: 4L_9HtPS1h1.jpg (334x499, 28K)

Because the current systems invite reactionary response, and fascism has been established as 3rd position, and the meme brigade is too busy tapping to traps to come up with a fourth.

>your poison will be illegal goy

>there is free speech, elections, individualism in fasicsm
>fascism is not a totalitarian ideology

Both national socialism and communism are completely totalitarian retard

if you look at what fascism is, as in read Mussolini's conception of it, you literally see Trump in his words

True.

This is why ((they)) fear the no-fap crowd.

Attached: ((its afraid)).jpg (1024x874, 119K)

Fact: in Nazi Germany all drugs were legal and the only drugs they really tried to discourage were alcohol and tobacco.

Smoke weed everyday. Heil Hitler.

Sounds like an antifa Utopia.

>198 style totalitarianism
>DOWN WITH EMPEROR SEVERUS

Attached: Spartacus_blood_and_sand_2010_685x385_cast_johnH.jpg (685x385, 98K)

Is that word supposed to scare or shame? Why wouldn't I want a Big Brother who kills subversives with extreme prejudice? We're already in 1984. I'm just trying to lean in, nigga.

But it's still pretty easy to label anyone who disagrees with the state as a communist

This guy knows whats up.

Attached: Stop watching porn.jpg (1280x762, 164K)

A. you state that my answer as to why I support fascism as (buzzwords), and not being relevant to a thread about why I support fascism.
B. you offer a rebuttle which consists of nothing but conjecture as to what would happen under some sort of modern american fascism as fact. (it isn't it's your own personal opinion)
C. you then resort to Germany as an example of fascism instead of say, I don't know actual Italian fascism, I'm assuming because you don't know anything about that, not enough Hollywood movies or slanted opinions for you to repeat.

of course the leftist retard ignored this fact

Both fascism and natsoc had plenty of legal internal critics and dissidents. Subversives - not so much.

Can't go wrong being fascist

Totalitarianism is retarded. That's all I'll say.

well then it depends on how you define the state.

this
Similar thing happened in Eastern Europe when the germans were advancing, They pretty much labelled the jews living there as "partisans" and killed them en masse.

but jews were literal partisans though

Because they're retards who are agry the thot theyhad a crush on is burning coal.

My grandparents actually lived under Mussolini, the OG facsit. It sucked. America isn't perfect, but the founders had it right.

Fascism is shit. The only path to glory is through freedom. Anarcho capitalism with strong ethnic values is the answer.

Attached: 1550069041631m.jpg (494x1024, 66K)

Because they need to act like subservient cucks under a supreme ruler while calling others cucks at the same time.

yeah but the problem is nowadays most young men without wives are fat

America could do without the niggers, though. That's why an ethnocentric constitutional republic is probably the best form of government. Which is what America was supposed to be from the beginning.

Attached: 1504925816262.png (1314x752, 641K)

Ah, the meritocracy of dictatorship. An interesting premise, but one that barely holds. I will tell you this, the people who come closest to power, are probably the most retched people of the nation. Politicians are not noble people. So, say if you are a dictator of your glorious fatherland, you have to pick a successor. Because there isn’t a clear law on succession (as there is in Primogeniture inheritance) your party members plot and murder each other in order to get your beautiful position. In a dictatorship, no inheritance causes massive intrigue. Notice that the Byzantine Empire outlasted both the Roman Empire and the Republic, because it was far more stabile. During the Middle Ages when the monarch was a child and a regent was issued, chaos gripped the nation as they waited for the monarch to become old enough, think of this stability, but for a constant period of your Empire. No inheritance leads to far less stability. The most successful Empires pick their leaders via inheritance. Look at what happened with the Soviet Union, it came to a point where everyone was corrupt because loyalty decreased every decade and intrigue became common place, what makes you think your fatherland will not suffer the same?

>Anarcho capitalism with strong ethnic values is the answer.
Then you get degenerates selling their bath water. Also, who is going to enforce those strong ethnic values without a state?

AnCap does not believe that the political exists, or that it should exist. It is the most extreme form of liberalism. Without the political, what is the point of life?

>argues fascism is bad because of the suppression of free speech
>doesn’t mention the context of the laws on Italy restricting speech
>lives in a country where his rights have been restricted to such a level that he can’t say mean things about brown people without being arrested
You already live in 1984, and it was “democratically” put in place.

>Anarcho capitalism with strong ethnic values

Attached: hankhulldurface.png (1000x766, 66K)

spoiler: nobody.
the premise is simple. if everybody just acted properly things would be good, and nobody should enforce it but the people themselves on themselves. it's like a trivial math solution. it answers the question but it's useless, we know if everybody behaved themselves things would be good but if it was that simple it would already be happening.

your entire claim is: "it wasn't a free society".
That's true, that's not a secret nor controversial.

But freedom isn't the only metric you should look at: It was an orderly society, a proud society, a united society and most of all a society of purpose.

The standard of living also was a huge factor: People had their first car, radio or vacation because of the Nazi policies. But we ignore standard of living for now, because it's not an issue in 21st century Western societies.

Until the war, the Nazis were a political regime as popular as never seen in any dictatorship. Hitler never feared assassination and walked around openly. The Reichs chancellery + Hitler's flat had 1 guard who mainly worked as a telephone operator and porter.

>if everybody just acted properly things would be good
why are people not acting properly now?

Because it's necessary to un-jew our nations.

Fascism:
>state controlled capitalism
According to its creator, Mussolini.
You don't know what you're talking about and none if your points are inherent to fascism.

from there arises the strange circular logic of it, the government holds us back, but somehow without a government people woul djust behave themselves, it literally is unable to answer the basic question, why do we have government in the first place? why do we get leaders, and why do humans use force for enforcing rules so predictably. to assume so many groups of people generate a hierarchy is a question or aspect irrelevant to the operation of the group is really naive and foolish.

>Get hanged for wrong think or for being a dissident
Happens in (((democracy)))
>Total suppression of free speech at gun point
Happens in (((democracy)))
>Be at the mercy of the state and military
Happens in (((democracy)))
>No elections to voice concern
Elections are rigged in (((democracy)))
>1984 style totalitarianism with the state interfereing with every aspect of the peoples' lives
Happens in (((democracy)))
>Forced to act according to the collective interest rather than minding about your own business
Happens in (((democracy)))
>Get conscripted
Happens in (((democracy)))