NationStates Jolt Archive

Hello Everyone!

There is a lot of argument between Capitalists and Communists here.
Pro-Capitalists defend the right to earn a profit and build a powerful economy that boosts a nation living standard and provides jobs and employment.
Pro-Socialists/communists fight for workers rights,better treatment for the working class, and the need to more evenly distribute wealth among the people.

Con- Capitalists are greedy and a lot of the time serve their own interest. They exploit people by hiring cheap labout from abroad and giving them ridiculous wages etc...
con- Commuists revolutions are extremely violent and innocent people get killed, against religious rights and in Communist countries people all live in a council flat in poor conditions.

Has anyone considered Corporatism as an option. Do you think that Fascism could serve as a third way between Capitalism and Communist.
The purpose of Corporatism is so Capitalism serves the state and not the other way around-like it is now. Corporatism works so that wages are distributed more evenly and the capitalists dont make quite as much as before but still earn enough so that they cant complain?

What do you think?

Fascism gives lots of power to the state. The state is usually pretty crap at making good use of the power it already, so I see no reason to give it more.

Yeah...I'm thinking no. Corporatism and fascism are probably the two worst forms of government. Apparently, since you want to be a sheep, I won't be able to convince you. Perhaps if you hit your head on a piece of wood enough and come back and post, you might start speaking some reason.

Corporatism really is communism, with the techinical fiction of private ownership.

It's all very well saying your society respects private property, but if you don't grant the rights in fee-simple, and everything you own is subject to the control of the government, you are pretty much a communist state - despite the bits of paper to the contrary.

true Fascism as it was originally laid out by Mussolini (whether he had any intention of following it is a different matter) is nowhere near as bad as what it turned into

Hello Everyone!

There is a lot of argument between Capitalists and Communists here.
Pro-Capitalists defend the right to earn a profit and build a powerful economy that boosts a nation living standard and provides jobs and employment.
Pro-Socialists/communists fight for workers rights,better treatment for the working class, and the need to more evenly distribute wealth among the people.

Con- Capitalists are greedy and a lot of the time serve their own interest. They exploit people by hiring cheap labout from abroad and giving them ridiculous wages etc...
con- Commuists revolutions are extremely violent and innocent people get killed, against religious rights and in Communist countries people all live in a council flat in poor conditions.

Has anyone considered Corporatism as an option. Do you think that Fascism could serve as a third way between Capitalism and Communist.
The purpose of Corporatism is so Capitalism serves the state and not the other way around-like it is now. Corporatism works so that wages are distributed more evenly and the capitalists dont make quite as much as before but still earn enough so that they cant complain?

What do you think?

If there is ever a fascist state formed in the US, I won't have to worry about it ... I will have died fighting it. :)

Fascism involves left-wing-ish economics (i.e. they don't work too well) with right-wing social policies (i.e. restrictive of freedom). It is the opposite of what I would go for.

The idea of making capitalism serve the state is interesting but it isn't quite how I would put the best way of doing things. I would say that the state should ensure that capitalism best serves the people. In practice this means not meddling with it too much, only to alleviate the harsher consequences of it. This is more or less what most Western democracies do now anyway, and I don't see many better ways in broad terms, though you can always tweak.

Dictatorship is never a way out; but neither is a total capitalistic anarchy. It's always a matter of balance. Alas, I think Churchill said: "Democracy isn't the ultimate form of government, but the best realized one."

If there is ever a fascist state formed in the US, I won't have to worry about it ... I will have died fighting it. :)
Seconded.

true Fascism as it was originally laid out by Mussolini (whether he had any intention of following it is a different matter) is nowhere near as bad as what it turned into

Actually, Mussolini developed the concept of fascism from the Aesop fable in which a father has one stick which breaks easily, but by binding sticks into a bundle (fascisti) they become one unbreakable unit. Fascism has, as its one inherent flaw, the same flaw that afflicts communism. By making the individual secondary to the state, the systems erode individuals and reduces them to component parts of either a fascist state or proletarian "masses" and ultimately leads to a consolidation of power at the expense of liberty. Only Republican Democracy has managed to maintain the balance between individual liberty and the neccessity of the state. One could make the argument that Democratic Socialism also has acheived this, but I would not be one of those people.

Corporate fasism anyone? Hmm.... thats a tough one , not. Facism is institutionalized corruption. It is a post-modern system of government where what you get in life is based on your ability to manipulate the political system. Merit matters someswhat but bribery matters more. If rule by those of virtue is ideal in a government any kind of facism is the contrary to that ideal. I dont know much about Il Duce's theories about government but the practices of the facist state are so repugnant to me that a version of them based on the large corporations we have now is something that would gladly die to oppose.

Actually, Mussolini developed the concept of fascism from the Aesop fable in which a father has one stick which breaks easily, but by binding sticks into a bundle (fascisti) they become one unbreakable unit.

like i say, his original intention was alot better than how it turned out

*sigh*

Apparently, many of you are horribly ignorant of politics (but, hey, don't let that stop you from debating!): Corporatirsm has nothing to do with Corporations. Nothing. At all.

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/corporatism - the first meaning is the one being discussed here.

Also, if you are going to argue Fascism, why on earth would you go about it froma POPULIST standpoint? Fascism (which is NOT the same thing as Nazism) is, by it's nature, elitist.

Facism an alternative? I don't think so!! :sniper:

If there is ever a fascist state formed in the US, I won't have to worry about it ... I will have died fighting it. :)

Same, and I'm not even American.

Same, and I'm not even American.
Cool, so at the moment we have a three-person militia!
Eutrusca, you, and I.
Go us!

The term 'Fascism' today just means jingoism to most people and nothing more. So when, without a second thought, people put it off and say 'nuke all the Fascists!' they're the ones actually being closed minded jingoistic elitists. funny.

Fascism was originally set out to be a neo-Hegelian social dialectical alternative to the Communist egalitarian dialectic. Corporativism, isn't much at all what a Corporate state would mean as the word has come to mean today; large business capitalism. It meant incorporating private interests officially to the public government system, the state. Representative private-public relation of ownership, private ownership for the interest of public benefit & vice versa. It tried to blur the line between public & private, whereas Communism wanted everything public and laissez faire systems wanted everything private. Fascism saw itself as a intertwined mutual/reciprocal symbiont system where the more public institution there were recognized the more private and contract laws backed it up and the larger the state was. It was meant to become a system of government that was to multiply the private interest which in turn multiplied the public interest ad infinum through a "totalitarian" state, or a state that involved every private interest as a public endeavor.

It became, in the end, a synonym for "bigoted nationalistic racist" government.

Nothing at all like what visionaries such as Giovanni Gentile saw, who were basically disgusted with blind nationalism for the sake of nationalism.

The term 'Fascism' today just means jingoism to most people and nothing more. So when, without a second thought, people put it off and say 'nuke all the Fascists!' they're the ones actually being closed minded jingoistic elitists. funny.

Fascism was originally set out to be a neo-Hegelian social dialectical alternative to the Communist egalitarian dialectic. Corporativism, isn't much at all what a Corporate state would mean as the word has come to mean today; large business capitalism. It meant incorporating private interests officially to the public government system, the state. Representative private-public relation of ownership, private ownership for the interest of public benefit & vice versa. It tried to blur the line between public & private, whereas Communism wanted everything public and laissez faire systems wanted everything private. Fascism saw itself as a intertwined mutual/reciprocal symbiont system where the more public institution there were recognized the more private and contract laws backed it up and the larger the state was. It was meant to become a system of government that was to multiply the private interest which in turn multiplied the public interest ad infinum through a "totalitarian" state, or a state that involved every private interest as a public endeavor.

It became, in the end, a synonym for "bigoted nationalistic racist" government.

Nothing at all like what visionaries such as Giovanni Gentile saw, who were basically disgusted with blind nationalism for the sake of nationalism. Hi,

Thats a good description. I dont why people are so afraid of Fascism- when only you and me on this thread seem to know what it is.
This may be shocking to some people but life in a fascist state really isnt that bad. People who live in Mussolini's Fascist Italy were happy and they enjoyed every day life. They didnt live in perpetual fear like they did in Stalins Russia or Maoist China.

If there is ever a fascist state formed in the US, I won't have to worry about it ... I will have died fighting it. :)

What are you waiting for then? Grab your gun, and lock and load because it's happened.

People who live in Mussolini's Fascist Italy were happy and they enjoyed every day life.

If they were not Jewish, trade unionists, communists, socialists, intellectuals or those who did not generally just kept their nose to the ground in grovelling appaissal of Mussolini.

In which case they were either imprisoned or handed over to Nazi Germany.

People who live in Mussolini's Fascist Italy were happy and they enjoyed every day life. They didnt live in perpetual fear like they did in Stalins Russia or Maoist China.


Fascism - slightly better than Stalinism.

Forgive me if I'm not instantly sold on the idea.

Same, and I'm not even American.

Cool, so at the moment we have a three-person militia!
Eutrusca, you, and I.
Go us!

Count me in on the broadbased anti-fascist militia should the need ever arise. As far as I'm concerned, fascism is an alternative to anything good and desirable.

Hi,

Thats a good description. I dont why people are so afraid of Fascism- when only you and me on this thread seem to know what it is.
This may be shocking to some people but life in a fascist state really isnt that bad. People who live in Mussolini's Fascist Italy were happy and they enjoyed every day life. They didnt live in perpetual fear like they did in Stalins Russia or Maoist China.

You are making assumptions. I have reasonably clear ideas of what constitutes fascist politics. Fascists believe that might is right and that difference is wrong which is a good enough reason to be against them. Furthermore, plenty of people in mussolini's italy did live in fear of their lives.

For a lot of the time a lot of the people in maoist china lived much better than they had lived in the preceeding 50 years, and in much greater personal security, but that is by the by. The fact that stalin and mao and their respective political systems butchered hundreds of thousands and made life very bad indeed for tens of millions doesn't make fascism seem any more attractive. The two things aren't relevant to each other.

Send a gang of uniformed thugs round to my house to see if I'm loyal to their new state and see what happens.

Hi,

Thats a good description. I dont why people are so afraid of Fascism- when only you and me on this thread seem to know what it is.
This may be shocking to some people but life in a fascist state really isnt that bad. People who live in Mussolini's Fascist Italy were happy and they enjoyed every day life. They didnt live in perpetual fear like they did in Stalins Russia or Maoist China.


Absolute bullshit. My country was a fascist state until 30 years ago, so many people that are still living today, including my parents, lived under such regime.

And it was scary as hell. My granfather was arrested because he fought for the simple demand of miners to be given better masks. One of my uncles was hanged (literally) by the secret police, because he was a communist.

There isnt one good thing that I can say about the fascist pigs that ruled us over. Not one. So don't come and even defend it with such a stupidity as "They didnt live in perpetual fear like they did in Stalins Russia or Maoist China", has if that could provide any excuse.

Absolute bullshit. My country was a fascist state until 30 years ago, so many people that are still living today, including my parents, lived under such regime.

And it was scary as hell. My granfather was arrested because he fought for the simple demand of miners to be given better masks. One of my uncles was hanged (literally) by the secret police, because he was a communist.

There isnt one good thing that I can say about the fascist pigs that ruled us over. Not one. So don't come and even defend it with such a stupidity as "They didnt live in perpetual fear like they did in Stalins Russia or Maoist China", has if that could provide any excuse.Im guessing your family's from Spain? Correct me if im wrong.

If your refering to the Franco era er well... Franco wasnt a Fascist. He was just a military dictator. Being a Military Dictator doesnt make you a Fascist. Jose Antonio Primo de Riviera was a Fascist and the man who should have ruled Spain.

But As I said an whether you agree or not life in Communist nations is a lot worse.

If they were not Jewish, trade unionists, communists, socialists, intellectuals or those who did not generally just kept their nose to the ground in grovelling appaissal of Mussolini.

In which case they were either imprisoned or handed over to Nazi Germany.Not true, in there were many high-ranking Jews in Fascist Italy. The Chief Rabbi or Rome was a member of the Fascist Party.
They worked with Compromising with the Trade Unionists. Socialists and Communists may have been jailed but wernt killed. Nothing at all happened to intellectuals unless they were openly promoting Communist agenda.

You're looking at it as if it's black and white. It's not. How about socialism? Personally, I think the economy should be very, very tighly regulated. "The freer the market, the freer the people" is bullcrap. Capitalism will be the downfall of humanity.

But As I said an whether you agree or not life in Communist nations is a lot worse.

What Communist nations have ever been formed ?
Russia has never been communist and neither is China.
Stalinism and Maoism is NOT Comminism. And the sooner people understand this the better.

"The freer the market, the freer the people" is bullcrap. Capitalism will be the downfall of humanity. - not a more honest work spoken

The basis of Fascism is strong nationalism combined with a sense of national superiority. They promise to progress to a glorious future or an idealized past.

Quite frankly, I would have rather lived in Communist USSR or China than in a Fascist state. But that could be just because I hate corporations/capitalism. Do I live the civil liberties those places gave? Absolutely not. But at least I'd have food.

Wait a minute . . . Who is this?

Is this the same guy who came in here a month back, advertising his new "Fascism Forum"?

I went to that forum, you know, to talk some fascism with some hot fascist chickies and I got blamminated in 12 hours flat.

So if that's what fascism is all about, count me out. That's not a viable alternative.

Stalinism and Maoism is NOT Comminism. And the sooner people understand this the better. Absolutely not. :) If they were Communist, they'd still be around today.
Well, China is...
But that's because they aren't in direct competition with the US. Besides, China is freeing it's market little by little. (Morons.)

You're looking at it as if it's black and white. It's not. How about socialism? Personally, I think the economy should be very, very tighly regulated. "The freer the market, the freer the people" is bullcrap. Capitalism will be the downfall of humanity.Im not looking at this black and white thats the point I was making about the pros and cons of both Socialism/Communism and Capitalism.
Capitalism provides jobs and enhances consumer choice and builds a nation economy.
Socialism fights for the working-class rights and a more evenly distribution of wages.
Both these ideas or ideologies are fine in themselves but they both have their weakpoints.
Fascist Corporativism provides the best of both worlds and controls capitalism through the Corporate State each company has to be a member of a specific Corporation in order to manage a companies trading and employment policies as well as tax big business more and re-distribute these funds back into the State.

I may start another thread discussing Corporativism and the Corporate State soon and go into these points in more depth.

Absolutely not. :) If they were Communist, they'd still be around today.
Well, China is...
But that's because they aren't in direct competition with the US. Besides, China is freeing it's market little by little. (Morons.)By competing with the USA they are turning themselves into a stronger nation and with adopting capitalism they are giving the citizens more freedom of choice than they had before.

China's communist past has a dreadful human rights record. Eventually China along with Russia may become future Fascist States.

What Communist nations have ever been formed ?
Russia has never been communist and neither is China.
Stalinism and Maoism is NOT Comminism. And the sooner people understand this the better.

- not a more honest work spokenOk so your basically saying that true Communism has never been implemented anywhere???? But the problem is Communist have had more than 70 years to perfect this supposed great ideology that promises to fix the whole world problem.
Maybe your right and Communism has never been properly implememented like Marx invisioned. But if so do you not think over 70 years of trial and constant error that just maybe it doesnt work?

Fascism gives lots of power to the state. The state is usually pretty crap at making good use of the power it already, so I see no reason to give it more.
sounds liek the same problems as communism

The basis of Fascism is strong nationalism combined with a sense of national superiority. They promise to progress to a glorious future or an idealized past.

Quite frankly, I would have rather lived in Communist USSR or China than in a Fascist state. But that could be just because I hate corporations/capitalism. Do I live the civil liberties those places gave? Absolutely not. But at least I'd have food.Why? Would you prefer to live in a place where you have to live in a council flat? A country like the USSR where you had to wait in line for hours to get some toilet paper?

Each to our own I suppose

Ok so your basically saying that true Communism has never been implemented anywhere???? But the problem is Communist have had more than 70 years to perfect this supposed great ideology that promises to fix the whole world problem.
Maybe your right and Communism has never been properly implememented like Marx invisioned. But if so do you not think over 70 years of trial and constant error that just maybe it doesnt work?
Of course that is what they are saying, it is easier than admitting they are wrong. People like you and I can see just how asinine the point is. it is comparable to saying that the Spanish Inquisition were not real Catholics...

I tell you what, here's a radical Idea. Why don't you get rid of all these systems!!!

Create a new one!!!

Some key fundamental policies.

1. 100% Tax for corporations, no company can make money out of people.
2. The right to live life with out the fear of persecution &/or attack.
3. Freedom to follow what ever religion you want as long as it doesn't contravene policy 2.
4. No more walls or fences, no immigration laws.
5. The right to Shelter, Food, Education & travel as long as it doesn't contravene policy 2.
6. Do away with the right to vote for 100 years (until the brain washing from the media can be....er.....washed!!) Because of the media you can't be trusted to vote for what is humanly right :eek:
7. Everything in life is legal, (drugs in particular) providing it doesn't contravene policy 2.
8. It will be illegal NOT to follow kyoto and in fact this should be taken a step further BAN fossil fuels.
9. Ban advertising for anything that can cause harm (Drugs, Fast Food, Britney Spears).

Just a few from my manifesto for the future, who's with me??? :fluffle:

Just a thought!!