NationStates Jolt Archive

I’ve always been inclined to think of it as a very right-wing reactionary ideology. But if you look at the history of it, Mussolini described it as the ‘Third Way’. Fascism was very anti-communist, while also being very anti-capitalist (as in, anti-’laissez faire’). Many of the economic reforms that the fascist nations utilized were more or less adopted by the democratic nations that won the second world war; FDR’s ‘New Deal’, while it may seem ‘socialist’ to some, was basically a macro-economic influence that wasn’t laissez-faire, but wasn’t communism either.

Obviously, the traditional right wing vs. left wing political scale doesn’t fit the bill perfectly, as one could argue that fascism was very right wing socially, and very ‘authoritarian’. However, economically, it was centrist in many ways. (With some later exceptions, such as losing the right to strike, etc.)

I believe the main difference between the fascism of the 30’s and 40’s, and our modern liberal democracies, is the degree of authoritarianism. All it really takes is a little tightening of state control, and compromise between elected officials and big business. Not a very big stretch of the imagination…

Thoughts?

Yeah, you've pointed out one of the various counterexamples to the left/right wing model of politics. Such oversimplifications just encourage people to forsake logic to take one side and fight the other.

Question: Was Fascism "Extreme Centrism"?

Answer: No.

Next question?

Centrism can be extreme? But doesn't that defeat the purpose of being a centrist if you're extreme? Especially since centrism is about moderation...?

Once again showing the failings of trying to force the multidimensional human political experience into an artificial 2-sided labeling system. It's fine, if you want to listen to talk radio. For dealing with real people in the real world, not so fine.

economically moderate.

socially conservative.



sorry, but "complete submission to the will of the state" and the extreme racist philosophy necessary for genocide do not a moderate position make.

I’ve always been inclined to think of it as a very right-wing reactionary ideology. But if you look at the history of it, Mussolini described it as the ‘Third Way’. Fascism was very anti-communist, while also being very anti-capitalist (as in, anti-’laissez faire’). Many of the economic reforms that the fascist nations utilized were more or less adopted by the democratic nations that won the second world war; FDR’s ‘New Deal’, while it may seem ‘socialist’ to some, was basically a macro-economic influence that wasn’t laissez-faire, but wasn’t communism either.


Thoughts?

Mussolini's description of it doesn't seem to me as counting towards legitimate. The word nazi originated from national socialism, but I fail to see how they were socialists. They (and other fascists) were (and are) mostly very inconsistent in denomination.

Plus, in the form it took on when Hitler seized power, it wasn't a democratic scope anymore (if it ever was).

Centrism can be extreme? But doesn't that defeat the purpose of being a centrist if you're extreme? Especially since centrism is about moderation...?The problem with some centrists is that they don't take moderation in moderation:p

I think that a key difference between Fascism and Communism is the latter's greater tendency towards nationalization of the economy. Both advocate a centrally planned market along with a good degree of economic protectionism where the state deems necessary. To this degree, we can say that Fascist and Communist states both 'nationalize' the economy. But where Communist states (in theory) do so in order to bridge rich-poor gaps and share out resources, fascist states take hold of the market...really just to make it stronger, often by keeping foreigners out of it. This is why fascism has been so appealing to working/middle classes in the past.
Germany's Nazi party actually had a good deal of lefties in its ranks before the night of long knives; these guys were a bunch of bigoted nationalists all the same but they had been most critical of unfetterred markets in their careers.
Fascism's explicit tendencies towards state worship are also telling...China and the USSR gives us good case studies of personality cultism but I don't think that any communist regime was clearer than Mussolini when he said that everything meaningful to one's life comes from the state.

The term state corporatism comes to mind. I think that's the term anyway. Fascism was an odd ideology. Dead set against capitalism because that meant less government control, and dead set against communists because they weren't fascist.

Like the whole building of the autobahns and volkswagon. The germans seem to get such terrible guilt complexes over the Nazis, yet they never changed the name of VW - an eternal reminder of the Nazis as it were.

Hmm... I guess you could say China is fairly facsist in a sense.
...
I hope to god we have no chinese posters because I really don't want to have to defend that point.

It's like, who do the Judean Peoples' Front hate more than the Romans? The Peoples' front of Judea. Essentially the same, only vaguely different, in that they were constituted of different people.

I don't have a lot of time, since I'm at work, but I wanted to mention something quick. I don't particularly believe that fascism was extreme centrism, the idea entered my head when I was looking up wiki's take on fascism. There's an entry in there that mentioned this line of thinking (don't have time to dig it out right now.)

economically moderate.

socially conservative.



sorry, but "complete submission to the will of the state" and the extreme racist philosophy necessary for genocide do not a moderate position make.

One could argue that every state asks for complete submission. You can't choose to ignore laws for instance, not without punishment. And as for extreme racist philosophy, that's Nazism, not Fascism. Also, I used the word 'centrist', not 'moderate'. They do not necessarily mean the same thing.

Left and Right in modern common usage aren't directly opposed.

Traditionally far-right meant extreme nationalism, because communism was originally (and in most varieties still is) very internationalist it was thus 'far-left'.

Fascism is anti-capitalist, strongly nationalist and evolved out of nationalist-syndicalist schools of thought. Extreme centerist? Maybe, maybe not, but it is designed to gain support from everyone afraid of socialist/communist/anarchist ideals during a period when capitalism is seen to be failing. Anti-capitalist? Anti-communist? Why not be a fascist?

No. You're stuck in a silly and meaningless left/right dichotomy. Get out of it.

Fascism allows different types of ecenomic administration, you don't have to have a centrist style economy to be fascist, you can even have a socialist economy.

Okay, so I'm back from work, and here's the portion from wiki that got me thinking about it;

Most scholars see fascism as on the political right or allied with right-wing movements.[4] In addition, some scholars see fascism as the radicalization of the center or as a populist revolt of the middle classes.[5][6][7][8] Fascist movements sometimes claim they represent a "Third Way between left and right, between Marxian socialism and capitalism."[9]

No. You're stuck in a silly and meaningless left/right dichotomy. Get out of it.

Did you read everything I posted, or just the title? I'm pretty sure I mentioned that the classic left vs. right argument can't encompass everything on the political spectrum.

sorry, but "complete submission to the will of the state" and the extreme racist philosophy necessary for genocide do not a moderate position make.

they might. moderates are notoriously dependent on the positions of others to define their views.

I don't have a lot of time, since I'm at work, but I wanted to mention something quick. I don't particularly believe that fascism was extreme centrism, the idea entered my head when I was looking up wiki's take on fascism. There's an entry in there that mentioned this line of thinking (don't have time to dig it out right now.)



One could argue that every state asks for complete submission. You can't choose to ignore laws for instance, not without punishment.

I don't know which country you live in, but I have never had any problem with obeying the laws of the state while not slavishly obeying every single policy, opinion, and desire expressed by anyone in the administration or the legislature. The only way that every state asks for complete submission is if it eliminates freedom of speech and prohibits any opinion or mindset except for the one that the state lays down, which quite a few governments have failed to do in recent recollection.

And as for extreme racist philosophy, that's Nazism, not Fascism.

Fascism often includes a degree of strong nationalism ("My country is the best one in the world!") which can unfortunately all too easily lead to, "Everyone else in the world must do as I do or die!!!"

I don't know which country you live in, but I have never had any problem with obeying the laws of the state while not slavishly obeying every single policy, opinion, and desire expressed by anyone in the administration or the legislature. The only way that every state asks for complete submission is if it eliminates freedom of speech and prohibits any opinion or mindset except for the one that the state lays down, which quite a few governments have failed to do in recent recollection.



Fascism often includes a degree of strong nationalism ("My country is the best one in the world!") which can unfortunately all too easily lead to, "Everyone else in the world must do as I do or die!!!"

I'm not saying that every state asks for 'complete submission', in the sense that fascism did. But don't kid yourself if you think you can do something other than what the state desires. That the state includes protections for individuals, does not preclude that you aren't still bound to the law of the state.

And fascism still isn't about xenophobia and racialism - that's a nazi twist to it. As for nationalism, every political stripe is capable of it.

Consider, during the second World War, many so-called 'free' countries forced young men into conflict through conscription, including shooting conscripts who fled the battlefield. Japanese were sent to concentration camps in far off locales just because they were japanese. Propaganda was everywhere, and dieing for your country was routine. Many people, perhaps most, still think of their country 'as the best in the world'. That is not an inherently fascist trait.

Thoughts?

I'm thinking that maybe you're really just a puppet of Forrest Lee Horn...

I'm thinking that maybe you're really just a puppet of Forrest Lee Horn...

Damn, foiled again. And I would have got away with it, if it weren't for you damn kids!!

sorry, but "complete submission to the will of the state" and the extreme racist philosophy necessary for genocide do not a moderate position make.
they might. moderates are notoriously dependent on the positions of others to define their views..
radical view #1: All humans are weak and inferior! We must all submit to our states!
radical view #2: No! Humans are not weak and inferior! Smash all states!

The Centrist Compromise: Well, most humans are weak and inferior. And there is but one particular state that we should submit to.

:p

.
radical view #1: All humans are weak and inferior! We must all submit to our states!
radical view #2: No! Humans are not weak and inferior! Smash all states!

The Centrist Compromise: Well, most humans are weak and inferior. And there is but one particular state that we should submit to.

:p

hooray, its the golden mean!

The best of all possible worlds;)

I would describe traditional European fascism as centre-left economically.

But it was extremely authoritarian (I count the right to strike as a social issue, not an economic one).

Center left economically? It's not that simple on the economics end either. Either that or giving government mandated monopolies to favored corporations and castrating labor unions is what passes for "Center Left" in Europe these days. The fact that you count the right to strike as a 'social issue' is nice. But it is a real economic issue for the working class.