NationStates Jolt Archive

You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist. I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics. At the time I became a fascist the place I lived was a morally relatavistic hell hole filed with sociopaths and liberals causing more and more damage to what was left of the good side of the neighborhood. I eventually made the conjecture that the only way to stop all this was through totalitarianism, by having law enforcement breathing down everyone's neck to make sure no one made anymore damage, and by having any officer who reported a corrupt officer paid generously and anyone who made a false report fired. Stopping the immorality going on seemed like the most moral thing to do so I became a hardcore devout fascsist and many of my friends became fascsists too, in fact one of my best friends is the one who got me to become fascist in the first place. I belevie what I beleive because I think it's the cure for the social diseases plaguing humanity, I see it as sort of a medicine for corrupt areas. So in conclusion places that aren't corrupt can be democracies but places infested with corruption all need a good dose of fascism.

In my opinion fascism is only justifiable in places like LA, New Orleans or other screwed up places where morality is long dead and the pople are out of control oppressing each other without end, at least fascism would give them morality, law, order and best of all safety. My ideal fascism is a benevolent dictatorship where a wise and altruistic man leads the land and gives his people the best he has to offer, keeping them healthy and well protected, even from themselves as a father would his children.

When do you think it's justifiable?

You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist.

Don't be daft. You're not notable enough to be on any of my lists, let alone the bastard one.

I have a list?? Last I checked, the only list I had was the one of what to do next, and that is... SQUAT!

When do you think it's justifiable?

Never.

This, yet again, has been another episode of brief answers to stupid questions.

Never.

This, yet again, has been another episode of brief answers to stupid questions.

I love this show! It's the best show on NSG! *donates money to "Brief Answers to Stupid Questions."* :D

I have a list??

What is this list everyone is talking about...we can ignore people?
Just like Nixon?

As for Fascism...never

In my opinion fascism is only justifiable in places like LA, New Orleans or other screwed up places where morality is long dead and the pople are out of control oppressing each other without end, at least fascism would give them morality, law, order and best of all safety. My ideal fascism is a benevolent dictatorship where a wise and altruistic man leads the land and gives his people the best he has to offer, keeping them healthy and well protected, even from themselves as a father would his children.

Quick question: what happens when your Übermensch becomes corrupt, destroys society, and you have no way of removing him from power?

I have a list?? Last I checked, the only list I had was the one of what to do next, and that is... SQUAT!
I think he’s implying we all have a collective list.

Stored in Forum 7, obviously. Access granted only to sociopaths and liberals.

Anyways SL, I thought you shot yourself for being dumb?

Quick question: what happens when your Übermensch becomes corrupt, destroys society, and you have no way of removing him from power?

don't you understand? It's a benevolent dictator. A BENEVOLENT dictator. He must be benevolent, otherwise he wouldn't want to be the dictator.

Obviously if we only have benevolent dictators then we wouldn't have a non-benevolent dictator, are you daft?

That's how benevolent dictatorships work. He'll be benevolent, duh. What do you think? This is impossible, he wouldn't be benevolent then. Sheesh, what do you think, that this vast, undeniable, unlimited, unquestionable power might somehow corrupt?

Huh? Who are you anyway?
And no, fascism is never justifiable. It's a principle that's contradictory to human dignity.

It's never justifiable, nobody should be protected from itself, except maybe children or mental patients. You can keep your 'morality, law, order and best of all safety'. I'm officially adult, i think i can take my own decissions.
I also don't think what you described was fascism, shouldn't that normally also include militarism and nationalism and totalitarism and corporatism?

By having law enforcement breathing down everyone's neck to make sure no one made anymore damage, and by having any officer who reported a corrupt officer paid generously and anyone who made a false report fired.

That isn't fascism, the first part is just wasting police funds, the second part is already done.


fascism would give them morality

How?


law

Because that doesn't exist already :rolleyes:

order and best of all safety

But at what cost? Fascism makes life hell, so none of that matters.


My ideal fascism is a benevolent dictatorship where a wise and altruistic man leads the land and gives his people the best he has to offer, keeping them healthy and well protected, even from themselves as a father would his children.


Completely impossible. No one is perfect, ultimate power only magnifies your flaws, and power corrupts.


When do you think it's justifiable?

I think maybe some forms of martial law can be justified temporarily if the country is in absolute chaos without power to sustain itself.

don't you understand? It's a benevolent dictator. A BENEVOLENT dictator. He must be benevolent, otherwise he wouldn't want to be the dictator.

Obviously if we only have benevolent dictators then we wouldn't have a non-benevolent dictator, are you daft?

That's how benevolent dictatorships work. He'll be benevolent, duh. What do you think? This is impossible, he wouldn't be benevolent then. Sheesh, what do you think, that this vast, undeniable, unlimited, unquestionable power might somehow corrupt?

The trouble with benevolent dictators is that they have a tendency to die, and their successors tend to be not-so-benevolent dictators.

I also don't think what you described was fascism, shouldn't that normally also include militarism and nationalism and totalitarism and corporatism?

shhhh, he says he's a fascist. Obviously he knows exactly what fascism entails as a political ideology and just...momentarily forgot to include certain elements of what fascism entails.

After all it's not like a teenager ever proclaimed he was part of a political ideology without actually knowing entirely what it was about. Nope, never happens. All those teenage communists for example have all read Marx and know everything about how a communist system works.

Believe what you want, unless you're running for office I don't care if you're the re-incarnation of Hitler*.




*Lol, Godwin

I think he’s implying we all have a collective list.

Stored in Forum 7, obviously. Access granted only to sociopaths and liberals.

Anyways SL, I thought you shot yourself for being dumb?

Shhhh! Don't give away our secrets! You bastard! It was supposed to be a secret! :eek: ;) Now he knows!!

Was there ever any need to create this thread:confused:

Its going to turn Into a thread where we all just start bashing the fascist Idealology.

The trouble with benevolent dictators is that they have a tendency to die, and their successors tend to be not-so-benevolent dictators.

still nonsense. Aren't you listening? We would have BENEVOLENT dictators. If our first benevolent dictator dies (may god have mercy on his benevolent self) then obviously his replacement must ALSO be a benevolent dictator. After all, we're only going to let benevolent people be dictators, so if he wasn't benevolent he wouldn't get to be a dictator.

really why is this so hard to understand? It's benevolent dictators, only they get to be dictators. We couldn't have a non-benevolent dictators, duh, we would only have benevolent ones.

Was there ever any need to create this thread:confused:

Its going to turn Into a thread where we all just start bashing the fascist Idealology.

SL is going to make some attempt to defend it, and whenever he's proven wrong he'll bring up this thread and claim we all just hate him because he's a fascist.

Well I love you SL :fluffle:

Never.

This, yet again, has been another episode of brief answers to stupid questions.

Theres no such thing as stupid questions just stupid people.



..Joking ..

SL is going to make some attempt to defend it, and whenever he's proven wrong he'll bring up this thread and claim we all just hate him because he's a fascist.

Well I love you SL :fluffle:

It a ploy for him to diistract you whenever you prove him wrong in the future ! Gah...

still nonsense. Aren't you listening? We would have BENEVOLENT dictators. If our first benevolent dictator dies (may god have mercy on his benevolent self) then obviously his replacement must ALSO be a benevolent dictator. After all, we're only going to let benevolent people be dictators, so if he wasn't benevolent he wouldn't get to be a dictator.

really why is this so hard to understand? It's benevolent dictators, only they get to be dictators. We couldn't have a non-benevolent dictators, duh, we would only have benevolent ones.

Ah. I wasn't aware this argument had traveled through Crazy Land on its way to NSG.

All previous fascist regimes have kind of...well...failed. In spite of this, you still believe it to be a desirable system. One of your previous threads is about the less intelligent being eliminated from society...are you clever enough to work out what your duty is to the genepool?

Any examples?

It depends, would you consider absolute monarchs dictators?

The trouble with benevolent dictators is that they have a tendency to die, and their successors tend to be not-so-benevolent dictators.Any examples?

Shhhh! Don’t give away our secrets! You bastard! It was supposed to be a secret! :eek: ;) Now he knows!!
But he’s got to become a ‘liberal’ to gain entry, thus destroying him.

Our evil plans prevail, once again. Now, excuse me while I bias up the media.

Well I love you SL :fluffle:
I don’t know if I would call SL a friend.

Although we might play football at Christmas.

Any examples?

I don't know of any dictators who have died and had successors .. Normally dicatators die and get there nation crushed .. Well resently anyway ...

Any examples?

I don't think there ever was a true benevolent dictator.

I don't think there ever was a true benevolent dictator.

It's an oxymoron anyway.

It depends, would you consider absolute monarchs dictators?Um, yes.

Ah. I wasn't aware this argument had traveled through Crazy Land on its way to NSG.

the entire concept of "benevolent dictator" took a big trip through Crazy Land before it got posted here.

it's the only universe in which the concept works. When arguing with people, like SL, who seem to advocate the concept of "benevolent dictator" the conversation goes something like this

but what if he turns out not to be benevolent?

He would be

But what if he isn't?

Then he wouldn't get to be dictator

what if he starts benevolent then then turns?

he wouldn't do that

How do you know that?

He just wouldn't.

But what if he does?

Aren't you listening? HE WOULD NOT.

Well what about the guy after him?

He wouldn't do that either

How do you know?

because he wouldn't.

Well what about Hitler, Stalin, Mousillini, Mao and all the others?

Well they weren't benevolent

But people thought they were

But they were wrong, we wouldn't be.

How do you know?

We just won't be.

Any examples?

Charles Nelson Reilly. *nod*

It's an oxymoron anyway.

I agree, just poining out that it was going to be hard to find an example. And if he managed to find one, he was probably only benevolent for his own people.

You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist.

You're a pretty rubbish fascist if you actually care what other people think. Your clashes with others will either make you a stronger person or crush you, but in the end your fate will be decided through conflict.

So in conclusion places that aren't corrupt can be democracies but places infested with corruption all need a good dose of fascism.

Hear Hear! Rule through the weak multitudes cannot improve anything but can only maintain a status quo or slow down the decent into anarchy. Only through strength of will can humanity truly progress.

When do you think it's justifiable?

Always

Quick question: what happens when your Übermensch becomes corrupt, destroys society, and you have no way of removing him from power?

Übermensch?!? FASCIST!! :p

Um, yes.

Actually...I can't think of any.

I was going to say Augustus, but on second thought, I think he was more than a bit of a bastard.

I don't know of any dictators who have died and had successors ..

How many european kings do we need to mention?

And if you want an example of a fairly benevolent dictator who was succeeded by a non benevolent dictator...

Charles I

Actually...I can't think of any.

I was going to say Augustus, but on second thought, I think he was more than a bit of a bastard.What about Iulius Caesar?
What about the line of adopted emperors?

What about Iulius Caesar?
What about the line of adopted emperors?

Well, yes. But I think most of them were bastards too.

Caligula, Nero, etc.

never.

Well, yes. But I think most of them were bastards too.

Caligula, Nero, etc.I mean the line of emperors leading up to Marcus Aurelius, when emperors adopted those who they thought best for the job, rather than letting their biological sons inherit the empire.

I mean the line of emperors leading up to Marcus Aurelius, when emperors adopted those who they thought best for the job, rather than letting their biological sons inherit the empire.

To be honest, my knowledge of Roman history is limited.

the entire concept of "benevolent dictator" took a big trip through Crazy Land before it got posted here.

it's the only universe in which the concept works. When arguing with people, like SL, who seem to advocate the concept of "benevolent dictator" the conversation goes something like this

That's pretty fucking crazy.

To be honest, my knowledge of Roman history is limited.But think of it: a benevolent dictator selecting the one who is to succeed him and keep to the benevolence.

But think of it: a benevolent dictator selecting the one who is to succeed him and keep to the benevolence.

Well, yes, but we've seen how that worked out.

Well, yes, but we've seen how that worked out.Yes, as soon as one didn't get to select a successor in time...

Yes, as soon as one didn't get to select a successor in time...

You're talking about Claudius, right?

You're talking about Claudius, right?Yes.

(Who btw has nothing to do really with the 'Claudius' in the Gladiator movie, except that he was a complete butthole.)

Wheres this liberal hellhole?

Yes.

(Who btw has nothing to do really with the 'Claudius' in the Gladiator movie, except that he was a complete butthole.)

That wasn't Claudius, I'm fairly sure. That was Commodus, son of Marcus Aurelius, if you're talking about Jaoquin Pheonix's character.

Claudius was Augustus' immediate successor, and he was succeeded by Caligula.

Wheres this liberal hellhole?

And how much is the airfare?

I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics.
Hahaha!

lo·gis·tics (l-jstks, l-)
n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)
1. The aspect of military operations that deals with the procurement, distribution, maintenance, and replacement of materiel and personnel.
2. The management of the details of an operation.

You go ahead an use your logistics.

Here's my two cents: Fascism is never justifiable.

And it's spelled Sauerkraut.

Fascism as a collective ideology is no longer justifiable. Using its authoritarian approach to economics without the social trappings may, however, have some benefits.

You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist. I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics. At the time I became a fascist the place I lived was a morally relatavistic hell hole filed with sociopaths and liberals causing more and more damage to what was left of the good side of the neighborhood. I eventually made the conjecture that the only way to stop all this was through totalitarianism, by having law enforcement breathing down everyone's neck to make sure no one made anymore damage, and by having any officer who reported a corrupt officer paid generously and anyone who made a false report fired. Stopping the immorality going on seemed like the most moral thing to do so I became a hardcore devout fascsist and many of my friends became fascsists too, in fact one of my best friends is the one who got me to become fascist in the first place. I belevie what I beleive because I think it's the cure for the social diseases plaguing humanity, I see it as sort of a medicine for corrupt areas. So in conclusion places that aren't corrupt can be democracies but places infested with corruption all need a good dose of fascism.

In my opinion fascism is only justifiable in places like LA, New Orleans or other screwed up places where morality is long dead and the pople are out of control oppressing each other without end, at least fascism would give them morality, law, order and best of all safety. My ideal fascism is a benevolent dictatorship where a wise and altruistic man leads the land and gives his people the best he has to offer, keeping them healthy and well protected, even from themselves as a father would his children.

When do you think it's justifiable?

Fascism itself is a corruption and a social disease. Fascism is a society that turns its free will over to a state apparatus that has zero concern for individual rights, all for the sake of finding someone to blame for societal ills they need only blame on themselves.

One can't be healthy and well protected when one is living in fear that their own children might turn them in to the fatherland over a muttered word, or out of spite. One can't be safe when one has a higher probability of being conscripted into armed service in the perpetual act of feeding the military-industrial complex that supports the fascist economy. The government isn't your father, nor the citizens its children. The government is the servant of its citizenry, or should be.

A breakdown of law and order requires more law and order - yes. Not fascism. Increased policing does not require fascism, and to be frank, totalitarian societies are far more prone to corruption than ones with democratic oversight.

That wasn't Claudius, I'm fairly sure. That was Commodus, son of Marcus Aurelius, if you're talking about Jaoquin Pheonix's character.

Claudius was Augustus' immediate successor, and he was succeeded by Caligula.Indeed. All those C-names...

Claudius was Augustus' immediate successor, and he was succeeded by Caligula.

Tiberius was Augustus' immediate successor.

At the time I became a fascist...

aren't you like 11?

You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist. I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics. At the time I became a fascist the place I lived was a morally relatavistic hell hole filed with sociopaths and liberals causing more and more damage to what was left of the good side of the neighborhood. I eventually made the conjecture that the only way to stop all this was through totalitarianism, by having law enforcement breathing down everyone's neck to make sure no one made anymore damage, and by having any officer who reported a corrupt officer paid generously and anyone who made a false report fired. Stopping the immorality going on seemed like the most moral thing to do so I became a hardcore devout fascsist and many of my friends became fascsists too, in fact one of my best friends is the one who got me to become fascist in the first place. I belevie what I beleive because I think it's the cure for the social diseases plaguing humanity, I see it as sort of a medicine for corrupt areas. So in conclusion places that aren't corrupt can be democracies but places infested with corruption all need a good dose of fascism.

In my opinion fascism is only justifiable in places like LA, New Orleans or other screwed up places where morality is long dead and the pople are out of control oppressing each other without end, at least fascism would give them morality, law, order and best of all safety. My ideal fascism is a benevolent dictatorship where a wise and altruistic man leads the land and gives his people the best he has to offer, keeping them healthy and well protected, even from themselves as a father would his children.

When do you think it's justifiable?

Never.

Also, I hope you don't live in the U.K.......its alot safer for us Brits if you stay far away from us :p

Tiberius was Augustus' immediate successor.

Whoops. I stand corrected.

It is never justifiable for one man to opress another...period.

I love this show! It's the best show on NSG! *donates money to "Brief Answers to Stupid Questions."* :D

*Does the same*

hardcore devout fascsist and many of my friends became fascsists too

Typically, you should be able to spell your political views.

When you need a 7 letter word for belligerent nationalism.

At least he didn't put facist.

I LOL'd.

Typically, you should be able to spell your political views.

At least he didn't put facist.

When you need a 7 letter word for belligerent nationalism.

We can close the thread now; we have a victor! You win this thread!

aren't you like 11?

Surely that's just what his writings would lead one to believe?

Surely that's just what his writings would lead one to believe?

Hey! Hey! Hey!

That's very insulting to eleven year olds.

Hey! Hey! Hey!

That's very insulting to eleven year olds.

They can suck it up, those lousy koolaid imbibers.

those lousy koolaid imbibers.

No, that's fascists.

Surely that's just what his writings would lead one to believe?

it's what his writings lead me to hope, at least. at that age there would still be hope for him.

It's justifiable when you need an an evil form of government for your fictional stories. Fascist governments like the Empire in Star Wars or in Starship Troopers are fun kind of nasty governments :)

You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist

Wah. No one likes me because I advocate eugenics, I can't make a coherent sentence, let alone argument, I troll, I'm a fascist, and I'm ignorant.

Wah.

I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics.

I think you meant "logic" dear. Something you wouldn't know if it came up and ripped your argument to shreds and shoved it down your throat.

At the time I became a fascist the place I lived was a morally relatavistic hell hole filed with sociopaths and liberals

Blah blah blah moral relativism blah blah blah liberals blah blah blah.

How enlightening.

I eventually made the conjecture that the only way to stop all this was through totalitarianism

What a stunning leap of "logistics."

Stopping the immorality going on seemed like the most moral thing to do so I became a hardcore devout fascsist

Ah yes, because fascism is known for it's beacon of morality. Starting world wars, commiting genocide, removing freedom - how fucking moral.

and many of my friends became fascsists too, in fact one of my best friends is the one who got me to become fascist in the first place.

Too bad he didn't put a gun to his head a la Hitler. Then you might have done the same yes?

I belevie what I beleive because I think it's the cure for the social diseases plaguing humanity, I see it as sort of a medicine for corrupt areas. So in conclusion places that aren't corrupt can be democracies but places infested with corruption all need a good dose of fascism.

You believe what you believe because your friends did and you have no capacity for independent rational thought.

In my opinion fascism is only justifiable in places like LA, New Orleans or other screwed up places where morality is long dead and the pople are out of control oppressing each other without end

Oh, is this more of your "logistics?" People are "oppressing" each other, therefore the solution is totalitarianistic fascism.

at least fascism would give them morality, law, order and best of all safety.

Wah. Let's all be safe. Make me feel safe. Save me, dictator.

My ideal fascism is a benevolent dictatorship where a wise and altruistic man leads the land and gives his people the best he has to offer, keeping them healthy and well protected, even from themselves as a father would his children.

Your ideal government is a drunk, stupid father who beats and rapes his children.

It is never justifiable for one man to opress another...period.
Justifiability has nothing to do with oppression - The west was and is built on oppression, oppression of those less worthy, be they segregated by race, social class or distance.

And fascism...that's one of those ideologies which has gotten bad press because of malformed practice of a single notable (though democratically elected) government of its type.

In the end...any instance of 'in name of national security' overriding person's rights or needs is fascist: Needs of state put above the needs of people is fascism.

Whether that's absolutely bad all the time is debatable...Consider eg. normal armed forces whose job is to maintain and protect state and its values even at the ultimate cost of an individual's life.

You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist. I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics. At the time I became a fascist the place I lived was a morally relatavistic hell hole filed with sociopaths and liberals causing more and more damage to what was left of the good side of the neighborhood. I eventually made the conjecture that the only way to stop all this was through totalitarianism, by having law enforcement breathing down everyone's neck to make sure no one made anymore damage, and by having any officer who reported a corrupt officer paid generously and anyone who made a false report fired. Stopping the immorality going on seemed like the most moral thing to do so I became a hardcore devout fascsist and many of my friends became fascsists too, in fact one of my best friends is the one who got me to become fascist in the first place. I belevie what I beleive because I think it's the cure for the social diseases plaguing humanity, I see it as sort of a medicine for corrupt areas. So in conclusion places that aren't corrupt can be democracies but places infested with corruption all need a good dose of fascism.

In my opinion fascism is only justifiable in places like LA, New Orleans or other screwed up places where morality is long dead and the pople are out of control oppressing each other without end, at least fascism would give them morality, law, order and best of all safety. My ideal fascism is a benevolent dictatorship where a wise and altruistic man leads the land and gives his people the best he has to offer, keeping them healthy and well protected, even from themselves as a father would his children.

When do you think it's justifiable?

http://willlangford.com/wp-content/limecatfail1kd.jpg

And fascism...that's one of those ideologies which has gotten bad press because of malformed practice of a single notable (though democratically elected) government of its type.A single one? I can think of at least three...

I believe the comparison of fascism to a benevolent father tending to his rowdy children is quite apt. In some ways, the typical household dynamic conforms to fascist theory. There is a central figure who is responsible for the public welfare. This man may exercise power when the populace gets out of line; this is similar to spanking an unruly youth. Surely, the angst-ridden child may feel apoplectic rage when receiving the punishment, but, in the end, it will have been for his own good. This person also has some degree of control over the economic apparatus; after all, you can't have children buying IPods and computers only to realize that they have no food, no clothing, and no home. If a robber tries to break into one's home, the father can load a shotgun and blow the intruder away; unsupervised children would never be able to defend themselves so capably. The father knows best -- of course, there is also the chance that he is an abusive drunkard who does not care a whit about his children's well-being. Having such a tyrant would be detrimental to any populace. Depending on the circumstances, fascism may be the optimal form of government or one of the worst. And although I am not a proponent of fascism, it is a very viable system of government which will, more often than not, allow a country to thrive.

-snip-

And, enter: The FAG! Cue: trolling.

And, enter: The FAG! Cue: trolling.

You're just saying that because you're a corrupt and immoral liberal, a plague upon humanity, in need of a stern father-figure to guide you and protect you from the dangers of your own liberty.

You're just saying that because you're a corrupt and immoral liberal, a plague upon humanity, in need of a stern father-figure to guide you and protect you from the dangers of your own liberty.

Oh, I need a stern father-figure, all right. The harder prick, the better!

You're just saying that because you're a corrupt and immoral liberal, a plague upon humanity, in need of a stern father-figure to guide you and protect you from the dangers of your own liberty.

Ya, the fatherland should give you a time out mister fass man!

And, enter: The FAG! Cue: trolling.

At least it was well written.

A single one? I can think of at least three...Let's face it, we wouldn't be bashing fascism if certain form of fascist government - and it's satellites - didn't go around genociding innocents because of their ethnicity.

Then again, in my opinion, most states have to excercise some degree of fascism in order to stay sovereign - which leads, in my view, to an interesting dichotomy between taking moral high ground over fascist governments and actions taken at home to protect the state: Fascism is an integral part of our world divided into countries and other political divisions.

However, on a general level, monopolitical fascist governent is too utilitaristic and ultimately doomed to be dysfunctional: State's wellbeing in general is the wellbeing of all it's people - In fascism the people in control represent the state and define *subjectively* what's good for the state...which usually leads to oligarchy - which in itself isn't bad - of some sort and the tendency to 'improve the nation' based on the ideas of few.

If a robber tries to break into one's home, the father can load a shotgun and blow the intruder away; unsupervised children would never be able to defend themselves so capably.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/YoungAdolf.jpg
I think you're wrong.

And, enter: The FAG! Cue: trolling.

http://weaselhut.net/cheezweas.gif

Believe what you want, unless you're running for office I don't care if you're the re-incarnation of Hitler*.




*Lol, Godwin

If I was then I'd be persuasive and would have gained all your support with strong rants and powerful speeches. Taking into consideration that I haven't that means I'm not the reincarnant of Hitler.

If I was then I'd be persuasive and would have gained all your support with strong rants and powerful speeches. Taking into consideration that I haven't that means I'm not the reincarnant of Hitler.

Uhh... yeah, that would never happen. Sorry, buddy.

Uhh... yeah, that would never happen. Sorry, buddy.

you know, maybe it's just me, but I don't think hitler is the best person to sell me on fascism. I dunno....

you know, maybe it's just me, but I don't think hitler is the best person to sell me on fascism. I dunno....

What, you don't like killing jews?

the pople are out of control oppressing each other without end

Of course! Oppression can be ended with fascism... it's all so simple now!
:rolleyes:

Wah. No one likes me because I advocate eugenics, I can't make a coherent sentence, let alone argument, I troll, I'm a fascist, and I'm ignorant.

Wah.



I think you meant "logic" dear. Something you wouldn't know if it came up and ripped your argument to shreds and shoved it down your throat.



Blah blah blah moral relativism blah blah blah liberals blah blah blah.

How enlightening.



What a stunning leap of "logistics."



Ah yes, because fascism is known for it's beacon of morality. Starting world wars, commiting genocide, removing freedom - how fucking moral.



Too bad he didn't put a gun to his head a la Hitler. Then you might have done the same yes?



You believe what you believe because your friends did and you have no capacity for independent rational thought.



Oh, is this more of your "logistics?" People are "oppressing" each other, therefore the solution is totalitarianistic fascism.



Wah. Let's all be safe. Make me feel safe. Save me, dictator.



Your ideal government is a drunk, stupid father who beats and rapes his children.

I have no problem with civilised debate or discussion, but this is flaming. You don't see me flaming you.

That's not flaming.

But at what cost? Fascism makes life hell, so none of that matters.

The hell from fascism is a byproduct for ensuring safety, it also serves as punishment to the populace for being corrupt and vile in the first place. One the civs clean up the act and all the nastiness from the corrupt society is gone and they are no longer corrupt they are free to return to democracy.

That's not flaming.Yes, it is.

The hell from fascism is a byproduct for ensuring safety, it also serves as punishment to the populace for being corrupt and vile in the first place. One the civs clean up the act and all the nastiness from the corrupt society is gone and they are no longer corrupt they are free to return to democracy.

Fascism is about control. Democracy would be giving up control because it puts the government back in the hands of the people. Fascism doesn't like the government in the hands of the people. It's a strict parent and democracy is a lesbian commune.

The hell from fascism is a byproduct for ensuring safety, it also serves as punishment to the populace for being corrupt and vile in the first place. One the civs clean up the act and all the nastiness from the corrupt society is gone and they are no longer corrupt they are free to return to democracy.

So, would you rather be put in a plastic bubble in a padded room, or stripped naked and left to wander the streets?

Yes, it is.

More of a flamebait.

So, would you rather be put in a plastic bubble in a padded room, or stripped naked and left to wander the streets?

The funny thing about fascists is that they tend to advocate it, and tend to advocate oppression and the suspension of rights....right up until they're the ones being oppressed and having their rights suspended.

The funny thing about fascists is that they tend to advocate it, and tend to advocate oppression and the suspension of rights....right up until they're the ones being oppressed and having their rights suspended.

Would you expect anything more from them?

Would you expect anything more from them?

No. Not really.

The funny thing about fascists is that they tend to advocate it, and tend to advocate oppression and the suspension of rights....right up until they're the ones being oppressed and having their rights suspended.

I've noted this before, I believe I said something like....Stalinist Russia was great, if you were Stalin. For the millions of other people, not so much.

The problem with all these wanna be fascists is they all want to be Stalin. Everybody wants to be Stalin. The problem is, there only gets to be one Stalin. Most of these people like Sl would be the first ones dead in a ditch if a real fascist revolution came to pass.

The hell from fascism is a byproduct for ensuring safety, it also serves as punishment to the populace for being corrupt and vile in the first place. One the civs clean up the act and all the nastiness from the corrupt society is gone and they are no longer corrupt they are free to return to democracy.

and the assumption that these fascist leaders would just willingly turn society back over to peaceful democracy is the biggest error in the whole long list of your errors.

The only good fascist is a dead fascist. Don't give them freedom because they're not going to give you yours.

When do you think it's justifiable?


Oh, you've just got to be yanking my chain on this one...

The only good fascist is a dead fascist. Don't give them freedom because they're not going to give you yours.So you're basically doing the same, right?

and the assumption that these fascist leaders would just willingly turn society back over to peaceful democracy is the biggest error in the whole long list of your errors.

If he's benevolent.

If he's benevolent.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, remember?

If he's benevolent.

and i want a pony

http://www.megat.co.uk/wrong/wrong.php?r=adgijklrt&n=South+Lizasauria&c=%23FF0000&t=fascism

I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics.

Managing your resources well caused you to become fascist? :confused:

and i want a pony

as long as you earn it by serving the state well. ;)

and i want a pony

I am so going to start saying that whenever anyone says something patently absurd.

So you're basically doing the same, right?

I was waiting for someone to get the song references, actually. :(

So you're basically doing the same, right?

only if stopping a dude from attacking you is assault

The hell from fascism is a byproduct for ensuring safety, it also serves as punishment to the populace for being corrupt and vile in the first place. One the civs clean up the act and all the nastiness from the corrupt society is gone and they are no longer corrupt they are free to return to democracy.
There's only one thing that comes to mind:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/SafeState.jpg

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/SafeState.jpg

http://www.pensitoreview.com/images/art-gop-fascism-poster.jpg

http://www.pensitoreview.com/images/art-gop-fascism-poster.jpg
ROFLMAO

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, remember?

Not so, there were many benevolent absolute leaders who weren't corrupt. Henry V, leaders of native villages before and during western imperialism, and lets not forget Hirihoto.

I like what you say. The only problem is it is not easy to instill morals. ascist governments are easy to corrupt. You need a strong leader to direct.

Not so, there were many benevolent absolute leaders who weren't corrupt. Henry V, leaders of native villages before and during western imperialism, and lets not forget Hirihoto.
Hirohito? If he had power, he was behind the Japanese killing, uh, six or so million people. Otherwise, he was just a figurehead.

Hirohito? If he had power, he was behind the Japanese killing, uh, six or so million people. Otherwise, he was just a figurehead.

Did he not order the surrender to ensure the Japanese people were not destroyed?

It's threads like this that have you on my ignore list, SL ;)
Fascism is a form of government, and as such, is purely imaginary. The concept of justification does not apply. I will say, however, that as the point of fascism is primacy of the state, which is also imaginary, you have chosen a particularly amusing form of government to adopt.

Not so, there were many benevolent absolute leaders who weren't corrupt. Henry V, leaders of native villages before and during western imperialism, and lets not forget Hirihoto.

Because Henry the V didn't live in a castle.

I am so going to start saying that whenever anyone says something patently absurd.

i find it saves time

It's threads like this that have you on my ignore list, SL ;)
Fascism is a form of government, and as such, is purely imaginary. The concept of justification does not apply. I will say, however, that as the point of fascism is primacy of the state, which is also imaginary, you have chosen a particularly amusing form of government to adopt.

so how come you were able to see this thread?

Not so, there were many benevolent absolute leaders who weren't corrupt. Henry V, leaders of native villages before and during western imperialism, and lets not forget Hirihoto.
Hihi Hoho. Hahahahaha.

Dammit. Just read over what you're punching into the keyboard. Your spelling really is horrible.
Did he not order the surrender to ensure the Japanese people were not destroyed?
More important is what happened before Japan went to war:

At this point, the sovereign astonished all present by addressing the conference personally, and in breaking the tradition of Imperial silence left his advisors "struck with awe." (Prime Minister Konoe's description of the event.) Emperor Shōwa stressed the need for peaceful resolution of international problems, expressed regret at his ministers' failure to respond to Baron Hara's probings, and recited a poem written by his grandfather, Emperor Meiji which, he said, he had read "over and over again":

"Methinks all the people of the world are brethren, then.
Why are the waves and the wind so unsettled nowadays?"

Recovering from their shock, the ministers hastened to express their profound wish to explore all possible peaceful avenues. The emperor's presentation was in line with his practical role as leader of the Shinto religion.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirohito )

And yet, even he could not do anything about Japan going to war. So much for preventing his (and other) people from being harmed...

If he's benevolent.

and around and around we go. I've already summarized (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12706434&postcount=31) the next hour or so of discussion this topic. Why don't you read it and save both of us some time?

Or, if you would like a summary of the summary, I, too, would like a pony.

Or, if you would like a summary of the summary, I, too, would like a pony.
Sure thing.http://www.section.at/img/smiley/hotte1.gif

Sure thing.http://www.section.at/img/smiley/hotte1.gif

Alrighty then. Ponies for everyone! :D

Did he not order the surrender to ensure the Japanese people were not destroyed?

No.

You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist. I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics.


When do you think it's justifiable?

Two things, the first being never. The second more in the nature of a pisstaking. How can one use the ability to plan movement of goods/troops/equipment etc... to decide wether or not facisim is a good thing?

You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist. I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics. At the time I became a fascist the place I lived was a morally relatavistic hell hole filed with sociopaths and liberals causing more and more damage to what was left of the good side of the neighborhood. I eventually made the conjecture that the only way to stop all this was through totalitarianism, by having law enforcement breathing down everyone's neck to make sure no one made anymore damage, and by having any officer who reported a corrupt officer paid generously and anyone who made a false report fired. Stopping the immorality going on seemed like the most moral thing to do so I became a hardcore devout fascsist and many of my friends became fascsists too, in fact one of my best friends is the one who got me to become fascist in the first place. I belevie what I beleive because I think it's the cure for the social diseases plaguing humanity, I see it as sort of a medicine for corrupt areas. So in conclusion places that aren't corrupt can be democracies but places infested with corruption all need a good dose of fascism.

In my opinion fascism is only justifiable in places like LA, New Orleans or other screwed up places where morality is long dead and the pople are out of control oppressing each other without end, at least fascism would give them morality, law, order and best of all safety. My ideal fascism is a benevolent dictatorship where a wise and altruistic man leads the land and gives his people the best he has to offer, keeping them healthy and well protected, even from themselves as a father would his children.

When do you think it's justifiable?

Being of the same political persuasion myself, I find myself in broad agreement. The only shading necessary would be to add the condition that fascism is acceptable when the electorate of a certain state is sufficiently moronic to render their votes irresponsible.

Don't know if this has been said but:You all seem to have put me in your bastard list for being a fascist. I came to that ideology freely based on all my acquired knowledge at the time and by using logistics.
So you became a fascist based on the moving of goods from one place to another?

Okay, I can understand that...

...one day....

I think.

SL, have you ever thought about joining the Repuplican Party?

If you're a really, really bad actor, and you would rather hang out with some old guy at a really bad opera than have wild sex with your woman, and the old man says that he'll show you how to use that phallic symbol if you only let him turn the whole universe fascist.

I have no problem with civilised debate or discussion, but this is flaming. You don't see me flaming you.

Why don't you leave the moderator judgements to someone with above a second-grade education, OK? Like for example, the moderators.

you know what i like about fascism? by its own standards, it is a terrible failure as an ideology. it is weak and decadent, unable to survive the glorious struggle of life. it's a good thing that fascism is also committed to irrationalism, otherwise they'd be in a bit of a pickle here.

Extremely violent domestic emergencies.

Read: Armed internal insurrection, massive armed invasion from abroad, massive nationwide destruction from natural or unnatural events

In American history, only the American Civil War even remotely meets the standards I would set for such an action, and Lincoln took steps towards fascism, but never went all the way.

Had Roosevelt gone down that road during the Great Depression, his actions would have been unjustified, and unwarranted. Anything since the Second World War has been totally unworthy of such drastic, emergency steps.

Only justifiable for extreme circumstances and short periods of time.

Never, because it doesn't really work at all. Soviet-style communism is vastly superior to it in all forms in terms of state control of the economy and people and its ability to allocate resources efficiently.

Never, because it doesn't really work at all. Soviet-style communism is vastly superior to it in all forms in terms of state control of the economy and people and its ability to allocate resources efficiently.

Was it really? I'm more curious than anything else. My impression was that Nazi Germany was far more productive than the Soviet Union. Perhaps that may have had more to do with some german ingenuity rather than the economic system of fascism.

My impression was that, economically, fascism worked for a short period, because it was essentially massive deficit spending on public works and military objectives. The long term effects of a fascist economic system would probably have been similar to the long term effects of soviet-communism, but for the short term it seemed very productive.

Never, because it doesn't really work at all. Soviet-style communism is vastly superior to it in all forms in terms of state control of the economy and people and its ability to allocate resources efficiently.

Unfortunately for you, terribly fashionable though unilateral fascist bashing is, that contention is bollocks.

Not only was the Nazi pre-war economy vastly superior to that of the USSR, but, had the Nazi state been able to pay Russia its full attention, and had Russia not had the crutch of Allied Aid and intelligence, it is indisputable that the USSR would have been cowed relatively quickly.