Sincere question, can you explain the difference between communism and fascism?
they seem like 2 sides of the same coin to me
Both advocate heavy surveillance, extreme punishment for those who disobey, imperialism and expansionism, and generally want to control everything about the citizens and overall shitty tyranny
Other urls found in this thread:
is2.Sup
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
The difference is in what they're applying that "tiranny" for.
commies government own businesses. fascists, government works with businesses, like china.
Yeah. Fascism is more focused on combating degeneracy and promoting culture, while communism tries to enforce economic "fairness"
>Le horseshoe
Fascism works
Communism doesnt
Under fascism, people are killed with efficiency.
Under communism, people are killed with inefficiency.
Fascism is for traditionalism, morality, God, and for their people. Communism is agaisnt all of that
>Under communism, people are killed with inefficiency.
Killing people was the only thing the USSR succeded at.
Communism is the economic system of Judaism
Yea most of them starved to death.
Fascism at least leaves some economic freedoms.
>combating degeneracy and promoting culture
so fascism is trying to do religion's work? call me back when that works out fine
Morality? god? and his people? doing stasi-tier shit is "moral" ?
tyranny isn't fucking moral
Fascism can technically exist irrespective of political and economic ideology, but in practice there have been very few right wing fascists. A system which operates primarily upon coercion does not mesh well with free markets.
Also don't buy the "NAZISM IS RIGHT WING" meme. Nazi is short for National SOCIALIST German Worker's Party. Socialists are left wing. Not very complicated.
A very efficient way to kill people.
You can even safe yourself transportation costs.
fascism is the idea that anyone not fit to live should die, it is based off of nature
communism is the idea that all the troubles of the world should be handled by the government, it is based off of the mind of a child.
>the idea that anyone not fit to live should die, it is based off of nature
you're talking about anarcho capitalism
well fascism is "people are too stupid to rule themselves" and communism is an ideaology of eternal revolution against an imaginary phantom of made-up societal properties and collectivism.
So you can be a fascist communist. The opposite of that would be anarcho-communism (how the hell that is supposed to work is beyond me lol)
They are fairly similar. But a key difference is fascism's glorification of the state and nationalist focus.
Socialism is left wing, but National Socialism is right wing.
National Socialism has nothing to do with Marxism.
Don't buy the "NORTH KOREA IS AN AUTHORITARIAN REGIME" meme. North Korea is short for the people's DEMOCRATIC people's republic of Korea. Democracies aren't autocracies.
Not very complicated.
Communism is inherently anti nationalist anti monarchist utopian ideology whereas fascism came from nationalist anti monarchist Italians opposing communist Italians.
Communists don't believe in property, nations, borders, or even government although in practice the only successful forms of Communism (Marxist-Leninism) had all those things out of sheer necessity.
Fascists generally believe in government and propwrry, but also dislike multinational globalism / neoliberalism and believe the government should implement the will of the people of the nation.
>americlap education
well Sup Forums memes aside, the russian population exploded in number after the WW2
After the relative de-Christianisation of Europe, the Enlightenment spawned two different branch of materialism, one focused existing within a Darwinian and Historicist worldview of biological differentiation and race theories, while the other existed within the economic realm in the form of historical materialism. Both contains elements of romanticism, in that they are epistemologically pessimistic ideologies that prize the self-determination of some collective unit -- the race, the class -- against all out and excluding the possibility that other groups may perceive reality as they do. In the face of such collectives, the individual unit is merely an small element, a kind of atom, with little power of autonomy.
They have a bunch of stuff in common from a philosophical point of view.
The kraut know's what's up, good job my man
*Property
that's not true, anarcho-capitalism says nothing the like.
You'd still help your neighbors and family, even without having an agency of coercion that steals 50% of your income.
ANCAP is just the full application of the NAP wheres libertarianism is a half-assed version of the NAP which says that the state is evil but we cannot possibly exist without it and therefore we need the smallest possible version of it.
They're both 2 extremes.
Extremism is always retarded.
knows*
worked pretty well on the ostfront.
Freedom is good
Too much freedom promotes degeneracy, that's when fascism comes in. Also an average citizen isnt smart enough to be influential in politics.
Modern Communists fight for equal pay because they believe smart people that contribute to the world shouldnt get more than dumb useless trash and they also fight for total individual freedom. "Communists" nowadays are just a bunch of Anarchists desu
Communism is the material reduction of human beings into herd-like masses. It is the syndication of the human spirit as well as the annihilation of all human identity into a mob of easily controlled rabble overlooked by an incredibly wealthy elite.
Fascism, while a dictatorship, promotes leadership, good health, morality, and heritage. Free trade under Fascism is actually encouraged as newer and better technologies are always being worked towards. The difference between the Fascist market and the Capitalist market is the Capitalist market promotes foreign interests rather than national interests, so Fascists look after the national economy first rather than their own bank accounts.
I'd say Democracy produces shitty tyranny because it allows a hostile foreign people to annex the nation via economic control as they have done already and are continuing to do so. Safety takes a back seat because Capitalism requires Globalism in order to keep itself floating (lower reduction in quality to obtain higher profits, this is 101). It's actually a similar ideology to Communism in that regard as both seek to devalue human interactions and societies in order to support the interests of those who control all of the industry.
I used to think this as well. But extremism is incredibly effective in ushering societal change.
...
>Freedom is good
>Too much freedom promotes degeneracy, that's when fascism comes in. Also an average citizen isnt smart enough to be influential in politics.
perfect example of how fascists think
I never actually had the opportunity to see just how fucking stupid this meme really is.
Fascism is about the Volk and natvism, Communism about the "oppressed"proletariat and classes above them exploiting them.
Many Americans honestly believe that you can only be right wing if you oppose all forms of government and that if you support any government action at all you are leftist.
So Nazis, Kings, Theocracies, Warlords, Empires, etc are all Left wing despite the origin of left/right coming from the labels used to describe loyalty to the French crown.
So originally
Right wing = loyal to the King of France
Left wing = Republicans
But in America according to libertarians
Right wing= no government
Left wing = any government at all
At least that's what it was through the Ron Paul years
However a more accurate definition IMO is
Right wing = preserve parts of society and continue them
Left wing = destroy parts of society and replace them
the fascist takes a (usually true) universal statement and turns it upside down with conditionals that fit his narrative.
"Rape is evil, but too little rape promotes bigotry so that is when fascism comes in."
Ancap is a scenario where the government does not exist which means no one will cuddle you, and you have to take care of your own self, if you're fit to live in an anarchist society means you're fit to live.
(opposite of fascism where government influence is to the endless and is supposed to protect everyone)
leafposting with big words, impressive!
That's actually a good observation regarding American politics, which are completely pants on head retarded sometimes.
I've been having a lot of trouble explaining that the Berkeley protesters are not "Fascists" as the Alex Jones Lolbertarian types keep projecting.
These people have no idea what they are even saying and are just like the Communists who throw around the word "racist" to try and end all arguments.
Ancaps are just monarchist
If the land owner is sovereign over his land and enforces his claim he is just a king while anyone else living on his land is a serf
reminder
Guess who has been funding radical leftists/blm/Trump slander
you mean totalitarianism: where government influence is to the endless and is supposed to protect everyone
right now I live in a socialist state and the state doesn't cuddle me. It steals from me. When I get sick, I get health care. If there were no state, I'd have a private insurance and I would get health care too so whewre is the benefit here? ANd how does it justify theft?
How is this a meme?
Erm nope.
Under Fascism, or Corporatism, you can do what you like so long as it does not negatively impact the state or its people. It is fine, for instance, to have a business, become rich, and live like a lord. Under communism that is forbidden, everyone is supposed to be equal.
There is plenty of literature on it.
I suggest starting with based Mosley, very easy to read and interpret.
The reason you see it as theft is because your government is corrupt and not working for any productive interest.
You are correct: it is THEFT because the Austrian government does not work in the interest of the Austrian people.
Re-unite with Deustchland, kill Merkel and the SPD and bring back the Reich. Then we'll move onto the next step.
no, a monarchy has a ruler, a king. A king is someone who makes laws and has goons who enforce them with weapons.
that's not ancap :D
The reason I see it as theft is, because it is. If you take property against the will of the owner, it is theft. Very simple. A thief puts a gun to your temple and takes your wallet and says "no worries I'll use it for the greater good lel" - is this not theft?
>does not negatively impact the state or its people
>become rich
mutually exclusive.
You are focusing on only a tiny portion of their actions They are completely different, right down to the core precepts.
The foundation of Communism is the idea of
>"Equality"
The foundation of National Socialism is
>"the tribe/race"
The foundation of Fascism (Italy) is
>"the state"
is2.Sup Forums.org/wsg/1480768591311.webm
"Too much freedom promotes degeneracy" is turning an statment upside down? Sure sweethearth
>Too much freedom promotes degeneracy
who gives a fucking shit?
>that's when fascism comes in
nope, that's when religion comes in, fascism is trying to do religion's work and that's dumb
>Also an average citizen isnt smart enough to be influential in politics.
and some BR BR HUE HUE is smarter than the average citizen? heh
The average citizen who completed his education has basic knowledge of sociology and politics
Look at the OP, both are totalitarian ideologies that enforce themselves using edgy means.
I've found the American right adopted a largely anti government mindset in the 90s when it became clear under Clinton and Janet Reno that the government was attacking and killing right wing people (Waco, Ruby Ridge, etc)
That's where most the Alex Jones type come from. Prior to the 90s most conspiracy theories were leftist boomer fairytales (The US faked the moon landing since they could never defeat the superior USSR communists, JFK was assassinated by the CIA not a communist, etc) mainly because boomers were anti establishment up until the cultural revolution was successful.
freedom is absolute. You are free, or you are not.
If you initiate the use of force against someone, freedom for that person is gone.
It's like rape, as I stated. You can't "rape a little bit" - either it is rape or it is love-making, there is no middle ground.
Considering we already have Private Military Companies, in an Ancap society what would prevent these from going away?
You could say: "Oh, the NAP." but remember that because there is no Nationality, Identity, or Volk to root people into a society (Anarchism) there is no reason for anyone to do anything for anybody else.
So you will find that the brutal will reign after a short period of time. If you seriously expect people to amass a personal fortune and all of them play along with your NAP you are delusional. Even American Capitalism, which is probably the closest to Ancap ideology as you can get, has Federal institutions to try and at least pretend like they're stopping the rampant corruption and selling out of the nation by the plunderers.
I would see theft as foreign interests lobbying my government into supporting them, the way the Israeli lobby does it to my government. The entire US system is just composed of massive industrial lobbies that aren't working for the growth of the nation but rather their own personal interests.
This was a huge problem, for example, with the Tobacco Companies in the 90's who could buy out entire court rooms to prop them up.
That is theft to me. Paying taxes to support infrastructure, police, firemen, etc. is what makes one a Citizen rather than an outsider.
>american sucks the dick of people whose grandfather died fighting
pathetico
After a few long years of fighting, wouldn't you want to fuck too?
The land owner is the sovereign ruler (king)
If he doesn't own the land then he isn't sovereign or an owner.
different Ideologically, identical in practice
Mainly due to human meat bodies having to implement and enforce the rules.
>Irish user says fascism is X
>Shitskin algerianon counters: No it's not !!!
Woah....Mudslime intellectuals everybody
> Sincere question, can you explain the difference between communism and fascism?
That`s different pro-anglo leftism branches.
All government is force
©
You can't enforce your claim on property without force
Freedom only comes from being able to violently defend your property
Fascism = corporations take all your money and enslaves you
Socialism = Government takes all your money and enslaves you
Fascism is about submission of the individual to the state (albeit for the collective good of individuals). Communism is about the withering and eventually complete elimination of the state.
>communist
looks like a soft little gay cuck
>fascist
looks like a hard mofo who would knock that commie cuck out with one fucking punch
Shooting people in the back of the head,suppressing freedom of speech and press, practicing eugenics and intoducing your citizens to an unhealthy load of propaganda isn't moral you dumbfuck
This was a solid write up, thank you
I'm not a social engineer (aka communist), so all I can say is this: I know that the initiation of the use of force is immoral, so the state is immoral as it is by definition an agency of coercion. I really don't give a crap about hypothetical possibillities and what would happen if you remove centralized coercion and violence from a societal structure.
2) So if there is a thief holding a gun at your temple, he is not "really" a thief, as long as there is another person telling him what to do with that money?
Hey, What happens when you don't pay your taxes? Will israel invade your home, or will the state lock you up? What's the real evil here?
>Moral is objective
I dont disagree with those things being immoral, but you argue like a retard. Nice proxy btw.
So Islam is not moral?
>grasping for straws
My grandfathers both lived and they fought the Japs exclusively.
Had they known the extent to which our governments had/would betray us, I have no doubt they would've defected to Europe and fought for the Axis.
and the people working for him on his land are subject to the same moral category as the "ancap king" which means that any interaction is voluntary. What's the problem with this
Goddamn I would kill myself if I was as ugly as these people wtf
The Americans and Nazis were very similar in the 40s
They were more competitors than ideological opponents
self-defense or defense or property is radically different from allowing people to live on your land but locking them in cages if they don't behave as you like.
Also, the use of reason is a thing. You can't shoot a person who stepped on your lawn for 3 seconds. Nobody would say that is a reasonable response.
i'm not a muslim, who said something about islam?
>I dont disagree with those things being immoral
then you're a bootlicker, a cuck, and a mindless faggot who works against his own interest
let's see how your vision of fascism changes when officer schultz of the secret police breaks down your door at 3 AM to look for contraband then proceed to torture you
>hypothetical possibilities
So you are not going to take the time to think about the long term consequences of your ideology that is driven entirely by economic self-interest?
The earliest tribes of Man were very close to Ancap societies. There was loose structures that drove people together which eventually resulted in small groups of individuals amassing the largest fortunes and therefore the largest shares in control.
This is just how economics work. The stronger the economy, the stronger the people (or in the case of the Ancap, the individual).
Thinking that people will arbitrarily obey your "NAP" because you say it is the "moral" thing to do is just ridiculous because it requires an insane amount of factors to become true.
>the state is immoral
In its current form, yes, I agree. Democracy is immoral because it is indeed plundering the people rather than supporting them. Democracy does not promote leadership, rather, it promotes a material worship of money. The Fortune 500 is filled with the most vile scum you can even imagine but that is simply because that is what Democracy creates - foreign lobbies promoting foreign interests.
Rather than elevate the national Citizen and the volk, it sells them out to a pack of wolves.
They are serfs with no political representation
The land owner decides everything law, tradition, taxation, etc and the people have no representation in their own governance. This is essentially feudalism.
Ancaps are feudalists
violence and suppression used to achieve a totalitarian goal, only difference is the political end game
the americans weren't gassing people and mindlessly expanding themselves
...
Makes sense so two extremes like facism and communism are close together
Facism at least in Nazi germany was anti christianity
Not true nazis were very critical of capitalism
any moral theory must be objective and consistent. In fact ANY theory has to fulfill these requirements, as reality is objective and consistent.
A moral theory that is not objective or consistent is false.
So if we say that murder is universally immoral and you disagree, please provide an argument with an example why and when murder is moral or "preferred behavior".
If you are the sovereign of a geographical area you decide what is legal or illegal.
So locking people in cages is perfectly justified both practically and morally (in Mesopotamia the king was also a deity so he decided what was moral, in Europe they had the concept of divine right of kings)
Yes it was. Christianity teaches that we are all one race under god and that you should turn the other cheek when somebody punches you in the mouth and the bend over and take it up the ass
Neither were the Nazis
taxation is theft, ancap societies would not tolerate it. The same goes for laws: any moral law is immoral and would be nullified by DROs.
But what system is preventing someone who has amassed the largest personal fortune out of all the other citizens into obeying your laws?
Repressive murderous authoritarianism in the service of national glory, vs repressive murderous authoritarianism in the service of utopian fantasy economics.
Their biggest difference is in their economic plans. In a communist system you're guaranteed failure, poverty and misery. In a fascist system it's basically just capitalism with maybe a few more economic regulations. So a fascist country will have some chances at prosperity.
Aside from that if you're a minority in a fascist country you'll most likely have problems, but the majority will enjoy a very homogenous society with few social problems, but fascism doesn't necessarily = genocide or problems for the minority. In a communist country everyone has problems.
In both though you're freedoms are limited heavily because they are both very authoritarian. In both, if you talk out of line you could end up dead. In a communist country though in a little in fraction could be your death. It isn't as strict in a fascist country. You'd have slightly more economic and social liberty in a fascist country.
locking people in cages cannot be moral as it is 1) a violation of the NAP and 2) dependent on the assumption that there are different moral categories for individual people, which is not true
"murder is wrong" is not a "law", it is a universal truth that is derived from First Principles. A "law" is the violent enforcement of opinions.
I knew I recognized him from somewhere
Objective=/=Consistent
Subjective just means that's it subject to bias.
2+2=4 is an objective truth provided that the axioms it builds upon are true.
A moral theory is subject to the bias of it's creators and is thus subjective. They can be very consistent in how they apply this theory and what not, but it's still subjective.
What the fuck are you talking about, you vitriolic leftyshitter. Did the AC break down at the shareblue office?
I'm not defending those things, I'm just calling you out on being a retard. People can disagree with you without being facists, isn't that odd?