Has real fascism ever been tried according to you fags?

Has real fascism ever been tried according to you fags?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_miracle
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thing_(assembly)
twitter.com/AnonBabble

yeah its called Roman Empire it was epic

Fascism didn't fail in Spain.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_miracle

yeah and it failed because it is communism

People complains about Pinochet not being fascist enough but that's horsewash.

Fascism failed in Chile?
Compared to what other south american country?

Brazil.

>Spain lasted 39 years
>Portugal lasted 43 years

Doesn't seem so bad

>Pinochet was a fascist

The flourishing Brazil, of course

This, Fascism was great for spain and only ended after Franco died. Franco is still admired today by many Spaniards for what he did to keep away communism and help Spain stay for Spaniards. If They'd lost the civil war you would have seen yet another country in europe fall to godless and cultureless communism.

Was Franco a fascist? I've read some stuff that say he was just a conservative monarchist

Fascism in Spain didn't fail

>no Greece
It was actually going well until Hitler invaded

Neither did it in Chile or Portugal.
And the Republic of China still exists in Taiwan.

''Fascism fails every single time it's been tried!''

Well, it would work if the group of retarded consumerist overlords wouldn't invade the countries and destroy most of its factories or even cause a political corruption within it by invading and killing thousands of innocent people that just wanted to live in a patriotic justified society.

>republic of china
>fascist
>failure
Compared to the glorious maoist people's republic, such a failure

Fascism was pretty successful as I recall before the international community and the Marxists shut it down for working against them.

>Germany, National socialism:
Took the entire modern world mobilized to destroy.

>Russia, Communism:
Destroyed itself.

Too bad the nationalists in Taiwan are no longer in government

Franco was right aythoritarian. Fascism is center authoritarian.

communism and fascism probably would work if they weren't always toppled by outside imperialistic forces.

Meh. Fascism mainly exist in order to prevent the left from reuining the country.
Taiwan does pretty good nowadays, so better let people be until lefty retardation comes to far again.

But Chile is less of a shithole than Brazil.

we still haven't tried anime fascism
just sayin

ruining the country*

Republic of China still exists on Fromosa/Taiwan.

You are stupid for constantly reposting this.

You fail.

Communism doesn't work since it falls from the inside.

Fascism failed because of the allied invasion.

He was a centrist. Spain did not have an extremely free economy. Some things were still intervened on and nationalized.

When actual communism is left wing you actually need an extremely liberal economy to be right.

Fascist Italy and National Socialist Germany were both economic powerhouses, and rapidly industrialized/improved upon adopting the systems they used. They didn't "fail" because of their political system; they failed because they lost a war. It's like saying democracy is a failure because France got blitzkrieg'd.

Japan is still extremely nationalist, and they're an economic powerhouse.
Taiwan is doing better than ROC
Spain did extremely well under Franco, and it was only after he stepped down and they turned to democracy, that Spain started devolving more into a bunch of lazy siestaniggers
Chile was very prosperous under Pinochet

And hell, let's not forget about Singapore. On paper, it's a democracy, but it's system of government was actually straight-up inspired by Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists.

A
FUCKING
TREE

touché

Fascism is conservative and traditionalist, is the most right wing ideology

salazar is a hero

I could argue every government "fails" 100% of the time given enough time.

But as far as i'm concerned, Monarchistic governments by and large out score any form of collectivist democracy over human history (and i'm talking over the thousands of years). Hell, we even had to suspend our precious democracy to win ww2, FDR was elected an illegal 3rd time, wages were frozen by government decree, industry was centralized and directed for the nation, not the good of profit. Face it, when shit gets real, everyone wants Fascism. 88

every day i get called this and ive done nothing to deserve it

Yes but doesn't his views on religion and onarchy put him more to the right ?
I mean, just look at pic related.

It's not bad at all, after all they are making an indirect joke to canada and it's a free (you)

Half of the countries on there werent even fascist.
>japanese empire
>fascist

>Nationalist China
>fascist

>Chile
>fascist

>Spain
>fascist

>Portugal
>fascist

>Brazil
>fascist

Fascism is very statist and pro-worker though.

>Germany
>Japan
>Italy
>China
Were defeated in war and dismantled
>Spain
>Portugal
Peacefully changed to democracy/republic (most likely due to outside pressure, but it's not important).
>Chile
Peacefully changed to republic and while it lasted it made the economy grow.
>Brazil
No idea honestly.

What does this mean? Fascism is good at reacting to a crisis or performing radical reforms, while during the peace time it changes to a more lenient political system. It's almost as if it isn't meant to last forever.

Shut up, discount texas.

Shut up, Yankee

BUT IT WILL WORK THIS TIME FOR SURE

That doesn't make him/his government any less fascist, he just held traditionalist and monarchist views which were also popular with many people in Spain who were upset with the Republic and how liberal everything was getting.

It doesnt fail, everyone else fucks with it.

It actually worked really well in Portugal.

The two term limit wasn't in the constitution until after FDR.

I'd like to point out that fascism only failed in most of those countries due to external threats and war with other nations. Not because the concept cause something bad to happen within the country practicing it.

That's ok. The modern PRC is fascism hiding from the Jew under a red blanket.

Shit gets good for the country, others get jealous and fuck everything up for their kike overlords

Salve.

i wouldn't say peaceful, some people died, there was a lot of tension and the resentment is still palpable

>Taiwan does pretty good nowadays, so better let people be until lefty retardation comes to far again.
Too late, Taiwan is practically run by antifa at this point
It's the only pro-fag & pro-refugee place in east asia

I didn't hear shit about it so I assumed so. I mean, it's not the level of USSR collapsing or Venezuela.

Brazil never had a fascist government, the fuck you're talking about. Vargas was not an integralist, he jailed them.

They give the power to the king and.then he stablish democracy right?

Im new in spain

/thread
Roman fascism wins every time.

Neither did nazism or fascism. They where defeated. And It took the entire world to stop them.

Communism on the other hand never had to be defeated. It imploded on its own pretty much anywhere it was tried.

kek summarized yes

Reminder that libtards rewrite history making them look worse than they were.

Failed in Spain and Portugal?
From what I know in both cases the parties were losing support and just made sure there is a (semi) peaceful transition.

I agree. I see democracy as an aberration of the what's normal. Monarchy has been the standard across the world for thousands of years. Democracy has only really arisen in the past 200 years, and more like 100 for everywhere but America. Every system has its ups and downs, but I think democracy is a shit system that has never really shown itself to be worthwhile. This current "experiment" is a mere blip on the scale when you look at all of history.

The main problem I see with democracy is that elections and political terms means that only short term benefits matter. It's all about what you can promise to your voters within the next few years that counts. Any long-term repercussions way down the road? Doesn't fucking matter, because you'll be out of office then. The constant need to placate people in the short-term means that we end up with a prisoner's dilemma where we're heading to an obvious iceberg at full-steam, but nobody is really willing to change course.

Perfect example of this is the welfare state, and how our economic systems are on course to collapse due to things like welfare, medicare, social security, etc. These things are all pyramid schemes that can't sustain themselves, but no one is willing to address the problem, because taking away gibs will piss off huge numbers of voters. In terms of game theory, it's better to just keep giving people what they want in order to keep getting elected, even if it means bigger and bigger problems down the road.

In a monarchy, however. You really don't have that problem. You're the ruler for life. You are better able to manage things long-term rather than on a year-to-year basis. Overall stability rather than short term placation and long-term destruction. And while it's true that monarchs are "riskier" because it's a role of the dice each time, the idea that monarchs aren't beholden to their people is false. And it's not like there aren't ways to get rid of a monarch that's doing poorly.

The one benefit that democracy has over monarchy is that democracy ensures that if the people want a terrible governor removed, they can do so in an election. If you have an awful king, the only legitimate way to remove him is through violence, which threatens the safety of ordinary people.

That being said, there are plenty of dope monarchs, like the Prince of Liechtenstein. His solution to create a legal pathway for secession more or less means that the only reason people live under his laws is because they choose to, and therefore, his principality is a voluntary society.

Yeah, it failed because the entire world decided to declare war on it.

They made it because if he lived, he would have stayed president for the rest of his life. If he was alive, nobody would have done shit to stop him.

This flag's neat. People should be waving this instead of the nazi flag.

definitely, it didn't break into hell but the americans still parked an aircraft carrier at the mouth of the tagus (lisbons river) to put pressure against the communists

In 1944 did national socialism as an ideology fail? Or was the government overthrown by foreign militaries?

Yep. And it's awesome. Best system so far.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thing_(assembly)

>Pinochet
>Failed

>The one benefit that democracy has over monarchy is that democracy ensures that if the people want a terrible governor removed, they can do so in an election.
Not really. Look at how the deep state works. How all our political choices are funneled into being two sides of the same coin, and anyone who doesn't fall in line with what the elites want is silenced even if their positions would be popular. If anything, Democracy is just a farce, because it placates people and makes them THINK that their voice actually matters and that they can cause change. In reality, it's really just a release valve so that people don't bother doing any real revolution


>If you have an awful king, the only legitimate way to remove him is through violence, which threatens the safety of ordinary people.
Wrong. When monarchs are fucking up, there are plenty of ways to remove the king without a revolution or violence. There have been plenty of times throughout history where a poor monarch stepped down and let someone else take his place to do the job better. Typically due to internal family politics, having a cousin or uncle takeover, or what-have-you.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thing_(assembly)
Nevermind, then.

I love it how American schools teach you that all kings were evil tyrants and they never talk about how early Germanic monarchies were limited and accountable

Only on a national level. It still strongly adheres to the ideals and principles of traditionalism which pervade its collectivist population. Communism on the other hand is a global collectivism that not only disowns traditionalism, but actively seeks its destruction because it gives its subjects a national identity instead of a global, communist identity. This is why culture has thrived in fascist states, but died out in communist ones.

So basically the same excuse as commies with yugoslavia
>authoritarians Every time

Same excuse as with commies then, blame america
Atleast communism lasted longer

It's not even just the germans (but on that subject, look up how the HRE worked). The idea that a monarch was like a gamer playing Sim City and micromanaging every aspect of a society by his will alone is complete nonsense. Monarchs still had officials, senators, and plenty of other people there as well. I can't think of any time in civilized society where a monarch was just some batshit insane guy who decided 100% of everything entirely on his own. That's just a hollywood depiction of what monarchism is.

Monarchy in general is a good system if the nobility exists, since then you have a layer of local autonomy (which is especially good if there's a freedom of movement for commoners, then natural selection would choose the best/most sustainable policies by having best governed territories flourish) AND a group of people with means and determination to overthrow the king if he's being completely shit (which admittedly is very rare).
Monarchy also means that monarchs want to care for the country because that's literally the greatest legacy they'll pass on to their children. Since you don't deal with commoners' feefees the king is free from populism as well, most of the time. Welfare state slippery slope is a very good example, add to that the INSANE national debts and well...
Also, a king is supposed to be a king from the very beginning, is taught how to be a king and is surrounded by people specifically supposed to make him being a king easier. Now, how many people were taught to be rulers from birth in democracy?
>3050 in the post
Fuuug I don't wanna wait a thousand years for this.
Nobility's supposed to keep monarchs in check.
Also majority of teachers are leftists. I wonder if that influences their opinion... Feels good to live in Poland where we take pride in our kings, even if we aren't monarchy anymore.

One barely lasted 10 years
The other lasted 70

So in these societies, the monarchs were elected for life? The position of king wasn't inherited?

1) Yugoslavia didn't fail because of gommunism. It failed because it was a franken-country of ethnic groups who hate each others guts forced to unite together under one fake country
2) Yugoslavia was not exactly a successful country. The comparison with Spain is terrible, because Spain was actually very prosperous under Franco.

For Every fascist example there is a communist one.
Its just that people can't deal with Shitty ideologies , so they have to make their failures unfalsifiable (unscientifc)

Communism lasted longer since it didn't had any full invasion destroying the whole country infrastructure to the ground you numb nuts, if we go by the logic of your opinion then why France failed in WW2? They were a capitalist country too.

T H I S

What its failing is democracy.

Not all monarchies are by blood, no.

Hitler tried to micromanage, the military anyways, and failed massively.

So one was so good it needed the entire world to stop it, and one was so bad that it didn't even stand on its own? Now THAT makes my brain fizzle.

Really? What capitalism has brought good in my country and your country is the fact that at least we can eat without being consumed by starvation, fascism is an ideology where you can be feed well by its strategic economic system, capitalism just brought consumerism, an economic plane that just makes civilians become consumers and nothing else, no morals no nada.

Only the capital while it lasts.

...

>fascism failed because the entire world ganged up and bullied them for not falling in line
Sure, it's all Fascism's fault.

It's also important to have a nobility that's actually of the same stock as the rest of the people. Part of the problem we have nowadays is that our replacement of the old nobility (ie, the rich jews who control the deep state) are NOT Americans, Brits, French, Germans, etc. They don't care about the successs of the countries they live in, because they have no allegiance to the people. They have an allegiance to THEIR people, the fellow jews.

>le helicopterman was a fascist
>hurrdurr every right wing authoritarian is a fascist
Stop repeating leftist propaganda you tards and stop worshipping a CIA plant

This.
Pinochet was a neoliberal dictator who sold everything to the big corporations. That doesn't sound fascist to me desu~

if left to it's own device, the 1000 year reich would have lasted a 1000 years. cuck.

Polish-Lithuanian Commowealth worked like that.

>Muh consumerism
>I don't like buying things >:(
>How dare big corporayshuns sell stuff

He sold Chile to chileans, he created a national identity from the army identity too.

>King making non-countryman a noble
How cucked is he?

The problem is not them selling stuff, the problem is them changing cultures and costumes for them to sell stuff.

Look at the history of the jew around europe and you shall understand what im talking about.

>knows nothing about it yet tries to argue with someone from there
Typical american
>their religions are diffrent but their race and language is the same with serbs using a diffrent alphabet
>yugoslavia was very sucsessful under tito go read a book
Nevertheless the exuses are the same when it comes to commies and fascists
They think they win by being unfalsifiable , but it just show that politics is far from being a science

They've only been destroyed. They have had no impact on how effective they are.

Tbqh early Italian fascism and Falangism seem great.