Why is Fascism considered far-right?

Why is Fascism considered far-right?

Anarchy should be as far-right as you can get.

Other urls found in this thread:

politiscales.net/en_US/help/
youtube.com/watch?v=I3x-ge4w46E
politiscales.net/en_US/results/?s1=67&j1=43&s0=17&j0=29&c1=98&comp=67&t1=50&t0=31&b0=19&b1=79&e0=14&e1=40&p1=71&p0=10&m1=21&m0=29
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Doesn't make any sense at all

*sips tea*

Not even close.

left and right are p meaningless desu

Extreme right is anarchy.
All centralized state monopolies are leftist in nature.

fascism isn't necessarily right wing, most examples in history are right wing though
the EU is becoming a good example of left wing fascism, votes that go against the oligarchs' will are ignored or they just make countries vote again until they get what they want (Ireland, France, UK soon...)
it's just placed on the right because the left wants to be able to accuse anyone they don't like of being nazis (which were more leftwing than clinton...)

Communism is Anarchy with prep work.

This guy gets it.

Anarchy isn't a real political ideology the same way that agnosticism isn't Gnostic.

there is more than one dimension user

>still being a linecuck
>not taking the triangular pill

Sure, but you must know what I mean.
As you continue to go right on the spectrum, government gets smaller and smaller. IF you could theoretically go right far enough, you would hit a point where there was essentially no government whatsoever.


Is the spectrum just no longer a valid political theory? This thing makes much more sense to me

Politics isn't a line, it's a snake's back according to Jordan Peterson.

Academics have been trying to turn Hitler into a right wing extremist ever since he invaded the USSR. Before then, progressives loved him. Fascism is just another flavor of totalitarianism.

Anarchy is the government communists think they want. Which is the funniest shit imaginable.

> ANARCHY!
> TELL ME WHAT TO DO AND RULE OVER ME!

But honestly, anarchy would be a branch from all government charts.It means no government. Or if anything, anarchists should support libertarian gov., basically just leave me the fuck alone the political party.

All 1D or 2D or even 3D political alignments are fucking retarded, as is anyone who unironically falls for them. I mean, it's convenient lingo for talking to normies in fragments of complete sentences, but other than that, it's useless.

Here is a halfway-decent 8D representation: politiscales.net/en_US/help/

Fascism, on the above, is
>essentialist
>nationalist
>conservative
>revolutionary when out of power and reformatory when in power.
>in the middle of the spectrum for the other four dimensions

Meanwhile, the modern "left" and "right" coalitions, as expressed by the "leaders" of the party, have mostly been
>constructivist
>internationalist
>divided somewhat on the others but with positions basically not far from the middle
Which has put them at odds with a large portion (probably 25% of all Whites) who are latently Fascist but would deny being so in so many words.

Even if you feel that way, true far right should be minarchy or night-watchman state

Left-right political spectrums are a remnant of the French revolution, where those seated on the left would propose progressive actions and those on the right would often try to maintain the status quo. The left-right dichotomy is retarded and antiquated.

I think you are referencing how Peterson said that the point on the line goes back and forth between opposing ends. One year we are too liberal so we push towards conservative, but then we are too conservative so we go back towards being liberal.

>muh right-left

>Why is Fascism considered far-right?
>Anarchy should be as far-right as you can get.

american education is worthless...

The only spectrum that matters is whether you are correct or incorrect or somewhere in between.

>Why is Fascism considered far-right?
What is horseshoe theory?

Fascism is just applied Libertarianism

>left and right are purely determined by economic theory
fucking burgers

Fascism is Center to Far Right.

because lefties don't want to admit that they're fascist

Because the socialists fought the fascists in the Spanish Civil War and the leftists have used that to justify the concept that the fascists are right wing.

To do otherwise would cause them to question the trust worthiness of the glorious all powerful state and they can't bring themselves to do that.

Right-wing isn't 'small government' - it's tradition and order.

Your classification of 'left' and 'right' wing are only left and right wing under classical liberal paradigms. Look into how the term originated under monarchy.

This board has truly descended into boomerposting.

Hitler wasn't a marxist socialist. Socialism as a concept has been around for far longer than the idea of an economic system - he's eluding to the spirit of what it meant under no economic sense.

>Defining political views on a line instead of an xy axis
C'mon

Ancap is hyper-centrist. This is why the left/right model is shit.

It doesn't matter what you call it. If your neighbors can rat you out to the secret police and you're never seen again, you're living in a totalitarian state. Fun fact: Goebbels voiced his support for Lenin at a beer hall meeting in 1925 and caused a riot that resulted in a few deaths.

You fucking mongrels are so damn retarded with your left and right meme. How could you ever put hundreds of different ideologies on a single scale? Left and right doesn't mean shit because you could never put all the political ideologies on a single scale.
Fascism doesn't even mean "big government"
Was Stalin one because he was authorian? No he was the exact opposite of a Fascist.

>>Muh political line
Fucking new fag.

Fascism is literally the Third Way. Mussolini was clear that Fascismo was an attack on both authoritarian collectivism and neoliberal democratic capitalism. This is why Libertarian political maps have two axis to maintain symmetry.
There are more than two choices, don't fall for the dichotomy.

>Why is Fascism considered far-right?

Because like any other belief system it's just spooks that try to tell people what they should and shouldn't be, do, say etc.

>Socialism as a concept has been around for far longer than the idea of an economic system

Yes and its always been shit, what's your point?

>>Going back to the Spanish Civil War to justify the US political climate in the current year.

>There are more than two choices, don't fall for the dichotomy.
No, there aren't. First past the post voting always results in a 2 party system because people wind up voting strategically.

When people cant tell their left from their right.

youtube.com/watch?v=I3x-ge4w46E

FPTP results in two de facto parties, true, but those are really just coalitions formed during the primaries, as opposed to the coalitions that form after elections in more sophisticated parliamentary systems.

There are more than two DIRECTIONS or PHILOSOPHIES and there's no guarantee that even with two de facto parties that they won't share all of the same basics that count.

There's also the possibility of a political insurgency taking over one of those two coalition/parties as well.

As "systems" both capitalism and communism are Jewish.

People say that " 'communism' works in the family so let's scale it up" and that fails.

But free market exchange also only works in small situations (two or so individuals in a controlled homogeneous environment) and immediately turns into the rape of the workers or the nation when scaled up, so it's shit, too.

Maybe if someone had an idea like "national socialism" that would work; limit the free exchange to what doesn't hurt the people, and limit the social welfare to the people that actually belong in the nation and country?

"muh freedom is best" the post.

Frankly IDGAF if the State I live in is "totalitarian" or not.

All I GAF about is if the State I live in is a White State that does its best for the White people who live in it. And if it DOES do that, I actually WANT the State to have power. Lots of it.

Oh, man. I love politiscales.

The one I got tonight is cool.

How'd you get the two characteristics at the bottom?

I did it about a week ago, and I got neither of those - it must be a new feature but when I went onto my page it doesn't show any

politiscales.net/en_US/results/?s1=67&j1=43&s0=17&j0=29&c1=98&comp=67&t1=50&t0=31&b0=19&b1=79&e0=14&e1=40&p1=71&p0=10&m1=21&m0=29

All the political words and classifications real meanings arent what most people think anymore. People are mostly stupid.

Libertarianism and anarchy are left wing by historical definition. But Left/right doesn't have true ideological definitions anymore. Modern politics have morphed the political spectrum into two big tent factions. The pic in OP says "smaller government" is right wing because its trying to explain the relatively recent phenomenon of libertarian-esque politics find a home in the "right wing" factions. But in the original french definition of right/left, the right wing was undoubtedly "big government". The ideological definition means nothing. Left and right are the labels of two factions. So is fascism right wing? Yes. So is libertarianism. They are a part of the same faction. The fact that libertarians and fascists have more in common with eachother than they do with leftists really illustrates how polarized politics have become.

I just did it and got the thing at the bottom.

Mind linking your thing, so I can see if I can figure a way to get the stuff at the bottom without having to redo it?

>faggot OP thinks politics is about government size rather than societal values and economic policies

Quote mining

fascism is placed on the right for one reason. People who become fascist are right wingers who finally realize the only way to get the traditionalist society they want is through an authoritarian fascist government. so it may not be "right" but it is an ideology eventually adopted by people on the right.

>left and right are about authoritarianism and libertarianism
>politics is one dimensional

why are so many people so retarded

It is individualism against collectivism. Yet pol don't realise that both libertarians and fascists are mostly collectivists ie let's have rules which benefit the society, while socialism/communism is individualist ie everyone working where he wants, behaves as degenerate as he wants and collects as much welfare he can take.

>libertarians are collectivist
>communists are individualist

Because you're using a dogshit one-dimensional political spectrum. I mean fuck, at least use the two-dimensional ones from political compass. Or can your brain not comprehend more than one line at a time?

If you define collectivist as a person who values society then yes.

It suddenly and magically switched from being far left to far right on the day the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was broken.

Anarchy is not in the chart since it is not a government form.

I have awakened
I am the center of all dimensions

Stalin was neither communist nor socialist. He purged all commies and socialist.

Step 4 here, Does step 6 represent a theocracy?

>1DPD
kys