- This topic has 149 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 7 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
>what is fascism?
>thing I don’t like of course -
>opponents of Fascism had no idea what it was
Makes sense-
Fascism is the partnership between government and corporations to control key resources (via legislation, funding and contracts) where the rest of the economy is largely unregulated.
What people call fascism is actually totalitarianism which can exists in any form of government.
Fascism is a flavor is socialism. The USA was founded as a weak fascist system which is why there are fasci (the stick/axe) all over houses of government.
-
So why has every single fascist regime been totalitarian in some way?
Or was there one that allowed their citizens to participate in government (voting, petitions, etc…) and that allowed them civil liberties (free speech, gun ownership, religious freedom, etc…)? No, Nazis giving these ONLY to aryan Reich citizens while treating garden gnomes/gypsies/slavs/etc… like shit doesn’t count.
-
>Why do we only pay attention to the totalitarian ones
Because Reddlt and MSM is propaganda directed at midwits.Pre 1900 USA was weak fascist as was the Roman republic. In fact most of the time you’re talking about socialism it’s a flavor of fascism.
Tl;dr muh nazzies is an example of a totalitarian version is fascism and the USA is text book successful fascism up till 1914 when the central bank took over.
-
> and the USA is text book successful fascism up till 1914 when the central bank took over.
Wait, are you saying that from Washington to Wilson that America was, in general, an example of a successful fascist state?
-
Yup.
It’s not a claim, it’s literally textbook fascist. Soft fascism with a weak central authority. They controlled trade at first. Then moved on to agracultire, minerals and banking.-
Can you give me your definition of a textbook fascist? Cause this shit does not fit with the definition I’m familiar with. The USA enshrines individual liberties in the constitution. A fascist state usually suppresses individual liberties. I can’t imagine Washington wanting to be an autocratic dictator. Your definition of ‘soft fascism’ seems to be so broad that you could easily use it to categorise states under that umbrella for people and leaders who would have been disgusted (and some of them salivating over the possibilities) to be called/act such.
-
>fascist state usually suppresses individual liberties
Not him but he’s arguing over the fascist economic model, not it’s social model which he’s claiming can be variable. The US enshrining civil liberties can coexist with the fascist economic structure-
Oh I see, still seems overly broad. Would it be fair to call it a fascist state or more accurate to call it a democratic republican state with ‘fascistic tendencies’? Seems a bit simplistic to simply classify it as a fascist state because the economics is fascistic. The leader is clearly not autocratic, which is the textbook definition, nor are its stances (for the most part) on civil liberties. If one is to take the existence of ANY laws or impositions on the individual as suppression that everything could be redefined as ‘weak fascism’.
-
Give me an example of an autocratic fascist state
-
-
-
>A fascist state suppress the individual
No, any STATE suppress the individual. The prime distinction is how and how much.
>Fascism obligates an autocrat
Nope. Even Hitler didn’t want to rule Japan, Italy and north Africa.It isn’t broad at all, it’s just swept under the rug of history. Any weak form of government isn’t overt.
The constitution ENUMERATES individual rights to limit the negative aspects of fascism–the founders learned from the Roman republic and tried to limit fascism from becoming totalitarian.
It isn’t"my" definition. It’s THE CORRECT definition.
>Fascism suppresses the individual.
Cool story, tell us more about communism.You’re economically illeterate.
-
I understand what you’re saying but that’s clearly not the textbook definition of fascism. It would be easier to judge whether your definition of fascism is overly broad or your assertion it is correct and not your personal definition if you simply posted it so we could discuss it.
-
It was given to me by a history BA. It was originally supposed to be coined as corporatism.
Everything after 2013 (leading up to WW1) was a push to totalitarianism.
-
1913, my bad. The USA didn’t have a federal standing army till just before ww1
-
OMG, I just want your definition of it. You said textbook, well fuck, just tell me which textbook if you don’t want to type it out.
What? Nazi Germany with Hitler, Mussolini’s Italy, Francoist Spain.
-
>The partnership between government and corporations to control key resources with the rest of the economy left to the whims of the public
Hitler didn’t micromanage German industries (literally the opposite) and didn’t want to control any Ally. Mousseline literally wanted to call it corporatism because he, also, didn’t micromanage his industrial leadership.
https://roanoke.com/news/local/quote-of-the-day-benito-mussolini-on-corporatism/article_1142b9c9-4df6-5e3c-92b4-33538011d97a.html -
>The partnership between government and corporations to control key resources with the rest of the economy left to the whims of the public
Wait, that’s your definition? That’s it? You have a history BA and your definition of fascism is just one line about economical control by government?
-
>Just how the government controls the economy
>Just
F=ma
E=mc^2Brevity sis.
-
It was called corporatism for a totally different reason. Do you know what corporatism is?
-
Sorry for being snarky, I’ve been imbibing
-
-
-
-
> and the USA is text book successful fascism up till 1914 when the central bank took over.
Wait, are you saying that from Washington to Wilson that America was, in general, an example of a successful fascist state?
Pre 1900 USA was weak fascist as was the Roman republic. In fact most of the time you’re talking about socialism it’s a flavor of fascism.
Tl;dr muh nazzies is an example of a totalitarian version is fascism and the USA is text book successful fascism up till 1914 when the central bank took over.
Fascism tried to sell itself as that, but it really was bullshit.
Fascism is any series of philosophies espoused by a political group that are custom-designed to ensure the group remains on power- via popular support- at any means.
These philosophies will change according to what’s convenient and what’s not. Hitler and Musso are old and obsolete. New fascists are a plenty and in all the continents.Latam facism claims to be socialist and anti-corporate because being socialist is considered the "normal" in the continent.
The day that changes, fascists will start talking about how the country needs to open up to foreign investors.If this is your definition of fascism, literally every government in history is fascist. Under this definition, fascism just means state and is a useless term beyond that. Actually scrotebrained take. Why the fuck does every midwit feel the need to invent their own personal definition of this word?
-
>Every state in history was fascism
A lot of them, yes. The USA: absolutely. I’m using the actual definition, you’re using the Marxist propaganda version.
Non fascist socialism is called Charity. State mandated socialism is fascism.Your concept of fascism is programming from the Marxist indoctrination of public "education" and corporate media.
The problem is you have a mental disorder associated with your programming.
The commies want you to hate America, thus the very system America is founded on has been programed into you as evil.
It isn’t "my" definition, it is the non communist corrupted actual definition.
-
> I’m using the actual definition, you’re using the Marxist propaganda version.
Fascism, defined by Mussolini, is "Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State". That doesn’t fit the description of the early USA at all, where the state was very decentralized. Washington didn’t run a totalitarian regime pseud.-
Mussolini was a totalitarian. Totalitarianism can exist in any form of government. The government/corporate control of resources was the fascism. He didn’t dissolve the corporations.
No. The name is much older. It came from the Etruscan symbol of the bundle and axe. It is a flavor of fascism rooted in corporate/government partnership.
Cool story. You clearly learned history from Netflix and Wikipedia.
>Back to reality
It’s literally the partnership of the government and corporations to control key resources where the rest of the economy is largely unregulated. -
The unions were called Fascio for the same reason, and the original fascists were all former trades unionists.
-
You’re talking about the structure of the corporation itself. Unuions use law (government) and legislation (government) to asset power over the board of directors or ceo. The government doesn’t care about the corporate organization, the government only cares that it can compel the corporation to meet national needs. The role of the government is to enforce contracts.
-
No i learned what corporatism is from Giovanni gentile. It has nothing to do with private companies and corporation. It has to do with restructuring the economy by creating a more unionized guild system. As the pic shows, the corporations were really more like mass guilds or unions that represented all jobs and professions. It’s meant to make the state function more like a body, a corpus
-
I didn’t think it were possible for an ideology to become so alien just because of a version of a single language (in this case, american english)
-
It was called corporatism for a totally different reason. Do you know what corporatism is?
>Corporatism has nothing to do with corporations
>Writes all about structures corporations and strong unions could treat the state like an corpus head
Did you read what you just wrote lad? This is a state partnership with corporations. You simply defined it bottom up not top down. Replace unuions with nationalism (which are interchangeable in your description) and there it is–state partnership with corporations to control resources (people in this case)Now look a the USA up to the 1900s. Strong unuions increasingly partnering with the government (legislation and law) to protect workers and improve working conditions.
The idea of Fascism was corrupted in the 20rh century, it wasn’t crated.
-
>Mussolini was a totalitarian.
Granted, but are you suggesting that anarcho-fascism could be anything more than a scrotebrained meme ideology?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Fascism tried to sell itself as that, but it really was bullshit.
Fascism is any series of philosophies espoused by a political group that are custom-designed to ensure the group remains on power- via popular support- at any means.
These philosophies will change according to what’s convenient and what’s not. Hitler and Musso are old and obsolete. New fascists are a plenty and in all the continents.Latam facism claims to be socialist and anti-corporate because being socialist is considered the "normal" in the continent.
The day that changes, fascists will start talking about how the country needs to open up to foreign investors.-
>Fascism claims to be that but isn’t
No, it is.>Claims to be anti corporate
No, it literally doesn’tYou have a mental disorder dude.
-
>These philosophies will change according to what’s convenient and what’s not
scrote-speak for "everything I don’t like is secretly fascist" -
All this sounds like Biden and the Democrats
-
-
>look mom I posted it again
-
-
The same as today.
-
Neither do facists
-
-
Unironically this is why the word should be ditched in political discourse and academics. The name of an ideology should be determined by the name of the founder even if the founder made it a name since there will be modern interpretations that use the name that still differ.
-
"Third position" works fine, but academics (and those who pressure them) are political hacks crammed full with cultral/historical/social biases. Trust Western political "science""""""" as much as Soviet biology.
-
The difference is, Soviet biology actually ditched Lysenkoism once hard evidence for heredity and modern molecular biology started piling up in the 50s. A bit late, but better than never. Western academia makes Soviet academia look fair, free, and transparent by comparison.
-
Amerimutts had their own Lysenko and his name was Ancel Keys.
-
Amerimutts had their own Lysenko and his name was Ancel Keys.
I love how communists still have useful idiots coping on their behalf a century later and well beyond even the slightest possibility of another communist state existing. You know an ideology was shilled HARD when its fumes alone are enough to damage the brains of people generations removed from it.
-
>criticizing capitalism makes you a communist
How does it feel, muttoid, that you’ll die diabetic, blind, and footless while Mexicans and Chinamen partition what remains of your country?-
>I’m totally not a communist you’re so ideological!
>this is me masturbating over the fantasy of America dying
The joke couldn’t be more on you, I’m Russian, чиcтый дeбил.-
>The joke couldn’t be more on you, I’m Russian, чиcтый дeбил.
Sure, let me rephrase that.How does it feel, noviop, that you’ll die diabetic, blind, and footless while Chechens and Chinamen partition what remains of your country?
-
I’d bet anything I’m taller, can lift more, and make more money than you.
-
>and make more money than you.
not saying much since he does it for free
-
-
-
-
-
-
>Western academia makes Soviet academia look fair, free, and transparent by comparison.
The pain is unreal bros
-
-
It’s not a third position it’s just right wing
-
No it isn’t scrotebrain, Fascism is an off shoot of socialism. Mussolini considered fascism to be the true end goal of socialism instead of communism.
-
>Mussolini wrote stupid shit
>Anon is scrotebrained
-
-
No, you cunt. 3rd position movements made compromises with conservatives as part of coalition building. That doesn’t mean they were "right wing".
-
-
> "Third position" works fine.
Something that isn’t A or B…
It’s a shitty way of describing anything.
-
-
-
I remember somewhere in The Greater Britain Oswald Mosley complained about fascism being misrepresented and labelled to just anyone people didn’t like. Some things never change.
-
>fascistoid
lmao-
literally reads like a LULZ thread
-
-
Well, tbh calling SPD fascist was totally true, because they defended the bourgie state by the means of terror.
And as soon as soviets began propagating electoralism and strategic alliances with bourgeois parties, they became reactionary as well. -
pretty much, it is just a liberal smear tactic
-
The next paragraph is even more interesting
The "anti-fascist" hysteria in Spain, which caused the left to tear the country apart occurred when there was basically no fascism.
-
-
-
>the socialists sowed the whirlwind and reaped the consequences
lmao
-
>Kills ten Falangists
>Falangists strike back
>NoOoOoOoO NOt JuAnitA NoT ThE wHolEsOmE SoCiaLiStErInOs freaking rEaShUnArIes-
The ‘funny’ thing is that the Falange had made a ridiculous score during the 1936 elections, barely 0.5% of the votes. It was leftist violence (coming from both anarchists and socialists) which turned it into a mass movement.
-
-
-
-
-
The Collapse of the Spanish Republic, 1933-1936: Origins of the Civil War
By Stanley G. Paynestarts on page 64
-
Thanks, anon.
-
-
-
Sounds like far right propaganda tbh.
Especially regarding Spain where there was a lot of reactionary powers of not fascist origin.-
>book written by respected historian specializing in the spanish civil war
>nooooo it can’t be truuuu this is fascist propaganda
Why are they like this?-
Respected historian should know that struggle between republicans/leftists and reactionary forces of various kinds in Spain has a long history, and painting leftists as those who drew the first blood is, most likely, getting the facts wrong.
-
Cope
-
>respected historians only agree with me
lmao
-
-
you’ve presented literally nothing but your feelings so far
-
>presented literally nothing but your feelings
>that struggle between republicans/leftists and reactionary forces of various kinds in Spain has a long history
This is a fact, and this struggle was pretty violent. For example, the "Black Hand" setup when royals have executed several anarchists on the unproven accusation of being part of a terrorist conspiracy.-
>reactionary
now who’s playing semantic games? This thread is about fascism and the left calling everyone fascists. It’s not about all reactionaries (monarchists, royalists, catholics, conservatives, etc) as that conflict had been going on for well over a century. The fascist/socialist conflict didn’t begin until the 1930s. And of course the left was more than happy to call everyone, especially each other a fascist.
-
Anarchists are by definition part of a terrorist conspiracy to violently overthrow the state.
-
-
-
-
-
Well spoken comrade, remind me to close the office which let this shovelcrap get published.
-
Seethe
-
That’s very nice, now when will we trade half of our gold for a bunch of rotting Mosin Nagants cumrade?
-
>history is when people in academia say the same things that I already believed
-
-
-
>Sounds like far right propaganda tbh.
>blatant plebbitor trying to fit inHow do you do fellow LULZner!
-
-
>The "anti-fascist" hysteria in Spain, which caused the left to tear the country apart occurred when there was basically no fascism.
A premonition if there ever was one
-
-
idk
-
Didnt read. Stop playing semantics every thread. Make an argument.
-
>didn’t read
>makes an absolutely horrendous post
Classic American post.-
>NOOO!! LET ME MAKE SEMANTICS OF FACISM THREAD NUMBER 394848!!
-
>LET ME
lmao you can’t stop anyone from doing anything
-
-
-
-
-
It’s really just a term the left uses to designate targets for whom it is justifiable to use violence against in non-revolutionary settings.
-
Yes.
-
>You are a fascist
>N-no you are a fascist
Wow. Crazy to think leftoids have been doing this for almost 100 years. -
>none of those use fasces either symbolically to characterize their social ideology or symbolically as a literal emblem
Calling Americans "fascists" is okay but it’s because they have fasces on literally every emblem they own -
Because fascists by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost. Anyone exhibiting these tendencies is ultimately a danger to society
-
>Because fascists by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost.
-
>Because fascists by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions
I can’t think of a single truly fascist movement (Hitler, Mussolini, Mosley, etc.) that ever tried to lie. In fact they get right up on stage and say exactly who they are and what they want.-
It’s just usual leftist lies about how the people really, deep down, want their weird, unpopular shit rather than populism.
-
-
sartre was a complete hack, most overrated "thinker" of the 20th century and that’s saying something
-
i’ll bite
tell us why anon
-
-
This is so stupid and unironically a bad faith argument
>Anti-semites don’t really believe in anything they say or even authentically hate garden gnomes, in fact they know they’re wrong. They just do it to be evil because they’re evil bad guys who hate for fun.
-
It’s a good propaganda piece. and that’s what matters. Makes for shitty philosophy though.
Because fascists by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost. Anyone exhibiting these tendencies is ultimately a danger to society
So true gomrade.
Not the anon, but the quote is pretty self-explanatory, but to be fair I haven’t read him, or will because he is clearly a propagandist, not a thinker.
-
who is a real thinker to you anon
-
someone else.
a self-fulfilling prophesy even.
-
Plus it really doesn’t matter we’re talking about Sartre here.
-
>who is a real thinker to you anon
A man whom Sartre hated not as a German, but as an aristocrat.-
Yeah and Céline hated him as a cuckold
Storm of steel is brainlet shlock on par with war movies and On The Marble Cliffs is some of the gayest and most pretentious shit i have ever read
Didn’t make me want to read more-
>Storm of steel is brainlet shlock on par with war movies and On The Marble Cliffs is some of the gayest and most pretentious shit i have ever read
No shit, it was his debut piece when he was still fresh out of the trenches in his 20’s and new to the literary scene. What if I told you he wrote books other than Storm of Steel?-
>The key theme in the novel is the figure of the Anarch, the inwardly-free individual who lives quietly and dispassionately within but not of society and the world.
>The Anarch is the positive counterpart of the anarchist.
>I am an anarch – not because I despise authority, but because I need it. Likewise, I am not a nonbeliever, but a man who demands something worth believing in.
>Although I am an anarch, I am not anti-authoritarian. Quite the opposite: I need authority, although I do not believe in it. My critical faculties are sharpened by the absence of the credibility that I ask for. As a historian, I know what can be offered.
>The Anarch is to the anarchist, what the monarch is to the monarchist.
*tips fedora*
Exactly the same kind of pretentiousness I didn’t like in OTMC. "Yes I’m a bootlicker but i can’t find any worthwhile boots to lick because classical society has fallen, now admire how superior i am as i describe calmly picking flowers for 3 pages"
Jesus christ-
>*tips fedora*
>Exactly the same kind of pretentiousness I didn’t like in OTMC. "Yes I’m a bootlicker but i can’t find any worthwhile boots to lick because classical society has fallen, now admire how superior i am as i describe calmly picking flowers for 3 pages"
>Jesus christ
Spoken like a slave with a case of sour grapes over a man who was truly free.-
More like an aloof selfish prick
Why are you even talking to me, shouldn’t you be alone in the forest brooding and meditating on metaphysical questions? -
that sounds woke af
-
-
just stop embarrassing yourself and admit that you haven’t read anything from him lmaoooo
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hell, I can even be a scrotebrain and dissect that quote.
-
-
-
Hitler literally wrote a book explaining how he wanted Lebensraum and to remove garden gnomes from Europe
Seems pretty honest to me -
Because communists by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost. Anyone exhibiting these tendencies is ultimately a danger to society
Because capitalists by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost. Anyone exhibiting these tendencies is ultimately a danger to society
Because socialists by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost. Anyone exhibiting these tendencies is ultimately a danger to society
Because democrats by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost. Anyone exhibiting these tendencies is ultimately a danger to society
Because liberals by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost. Anyone exhibiting these tendencies is ultimately a danger to society
Because globalists by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost. Anyone exhibiting these tendencies is ultimately a danger to society
Antifascists are imbeciles who can’t describe what the hate.
-
seethe
-
cope, trying to make someone angry after losing an argument does nothing, stop being a dumb scrote.
-
Hammer the 8 button
-
-
-
Why do 20th century communists and liberals always sound like a secularized version of some arch-catholic priest giving advice on exorcising demons whenever political badthink comes up?
-
> garden gnome mad his pilpul is being used by fascists against him.
-
>Because leftists by their nature are deceitful beings who eschew good faith dialog and hide their true intentions, which is to lust for power at any cost. Anyone exhibiting these tendencies is ultimately a danger to society
Fixed that for you, woke af on any and all studies into the correlations of psychology and politics.
-
-
https://i.imgur.com/sSpZYM4.gif
>A bald 5’7 Italian mindbroke them this bad
And still it lives rent free in their heads as they get keked by geriatric nu-liberals like Biden. -
Fascism is a term for "any government action that I feel might benefit white people".
-
Weird how those medieval French counts and English barons and so on were fascist because they might have built a nice bridge for their 99.9% white subjects once
-
Neo-fascist even
-
-
-
>what is fascism?
A very strict definition would just mean the political system of Italy between 1922-1943. More broadly, fascism could be called an evolution of national syndicalism. -
Fascism is a merger of state and corporate power. When Mussolini says this, people think he’s referring to large companies, but what he’s really talking about here are syndicates.
-
Corporatism means structuring the economy according to the interests of the corporates, meaning guilds and/or the various public and private sectors. Nitwits see "corporation" and think about hypercapitalism and businesses for profit, which is false.
-
https://i.4cdn.org/his/1633005459868.webm
Italian Fascists supported private property, but denounced international finance and what they called "supercapitalism".
-
True, what is today synonymous with "capitalism" such as liberalism, globalism and the selling out of national goods for international profit need not be synonymous with capitalism at all.
-
-
you say that as if we don’t functionally have that today. The political upper class and the business upper class are one in the same, mega cooperations are not allowed to fail and are all heavily involved in a back and forth with the state.
The lobby, bribe, and kill to ensure an every increasing number of laws that them while drowning even mid size companies under unbearable layers of regulation and legal proceedings.
They are at the top and are a entrenched part of the system, they protect this position through influence on the legal system which decade after decade had shifted to place the protection of cooperations their profits, and their CEOs above all other issues.They are new aged guilds in all but name hashing out agreements between one another and the political oligarchy to ensure the system runs smoothly whike the remaining 98% of the population gets poorer and poorer. The only difference is one of scale, yesterday it was a city and it’s ruling council, today it is the world with organizations like the IMF world economic forum, etc
-
>completely misses the point and does thing anon complains about
-
-
-
It had nothing to do with corporations dude
-
-
I personally define fascism as when there is a one party state.
-
>What is Globalism/Liberalism
>Anything I don’t like -
If you knew what a Fascist is, you’d be one.
-
You know I never considered Nazism as a subset of fascism. It may have borrowed a few ideas from it, but it’s a seperate ideology imo. Many of the central tenets of Nazism, such as eugenics, anti-semitism, nordicism and lebensraum were a thing before Mussolini was even alive.
-
Their political systems are very similar to each other. The main difference is in their driving motivation. Mussolini sought to elevate the state above everything else, whereas the nazis sought to elevate race. Obviously it’s a bit more complex than that, but that’s the just of it.
-
-
Fascism is criminals running the state.
Nazi = Criminals
Mussolini = Criminal-
>This is your brain on liberalism
-
-
Why is gigachad in the background?
-
Fascism is just Socialism 2.0. The name comes from the Italian for trade unions (fascio) and each of the founding fathers of Fascism were socialists who felt the need to rejig their ideology after seeing what a shitshow the USSR was. It’s why they hated Bolsheviks so much.
-
pretty much, id describe it as a more materially viable conclusion of socialist thought that isn’t an unachievable carrot on a stick like communism is
basically socialism for people who arent freaking scrotebrained
-
If you ever need a perfect example of that use the progress of China.
-
-
-
fascism is simply an autocratic government with a private economy represented by various industry-specific corporate guilds that allow streamlined communication between industry, workers, and the state so that the government can both be kept apprised of the needs of their nations industry and workers and in return regulations can be passed down to ensure everyone’s needs are met and the industries of a nation flourishes. industry gets what it needs, workers get workplace regulations and social programs to ensure their quality of life, the state gets to maintain its power on the support of the people and the industrialists. class harmony instead of class conflict
no corporatism is not the same thing as corporatocracy, no fascism is not corporatocracy
-
>no corporatism is not the same thing as corporatocracy, no fascism is not corporatocracy
I wish more people understood this. The amount of times I’ve seen dumbasses say shit like, "corporations control the U.S. government, so we’re becoming a fascist state," is concerning.-
yea… as a certain famous Poet once said: "I should say that from being a country where practically everything and anything was for sale, Mussolini has in ten years transformed it into a country where it would even be dangerous to try to buy out the government."
I wonder what things would be like if the masses were actually taught about fascism and national socialism
-
-
-
Commies love mocking people who think socialism is when the government does things, yet they do this shit all of the time. They also changed the definition of imperialism to capitalists doing things
-
Corporatism is not a real thing
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.