Was fascism revolutionary?

>>1656085
Not really, it's always been around with absolute monarchies.

It's more of a status quo, counterrevolutionary movement.

>>1656085
Don't think i've ever heard of a fascist revolution unless you count Franco as fascist. Fascism is such a loose ideology it's hard to really define it.

>>1656099
>It's more of a status quo
What about the fact that it makes landed gentry/factory workers/owners/peasants equal, they all belong to the same race or group of people rather than separated by class? Isn't that a complete rejection of the status quo?

>>1656120
No, b/c you still had classes under Hitler's national socialist government.

Also, what you are describing isn't fascism.

facism was basically the hip thing in Europe during the the 30s every one was becoming facist and adding cool Eagles to there flags. It was like the socalism movement in Europe today.
it wasnt such a revolutionary thing cause it's just a hyper nationalistic dictatorship. Facism is more of a rebelion against democracy

>>1656099
>Monarchy.
>Fascist

>>1656099
>Not really, it's always been around with absolute monarchies.
Ah, no. Fascism is nationalist and totalitarian. Monarchies are authoritarian as can be, but certainly not nationalist or totalitarian. Nationalism and totalitarianism are actually what often fill the vacuum of monarchy: the loss of the monarch requires a new linchpin of loyalty, which is often the volk or the class, and the end of such a constant standard of power makes the country EXTREMELY unstable, which causes a totalitarian reaction.

>>1656125
exactly right. Fascism strictly enforces hierarchy. It's obsessed with people in their "rightful" place. This reinforced class differences, even within its chosen people or race. It's reactionary

>>1656189
>fascism is nationalist and totalitarian
Absolute monarchies can also be nationalist and totalitarian as well, good examples of this would be: Kang Frederick II of Prussia, the Sun-Kang of France, and Tsar Peter I of Russia.

So I don't really agree with you.

>>1656199
If you add chosen people or race into it, it becomes national socialism btw.

>>1656099
>movement created in the 20th century existed during the absolute monarchies

Top kek

>status quo

Bait

Yes. Fascism as an idea proposes a new government, a new man and and a new world. It actively fought against the status quo. Fascism indeed was both progressive and revolutionary

>>1656085

It's reactionary by ideology, although it poses as revolutionary to fool the idiots that back it.

It thrives on willing ignorance and hate born from frustration.

>>1656085
Fascism is just racial collectivism, it applies the egalitarianism of socialism to an in group instead of everyone. It is the complete reorganization of society around a party that represents the national interest. Its pretty revolutionary.

File: mussolini race.jpg (72KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 850x400px

>>1656240
>reactionary by ideology

Why are people this stupid even allowed to post here? Educate yourself.

>>1656242
>racial collectivism

Pic

>>1656242
Fascism isn't racial collectivism you stupid fucking faggot, that would be national socialism. Also I think you ( >>1656240 )
would agree with this faggot as well.

I suggested this before, here.
>>1656125

So yes, the two ideologies are different from each other, get it right next time. Sad that this guy ( >>1656246 ) has to correct you two on this.

>>1656085
>Was fascism revolutionary?
Well, you could ask representatives of the governments they overthrew

>>1656085
That's Soviet anti-Nazi art, right? The faces are grotesque

>>1656085
Yeah. It's the reorganization of society about nationalist principles, instead of liberal or socialist or traditionalist principles.

File: 1455990203971.jpg (51KB, 666x555px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 666x555px

>>1656246
>yfw mussolini didn't believed hitler's autism
>decided to go along with it because he felt that he would win at the end
>fascism is now dead because german ruin everything

File: I wish I was at frankfurt am main chasing some girls. The sieg heil is too loud. My feet hurt.jpg (56KB, 254x325px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 254x325px

>>1656284
I have no idea dude, Germans are a pretty ugly bunch though.

>>1656379
>>1656284
It looks like something from Glenn Fabry.

>>1656099
This. Fascism is literally "the status quo movement".

>>1656284
No, unfortunately it's exactly what Germans look like.

>>1656393
>fascism literally created to overthrow the status quo (March on Rome in Italy)
>somehow a status quo movement

>>1656085
They claimed so but really what they have done was basically class collaboration.

>>1656085
nah, I think fascism doesn't assert itself through revolutions (common, not per-se politically organized people get together as the masses to overthrow stuff), but through coups (a specialized, political group with an agenda seizes control).

File: 1461823204710.png (376KB, 674x674px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 674x674px

>>1656393

>distributed land amongst farmers
>employed an inheritance tax
>destroyed parliamentary democracy
>creation of new state institutions
>encouragement of mass populace participation

>this means status quo to people

>>1656460
>creation of new state institutions
Oh, can you tell me what it is then? And how exactly it revolutionized the society within it?

>>1656085

Revolutionary to capitalism, reactionary to communism.

>>1656460
It means status quo to shitlib "progressives" who see history as purely a linear progression.

>>1656466

Can you tell me if you're using revolution as it's proper definition as "a forcible overthrow of a government or social order, in favour of a new system"

or

Are you equating it Socialist revolution and class overthrow and thus politicising and capitalising revolution as "Revolution"?

More than one ideology can revolutionise it's populace, y'know.

>>1656466
They went against the globalist ideals of capitalism and communism.

>>1656475

Fascism and National Socialism are typically global in final goal.

Most wished for a unified Europe.

>>1656474
The first one. So, what fundamentally changed in its society, as reflected by the change of its institution and order?

>>1656480
No, they're not global.

>>1656484
A return to a caste-like system instead of the established pure democratic ideal.

>>1656492
So, for example, fascism in France wants to bring back the Three Estates? How would that work?

>>1656488

Sure they are. The intention behind fascism is to expand borders and to seek dominance in immediate spheres. Once this primacy is achieved, it only makes sense to continue pushing these boundaries.

One thing that keeps the Fascist state propped up is the whipping of the populace into an irredentist mindset. (ie. Hitler's Lebensraum and Mussolini's claims on the entire Mediterranean).

After WWII many Fascist groups in the 50's and 60's who remained alive (notably Mosley in the UK) heavily pushed for a unification of Europe under one super state.

>>1656484

Once factor is social mobility not possible under previous administrations. For example many German Gauleiter's (regional commanders) were mostly from working class or extremely low socio-economic backgrounds. Something unthinkable in the old Imperial system (mostly Conservative Nobles) and the Weimar (mostly cosmopolitan bourgeois)

This level of meritocracy was quite revolutionary in German society.

>>1656492

>return to a caste-like system

How deep did you have to pull that out of your arse?

I struggle to understand the differences between 20th century fascism and communism. They seem the same, just with some economic differences and fascism being all WE WUZ and communism being WE IZ

>>1656502
>After WWII many Fascist groups in the 50's and 60's who remained alive (notably Mosley in the UK) heavily pushed for a unification of Europe under one super state

Proof? Because Mosley was always for the glory of the British, would seem strange that he'd push for some absurd notion of national unity with the continent.

Even antifa scholars of fascism agree, Roger Griffen coined the term Palingenetic Ultranationalism to denote the revolutionary character of fascism, in the original sense of "revolution" meaning "To become full circle". Nazism (not even talking about Fascism) was originally concerned with the upheavel of society and doing away with bougeois notions and western capitalism, Hitler may have sold many of these ideals out when he courted German industrialists he needed for the war, but many Nazi's (Read: Strasser, Rohm and the left leaning SA) were calling for a second social revolution before he liquidated their opposition

>>1656502
So this new class which led/dominated the Germany at the time was the nationalist German working class? Also, why would National Socialism be considered fascism?

File: 1472938214944.jpg (301KB, 1775x1197px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1775x1197px

Fascists fought against the liberals, communists and reactionaries alike. The one thing Hitler ceded to the traditionalists was the military, and he bumped Rohm off for it, because he needed them.

People need to remember that Fascism is basically a modernist ideology, it is completely a product of the 20th century. Only if you reduce the defintion of Fascism down to things like "big strong leader" can you apply it to everywhere else in history, but that's really anachronistic. Fascism is just one of the latest and most prominent ideologies to place an emphasis on dictatorial leadership, so its at the forefront of our minds.

>>1656528
So, what is the revolutionist aspect of the ideology then?

>>1656539
They could unite people of various classes via class collaboration in order to topple aristocrats-bourgeois (nobles by wealth). They claimed so, but did they succeed? I heard it failed in everywhere, as they had to concede a lot towards the establishment. Even in Romania, which was supposedly the most radical one.

>>1656539
The whole concept of social rebirth to an alternative modernity

No. Revolutions are successful.

>>1656603
Depends on if you revolve 360 degrees

>>1656547
The Iron Guard never gained power, they were far too radical for the collaborationist regime to the point that it devolved into open conflict in a vy for power and were put down by the military

>>1656606
Kek.

>>1656099
>This is what communists actually believe

>>1656291
It still hurts.

Mussolini was definitely the smartest between Him, Hitler and Tojo or Hirohito.

>>1656506

Thats because they are both based on socialism.

>>1656099
>Hurrr
>DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!