>Fascism is left wing why do so many tards claim this?

>>1856606
>a collectivist ideology based on strong governmental control of the economy and of private affairs
Yeah, really sounds like the """far right"""

Inb4 you claim that the definition of right wing is "being racist"

File: gunpe.jpg (33KB, 600x583px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 600x583px

>the left-right dichotomy isn't an outdated relic of the French Revolution
why do so many tards claim this?

>>1856606
only americans say that

>>1856614
Yes, we enlightened europeans know that islamophobia and transphobia = right-wing = antisemitism = fascism :^)

I am so le smart :^)))

>>1856611
Economy is secondary, you inbred jewish spawn.

>>1856606
Because the right/left dichotomy doesn't accurately describe complex parties. In terms of economic control and public funding they were ultra left wing, but in terms of their repression of foreign influence within their land and personal freedom rules and restrictions they were ultra right wing.

>>1856611
>a collectivist ideology based on strong governmental control of the economy and of private affairs
But that isn't what left-wing means

>>1856613
If see it as left = equality, right = hierarchy, it makes complete sense

>>1856628
No it's not, economics is human activity, and human activity is everything.

>>1856639
That is the commonly accepted modern definition of left wing. I don't care about your special snowflake definition.

>>1856640
>it makes complete sense
Found the moron.

>>1856640
> left = equality
O I am laffin.

>>1856611

>people think right wing ideologies are defined by economic freedom, not promotion of hierarchies

>>1856606
right-left wing divide used to be traditional-progressive. in some contexts fascism can be seen as progressive i guess

either way, the thread can only result in pointless discussion on what right-left "really means", so have a sage

>>1856644
>That is the commonly accepted modern definition of left wing. I don't care about your special snowflake definition
No it isn't, except maybe in burgerland. By that definition, anarcho-communists aren't left-wing, which is ridiculous.

File: 1454902923339.jpg (197KB, 426x594px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 426x594px

Hahahahahahahaha How The Fuck Are Political Dichotomies Real Hahahaha Nigga Just Embrace Corporatism And Futurism Like Nigga Me Ne Frego Haha

that's only according to the meme tier left/right dichotomy that passes in the US, where, as you'd expect, economy is what defines politics, with right = economically liberal, left = economically socialist

don't take it seriously

>>1856644

>Anarchism is a right wing ideology

Do people really believe this?

>>1856651
Right wing ideologies are defined by FREEDOM, of which economic freedom is one of the components.

Of course I am talking about modern terms.

>>1856653
First of all I'm french. And how exactly are anarcho-communists not collectivists?

>>1856661
Depends on which type of anarchism you're talking about. Anarcho-capitalism is indeed right wing. The various special snowflake collectivist ideologies of the left which are anarcho-something are all left wing.

>>1856644
>No it's not, economics is human activity, and human activity is everything.
You speak like a marxist and you are not even aware, uncultured sub-human american. Holy shit, how can you all be so fucking stupid, you are pratically right wing marxists now

>>1856664
If French Revolution terms are modern then fascism is post-modern.

>>1856664
>Right wing ideologies are defined by FREEDOM
kek

>And how exactly are anarcho-communists not collectivists?
You said:
>a collectivist ideology based on strong governmental control of the economy and of private affairs
Anarcho-communist clearly don't support "strong governmental control of the economy and of private affairs".

And if the only criteria is "collectivism", does that mean traditionalist conservatives are left-wing?

>>1856672
>You speak like a marxist and you are not even aware, uncultured sub-human american
I'm french... Nice to see your anti-american bias. I'm guessing you're some swarthy spic from some irrelevant shithole. Either that or one of our own european nu-males, shitposting from your cuckshed.

And no, there is nothing "marxist" about recognizing the fact that economic activity is inherently linked with human activity.

>>1856675
I don't care about semantics.

>>1856683
>not being anti-american
kys kike

>>1856677
>kek
Kek all you will, faggot.

>Anarcho-communist clearly don't support "strong governmental control of the economy and of private affairs".
Yes they do, since it's impossible to enforce collectivism without governmental coercion.

Really, anarcho-communism is an oxymoron, a fantasy only attainable in the child-like moronic brains of leftist ideologues. I love how all the "anarchists" in Catalonia were forced to work at the end of the barrel of a gun.

>And if the only criteria is "collectivism", does that mean traditionalist conservatives are left-wing?
Yes, traditionalists are left-wing. They don't like very much the right wing values of freedom and individualism.

>>1856692
Hi Pablo.

"Left and right don't real" is such an autistic special snowflake opinion. It clearly is a real distinction, because it influences historical action. When the Spanish Civil War went down, anarchists, socialists, Stalinists, Trots, social democrats, liberals were all on the same side, because they all saw themselves as "left", despite being very different, while fascists and monarchist conservatives were on the same side because they saw themselves as "right", despite being very difficult. Fascists go into power in Italy and Germany by allying with conservatives. Whine about it being a French Revolution meme all you want, it clearly matters in the real world.

>>1856694
Your definition is a total special snowflake definition believed by no one else, besides some autistic libertarians maybe

>>1856694
>everything i don't agree with is left wing

>>1856702
>Your definition is a total special snowflake definition believed by no one else,
It's the conventional definition. Your definition of left wing as "the nice guys XD" and right wing as "le ebil :(" is high-school tier.

File: what the fug.jpg (41KB, 680x793px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 680x793px

>>1856694
>Yes, traditionalists are left-wing.

Traditions are the very definition of the right. Everything else is irrelevant. The USA had, traditionally, a rage boner for """freedom""" and that's why you're so confused.

t. right-wing man

>>1856705
I agree with traditionalism though.

What now faggot?

>>1856708
>Traditions are the very definition of the right.
NO, NO, NO.

Stop with this fucking "le left wing are le progressive future obama HOPE" and "le right wing are anti abortion bible thumper guns freedumbs" garbage.

Right wing = smaller government, increased individual freedom
Left wing = bigger government, lowered individual freedom.

>>1856707
>Your definition of left wing as "the nice guys XD" and right wing as "le ebil :(" is high-school tier.
I'm right-wing (and a proud collectivist) you ignoramus

>>1856707
he never stated that he tought hierarchys are evil. get someone to treat your autism

>>1856717
Then you're not right wing. Sorry bub.

>proud collectivist
Are you also the proud owner of a cuckshed in your garden?

>>1856715
Source: your ass

File: 1454547514746.jpg (23KB, 302x187px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 302x187px

>>1856694
>Yes, traditionalists are left-wing.
>Yes, traditionalists are left-wing.
>Yes, traditionalists are left-wing.

>>1856710
so you call yourself leftist?

>>1856718
And get someone to teach you how to spell, you low IQ nigger.

And it's not about hierarchies being evil, it's about right wing being against (imposed) hierarchies.

But why do I even bother, you're all high schoolers who get all their information from reddit and Bernie Sanders commercials. Sigh.

>history board doesn't realize fascism was billed as radical centrism from its inception
fucking really?

>>1856606
Because the movement was started by a socialist

>>1856719
You're making a fool of yourself

>>1856721
Source: conventional political defintions.

>>1856723
No, I call myself a traditionalist with a libertarian bent.

>>1856730
No u

>>1856733
So, by your definition, you are a leftist

>>1856715
You're just saying right wing is good boys (your good boys) and left wing the baddies, you're doing literally what you're accusing others of doing.

>>1856733
>Source: conventional political defintions.
Not an argument

>>1856664
>Right wing ideologies are defined by FREEDOM

Yeah because when I think of "freedom" I think of monarchy and social conservatism.

>>1856664
>First of all I'm french
Burgerclap pretending to be French detected. Really pathetic, re-evaluate your life

>all these dumbasses thinking that politics are static
You guys should learn one thing or two from Heraclitus and the Futurists.

>>1856742
He probably thinks monarchies are left-wing as well.

>>1856750
If politics isn't static then that's all the more reason to reject the left-right dichotomy.

>>1856755
>either everything stays the same (static) or everything changes
No

>>1856763
Where the hell did you pull that from?

We should reject it because it was contextual to a very specific situation, and very clearly falls apart when taken out of that context. All of these arguments over the years about what's "left-wing" and what's "right-wing" are proof of this. They're fundamentally flawed definitions.

>>1856724
>And it's not about hierarchies being evil, it's about right wing being against (imposed) hierarchies.

but leftist are against all forms of hierarchys even natural and unimposed ones. thats why they push affermative actions, gender/race quotas and commies wants to abolish the worker-boss relationship

>>1856606
>right wing
>left wing
why do so many tards say this?

>>1856769
>very clearly falls apart when taken out of that context
Not really. It can't explain everything, but it clearly still matters

>>1856751
That made me think, how would we be able to put monarchies from Antiquity and the Middle Ages into the left-right dichotomy?

>>1856763
I think you misunderstood, it's not "everything" that changes at once.

>>1856781
It matters when we talk about pre-20th century politics (liberalism, socialism).

>>1856725
Fucking this. Fascism arose from a compromise between internationalist Marxists and people that wanted to restore feudalism.

>>1856715
That's wrong though, right wing is about preserving values which often means restricting the freedom to change

>>1856797
>Fascism arose from a compromise between internationalist Marxists and people that wanted to restore feudalism
wut

>>1856781
>Not really

Yes really.

It only matters in the sense that many people still take the dichotomy as gospel and don't bother with nuance. It's just become a short-hand for partisanship. As a measurement for actual values or ideology it is worthless.

>>1856806
That's basically what politics in post wwi Europe was about. Either full blown reactionaries that wanted to restore the ancien regimes or Marxists that wanted to tear down all borders across the world. Fascism arose as a "third position".

File: 1461954057198.png (20KB, 256x192px)

20KB, 256x192px

>>1856797
>Fascism arose from a compromise between internationalist Marxists and people that wanted to restore feudalism.

>>1856820
>As a measurement for actual values or ideology it is worthless
Nope

Fascism was a counter movement to communism which treid to get their members in the same social circles as the communists: Workers and underdogs.
If you look at their ideals, you will notice that they're very closely related:
>against big corporations
>against capitalism
>both see violence as acceptable means to achieve their goals
>both are extremely militaristic
>both are a working-class movement

The biggest difference is, of course, the excessive nationalism that comes with fascism and is strongly rejected by communism.

>>1856715
>Right wing = smaller government, increased individual freedom
>Left wing = bigger government, lowered individual freedom.

Did someone sharted here? This seems like a product of sharting mind

>>1856831
Why do you think your curt responses are worth a damn? It just makes people not take you seriously. Like me.

>>1856833
He's pretending to be French, let him have this.

>>1856825
The term "third position" was used in reference to capitalism and socialism. In what way is fascism a compromise between feudalism and Marxism? It totally rejects every tenet of Marxist ideology, and is highly modernist, and thus not at all reactionary.

>>1856832
you forgot that fascist aren't against private property like commies are

>>1856834
Calm down senpai. There is really nothing more to say. These >>1856640 >>1856696 are the best posts ITT

>>1856742

Medieval Monarchies were essentially just federalist systems with a fixed center. There was allot of local governance, and minimal involvement from state bureaucracies in peoples personal lives, due to the many intermediaries that divided up authority and legitimacy and made state power quit fragile.

Democratic homogenization and the focus on all subjects being equal "citizens" of a nation created far more bloated and managerial governments, that acted as great levelers across social classes.

Fascism is left wing politics with a paganistic-nihilistic aetshetic, to counteract the pseudo-christian political theology of neutralizing difference through egalitarianism, under the guise of morality. The focus on revolutionary violence and nationalistic homogenization was born of the French Revolution and is inherently left wing. Fascism is simply about turning leftism on itself.

Some fascist regimes did mix in conservative monarchist elements, but that is a matter of syncretism, and not what is essential to fascism.

What is most important to remember is that fascism is just the logical end point of democracy. Democracy postulates an imagined homogenized demos, and that a group will can be expressed by, ignoring social hierarchy and distinction within those who are part of the demos. Fascism makes that ideal a reality by using force to destroy heterogeneous elements and leveling out the populace according to prejudices of the "common man". In fascism there is only the citizen and the state, degrees of substantial differences between citizens in minimized for that binary of the equalized populace, and the managerial state.

Monarchism is right wing, democracy is left wing. Democracy is also totalitarianism. Fascism is a kind of totalitarianism so it is left wing.

>>1856842
Compromise may have been a bad word. Syncretism is maybe better. My point was that it arose as a kind of go between of the prevailing ideologies of the time. Just right wing enough to satisfy the big corporations and just left wing enough to satisfy the various worker movements of the time.

File: H0011-L92793513.jpg (130KB, 750x1166px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 750x1166px

>>1856853
>paganistic-nihilistic aetshetic

>>1856853
Pseudo-intellectual tripe

>>1856853
The first two paragraphs of this post were good, but it goes off the rails

>>1856861
>just left wing enough to satisfy the various worker movements of the time
In what way did fascism "satisfy the various worker movements of the time"? Fascism was always strongly opposed by the labour movement, and they just crushed them when they got into power.

>>1856772

>but leftist are against all forms of hierarchys even natural and unimposed ones. thats why they push affermative actions, gender/race quotas and commies wants to abolish the worker-boss relationship

But the crates a hierarchy of the people pushing for this change. It's not that leftists are against hierarchies, its that they are against hierarchies that they do not control.

>>1856896
>But the crates a hierarchy of the people pushing for this change
This happens in practice, but is not the ideological goal

>>1856894
Go look up the fascist manifesto. Things like a guaranteed 8 hour work day, minimum wage, progressive taxation were certainly considered radically pro worker in 1920s Italy.

>>1856894
Corporations were pretty the same as labour unions but with political power. And no, I'm not talking about companies, I'm talking about the sociopolitical organizations that represented various parts of the working class.

>>1856606
Because it is

>>1856853
rofl

>>1856916
But they were totally powerless in reality

>>1856664
>Right wing ideologies are defined by FREEDOM
A bald eagle shed a single tear of pride at this post.