Hipforums Fascists (or anybody sharing an interest in Fascist Philosophy)

Are there any Fascists here at Hipforums? (Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists and other racists are not Fascists. They are jerks)

Anybody interested in the philosophy of Benito Mussolini or the concept of an organic state? Well, I am not a fascist myself, but would like to talk to someone who is, and ask them their reasons for believing in fascism.

With 20,000 members, I am sure someone is.

 

I am not a fascist, although I have been called one.

By the way, Benito Mussolini enacted anti-Jewish laws in 1938 and had pretty deep ties with Adolf Hitler. I don't think fascism and racism could ever be separated because of the historical reality, even though in theory it's possible.

 

Mussolini actually despised the Nazis as "Barbarians" before the Nazis controlled all of Germany


But Mussolini was a pragmatist beyond all else. He had no anti-semitic agenda and actually had a few Jewish administrators in his authoritarian heirarchy. He felt the need to pander to Hitler to assure the survivability of his empire and he did so. But still, he could have done a much better Job by being Neutral in WWII, but he had done so, Italy would have surely gotten invaded by the Third Reich.

Still, the fact is that he did it reluctantly, but nonetheless he supported Hitler's murderous agenda even when he was a much smarter man than hitler himself. But yeah, the doctrine of fascism, taken solely as a theory, has some intellectual merits to it, and does not deserve to be dismissed but discussed.

 

I dunno why anybody would want to be that.

 

If what interests you is a purely organic state -- aren't you talking about anarchy?
Head to Denmark and visit the town of Christiana if you want to experience the closest thing on earth to a true Anarchist City...

I have not been there, but hear it is quite amaizing...

 

nazis are.. are..
just FUCK them!

 

Me thinks you are using the wrong word... me thinks you say facist and mean anarchist-- as facism is quite the opposite of organic -- and a pure organic state of being is anarchy. Any how, back to facism:

The word fascism has come to mean any system of government resembling Mussolini's, that

* exalts nation and sometimes race above the individual
* uses violence and modern techniques of propaganda and censorship to forcibly suppress political opposition
* engages in severe economic and social regimentation
* engages in corporatism [1] (http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?tocId=219369)
* implements totalitarianism

to learn more and develop your own reasons fight facism and it's friends racism and corporatism goto:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facism#Definition

the US under the Bush adminstration adpoting some facist flavors ... yea feels real good, huh...

 

Damn, it sounds like the Bush agenda.

 

if you wanna talk to fellow fascists just write a letter to your congress

 

neocons are not fascists.

 

yeah, but Fascism will be higly inappropriate in a well industrialized and individualistc countrly like America. I think Fascism can help improve the third world and help file moral decline and social degradation elsewhere.

 

agreed... f*** them!

once again, Nazis are barbarians. They are an undoing of 4000 years of human social progress. Die, Nazi Punks!

 

yes.

Not neccesarily, but yes it can be considered anarchic because under fascism, a state is a "spirtitual" entity and not a bureaucratic one. Yes, that would be an ideal but a rather unattainable one. We need to have a corpus of a state for people, to make people know that it is something real, although it is an embodiment of the universal princples that unites all members of a nation regardless of material condition, gender or race.

Wow. I might have to do some research on that and visit it if I ever go to Europe again.

It must be. Alternate forms of social organisation fascinate me.

 

Well, we need a state to make people truly free, and align them in a way that the society resembles an organism with people as constituent organs. There is a reciprocal benefit in this.

It would have been real nice if principles by themselves could accomplish this goal. They can't, thus, we need a state as manifestation of such principles.

 

WHew! good to know there are still some out there Rumsfeld hasn't put into a persistant vegetative state Now if we could just get another 2% to wake up ...

 

you say "because under fascism, a state is a "spirtitual" entity and not a bureaucratic one."

help me to understand how this is, where you've heard this... as it conflicts with what I understand a Facist state to be...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facism#Definition

i hate to harp...
ok, i like to harp... particularly on stuff that gets passed-over...

help me to understand how facism is really what we are talking about here...
i believe hippy totalitarianism could be a fit, accept for the ban on free thinking...

hippy communism... well that is just an assumed relationship, right?

um, i would have to say that Hippy Movement... mmmm too boring

Hippy-soul-nation Liberation Front!??!

 

Or you can just pm HuckFinn.

 

Well, I understand the goal of fascism as the creation of the organic state (which has proved elusive, but is still reachable as, unlike the communist ideal, it does not contradict human nature) where each individual sublimates his good for the good of the state, much like we repress immidiate desires for happiness for fulfilment of long term goals. Thus once a true organic state is reached, the individual sees himself as an organ in the great organism of state.

Thus one's subjugation to the state is voluntary, and there is no need for compromise or contrived measures for cohesion, and the individual is dedicated to the state "spiritually" in the sense, that he sees the state as defining who he is, as much as a christian is defined by his christianity.

What I am saying may appear vague to you, as I am not very good at explaining the doctrine of fascism (and it is a rather complicated one). Reading the doctrine itself may help you understand my background, as well as the concept behind fascism.

The doctrine of fascism can be read online:
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm

 

In my opinion Mussolini was just an opportunist who adapted the meaning of Fascism whenever it suited him to make it more appealing to different groups.

From the history channel website:

"Debate has raged ever since about what exactly his party stood for. To what extent can it be identified with similar political movements in other countries - let alone authority figures in general, like headmasters?
"At the end of the twentieth century fascism remains probably the vaguest of the major political terms. This may stem from the fact that the word itself contains no explicit political reference, however abstract, as do 'democracy', 'liberalism', socialism' and 'communism'. To say that the Italian fascio ...... means 'bundle' or 'union' does not tell us much. Moreover, the term has probably been used more by its opponents than by its proponents, the former having been responsible for the generalization of the adjective on an international level, as early as 1923. 'Fascist' has been one of the most frequently invoked political pejoratives, normally intended to connote 'violent', 'brutal', 'repressive' or 'dictatorial'. Yet if 'fascism' means no more than that then Communist regimes, for example, would probably have to be categorized as among the most fascist, depriving the word of any useful specificity....... Some scholars deny that any such general phenomenon as fascism - as distinct from Mussolini's own Italian movement - ever existed."
Stanley Payne, A History of Fascism 1914-45 (1995)
An influential line of thought contends that fascism was (and is) an entirely negative movement which lacked any ideological content. Unlike other modern political movements, it has no founding text to match, say, Marx's Das Kapital. And careful analysis of Mussolini's speeches verifies the absence of serious thought. Hence the old joke, 'Have you half a mind to become a Fascist? That's all you need!'
"Everything about Fascism was a fraud... Fascist rule was corrupt, incompetent, empty; Mussolini was without either ideas or aims......... In 1943 Fascism collapsed overnight. Not a single Fascist attempted to defend the regime which had lasted twenty years and had boasted itself of such power. It simply fell down like a house of cards, which was all it really was."
AJP Taylor, The War Lords (1977)
This is contested by Roger Eatwell in his recent book on Fascism. He argues that the ideological content has been neglected, partly because of its rational argument that people were largely swayed by irrational motives - an obvious source of confusion.
"The essence of fascist ideology can best be summed up by combining two ideas. The first relates to the basic nature of the community fascism was primarily concerned with building, or reviving - the nation. But there have been nationalists who accept liberal rights, or who welcome diversity. The fascist conception of the nation was more holistic; it sought to overcome divisive differences and to forge a strong sense of shared purpose [community rather than individual]. The second part relates more to socio-economic policy. Intellectual fascists were often to term themselves supporters of a 'Third Way', neither left nor right, neither capitalist nor communist. The term is in some ways misleading, as it could be taken to imply that fascism was a form of centrism, or conservatism. Both would be totally false descriptions for an ideology which sought to launch a social revolution, albeit one which owed more to the right than left. Yet it is a useful shorthand for fascism's syncretic style of thinking [reconciliation of opposites.]"
Roger Eatwell, Fascism: a History (1996)
Other historians reserve the term 'fascism' for Italy. Gilbert Allardyce argues that no definition can be stretched across national boundaries, since the two alleged paradigms were utterly different (for example, the Nazi Party persecuted Jews and the Italian Fascist Party recruited them in great numbers). From this perspective fascism was unique to the circumstances of Italy in and after the First World War.
"Fascism, like communism, was essentially the child of war......... Its appeal was to the officers of the war generation, to the 'real Italy' of the trenches and Vittoria Veneto, to men who had won the first major victories of Italian arms. Together these men had overcome not only the Austrians but also ......the hated neutralist Establishment, the cowardly Giolittian parliament, the treacherous Socialists, and the peace-mongering Church; and in the post-war ferment, braving insults and violence, they had conquered them all again. They never forgot. The regime's slogans and symbols were always military - 'believe, obey, fight'. Mussolini's working office after 1929 was in Palazzo Venezia, which had until 1915 been the Austrian Embassy. Wartime memories accounted for many Fascist policies.
"'Intervention' in the economy was geared mainly to national glory. So was 'industrial mobilization'. Factories had recreation centres, like the soldiers had had in the war; the Balilla had chaplains, as regiments had had in the war; newspapers were censored, as they had been in the war. 'War alone', proclaimed Mussolini's official Doctrine of Fascism in 1932, 'brings up to their highest tension all human energies and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to meet it'. When there was no war to fight, the Fascists found surrogates; when there was, they joined in. Mussolini was always the Duce, the military leader, the man on horseback. His regime was neither conservative nor revolutionary: it was bellicose."
Martin Clark, Modern Italy 1871-1995 (1996) "