Fascism vs. Capitalism vs. Socialism: The Smackdown

I usually don't try to argue with Germans because they are really much smarter than the rest of us. Ubermensch, I think, is the word, but this time I think that something has been overlooked( purposely)?

Here are elements of the program of the Fasci di Combattimento founded by Benito Mussolini(compare with Socialist Principles)

l. The creation of various government bodies run by workers' representatives.

2. Forcing landowners to cultivate their lands or have them expropriated and given to veterans and farmers cooperatives.

3. The obligation of the state to build "rigidly secular" schools for the raising of the PROLETARIAT's moral and cultural condition"

4. "A large progressive tax on capital that would amount to a one-time partial expropriation of all riches"

Source--Jonah Goldberg--"Liberal Fascism"

I am sure that Mr. Hinteler will not challenge Mr. Goldberg. he probably feels that Mr. Goldberg does not, and indeed, cannot, carry appropriate scholarly credentials.

3.

Om Sig David wrote:

(Mussolini was a lifelong socialist)

Of course, and those who have not read widely about Mussolini's History in the original do not know the full extent of the Socialism he had to try to disguise as populism.

Thank you _Om Sig

Mussolini made up the word-"Totalitarian"--His famous motto-"Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state" led to the idea that everything was fair game if it furthered the ends of the state>

It sounds like the ideas coming from the Obama brain trust in DC, but there are only 219 days until the election.

You daughter might be interested in reading the ideas of the Eugenicists early in the 20th Century. Even Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes was in favor of Eugenics. It shows clearly that even brilliant people can be completely in error.

So, the Tea Totalitarians hide behind a mask of populism.

Non sequitor.

Thank u, MASSAGATO.
He was a socialist newspaperman, long before Hitler in Germany.
I may add to that, the fact the nazis were National SOCIALISTs.
Hitler grew up in abject poverty; such is the resource of socialism.
His S.A. militia, were drawn from the ranks of impoverished, unemployed
or underemployed German workers, who desired socialism.
The Hitler-Stalin Pact was a natural thing for them both to do.
Thay were both authoritarian-collectivists.

Someone on Abuzz had a collection of anti-Individualist rhetoric,
long quotes, with which Hitler inveighed against free enterprize
and freedom of the Individual, a postition with which my German Nazi uncle agreed,
debating against me with it. He scorned free enterprize.
I argued for laissez faire capitalism.
He described himself as a "socialist"; he kept a flag with a swastika on it.





David

? Who?

I usually do not attempt to correct misspellings, plainoldme, but I think your post reveals the depth of your comprehension and ability.

It is not "NON SEQUITOR"

It is 'NON SEQUITUR"

If you had read this term dozens of times or written it frequently, you would know how to spell it.
Check your dictionary before you stretch beyond your ability, plainoldme.

Thank you, OmSigDAVID. You are, as usual, right on target. Any close examination of the 1920 Nazi Party Platform clearly shows how many true Socialist Principles were espoused by the Nazis. But, as I am sure you are aware, Om Sig, the left wing is frightened to death of such comparisons because it clearly shows how Socialist Principles can be so easily transmuted into the tolitarianism of Mussolini's Italy and Hitler's Germany.

Yes, indeed; that 's absolutely right!
Thay r ashamed of one of their own.





David

Yes, but in fairness,
according to her profile, Plain is an English teacher, not a Latin teacher,
so we ought not expect too much.





David

http://www.americanpregnancy.org/pregnancyhealth/illegaldrugs.html

Tho I agree that it is not wise for girls to take those drugs,
I don 't see what moved u to post that link?
It seems like a non-sequitur; i.e., it does not follow.





David

Green Witch wrote:

I actually see fascism as being more similar to capitalism. In both systems you have a few controlling the masses and the masses are under the illusion that it is for their own good. In fascism it tends to be one big shark, in capitalism it's a school of sharks. As capitalists, Americans have their lives dictated to them by corporations who control the government through lobbyists. If Americans think they are free they are kidding themselves. We are controlled by Nanny Corporations who decide how much health care we receive, what kind of retirement we can plan for, what food we eat, what chemicals will be in our water, what wars we will fight, etc. Americans are trapped in jobs because they depend on the benefits they cannot afford as individuals. Americans are told what to do and how to do it through Madison Ave style marketing. It's not so different from fascist rule and propaganda. It's still a form of mind control and controlling the masses through need. Capitalism works best for the selfish and the greedy, as does fascism.
You seem to have thought this through, Green Witch, but in my opinion, you are egregiously mistaken. My I respectfully refer you to an excellent book entitled "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg which does a very fine job is showing exactly how both Fascism and Nazi ideology is very close to Socialism.

Is Capitalism a failure? Not if you note the number of people who are on waiting lists to get into the United States.

Is Capitalism a failure? Not if you notice the GDP of the United States above all other countries( not to last long if President Barack Hussein Obama continues his nonsense).

Is Capitalism a failure? Not if you measure the debt levels of most of the European Socialist leaners when compared to their GDP.

Capitalism does follow the mental nature of humans in the way of achievement strides and recognition and rewards but its value is compromised by the human nature of greed. Fascism as it was created in Italy (not Nazism) was designed to counter this greed by forceful government which believed in the welfare of the state as a whole as opposed to individual enrichment at the cost of the suffering masses. (for which this enrichment is always dependent) Yes, Fascism was founded on socialism which is practiced in every modern European nation as "socialist democracies" to include Canada and Australia .... IF you observe how they function and how they are obligated to their people. The difference in the fascist doctrine is that Mussolini believed that force was needed to be applied for this system to work since the good will of man would not act automatically. We can petition and conduct peaceful protest in America but without force and finance Il Duce may still be justified. What brought about his downfall was personal greed (for power not money), so the question is how to establish fascism not only for the rule of society but for the leaders themselves! Rules For Everyone regardless of personal wealth and power. Everyone working for the enhancement of society as a whole and not working as unguided centrifugal forces who work for their own personal enhancement at the cost of the working class and poor, or the majority, (peace in society and the future ecology).