666
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
666 points (100.0% liked)
politics
18904 readers
3563 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I would answer anti-fascist, but if someone asked me "Are you communist or anti-communist? Pick one" I would answer "neither"
You could pick either. There's no problem with having communist ideologies or being for capitalism.
There is a problem with fascism, it's not comparable to communism. A closer example would be asking someone if they are a racist or not.
We should be taking a hard line at certain ideologies and anyone that hesitate is suspect imo.
Racist or anti-racist, really. Many people can answer "I'm not racist, but...(insert racist statement)"
I'm not racist, but sourdough is the best bread for a grilled cheese.
Ah, so you just have ill will toward the French!
I'm not racist, but have you tried substituting mayonnaise instead of butter on your grilled cheese sandwiches? It levels then up nicely.
I'm not racist, but I prefer Formula1 over NASCAR.
Dammit if I’d just looked one centimeter down I’d have avoided making the same comment
Great minds think alike.
Alternatively: We are Borg
The point is that "neither" indicates someone who does not agree with an ideology but also does not see it as a threat.
You are of course free to treat that person accordingly.
Compulsory alliance is sort of a core feature of fascism so you really must be either fascist or anti-fascist.
If fascist government is in power, it will creat a system in which non-partisan participation furthers and advances the fascist state, so one cannot “opt out”. Since a fascist system won’t entertain neutral, the question “Are you fascist or anti-fascist? You can only pick one.” Is not inherently disingenuous.
Communism does not force people into supporting it, there “neither” is an acceptable answer to “Are you communist or anti-communist” in a way that cannot be applied to fascism.
Well, Communism doesn’t force participation as long as you don’t ask the tankiis, but fuck the tankies.
A great point well made.
If you live in a Communist state you won't exactly have any way to "opt out" of it any more than you can just "opt out" of paying taxes.
That's true for a culturally conservative Russian state that claims to be "communist" the way North Korea claims to be "democratic".
The USSR sucked ass because it was made of the same kind of Russians that we're still fighting against today. The label they wear as a disguise, communist, capitalist, kleptocracy, or whatever "the commies" are calling themselves these days is irrelevant.
Like I said, Fuck the tankies.
Leftist political theory can get very complex, and when people say communism they can mean a lot of things.
Technically, Communism as per Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto, Communism isn’t a government. Communism is a state of anarchy in which people naturally share resources and the means of production communally and provide ownership does not exist as a cultural concept. So going by the original definitions “Communist Government” is an oxymoron. Explaining what the hell happened in Russia is a whole conversation.
When people talk about communism or communist elements in a government, they are probably talking about some form of socialism.
The same is true of the UK monarchy, yet plenty of Brits are neither for nor against it.
I’m not familiar with the British Monarchy so I can’t really comment on how appropriate your framing is.
What I can point out is that your statement is logically inconsistent on its face.
One can’t be neutral towards a fascist state because the fascist state won’t allow one neutral. In such a condition, anyone who claims to be neither for fascism or actively anti-fascism is pro-fascism because the condition of fascist power will direct all the labour and efforts of participants to the support of the fascist state. In such a condition, pro-fascist is the default condition, and anti-fascism can only be achieved through conscious effort and educated and effective praxis. There is no neutrality. One is not neutral in the face of fascism simply because one declares to be so.
So, if the same conditions essential to fascism are true of the British Monarchy, then the nature of the political situation is stopping Brits from being neither for or against Monarchy. If your assumption that fascism is like the British Monarchy is true, then one could only be pro-monarchy, or achieve anti-monarchy through conscious and intentional effort.
You are not making any distinction between those who would want a fascist state to endure and those who would be indifferent to replacing it with something else. But I think that distinction gets to the heart of the question.
You are also assuming that fascists and anti-fascists are only concerned about their own condition. Suppose you asked an American their opinion of Mussolini and they responded "He was terrible". That's clearly anti-fascist. But what if they responded "Never heard of him"? That's neither pro or anti fascist, yet the neutral response won't advance a fascist regime.
Um… Yes I’ve made that quite clear because both have the same effect on a fascist state. If you’re just going about your business, working your job, not being political, being a centrist, then you are furthering the fascist state, just as you were a foaming at the mouth supporter, because fascist states co-opt the labour and effort of their citizens towards the growth of the state so there is no neutral. In such a situation, you are helping the fascist state to grow unless you are very intentionally fighting it.
You have no idea what I’m talking about. I have no idea where you got the idea “ I’m assuming that fascists and anti-fascists are only concerned with their own condition.” What comment are you reading?
Your supposition about asking an American what he thinks of Mussolini seems entirely tangential to me. I was talking about one’s actions within a context of a fascist state, not regarding foreigners looking in, so what are you commenting on?
Also, having an opinion or talking crap isn’t an into-fascist in any sense of the word. Fascist states need to be combated with direct action, such as economically divesting in financial systems that benefit and fund a fascist state. It’s not germain to my previous comment, as I was talking about people living in a fascist system, but even as a foreigner to a fascist system, allowing a fascist system to function unchecked is effectively the same as supporting it, because fascist government aligned themselves with capital and will use economic output and trade to fund themselves.
So, once again, it doesn’t matter what you say or don’t say. It doesn’t matter what you think or don’t think. You have to take intentional and carefully considered actions to combat fascist states. In this way, thoughts, opinions and statements cannot be anti-fascist. Only actions can be anti-fascist.
The opposite would be authoritarian or anti-authoritarian, it's possible to be conservative without being a fascist just like it's possible to be a socialist/communist without being authoritarian.
I say “I’m personally a communist but understand that it isn’t right for most people.” I would have been awesome at communism. I’m a minimalist in a lot of ways and was good at science and math in school. I’d have probably been working at Roscosmos and then happily going home to my little apartment for my daily ration of vodka and potato bread.
Or maybe I’d have been an Olympian. I was small but athletic growing up so had no chance of playing after high school, really, but they were given athletes zoo animal growth hormones and the good steroids back then. I might have come out of the Yaroslavl Oblast Youth Olympic Reserve School the size of Arvydas Sabonis.