Republican understanding of elections

Fascism shouldn’t be thought of as a static “thing” or an object of ideology. Peoples beliefs come from their environment. We are so individualized as a society that often we as progressives take “personal responsibility” too far, we buy the premise implicitly without realizing there are flaws with thinking in this way. Every logical system has flaws and contradictions, its proven mathematically though I think some systems are more rigorous and based on evidence.

GWF Hegel’s philosophy of Right was written in 1820, and influenced political thought ever since. Liberalism was still in it’s revolutionary phase and theories about it were still fairly new, the Wealth of Nations was written just 50 years before, and Karl Marx was like two when it was released, although it would serve as the basis for much of his work analyzing the hidden relationships of Capital, and ethical political philosophy on the whole.

The book is the closest I think someone can honestly get to an actual “horseshoe theory” because not only did it influence the left but it also influenced the far right. Hegel, using the works of other great liberal philosophers such as Locke and Kant, who Hegel was always working to surpass, applied his dialectical philosophical methods to the writings of liberalism.

What he discovered was a natural tendency toward what we would calll fascism. Like he prefigured fascism by 100 years. He wasn’t a fascist, there was no such thing. He was just exploring the ideas of this revolutionary philosophy, one that purported to liberate the mind, body and spirit, and discovered the oppressive seeds which might grow into something quite different.

This isn’t to call liberals fascists, I’m a communist and 20th century communism had a lot of problems, to put it mildly. I would say confidently that progressive liberals are not crypto fash, in fact the term “progressive” is a typically left-Hegelian ideal, in that it describes human progress and development as the subject of history. Instead it challenges the idea of the liberatory nature of private property, a key component of liberal thought. Of course this is all depending how you look at it, right-Hegelians see this same formulation as proof of the inevitability of their ideas and justification for their actions.

You’re getting a lot of different opinions about this stuff so I’m trying to make sort of a different point about philosophy, history and action. Other reading for a deep dive on fascism is the essay Ur Fascism by Umberto Eco (great empirical analysis, but the least scientific IMO), Trotsky’s pamphlet Fascism: What it is and How to Fight It, and HA Roy’s Fasism, Its Philosophy, Professions and Practice.

In a way, fascism has always been there below the surface, informally shifting the sands of history until it was formalized in the early 20th century. I don’t think you can have a society based on private property without some elements of fascism somewhere. Mostly “western democracies” will outsource their extreme cruelty to other countries where it doesn’t affect their citizens.

But in summary, Fascism is the realization of the contradictions inherent in liberal ideology, its liberalism turned inside-out, with all its appearances of justice and freedom cut away, leaving only the logic of expansion and domination that most liberal democracies do their best to hide. This is how fascists are able to hide in our society, their individual beliefs are not completely unpalatable to centrists and conservatives who have also started to dispense with justice and freedom in the interest of national greatness. Its what makes their beliefs so malleable, and its also why liberals have such a hard time defining it. But fascism isn’t an individual’s beliefs, if it was it would be just regular bog-standard chauvinism. Fascism is a mass movement which will use charismatic leaders amenable to their politics to rally the masses.

In our society, the middle classes are the “battery” for fascism. Middle classes are constantly under attack under capitalism and the individuals often feel this and become paranoid (doomsday prepping, etc.,) and this paranoia and real social pressure to produce or be wiped out, the fear from the constant threat of precarity and uncertainty fits hand in glove with the aims and means of fascists.

My favorite song by the Dead Kennedys is “Nazi Punks Will Go Away on Their Own So Don’t Make a Big Deal About It”

If you don’t have anything to contribute to the discussion, then you could just not comment.

When my facts contradict your narrative im a 15 year old antisemitic conspiracy theorist, meanwhile, you throw away all those facts to protect your narrative in the name of truth. Its a little disingenuous.

I admit I’m coming in hot and heavy with a particular view and i believe these dynamicx are real and important to understand. but these were just a few particularly nasty threads in a long, complex and difficult war. Treating these topics fairly and honestly is the work of books, stacks of volumes even, and unlike you, I won’t say that my view, which merely corroborates the perspective of the other commenter, is the comprehensive final word on WW2 history. That’s all I was doing was corroborating, giving some facts to support their perspective which you arrogantly dismissed without a squeaky fart of evidence. Again, disingenuous.

I assure you that I’m not 15 (multiply that by 3) nor a casual internet theorist, so dont bother trying to rattle me the way you might be able to with someone from one of those groups of people. In any case, whatever box you have to put me in to make yourself feel better than me is fine, but it doesn’t make you right or even like a good faith participant in this discussion. I hope you get a lot of mileage out of that little insult, I hope it makes you feel special and very smart. From my limited experience, those feelings of fake superiority might be one of the only things you have going for you. But feel free to prove me wrong with something like an intelligent comment. It doesn’t take much to impress me, being a dumb, childish, hateful oaf that you want to paint me as.

Its not that they wanted the Nazis, but the US will choose a dumptruck of fascism over a thimblefull of socialism every time. The US wasn’t officially aligned with Germany, there were forces in the US that wanted to see them defeated, and protect allies like GB. However many powerful american businesses were closely aligned with the nazis anc they wield a lot of political clout. IBM’s second biggest customer was Nazi Germany. So don’t act like there was zero conflict of interest. But as I said the incentives weren’t pro-nazi, they were pro-US superpower and anti soviet. There certainly were powerful forces within the US that explicitly wanted fascism here though, the Ultra podcast covers this well in 2 seasons.

Your version of history where there are good guys and bad guys that clearly demarcate the winners and losers in a completely justified in every way war, is the ahistorical garbo. People just can’t fathom that the US would act underhandedly to give itself an advantage despite every second of this country’s foul imperialist history. As if these things are decided by your personal morals rather than by politics and power. God what naive idealism.

In the war room, when it looks like the worlds greatest enemy are going to defeat your greatest enemy, should you intervene on behalf of your greatest enemy? No you wait and see how things shake out. Its always surprising when people just refuse to think about political economy and instead believe the “stars and stripes forever, super patriot, the US is the greatest country in the world” delusion.

No, the US stayed out of the war until after the Nazis had been defeated at Stalingrad and were getting pushed out of Russia. The reason the US didn’t enter the war earlier was 1. Forces in the US wanted Europe destroyed since all it would take is a push to over industrialize our economy and we could emerge as the worlds leading superpower (which happened) and 2. The powerful forces in the US were really hoping the Nazis would defeat the Soviets.

The other poster is more correct, we entered the war to clean up the western front and prevent the USSR from taking the credit for “winning”, and prevent expansion or even diplomatic leverage.

He is very unlikeable, but for a lot of people the cruelty a politician is capable of is a big part of the appeal. Won’t make him popular with the masses necessarily, but we can be tricked.

But yeah bringing out Vance early in such a high profile way will probably have the effect of making him look better down the road when the stakes are higher. All that couch-fucker stuff, his history of pro choice comments, they knew it would come out so its better to get it out now than later, when he’s already become part of the “establishment” of the right. No halfway career conscious editor is going to publish old news like that. And then a little more consent is purchased, not as the result of some widespread conspiracy but as the result of a system of incentives and disincentives that generate the kind of irrational self interest that is the only discernable political project of any kind on the right, maybe in the american political system as a whole, though I’m sure that would be taking the point too far.

There are actually powerful interests that like Vance, maybe more than Trump. Vance is a long term prospect for the moment, I think. Trumps admin likes to stir shit up over here, while building power and planning long term over there. I think historically Trump himself was a barrier to this kind of planning, but it seems like he’s gotten with the program this time around.

I doubt we’ve seen the last of Vance, in all the worst ways imaginable.

Laying low so as not to take as much heat for all this as Musk, so that when Trump is done Vance can be boosted as a more moderate alternative to Trump and Musk’s extreme measures, even though Vance would be just as bad, if not worse. But if they can keep heat off him in this cycle, it will be better especially when things reach the breaking point and people want heads (but still want to vote republican.)

When you get organized into a fighting force rather than some loner with a gun

Who could have expected this

Or, maybe I am paying attention and we have different opinions? I gave a ton of leeway in my response, like I’m not saying you’re wrong, but there are limits on what they can accomplish, and I don’t like the apocalyptic framing for my personal analysis, but at the same time I do think there is something very intentional going on, a conspiracy here at the tail end of the neoliberal era by the ruling class to gain ground and power. So I’m not sure why you have to assert that I’m misinformed.

If you think the ideas that you came up with in your head while staring at newsfeeds on your phone is the 100% objective truth, then more power to you. But IMO we could all benefit from good faith discussion and sharing ideas.

Thanks for the link, another right wing freak to keep track of 😫

Nah probably not. There will be suffering and shocks but they’re like restructuring the economy here. They can’t like go back to feudalism, they don’t know how, and it isn’t possible. I just can never buy the apocalyptic framing, its not really evidence based, just Hollywood based.

I do think you’re right about more prisons though, idk about debtors prisons yet but they are loving making people “illegal” and then doing horrible shit to them. If they can’t get enough people out of work to suppress wages how they want, then I bet you will see states arguing for their right to put debtors in jail. Although the expansion of online gambling into every part of our lives is kind of insane though, it could shift some dynamics.

I think its more like the billionaires want this or they don’t care because they all know they’re gonna make the money. And we are gonna get screwed

You can’t take over what you done already own

I see lots of references to John Denver, Country Roads, but I present:

“Bye, bye Miss Bologna Pie”

Is such a utopia possible?

Sure. Yeah its very hypothetical and silly. As if the Banks that manage national and international money supplies, since most of their managed assets are debt, haven’t thought of it? So no such button exists, whereas there might be a delete twitter button somewhere or one could be rigged up 👀

Attacking twitter would be more useful than deleting all debt? I mean go wild, take that shit ass site down but if you had a “delete twitter” button and a “delete all debt” button, mashing the second one would make you the greatest hero who ever lived.

Class isn’t determined by wealth it is determined by relationship to production. He’s still just a bourgeois capitalist. But I don’t think you’re off base. There could be certain social divisions among the ruling class, so that its possible Musk is actually trying to dominate the ruling class. These experiments are limited by material considerations, like law, infrastructure, economy, availability of natural resources or labor power – but he’s definitely trying something with these incredible stunts. No reason to believe someone in Musks position wouldn’t try something like that.

I also think that a critical mass of the ruling class is supporting him, cheering him on even. So I’m not sure that those class divisions exist in a way that would create an opportunity to actually dominate, but perhaps to lead?

For now I still only see the national ruling class and international ruling class, divisions created by the proliferation of international capital. The internationalists need the national capitalists, but musk seems to be burning through the capitalists of a number of countries, particularly in the EU that doesn’t support Musk’s far right flirtations with fascism.

Musk serves his class, which benefits himself personally but also other billionaires. The other master is the master of all of us, capital.