Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Is the current system we live under Fascism?


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

Is the current system we live under Fascism?

Worryingly, it's heading in that direction :(.

"papers please"  / vaccine passports definitely are fascistic. People can deny it all they want but that harks back to Nazi Germany or Mussolini's Italy in the 20's and 30's 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Warlord said:

I like the term "corporatism" or "crony corporatism" as a way of describing the system.

Yes, you can still make it here with an ingenious idea and starting from 0 so we're still semi-capitalist although when you get to the higher levels this capitalist system is perverted and big business has many special privileges 

Do you agree with this assessment?

We have bits of crony capitalism but elements that don't agree with the state also thrive - Iceland has many rows with Gov over green issues yet thrives.

Donors to opposition parties also run successful businesses in spite of that fact.

Its just too simplistic to pigeon hole things I'm afraid.

We have a variant on capitalism - we're a Heinz 57 mongrel, bits of what suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

It isn't fascism we have lots of free trade agreements.

Also normally in a fascist state there are not other parties allowed.

The obvious example of a fascist state is China of course.

 

In addition to being the world's biggest economy in its own right (in PPP terms), China is now the largest trading partner of pretty much every other country in the world.

Belt and road, baby.

https://www.silkroadbriefing.com/news/2020/11/10/chinas-belt-and-road-initiative-member-countries-exports-up-28-in-three-years/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Warlord said:

"papers please"  / vaccine passports definitely are fascistic. People can deny it all they want but that harks back to Nazi Germany or Mussolini's Italy in the 20's and 30's 

 

No as otherwise every time I had to show say my Yellow Fever innoculation card or similar it would make large swathes of Africa and China Fascists.

Every supermarket would also be fascist as demand ID for alcohol sale.

You cannot just look at one aspect and declare its a zebra. Sometimes you are looking at a horse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Warlord said:

"papers please"  / vaccine passports definitely are fascistic. People can deny it all they want but that harks back to Nazi Germany or Mussolini's Italy in the 20's and 30's

They're something that are too much in that direction and would fit right in there but alone certainly aren't anywhere near enough to justify labelling a society or government as fascist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Warlord said:

"papers please"  / vaccine passports definitely are fascistic. People can deny it all they want but that harks back to Nazi Germany or Mussolini's Italy in the 20's and 30's 

 

Vaccine passports are nothing! Edward Snowden has already revealed that we're way past the Nazis or the Soviets when it comes to state survellance.

The networked surveillance state literally knows **everything** about you. The hard part is washing the data so they can be presented legally in court.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Warlord said:

"papers please"  / vaccine passports definitely are fascistic. People can deny it all they want but that harks back to Nazi Germany or Mussolini's Italy in the 20's and 30's 

 

Proroguing Parliament, lies upon lies, "the matter is closed", sacking the investigator when the result of an enquiry goes against the government, refusing to give proper answers in PMQs....... I could go on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Locke said:

Fascism is a left wing ideology, because right wing ideology is about the rights of the individual.

We live in a fascist society; see the attempts to coerce the young into having an experimental medical procedure "for the greater good" by progressively removing their rights.

Fascism crushed other left ideologies. Would you say that most supporters (it was popular with rich people and business owners) were duped into believing it was right-wing?

2 hours ago, zugzwang said:

Right-wing ideology is about the rights of capital over labour.

Tommy Robinson and Jeremy Corbyn are emphatically not on the same side and never have been.

I think it's more complicated than either of these positions. I think Frederic Bastiat sat on the left in the French national assembly (isn't that where the term left-wing came from?) and he was an advocate of the market economy.

Should we consider him left-wing because he was opposed conservatism, or right-wing as an advocate of laissez-faire?

Edited by Young Turk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Warlord said:

Take note @zugzwang , @byron78

Supporters of capitalism also generally oppose crony capitalism and supporters such as classical liberals, neoliberals and right-libertarians consider it an aberration brought on by governmental favors incompatible with free market.[43][44] Such proponents of capitalism tend to regard the term as an oxymoron, arguing that crony capitalism is not capitalism at all.[45][46][47] In the capitalist view, cronyism is the result of an excess of interference in the market which inevitably will result in a toxic combination of corporations and government officials running sectors of the economy. For instance, the Financial Times observed that, in Vietnam during the 2010s, the primary beneficiaries of cronyism were Communist party officials, noting also the "common practice of employing only party members and their family members and associates to government jobs or to jobs in state-owned enterprises."[48]

Some advocates prefer to equate this problem with terms such as corporatocracy or corporatism, considered "a modern form of mercantilism",[49] to emphasize that the only way to run a profitable business in such a system is to have help from corrupt government officials.

Even if the initial regulation was well-intentioned (to curb actual abuses) and even if the initial lobbying by corporations was well-intentioned (to reduce illogical regulations), the mixture of business and government stifle competition,[50] a collusive result called regulatory capture. Burton W. Folsom Jr. distinguishes those that engage in crony capitalism—designated by him political entrepreneurs—from those who compete in the marketplace without special aid from government, whom he calls market entrepreneurs. The market entrepreneurs such as James J. Hill, Cornelius Vanderbilt and John D. Rockefeller succeeded by producing a quality product at a competitive price. For example, the political entrepreneurs such as Edward Collins in steamships and the leaders of the Union Pacific Railroad in railroads were men who used the power of government to succeed. They tried to gain subsidies or in some way use government to stop competitors.
 

I don't disagree we have crony capitalism.

I just haven't lived under any other form of capitalism in my lifetime (am I the oldest here?)

That to me suggests it's not an abnormal position. Capital controls capitalism. Not people. The market is free enough for those with enough money and influence to shape it to their end.

I've lived through America starting wars and insurgencies the world over for company benefits etc off the back of that malability.

It's more about oil and minerals now and less about fruit, but it's been how the system has operated for at least the last century.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic

Edited by byron78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Locke said:

The idea is that the needs of society are more important than the rights of the individual. Any sticks which are the wrong shape to fit in are whittled down or discarded.

Fascism is a left wing ideology, because right wing ideology is about the rights of the individual.

We live in a fascist society; see the attempts to coerce the young into having an experimental medical procedure "for the greater good" by progressively removing their rights.

No fascism is not a left wing ideology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

I think it's more complicated than either of these positions. I think Frederic Bastiat sat on the left in the French national assembly (isn't that where the term left-wing came from?) and he was an advocate of the market economy.

 

 

Sure, it's more complicated. It's more complicated historically and ecnomically. Liberal means different things to different people. There are anarchisms of the Left and the Right. We fought alongside the Soviets in WWII.

But it's not so complicated that we need to confuse democratic socialism with Nazism, which is the inspiration for this particular alt. Right/Trumper meme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Locke said:

The idea is that the needs of society are more important than the rights of the individual. Any sticks which are the wrong shape to fit in are whittled down or discarded.

Fascism is a left wing ideology, because right wing ideology is about the rights of the individual.

We live in a fascist society; see the attempts to coerce the young into having an experimental medical procedure "for the greater good" by progressively removing their rights.

Completely agree. Segregation was also a thing in fascist regimes of the past. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Didn't know that!

I think he's referring to the meeting between Kennedy and the German bank officials to offer gold shipment if he'd stop at nicking Sudetenland in '38. No money changed hands and Kennedy was Ambassador to UK then - it and other things prompted his recall. He was an anti-semite.

The man was a horror show who lobotomised his daughter for being indescrete and embarrassing him.

But AFAIK British Intelligence vetted Kennedy and said he wasn't a Nazi nor bankrolling them he was just a Jew hating scumbag who wanted to ship Jews from US to Africa and was worried Hitler bombing Britain would damage his election prospects in the 40s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Staffsknot said:

I think he's referring to the meeting between Kennedy and the German bank officials to offer gold shipment if he'd stop at nicking Sudetenland in '38. No money changed hands and Kennedy was Ambassador to UK then - it and other things prompted his recall. He was an anti-semite.

The man was a horror show who lobotomised his daughter for being indescrete and embarrassing him.

But AFAIK British Intelligence vetted Kennedy and said he wasn't a Nazi nor bankrolling them he was just a Jew hating scumbag who wanted to ship Jews from US to Africa and was worried Hitler bombing Britain would damage his election prospects in the 40s.

I couldn't be bothered to elaborate, but yes he was anti-Semitic and showed no interest in helping the Jewish population of Germany. He hate the British too, how on earth he ended up ambassador to the U.K...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

I couldn't be bothered to elaborate, but yes he was anti-Semitic and showed no interest in helping the Jewish population of Germany. He hate the British too, how on earth he ended up ambassador to the U.K...

He wasn't Hitler's banker though as far as I'm aware, he just thought he was a good thing as he had horrible views. Kennedy had tried to take over the film studios in 20s and many were Jewish owned - he was a proper scumbag and set up several owners but thought he missed out due to Jewish conspiracy - sound familiar.

Roosevelt sent him to Britain to get him out of US and prevent him meddling / getting more power. He only got SEC job as hired a crook to catch them. He figured he'd slip up and we would out it more than a US press.

He was a mate of Senator McCarthy too.

Apparently when son one was killed he remarked it'll have to be John then ( becoming President).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/07/2021 at 11:27, byron78 said:

So is leftwing ideology, surely? 

Did you sleep through the origins of the Labour movement - I'm not saying that's where they are now, but it was definitely built and fought off the back of individual rights. The right to work (and the right to a fair wage), the right to affordable homes, the right to universal education etc. Woman's sufferage and all the rest as well (working class women were branded as Marxists when it spread down from the upper and middle classes for instance).

 

Positive rights are not internally consistent.

If someone has a right to work, then when they come to you for a job, you are obliged to give them one.

If someone has a right to an affordable home, then you must sell them your house at whatever is deemed to be "affordable". But then they must sell you their home at a price affordable to you. etc etc

If someone has a right to education, then teachers must provide it to them at whatever price they demand, even if that be zero

 

These "rights" only make superficial sense in the context of a group of people enforcing them upon others, hence they are collective rights.

In the same way as making the Earth the centre of the universe required some absolutely crazy mathematics to predict the position of Mars, making the non aggression principle the sine qua non of morality is like placing the Sun at the centre of the Solar system. Morality is suddenly very simple and easy to navigate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Locke said:

Positive rights are not internally consistent.

If someone has a right to work, then when they come to you for a job, you are obliged to give them one.

If someone has a right to an affordable home, then you must sell them your house at whatever is deemed to be "affordable". But then they must sell you their home at a price affordable to you. etc etc

If someone has a right to education, then teachers must provide it to them at whatever price they demand, even if that be zero

 

These "rights" only make superficial sense in the context of a group of people enforcing them upon others, hence they are collective rights.

In the same way as making the Earth the centre of the universe required some absolutely crazy mathematics to predict the position of Mars, making the non aggression principle the sine qua non of morality is like placing the Sun at the centre of the Solar system. Morality is suddenly very simple and easy to navigate.

Lol!

What a load of nonsense!

Why do people always have to take things to extremes? Can some only understand the world if it's binary and simple?

Fine with that, but please stop dragging the rest of us into your nonsense.

We had the right to housing, education, and a fair wage in this country for the first 40 years of my life. Amazingly, we did not have to give anyone any of our houses. Nor was I forced to hire anybody I didn't want to hire. I also managed to receive a decent public school education whilst you proles got it free. Amazingly, we didn't have to let any in...

(Sorry to have to point that out, and most won't need to read it. Obviously obvious to anyone with even half a functioning brain).

Edited by byron78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Why do people always have to take things to extremes? Can some only understand the world if it's binary and simple?

You start talking about "rights", people with more than half a functioning brain are going to think about what these things actually mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Locke said:

You start talking about "rights", people with more than half a functioning brain are going to think about what these things actually mean.

The right to have something does not mean, and never has meant, that someone else is obliged to hand it out to you. They are obliged to not put barriers in your way though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.