Comments by "Mark Zuckergecko" (@markzuckergecko621) on "Why Do People Think Fascism Is Right-Wing?" video.

@herbiehusker1889 no no no, that wasn't REAL socialism🤣🤣🤣 I've always found this argument particularly stupid, because even if it wasn't socialism but was just labeled as such, it's going to attract people who like socialism to the movement. So at the very least, people who joined the Nazi movement were socialists, because that's what they thought they were getting. It wouldn't make any sense to start a movement that isn't socialist and call yourself a socialist.
62
I really wish I had an old, paper version of a dictionary, it would really be a trip to compare the real definitions of words to the Google overlords rebranding of them today.
28
I think because he wanted to bring Germany back to an era that he viewed as "the golden age". Not saying that's a legitimate reason for thinking of him as conservative, because it's not, and it's really not even what his goal was, his vision was really more "progressive" than "conservative" because he was aiming for a sort of utopian future, rooted in the glory days of the past.
26
It's pretty damn funny to ask leftists why fascism or Nazism are right wing, in their own words. I have not once heard a coherent answer. Most of the time they just screech and accuse you of being a fascist. Because you know. Asking questions about fascism means fascism.
23
#9 cracked me up, holy hell that's so annoying. I watch a lot of left wing content and I swear 50% of the comments start with a "as a _____" statement, because that's how these lunatics think, personal identifiers are far more relevant to them than the substance of any comment. To me, the only time that would be relevant is in a very specific topic, coming from a very specific kind of person. Maybe a video about grocery store shelves, and someone says "as a midget, I have a lot of trouble reaching the high stuff." Ok, that's valid. That is a physical difference that gives that person a legitimately different perspective of something most people may not have experience with. As far as politics, I don't give a shit if you're black, or gay, or an atheist, that doesn't make your opinion on a nebulous topic any more or less relevant.
20
Because they're a hell of a lot closer to fascist than anyone on the right is. They're not fascists, they're communists, or at least something similar to communist that may not have its own title yet. But there's a lot of similarities between fascism and communism.
10
@Tengu125 I became an atheist mostly because I was tired of pretending to have definitive answers to questions I really didn't have definitive answers to, because nobody does. I finally just let go and decided that sometimes "I don't know" is a valid answer, because it's the only honest answer. It's pretty sad to see so many people who had that same enlightenment at one period in their lives being swept up into the far left cult, who claims to have all the answers to everything. And all their answers are complete nonsense.
9
@geomancer6894 no, politics is about ideas. And since it's nebulous by nature, not everything or everyone neatly fits into a labeled box. But that doesn't mean labels are completely useless, they exist for a reason, so we can get an idea about where ideas exist, and which ones are good, and which ones are bad. And leftist ideas are bad.
9
I really think if you were to reduce the left and right to the simplest terms possible, and look at the one factor that has a greater impact than any other single factor, it would be collectivism vs individualism. If you look at the moderate left, and moderate right, liberal and conservative in modern US terms, one of the main differences is that a liberal would believe in more emphasis on government run programs like welfare (collectivism), and the conservative would believe in more emphasis on lowering taxes and creating more opportunity for people to make their own way (individualism). So yes, it's hard to imagine a coherent form of right wing authoritarianism, since authoritarianism is inherently collective. Even an extreme Anarcho state, which could resemble an authoritarian state, it would be individualistic because the authority isn't based on a collective, it's based on who has the most money and guns. This is also just a theoretical structure that couldn't actually exist in reality.
8
@bakerboat4572 they're sad, hollow people who have to just claim some arbitrary title to make themselves sound interesting, because there's nothing actually interesting about them.
6
Freud is to psychology as Royce Gracie is to MMA. Sure, he was a pioneer, he was the first to use techniques in that form of competition that most people hadn't seen and didn't know, and at the time was viewed as the titan of his trade. But he really wasn't very good by modern standards, and the things he was good at are just basic stuff in the modern day that would have become basic and common with or without him, he was just the person who actually did it.
6
You can do it without the glue. Just pretend like your thumbs are glued to your chest, the same way you're pretending to be a T-Rex. Pro gamer tip.
6
The closest you could ever come to leftism not being authoritarian is if everyone just agreed to leftism. Which couldn't realistically exist on any large scale, for any meaningful period of time, because as soon as some people start to accumulate any amount of wealth, they're probably not going to willingly give it all away to degenerate slackers who just want to get fatter and stupider all day long.
4
@iansmith8783 ok, he laid the ground work, I'll give him credit for that, and I already have. That doesn't mean it's relevant to today. There is a reason you don't see people driving around in Model Ts. Because that shit is obsolete.
4
The individual aspects of what it means to be conservative or right wing change with the times, but the core nature of what it means stays the same - that the family structure, and strong moral principles on an individual level lead to a strong nation on a collective level, and that the government should serve only as a backbone and have the least involvement in every day life as possible, while still maintaining an organized structure.
3
@iansmith8783 I mean, maybe some more hyperbolic people would say he was an idiot, but much of what he theorized and put forth is largely discredited at this point. Much like how Gracie would intentionally put himself on bottom position to go for submissions, being on bottom is only advantageous if your opponent knows absolutely nothing about grappling, you always want to be on top, even if you're better at grappling than your opponent, he's going to have an advantage on the top if he has any grappling experience.
3
I think history just rewrote fascism and Nazism as "right wing" because they felt like the left already had too many baddies.
3
@rtg5881 yes, politics sucks, because humans are flawed, and self serving at times, some people at all times. Which is also why politics is necessary, because if left to our own devices we would just kill the shit out of each other. We have to find a way to maintain social order, for the good of all people, the only problem with that is the people in charge of maintaining that order are the same flawed, self interested humans as us. That's why we argue about it so much, because there's no one size fits all solution to everything. Something is going to suck no matter what you do, the only choices we have are which things suck, why they suck, and how much they suck.
3
@rtg5881 because it would be complete chaos without any political structure at all. As far as things like law enforcement and education, public funding of some sort is probably the best way, because people should have equal access to defense and education, obviously it's not perfect, but the idea of having to pay at point of sale for firefighters or EMS is pretty ridiculous, if someone could work out some kind of plan for private sector to take care of that in a way that everyone has access, I'm all ears, because I do believe private sector is usually better than the government. But that doesn't mean we should have no government at all.
3
@randacnam7321 how dare you deny his lived experience? He can pretend to be a T-Rex any way he wants.
3
@azrael4887 never heard of him, just subscribed though. Thanks for the recommendation.
3
@rtg5881 I'm not disagreeing with you in principle, I'm just skeptical it could really work in actuality. I think government spending and oversight is way out of control and never should have been anywhere close to the scale it's at now, I agree about charity too, I just don't think a nation the size of the US should put all it's eggs in that basket. What happens when there's some major, unforseen disaster that effects a large population of people, and they don't have enough money in the charity piggy bank? Sure, other neighboring areas could chip in for them. But they wouldn't necessarily. That's what taxes were originally intended to be for, it's basically a giant country wide piggy bank, and it's regulated.
2
@cord113 it's a cult. Part of how cults control their flock is by convincing them that nobody outside of the flock could ever possibly be right about anything. That's why they label outsiders as "sinners" or "tools of the devil", or whatever other smear they choose to use. For the far left cult, everyone who disagrees is a racist, or a fascist, or a troll, or a bot. They're under complete control of the cult, because their brain has been reprogrammed to value the source more than the content, if a conservative says it, it's wrong, no matter how basic and obvious the statement is. If a leftist says it, it's true, no matter how nonsensical and verifiably false it is.
2
@cord113 YouTube shadow bans a ton of comments, sometimes more than half in any given thread. I can't really put my thumb on the reasoning, and it's not the same as how they delete comments for using their "naughty words", I can still always read all my comments even if they're hidden from other people, and I don't think they're hidden from all people either. It's not about vulgarity or anything like that either, I think it's more to do with what you might find objectionable, based on your personal comments and activity. It's creepy as hell. Because when I watch left wing content and comment, more than half the comments are hidden from me, it'll say there's 30 comments in the thread but when I scroll through there's only 10 or so visible to me, most of the ones I can see are more critical. Right wing content is the opposite, with 30 comments I'll probably be able to view 20 or so, because more of them are more agreeable to me. It's like YouTube is trying to further the divide by hiding comments you may find objectionable, siphon everyone off into echo chambers.
2
@JesusFriedChrist with a lack of hierarchy, whoever has the most guns and money becomes the monarch. Until someone with more guns and money comes along. And yes, liberals are more collective than conservatives. You're making the mistake of thinking that only extremes exist, like leftists do. I specifically used the example of the 2 most common MODERATE political ideologies, meaning neither of them is extreme collectivist or extreme individualist, liberals still believe in individual rights and liberties, they just believe in stronger social programs than people on the moderate right would, and conservatives still believe in some form of social safety net and collectivized services, just not to as much of a degree as their moderate left counterparts.
1
@rtg5881 and how would that work in a nation with 330 million people?
1