Comments by "Historia, Magistra Vitae" (@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.) on "The Majority Report w/ Sam Seder"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Kurgan19XX "you also have no idea what Capitalism and Socialism are either,"
Both are economic systems;
Capitalism, based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include capital accumulation, competitive markets, price systems, private property, property rights recognition, voluntary exchange, and wage labor.
Socialism, based on collective (such as workers, guilds, the government etc.) ownership or control of buildings and tools that make goods and services like farms and factories. This can be achieved through decentralized and direct worker-ownership, or through centralized state-ownership or control of the means of production.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Nobody is living in Fascism nor is there such a thing as "late Fascism" in the first place. Fascism hasn't been a thing since the WW2 era. It was a totalitarian far-left, socialist 3rd position ideology based on National Syndicalism which they adapted from Georges Sorel. It rejected individualism, capitalism, liberalism/democracy, and marxism. The means of production was organized by national worker syndicals (i.e. trade unions), and the guiding philosophy of the state was Actual Idealism.
Fascism was an outgrowth of Sorellian Syndicalism, which itself was an outgrowth from Marxist socialism. The idea was that society would be consolidated (i.e., incorporated) into syndicates (in the Italian context, fascio/fasci) which would be regulated by and serve as organs for the state, or "embody" the state (corpus = body). The purpose was the centralization and synchronization of society under the state, as an end unto itself. To quote Mussolini's infamous aphorism: "All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."
As created by Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile, Fascism comes from a belief that the "Stateless and Classless society" Communism calls for after its dictatorship cannot achieve Socialism, and that only the State can properly organize a Socialist Society. It cared about unity in a strong central government with society being brought together by syndicalist organizations obedient to the State.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@taranullius9221 : " he did not give workers any kind of control over their production or say in their workplace." ... correct, because that would be marxism which Adolf was against. Adolf promoted state socialism, not marxism. Both Adolf and Mussolini were simply imitating Lenin, who had earlier closed down all independent labor associations, factory committees and worker cooperatives, banned strikes, walkouts, and lockouts. Lenin even forced workers to work a slavish 80-hour week. After the Bolsheviks banned all labor unions, one unionist “described the unions as ‘living corpses.’” Any Russian worker who participated in general strikes was arrested, imprisoned or shot. Under Lenin’s regime, workers had no real representation or bargaining rights and were treated like industrial serfs who were chained to their factories. Although Hitler and Mussolini followed Lenin’s nationalizing craze, their treatment of workers did not mimic their Russian counterparts.
1
-
@taranullius9221 : "He left the capital class alone," ... no, Ad olf was strictly against capita lism and the bourg eoisie. He promoted planned economies in which it was the government that determined what, how much, and how to produce. That is why he sought out to natio nalize almost every aspect of the Germ an life.
"A strong State will see that production is carried on in the national interests, and, if these interests are contravened, can proceed to expropriate the enterprise concerned and take over its administration.“
— Adolf H itl er, As quoted in Hi tl er and I, Otto Strasser, Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin Company (1940) pp. 113-114 Other remarks
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Trump has nothing to do with Fascism whatsoever and that is not exactly the definition of Fascism either. Fascism was a totalitarian far-left, socialist 3rd position ideology based on National Syndicalism which they adapted from a French Marxist, known as Georges Sorel. It rejected individualism, capitalism, liberalism, democracy, and marxist interpretation of socialism ("class warfare"). Instead, it advocated for class collaboration where the means of production was organized by national worker syndicals (i.e. trade unions / Fascist Corporatism), and the guiding philosophy of the state was Actual Idealism (Neo-Hegelianism).
Being an outgrowth of Sorelian Syndicalism, (which itself was an outgrowth from Marxist socialism), its idea was that society would be consolidated (i.e., incorporated) into syndicates (in the Italian context, fascio/fasci) which would be regulated by and serve as organs for the State, or "embody" the State (corpus = body). The purpose was the centralization and synchronization of society under the State, as an end unto itself. To quote Mussolini's infamous aphorism: "All within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State."
As finalized by Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile ("the Doctrine of Fascism"), Fascism came from the belief that the "Stateless and Classless society" Communism calls for after its "dictatorship of the proletariat" cannot be achieved, and that only the State can properly organize a socialist society. Therefore, Fascism cared about unity in a strong central government with society being brought together by syndicalist organizations obedient to the State.
[01] "La Dottrina Del Fascismo / the Doctrine of Fascism", by Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile
[02] "Che cosa è il Fascismo: Discorsi e polemiche / Origins and Doctrine of Fascism", by Giovanni Gentile
[03] "the Philosophy of Fascism", by Mario Palmieri
[04] "Fascism: An Informal Introduction to Its Theory and Practice", by Renzo De Felice
[05] "Mussolini's Intellectuals", by A. James Gregor
[06] "La Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni", by Rabaglietti Giuseppe & Sergio Panunzio
[07] "Teoria generale dello Stato Fascista", by Sergio Panunzio
[08] "The Birth of Fascist Ideology" by Zeev Sternhell
[09] Any work from Emilio Gentile
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@07Flash11MRC : As I said, you do not understand the ideology and that is the problem here. Fa sc is m opposed liberal capitalism, but also international so ci alis m, hence the concept of a “third way,” their centralized economic policies obeyed collectivist and so ci ali st principles, openly opposing cap itali sm and the free market, favoring nat iona lism and aut archy. According to the father of fa scis m, Giov anni Gen tile, their ideology was a form of so ci alis m, sta tis m and ex tre me co lle ctivi sm. Hence, fa r-le ft ideology.
"It is necessary to distinguish between so cia lis m and so cial is m—in fact, between idea and idea of the same so ci alis t conception, in order to distinguish among them those that are inimical to F as cis m. It is well known that Sorellian sy ndica lism, out of which the thought and the political method of Fa sc is m emerged—conceived itself the genuine interpretation of Ma rxi st com mu nis m. The dynamic conception of history, in which force as violence functions as an essential, is of unquestioned Ma rxi st origin. Those notions flowed into other currents of contemporary thought, that have themselves, via alternative routes, arrived at a vindication of the form of S tat e—implacable, but absolutely rational—that finds historic necessity in the very spiritual dynamism through which it realizes itself.“
— Giovanni Gentile, Che cosa è il fas cis mo: Discorsi e polemiche (“What is Fa scis m?”), Florence: Vallecchi, (1925) pp. 42-45, 47-48, 49-51, 56,Origins and Doctrine of Fa sci sm, A. James Gregor, translator and editor, Transaction Publishers, 2003, p. 59
"Some still ask of us: what do you want? We answer with three words that summon up our entire program. Here they are…Italy, Republic, Soc ializa tion... Soc ializa tion is no other than the implantation of Italian So cia li sm…“
— Benito Mus soli ni, Speech given by Mu ssol ini to a group of Milanese Fa sci st veterans (October 14, 1944), quoted in Revolutionary F asc is m, Erik Norling, Lisbon, Finis Mundi Press (2011) pp.119-120. 1940s
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rschloch : I find it interesting when it comes to Mu ssol ini and Ad olf, usually lef tist amu rica ns go face first into bi ase d sources and different dictionaries while both had their manifestos and autobiographies and doctrines where they clearly explain their world view and ideology. But alas, when it comes to someone like Ma rx and Eng els, their writings are solid gold, can be taken at face value and are beyond critique.
So no, it doesn't depend on whose defining the meaning. As I said, it is not up to us to define their ideology when they were perfectly capable doing it themselves hence they wrote manifestos for crying out loud. "Dictionary" definitions don't typically confine fa sc is m to Mu sso lini because it's easier to spread propaganda this way, when you can lump almost everyone under the same name given the proper circumstances. That way they don't have to explain why someone like Ad o lf constantly considered himself a so cia li st, nor why Musso lini also did the same.
So yes, you are reaching if you try to argue that the meaning of fas cis m isn’t strictly confined to Mu sso lini and Italy, since nobody else followed 'the doctrine of fa scis m" or the writings of Giov anni Gen tile, who came up with the ideology in the first place for Mu ssol ini to put into action.
Both fas cis m and na zis m were clearly far le ft-win g, soc iali st regimes. Both ideologies opposed liberal cap italis m, but also international soc iali sm, hence the concept of a “third way,” their centralized economic policies obeyed collectivist and so cial ist principles, openly opposing capi tali sm and the free market, favoring nationalism and autarchy.
1
-
1