Comments by "Historia, Magistra Vitae" (@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.) on "Katie Halper" channel.

  1. "Privatizations started under Mussolini, and then were instituted under Hitler. " Wrong. Italy wasn't a Fascist nation when the privatization happened under Alberto de' Stefani, and there was never any kind of privatization in National Socialist Germany. Not to mention that both Fascism and National Socialism were strictly anti-capitalist ideologies.
    3
  2. Fa sci sm is not a thing anymore and when it was a thing dur ing the W W2, they were soc ial is ts.
    3
  3. @Banks of Barcelona: Ex ce pt that is not what fa sc is m was and what M uss oli ni said. Read again. Also com m unis m and ri ght wi ng are the polar opposite.
    2
  4. Corporatism doesn't mean what you think it means.
    2
  5. You people do n't even have a cl ue what fas cis m was and what it repres ented. Stop using wor ds that you do not under stand.
    2
  6. There is no such thing as "Neoliberal Fasc ism”. Those are two literal contradicting words. Fasc ism was a branch of soci alism.
    2
  7.  @Spock_Rogers  : Nope. This is basic W W2 history.
    2
  8.  @Spock_Rogers  "Na zis killed socia lists." Na zis weren't fas cists, they were National Soci alists hence the name. Two different ideologies, hun. Also what if they killed? So did Lenin and Stalin so your point being? Soci alists have always killed other rival socia lists.
    2
  9. @@Ayn-Rand-Is-Dead "That's the stupidest comment of the year! " How about go and read some history, starting from 'the Doctrine of Fas cism' by Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile, emoji boy.
    2
  10.  @marywalters1181  "Found the right winger." Depends how we define left/right. The fundamental differences between left-wing and right-wing ideologies center around the the rights of individuals vs. the power of the government. Left-wing beliefs are based on the idea that society is best served with an expanded role for the government. People on the right believe that the best outcome for society is achieved when individual rights and civil liberties are paramount and the role — and especially the power — of the government is minimized. By this definition, I'm certainly right since I advocate for libertarianism, Classical Liberalism and Laissez-faire.
    2
  11.  @paulwolinsky1538  "How would you characterize the difference between "National Socialism" and "Fascism" in ordinary, everyday language?" Fascism was subjugation under the State. Nazism was subjugation under the Race. Marxism was subjugation under the Proletarians. Fascism didn't care much about the race and was more about unifying everything under the State. Nazism on the other hand was race first on everything. In fascism, they had no dictator, since by definition Mussolini wasn't one, they had what is called 'the Grand Council'. In contrast to the Führerprinzip government model in Nazi Germany, the Grand Council retained the power to recommend that the King of Italy remove the Prime Minister from office. As all the former governing institutions had been subordinated to the Fascist party, the Council was the only check on Mussolini's power.
    2
  12.  @goldbluetears  "I am German and I can tell you what the naz is did was not soci alism." You bring shame to Germany, when you don't even know the history of your own country. You cannot be an advocate for centralized planning and strong government controls without being a soc ialist. That's what made Hi tler a soc ialist. He may have been right of the Bolsheviks, but he was still a socia list leftist as he believed in strong central government control. Hi tler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist international or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialis m from the rest of the Mar xist crowd.
    2
  13.  @goldbluetears  "There where some soci alist elements to their program but it was strictly „völkisch“ not communal. " Their economy was based on socia lism. National Socia lism believed in the socialization of the German people into a harmonious, racial "Volksgemeinschaft" free from so called "Jew ish exploi tation", i.e. from capitalism and bolshevism, hence they called themselves the "3rd position / way".
    2
  14.  @goldbluetears  "It was designed to uplift the German race under a fas cist ideology" Again, National Socia lism and fasci sm were two completely separate soci alist ideologies. Mussolini, Goebbels and Hit ler himself have said as such. Hi tler even criticized Mussolini's fasc ism in his 'Mein Kampf'.
    2
  15.  @goldbluetears  "Just as the fas cist state of the 3rd Reich had so cialist elements" Hi tler's 3rd Reich wasn't fas cist, it was national soci alist. Again, two different ideologies. Also Hi tler's Reich didn't just have socia list elements, their whole economy was based on it.
    2
  16.  @goldbluetears  "but the one question I asked you avoided." Already answered to your "So please enlighten us what is your definition of fasc ism?" question. Here it is again: There is no "my definition". There is only historical definition: Tota litarian far-left, socia list ideology based on national syndic alism and Heg elian philosophy. Fasci sm was an outgrowth of Sorellian Synd icalism, which itself was an outgrowth from Mar xist soci alism. 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 wasn't the promotion of private interest, but the cent ralization and synchronization of society under the state, as an end unto itself. To quote Mussolini's infamous aphorism: "All with in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." Ideologically, where the Fasc ists diverged from the Ma rxists was in their rejection of the narrative of class warfare, which they saw as utterly repudiated by the behavior of "the proletariat" during World War I, where rather than join together in a mutual overthrow of capit alism, the working class of each country stayed in lockstep with national loyalties and slaughtered their supposed foreign class brethren. Both the Fas cists and M arxists despised Classical Liber alism, and saw it as having a perverse role in atomizing the individual from society. Mussolini's favored intellectual, Giovanni Gentile, freely acknowledged Fasc ism' kinship with Marx ism through Sorellian Syndicalism.
    2
  17.  @semha6348  "Denmark and Sweden and Norway are soc ialist countries. " Scandinavian countries have social-democracy, which is still based on capitalism more or less. It's a mixed economy, not soci alist.
    2
  18. "Neoliber alism is always proto-fa scist when it is first installed in a democracy." Wrong. Neol iberalism has nothing to do with fascism whatsoever. They are the opposite of ideologies.
    1
  19.  @eottoe2001  "Since the adoption of neoliberalism under Reagan and Clinton government has gotten bigger." So it wasn't neoliberalism then... since by definition, it doesn't make the government bigger.
    1
  20.  @eottoe2001  "Big business is more integrated with big government, too, and vice versa. " This is called Corporatocracy, not neoliberalism.
    1
  21.  @eottoe2001  "indeed it does. " And wrong, it doesn't.
    1
  22.  @eottoe2001  "this is what you get with unregulated capitalism which is what neoliberalism is." Neoliberalism is economic liberalization. It's not the same thing as Laissez-faire which hasn't been even tried properly, anywhere.
    1
  23.  @eottoe2001  "Look at all the interventions with the central banks to keep the economy afloat." Which is the opposite of neoliberalism and intervention in general is antithetical to capitalism.
    1
  24. Reminder that Neoliberalism and fasc ism are two completely opposite ideologies. Former advocates for economic liberalism and capitalism while the latter advocates for statism and soci alism.
    1
  25. @Ilia Pustinqk: You are confusing corporatism and corporatocracy there. Mussolini was pro workers and unions, not "big business".
    1
  26. There is no such thing as "Neo-liberal fas cism". They are literally the polar opposite of ideologies.
    1
  27. "“Neoliberal Fasci sm” is a great term." Wrong. There is no such thing as "Neoliberal Fasc ism”. Those are two literal contra dicting words. Fasc ism was a branch of soci alism.
    1
  28. "The literal definition of fasci sm is a merger of state and corporate power. " Wrong. There was no such merger. There no corporate power either. There was only State.
    1
  29.  @07Flash11MRC  " It was socia lism in name only ... you would know that there was nothing soci alist about fasc ism or nazis m." Wrong. They were a textbook example of soci alism; centralized government, centralized and planned economy similar to the USSR, government controlling the means of production and also deciding what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid. This is by definition, soci alism.
    1
  30.  @07Flash11MRC  "If you actually look at the policies themselves and understood what words like social ism, " Socialism is an economic system where the collective (such as workers, guilds, the government etc.) own/control the 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/control of the means of production. Both na zis and fasci sts had the latter.
    1
  31.  @NotAPacifist825  "you have no idea what socia lism or fascism are." Fasc ism was a tota litarian far-left, socialist ideology based on national syndic alism, and the definition for soci alism I already gave just above. These are both historical definitions and not really up to debate unless you are into historical revisionism.
    1
  32.  @tinasmith1391  "Without multinational corporations W WII wouldn't have happened." The war happened because of social ism in general.
    1
  33.  @NotAPacifist825  You need to co pe harder than that. It was not a battle of left against right, but a struggle between different left-wing ideologies, an internationalist and a nationalist one.
    1
  34.  @tinasmith1391  "So was Henry Ford and the Bush banking family socialists too then? No, but they get some kind of free pass from you right?" They weren't socia lists, and they weren't the reason for the war either.
    1
  35.  @NotAPacifist825  "You don't even understand that socia lism and fasci sm are ideological opposites." Again, soci alism is an economic system, and fas cism is a political ideology. They are two different things but they are not mutually exclusive and have nothing to do with opposites. Fascism had a soci alist economy, by definition.
    1
  36.  @NotAPacifist825  "Repeating that fas cism is a leftist ideology won't make it true. " Again, it's a historical fact. Socia lism and national syndic alism are leftist positions and do not exist on the right side of the spectrum.
    1
  37.  @NotAPacifist825  " It's just that your knowledge is so lacking and fundamentally wrong that I can't even begin to have a conversation with you." Again, you need to cope harder than that. Is it really that hard to go and read some basic W W2 history? Do they even teach that in your country?
    1
  38. @PresidentJesus : Incorrect. Fa scis m opposed the ruling class. Fa sci sm opposed cap ital ism. Fa sc ism opposed class struggle. Fas ci sm was pro proletariat. Fa scis m was so ciali sm. Fas cis m was class collaboration.
    1
  39.  @Amadeus8484  : Italian fas ci sm has not be en a thi ng since the W W 2.
    1
  40. @Feynman Schwinger E_MC2 : Fun fact, Na zis and Fas cist came from the far left.
    1
  41. @burneraccount : You mean the ma rxi sts?
    1
  42. @burneraccount Well both Na zis and Fas cists hated the mar xists because in their mind, they were practicing socia lism wrong and wanted to correct that.
    1
  43. @burneraccount : "We are against the political bourgeoisie, and for genuine natio nalism! We are against Marx ism, but for true socia lism! We are for the first German natio nal state of a soci alist nature! We are for the National So cialist Ger man Work ers’ Par ty!" — Jos eph Goe bbe ls "We declare war against soci alism, not because it is socia lism, but because it has opposed nation alism…. We intend to be an active minority, attract the proletariat away from the official Socialist party. But if the middle class thinks that we are going to be their lightning rods, they are mistaken." — Be nito Mus sol ini "The Germany of today is a Nati onal Soci alist State. The ideology that dominates us is in diametrical contradiction to that of So viet Rus sia. Nati onal Socia lism is a doctrine that has reference exclusively to the German people. Bols hevi sm lays stress on inter national miss ion. We National Soci alists believe a man can, in the long run, be happy only among his own people. We are convinced the happiness and achievements of Europe are indissolubly tied up with the continuation of the system of independent and free national States. Bolsh evism preaches the establishment of a world empire and recognizes only section of a central intern ational." — Ad olf
    1
  44.  @feynmanschwingere_mc2270  : Cool story. You need to cope harder than that ... and while coping, go read some history.
    1
  45. @burneraccount : Define na zi pr op aga nda.
    1
  46. @djangokill65: Except fa s cis m opposed cap itali sm.
    1
  47.  @PutXi_Whipped  : Yup. Go read history.
    1
  48. "“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”" Mussolini has never said such a thing. Common American misquote, created by American called Adam McKay. Corporatism was how Fascism managed its socialist Command economy.
    1
  49.  @goldbluetears  "So please enlighten us what is your definition of fas cism?" Totalitarian far-left, socia list ideology based on national syndic alism and Hegelian philosophy. Fasci sm was an outgrowth of Sorellian Syndicalism, which itself was an outgrowth from Marxist soci alism. 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 wasn't the promotion of private interest, but 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." Ideologically, where the Fascists diverged from the Marxists was in their rejection of the narrative of class warfare, which they saw as utterly repudiated by the behavior of "the proletariat" during World War I, where rather than join together in a mutual overthrow of capitalism, the working class of each country stayed in lockstep with national loyalties and slaughtered their supposed foreign class brethren. Both the Fascists and Marxists despised Liberalism, and saw it as having a perverse role in atomizing the individual from society. Mussolini's favored intellectual, Giovanni Gentile, freely acknowledged Fascism' kinship with Marxism through Sorellian Syndicalism.
    1
  50.  @goldbluetears  "The social Darw inism that lead to eugenics is the antithesis of soci alism." Wrong. Socialism is not an ideology, it is an economic system and doesn't care about social darwinism nor eugenics. It only cares about a collective owning / controlling the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods.
    1