Hilarious how the people saying he was a fascist are themselves the fascists. If you don’t think exactly like them, be an automaton, you are excommunicated. No where was he trying to force his beliefs on people. He had opinions and that was it. Albeit many of them stupid, but only opinions at the end of the day.
A fascist to me is someone, like the literal Nazis (and not just the hyperbolic use of the word today), who (by force [very important context]) wanted to enact their beliefs and doctrine. I didn’t see Charlie going around to campuses and forcibly ending people who disagree with him or trying to put people into camps for thinking differently than him.
But a fascist by definition (not our own personal meaning, but the actual meaning) is:
‘a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement’
and that’s how I was using it. By that definition, which is the standard definition, Charlie Kirk was a fascist. He would have agreed with all of those things: he was far-right, authoritarian, and ultra-nationalist. (e: and I can give you examples in his own words where he proudly agreed with those things)
So, I am using the actual definition, where you are using your own personal definition.
That is one part of the definition and isn’t including the important part that the reason it’s authoritarian is by its use of force to enact its beliefs.
My comment about those throwing around the term fascist being the fascist wasn’t directed at you and was broadly applicable to the people who are (by force) trying to silence anyone who disagrees with them.
So you agree that fascism is far-right, authoritarian, and ultra-nationalist, you’re only haggling that it’s ‘by force’.
Can you give me any citations that say fascism is only fascism once it uses force?
I am not throwing around that term, I assure you, and it seems so far that you don’t actually understand what that word means.
It’s a political ideology, nearly the opposite of socialism.
So, again, can you explain why you said my comment was fascist? By your definition, I did not use force. What about my comment, or my ideology that you seemed to get from it, was fascist?
You missed the part where I said my reply wasn’t entirely directed at yours and was speaking more broadly?
Can you name large groups of fascists that didn’t use force to further along fascism? Nazis, Mussolini, Vargas, etc are the largest groups in history to be fascist and they all achieved their goals by force.
I’ll remind you of your comment that sparked this subthread.
I said Kirk was a fascist, and you said: ‘Hilarious how the people saying he was a fascist are themselves the fascists’.
Anyone with a brain would easily see you’re saying I am actually the fascist. Would you like to try again?
I’d love to have a conversation with you about this, but we both need to be honest.
e: also, no, I can’t name any fascist movements that didn’t end in violence. That’s why it’s so terribly deadly. They don’t start with violence, though. They start with populism.
Can you please explain what about my comment made you say it was fascist? Are you still confident you know what that word means?
He was literally the leader of the new Hitler Juggen. Not every Nazi killed people. They just accepted it and cheered it on. The Nazis didn’t start out slaughtering everyone they put into camps. It was their final solution. and only after massive incompetence on every other front.
If you are Jewish and you do not understand modern Republicans and the Trump administration in particular for what they are. You must be quite the cultural disappointment. That you have no problem defending Trump or his enablers. But don’t agree with Bibi Netanyahu. Is some really fucked up cognitive dissonance that you need to address in yourself.
Please show where I supported Trump or even Charlie for that matter? You people are just making up assumptions left and right. This is hilarious. I merely said someone with different opinions shouldn’t be killed for them. But apparently most everyone here is in a death cult who want anyone who disagrees with them to be silenced. I’m a LibSoc, anarchist btw.
If you’re actually Jewish, you should be far more careful with the word ‘fascist’, and you should learn about history before throwing that word around. Fascism is happening now, so being judicial with that word is more important than ever.
Hilarious how the people saying he was a fascist are themselves the fascists. If you don’t think exactly like them, be an automaton, you are excommunicated. No where was he trying to force his beliefs on people. He had opinions and that was it. Albeit many of them stupid, but only opinions at the end of the day.
Okay, let’s talk. Can you define ‘fascist’ for me?
What is fascism?
e: I had asked people not to downvote my interlocutor in order to foster conversation, but nevermind; this isn’t going anywhere.
A fascist to me is someone, like the literal Nazis (and not just the hyperbolic use of the word today), who (by force [very important context]) wanted to enact their beliefs and doctrine. I didn’t see Charlie going around to campuses and forcibly ending people who disagree with him or trying to put people into camps for thinking differently than him.
Okay, thanks.
But a fascist by definition (not our own personal meaning, but the actual meaning) is:
‘a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement’
and that’s how I was using it. By that definition, which is the standard definition, Charlie Kirk was a fascist. He would have agreed with all of those things: he was far-right, authoritarian, and ultra-nationalist. (e: and I can give you examples in his own words where he proudly agreed with those things)
So, I am using the actual definition, where you are using your own personal definition.
Now, can you explain how I am a fascist?
That is one part of the definition and isn’t including the important part that the reason it’s authoritarian is by its use of force to enact its beliefs.
My comment about those throwing around the term fascist being the fascist wasn’t directed at you and was broadly applicable to the people who are (by force) trying to silence anyone who disagrees with them.
So you agree that fascism is far-right, authoritarian, and ultra-nationalist, you’re only haggling that it’s ‘by force’.
Can you give me any citations that say fascism is only fascism once it uses force?
I am not throwing around that term, I assure you, and it seems so far that you don’t actually understand what that word means.
It’s a political ideology, nearly the opposite of socialism.
So, again, can you explain why you said my comment was fascist? By your definition, I did not use force. What about my comment, or my ideology that you seemed to get from it, was fascist?
You missed the part where I said my reply wasn’t entirely directed at yours and was speaking more broadly?
Can you name large groups of fascists that didn’t use force to further along fascism? Nazis, Mussolini, Vargas, etc are the largest groups in history to be fascist and they all achieved their goals by force.
I’ll remind you of your comment that sparked this subthread.
I said Kirk was a fascist, and you said: ‘Hilarious how the people saying he was a fascist are themselves the fascists’.
Anyone with a brain would easily see you’re saying I am actually the fascist. Would you like to try again?
I’d love to have a conversation with you about this, but we both need to be honest.
e: also, no, I can’t name any fascist movements that didn’t end in violence. That’s why it’s so terribly deadly. They don’t start with violence, though. They start with populism.
Can you please explain what about my comment made you say it was fascist? Are you still confident you know what that word means?
He was literally the leader of the new Hitler Juggen. Not every Nazi killed people. They just accepted it and cheered it on. The Nazis didn’t start out slaughtering everyone they put into camps. It was their final solution. and only after massive incompetence on every other front.
If you are Jewish and you do not understand modern Republicans and the Trump administration in particular for what they are. You must be quite the cultural disappointment. That you have no problem defending Trump or his enablers. But don’t agree with Bibi Netanyahu. Is some really fucked up cognitive dissonance that you need to address in yourself.
Please show where I supported Trump or even Charlie for that matter? You people are just making up assumptions left and right. This is hilarious. I merely said someone with different opinions shouldn’t be killed for them. But apparently most everyone here is in a death cult who want anyone who disagrees with them to be silenced. I’m a LibSoc, anarchist btw.
Nobody is making assumptions here but you.
Your comments have been very clear.
If you’re actually Jewish, you should be far more careful with the word ‘fascist’, and you should learn about history before throwing that word around. Fascism is happening now, so being judicial with that word is more important than ever.