|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:34 pm
Hey I think that all you fascists should come out of your shells and join me on this thread. Let's talk fascism ok? smile I hope that there are enough (or any) of us to make this interesting. If not I'm sorry to waste space on the forums.
I would appreciate it if we weren't pestered by anti-fascist peoples. smile
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 3:02 pm
*creeps in quietly*
Why I believe in Fascism: Because I do not believe that the lowest common denomenator is smart enough to govern himself. Because when countries are split on issues too intensely, nothing gets done or resolved. Because politicians are filthy bastards who only care about getting elected and therefore lie and cheat their way into office. Because campaign contributions from large companies are bullshit and should be stopped. Because big businesses can, with such campaign contributions, run the free world. Because, in a country with more than a few hundred thousand people, true democracy is an impossibility due to the sheer population. Because extremist values should never be enforced by law.
What I believe: Compassionate Fascism. The explanation, written by a friend of mine:
"We believe that a benevolent dictatorship is the only method for advancement in todays society. People do not always know what is best for them. People believe in absolutes, such as right and wrong, good and evil. There are no absolutes and subscribing to one or the other leads to imbalance and inequality in all aspects of life and society. Modern democracies function on a model of three steps forward two steps back. We advocate the use of oppressive tactics to preserve freedom. Anyone who threatens civil liberties is a threat to everything we hold dear. We encourage selective breeding. Policies of conservation and preservation of natural environments are key to our vision of tomorrow. The aim of Compassionate Facism is to liberate. We will drag the ignorant masses, kicking and screaming towards a better tomorrow for all. Free education for all. Free health care for all. End the failed drug war. End the failed war for imperialism and conquest. Stop the religious freaks. Illegalize racism and stupidity. Preserve the environment. Cease to expand suburbia. End consumerism. End genetic modification of foods. Start stem cell research. Legalize euthanasia. Expand sustainable developement. Legalize gay marriage. Fund research of renewable energy sources."
Liberal Fascism, aimed at preserving everyone's rights that do not impose on any other citizen, including those of the earth, those of homosexuals to garner state benefits just like married heteros, the free choice to use drugs if one makes the decision to do so, the right to not be harrassed for any reason, regardless of what the 1st amendment says, the right to not live under laws made based on anyone else's religion, the right to abortion and insurance-covered birth control, the right to die whenever and however one wishes, the right to free education and health care.
There is no way our current democratic society can accomplish these goals. End bipartisanism: I am the only Party. ninja
(Okay, A_L_R is also the Party. XP And there will be pickles. Oh, will there be pickles.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 11:26 am
Who's to judge what's compassionate and what isn't?
Sure, I'd love a state where I could do all in my power to help the people. However, there will always be people who disagree with me (sometimes almost half the population).
I'd much prefer a little say in national issues, as opposed to none at al, thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 8:24 pm
hey, if anyone is willing, i'd loove to discuss this! I (obviously) support fascism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 8:25 pm
Son of Axeman Who's to judge what's compassionate and what isn't?
Sure, I'd love a state where I could do all in my power to help the people. However, there will always be people who disagree with me (sometimes almost half the population).
I'd much prefer a little say in national issues, as opposed to none at al, thank you. Clearly, when I am supreme dictator, me. To be honest, I am one of the most compassionate people I know. I'm empathetic and sensitive, I don't like violence, and I'm unlikely to be corrupted with power. Not everyone will agree (for example, the right-wing nuttos will protest my immediate sanctioning of gay marriages), but my belief is that compassionate fascism is about protecting the rights of everyone provided they do not infringe on anyone else's rights. For example, vocal racism will be outlawed as, though it is protected by the racist's first amendment rights, it infringes on the rights of the targeted race to walk down the street without being harrassed, if only vocally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 10:32 pm
RavenMcCoy Son of Axeman Who's to judge what's compassionate and what isn't?
Sure, I'd love a state where I could do all in my power to help the people. However, there will always be people who disagree with me (sometimes almost half the population).
I'd much prefer a little say in national issues, as opposed to none at al, thank you. Clearly, when I am supreme dictator, me. To be honest, I am one of the most compassionate people I know. I'm empathetic and sensitive, I don't like violence, and I'm unlikely to be corrupted with power. Not everyone will agree (for example, the right-wing nuttos will protest my immediate sanctioning of gay marriages), but my belief is that compassionate fascism is about protecting the rights of everyone provided they do not infringe on anyone else's rights. For example, vocal racism will be outlawed as, though it is protected by the racist's first amendment rights, it infringes on the rights of the targeted race to walk down the street without being harrassed, if only vocally. Until now, I've never understood how there can be right and left wing fascists. You are the first literal example of a leftist fascist i've seen. I support the idea of giving everyone the exact same set of basic rights (probably fewer than we currently have) and enforcing those rather than trying to make everyone feel protected in their own spcific situation (if that makes any sense).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Though she disagrees with me every time I say it, I still contest that Raven proposes a form of Benevolent Dictatorship rather than "true" Facism. She's not quite populist enough, nor obsessed enough with church/military matters. xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 9:34 am
A_L_R Though she disagrees with me every time I say it, I still contest that Raven proposes a form of Benevolent Dictatorship rather than "true" Facism. She's not quite populist enough, nor obsessed enough with church/military matters. xp Okay, okay, okay. I finally sat down and went through which aspects of Fascism I agree with and which I don't, and the boy is right. I'm not proposing an overly nationalist, populist, religious, or militaristic state, and all of these are rather key characteristics of Fascism in the traditional sense. However, I am all for what could today be considered Fascist in the totalitarian sense, but should really be more considered a Benevolent Dictatorship. But the thing is, Compassionate Fascism just sounds better. Compash Fash: For a better tomorrow. ^_^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 3:30 pm
RavenMcCoy But the thing is, Compassionate Fascism just sounds better. Compash Fash: For a better tomorrow. ^_^ If "benevolent dictator" was good enough for Catherine the Great*, it's good enough for everyone. *anyone making "horse" jokes will be given a one-day probation >_<
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 3:32 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 5:59 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 6:21 pm
RavenMcCoy A_L_R Though she disagrees with me every time I say it, I still contest that Raven proposes a form of Benevolent Dictatorship rather than "true" Facism. She's not quite populist enough, nor obsessed enough with church/military matters. xp Okay, okay, okay. I finally sat down and went through which aspects of Fascism I agree with and which I don't, and the boy is right. I'm not proposing an overly nationalist, populist, religious, or militaristic state, and all of these are rather key characteristics of Fascism in the traditional sense. However, I am all for what could today be considered Fascist in the totalitarian sense, but should really be more considered a Benevolent Dictatorship. But the thing is, Compassionate Fascism just sounds better. Compash Fash: For a better tomorrow. ^_^ I'm confused. Why then do you call yourself a fascist? Fascism has nothing to do with totaltarianism. (and totaltarianism could hardly be called compassionate)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 7:10 pm
gyrowyrm RavenMcCoy A_L_R Though she disagrees with me every time I say it, I still contest that Raven proposes a form of Benevolent Dictatorship rather than "true" Facism. She's not quite populist enough, nor obsessed enough with church/military matters. xp Okay, okay, okay. I finally sat down and went through which aspects of Fascism I agree with and which I don't, and the boy is right. I'm not proposing an overly nationalist, populist, religious, or militaristic state, and all of these are rather key characteristics of Fascism in the traditional sense. However, I am all for what could today be considered Fascist in the totalitarian sense, but should really be more considered a Benevolent Dictatorship. But the thing is, Compassionate Fascism just sounds better. Compash Fash: For a better tomorrow. ^_^ I'm confused. Why then do you call yourself a fascist? Fascism has nothing to do with totaltarianism. (and totaltarianism could hardly be called compassionate) a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism) The denotation of the word, as opposed to the connotation, is one of essentially totalitarian rule. The connotation involves the aforementioned nationalism, racism, militarism, etc. Hence why I admitted in the very post you quoted to being more of a fan of the Benevolent Dictatorship. But in case you missed the whole point of my entire system of belief, totalitarianism is compassionate when one understands that, in order to preserve rights for all, democracy is an impossibility. My dictatorship will not seek to suppress the rights of the people, only to eliminate the beaurocracy in the protection of such. Want an abortion? Go ahead, it's not hurting anyone. State-sanctioned gay marriage? Not hurting anyone. Do lots of drugs? As long as you're not dealing, it's not hurting anyone but you. Have fun. Styrofoam, because it is nothing but a complete detriment to the environment, will be outlawed. Racism anywhere but inside the racist's own mind, because it hurts the object of the racism, will be outlawed. Willful stupidity will be outlawed. Mandatory education will not end at 16. State-provided health care. People do not know what's best for them, and if they do, they don't care what's best for anyone but them. That's why democracy is a failure, and that's why there needs to be one permanent ruling body who takes immediate action to ensure what's best for all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 9:44 pm
(curiosity, not attacking)
Where did you get that definition?
The definition on wikipedia, for example, doesnt include totaltarianism. Nor has any, logical, fascist i've spoken with, before you (and i'm not calling you illogical), ever associated fascism with totaltarianism in their typical senses. I'm curious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:36 am
gyrowyrm (curiosity, not attacking) Where did you get that definition? The definition on wikipedia, for example, doesnt include totaltarianism. Nor has any, logical, fascist i've spoken with, before you (and i'm not calling you illogical), ever associated fascism with totaltarianism in their typical senses. I'm curious. What is your definition of totalitarianism? I haven't ever met a fascist who doesn't use the two together.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
