 |
| |
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
In this sense, Joan de Arc was a radical fascist. |
Wow, nice Troll, I didn't expect it 
Jeanne d'Arc / Joan of Arc can only be related to fascism in the meaning she hated the English invaders. Le Pen's party celebrates Jeanne d'Arc's day every year, as she can be manipulated into being the symbol of our hatred for foreigners.
But Jeanne d'Arc has mostly to do with nationalism. She incarnates the resistance, resolve, and victory of the French nation in face of terrible odds. Well, she personally may have thought nothing of the sort, but such was the message when the 3rd Republic brough her long-forgotten myth back to life.
What is argued is the extent of nationalism she represents: love of the country, or hatred for foreigners?
As for the glorification of war: since the country was at war when she entered the legend, I hardly see how her behaviour glorifies war. It's similar to saying "Eisenhower was a fascist" because he "glorified" war when he led the ally assault  .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:31
|
|
quote:
Im not sure a facsist regime has to be protectionist by definition. |
I would argue that it does. Economic fascism is tied to coroporatism. State and businesses are partners, where costs are socialized.
quote:
And whether a protectionist regime is favorable to industrialists or landlords depends on the nations position in trade. Was Nazi Germany protectionist? If it was, that was of no benefit to industrialist vs landlords, since germany imported agricultural products. |
Germany was most definitely protectionist with regards to its industries. And while true that Germany wasn't a predominantly agricultural society (which doesn't mean there weren't any big landlords), that's precisely one of the reason why it became fascist. There wasn't a signficant landowning element arguing for the industries to be unprotected. In contrast to Spain at the time.
quote:
I would also suggest that there were genuine fascists in Spain, and that they supported Franco, and that they were part of the Franco regime. |
There were fascists in Spain (the falangists), but they were co-opted and undermined by Franco. Franco's Nationalist coalition was far more Latin American than German/Italian.
quote:
Fasciscm, in contrast, emphasized local traditions and distinctiveness,
...
In Germany and Italy local nationalist traditions were frequently at odds with the church,
|
But Italy was nonetheless solidly Catholic. Why wasn't Mussolini more pro-church? That was the local tradition and distinctiveness. The local traditions of Italy and Germany were to partition society into hundreds of little states (well, not Italy, but there was a fair amount of states) - kind of opposed to "German" and "Italian" nationalism, eh?
Italian and German fascists were looking forwards to build a new society. Spanish nationalists were looking backwards to times long gone. That's a pretty stark contrast IMO. And I think an important qualifier for fascism.
Last edited by Ramo on 05-11-2003 at 03:18
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
 |
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:31
|
|
quote:
The idea is that to defend those you love, you need a political structure to defend them. Back when there were no nation states, people fairly routinely saw their loved ones killed by local bandit "knights" etc. You could defend them yourself if you were sufficiently big and strong - if not, you were out of luck. Early nationalism and state support in a country like England was not for the most part mystica BS - it was a very pragmatic reaction against feudal disorder. Now maybe the nation state is obsolete, and the EU, or the UN or whatever is a better assurance of order and safety. But just defending yourself and your loved ones tends not to work, if everyone adopts that view.
|
The problem there though is that is assuming an attack. If attacked, one has the right to defend oneself, be that an individual or a political entity like a state. However in the latter case, we are dealign with a context of two states, where we assume them both to be a position in their own right. If we examine that concept further and ask oneself, "what is a country", you will find that it is merely a label attached to a few concepts and pieces of paper, perhaps with a fluid cultural basis too, but similar thing applies there. As such, I find a position such as nationalism to be wholly unsatisfactory. The idea of loving ones own country, well, to me is absurd. Now I dont love concepts. I happen to work and create them, being a writer, but I do not love them. I like liberty for example, dont get me wrong, but I would not fight and die for it, for I do not love it. I'm not about to get into a debate about penis size when we should be debating about concepts, and after all, that is all war is... penis envy  . I love myself (  ) and my friends and family. I love what I do in the artistic sense. I would die for those four things for I love them. In a manner of speaking, you could call me an individualist in the truest possible sense! As a result, I will refuse to waste my life, fighting and dying for my nation, or falling in love with a fallacy. I confess to looking down on those that do... people that love their country, people that fanatically support a sports team, people who wear other peoples advertising. All different colours on the same spectrum, and I look down on you all with a smug sense of superiority as the branded bus upon which you all travel is headed for a cliff, me standing on the precipice with a pair of binoculars and a porno magazine.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whaleboy
The problem there though is that is assuming an attack. If attacked, one has the right to defend oneself, be that an individual or a political entity like a state. However in the latter case, we are dealign with a context of two states, where we assume them both to be a position in their own right. If we examine that concept further and ask oneself, "what is a country", you will find that it is merely a label attached to a few concepts and pieces of paper, perhaps with a fluid cultural basis too, but similar thing applies there. As such, I find a position such as nationalism to be wholly unsatisfactory. The idea of loving ones own country, well, to me is absurd. Now I dont love concepts. I happen to work and create them, being a writer, but I do not love them. I like liberty for example, dont get me wrong, but I would not fight and die for it, for I do not love it. I'm not about to get into a debate about penis size when we should be debating about concepts, and after all, that is all war is... penis envy . I love myself ( ) and my friends and family. I love what I do in the artistic sense. I would die for those four things for I love them. In a manner of speaking, you could call me an individualist in the truest possible sense! As a result, I will refuse to waste my life, fighting and dying for my nation, or falling in love with a fallacy. I confess to looking down on those that do... people that love their country, people that fanatically support a sports team, people who wear other peoples advertising. All different colours on the same spectrum, and I look down on you all with a smug sense of superiority as the branded bus upon which you all travel is headed for a cliff, me standing on the precipice with a pair of binoculars and a porno magazine. |
Huh?
OK, ive got no country. I got a bunch of big guys in steel suits who go around killing and raping and stealing whaever they please. Im small and weak, and dont got a steel suit, so im screwed.
Some guy - lets call him Henry tudor - says hang with me and i'll stop of this sh*t. Ok, Henry, youre the man, im kewl with that.
Ok, no we got a state, but no particular nationalism.
Ok now Henry's son, lets also call him Henry, says, look, i need a divorce, this buggered pope, wont give me one, mind if i start the reformation? well, hey dude, im not all that religious i still get to go church, who cares if the head guy is in rome or canterbury. You and youre dad have stopped the thugs in steel suits, so im kewl.
Now Henry dies, his son eddy dies, and Mary becomes queen. with the support of her Spanish husband, she starts burning militant protestants. "Ok, so im not religious enuff to get burnt, (though i sure hate the smell) but these foreign dudes sure are mean - one day they might go after me. Wish this mary would just go.
Sure enuff, the babe dies. And the next queen is a babe too, lets call her lizzie. She stops the burning, and promises to follow along her dad and grandpa. No nasties in steel suits, no smelly burning, just goodies for everybody. But now them furriners want to toss Lizzie, and go back to burning and sh*t. Even if they lose, we could end up with lots of guys with steel suits again. So lets round good queen liz, and stop the furriners.
Bingo - we've now got a state, and nationalism to boot.
Sounds like what youre talking about isnt nationalism, but nationalist SENTIMENT, flag fetishizing and such.
Thats a matter of personal style, as much as i can see. I like my house, but i dont kiss the title deed. Some folks do, i suppose. Some folks dont want nothing to do with flags. I like flying old glory, but i dont get bent out of shape if some idiot wants to burn it. Some folks do. More how you deal with symbols.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:31
|
|
Spiffor, it was Joan, was it not, that inspired the whole concept of nationalism? She made the war against the English a war of the French nation against a foreign nation, where before, it had been merely a war of one set of nobles against another.
Add to this the concept that everything in the nation, including all its institutions and people, must support the nation otherwise you become an enemy of the nation, and you have fascism. But in this sense too, Joan was a fascist.
I look at China and I see a fascist nation. Ditto, Castro's Cuba and Ho Chi Min's Vietnam.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The Vagabond
|
 |
of realpolitik and counterpropaganda
Jan 1970
time: 05:31
|
|
One should not confuse a right-wing dictatorship (e.g. Franco's Spain) with fascism. I believe the key feature of fascism, yet not mentioned in this thread, consists in imposing a kind of biological selection upon the society. For example, if the government declares that people with dark hair are dumb, and only blonds are allowed to procreate, this would be a fascist policy. Or perhaps people with certain features should be sterilized. Well, that needs not be so drastic. There may softer versions. E.g. blonds having advantage when applying for jobs. Another example. Racism is not necessarily fascism. However, if biological foundations are put forth to justify inferiority of a certain group of people, and actions are taken upon them, this is facism.
Nonetheless, there is a factor that is very important when deciding whether certain things can be considered fascism or not -- the historic factor. For example, the blacks were certainly considered a biologically inferior race in the times of slavery, and action was taken accordingly. But this was not fascism. The thing is that by then the human society had simply not yet grown up to understanding certain kinds of things. However, if a modern dictatorship decided to treat a group of people in this way on a biological basis, that would be fascism.
Thus, from the viewpoint of the historic factor, fascism is a kind of regression from a contemporary level of enlightment, based on biological considerations.
Another example. Persecution of homosexuals is in essence a fascist policy. But it may not be perceived as such in view of the historic reasons. Simply we have not matured enough for that (not yet).
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31.
Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-11-2003 02:50
Maybe that's why the Nazis liked him so much and gave him support during the Spanish Civil War. It was a dark period in European history, where European Democracies further appeased the right wing and fascist elements rising in Europe. Freedom lost as the ideal of the Republic was crushed by a soon-to-be dictator, hell bent on murdering anyone who didn't see things his way.
So, all those who appreciate war are fascists? Sorry guy, but I think you are a fascict 
|