Communism and Fascism

[thegreekdog]

Are they completely different? Are they completely the same? Does the practical applications of both theories have anything to do with why people may think they are similar? Pardon me for using Wikipedia.

Communism

Communism (from Latin: communis = "common") is a family of economic and political ideas and social movements related to the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, or stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general, as well as the name given to such a society.[1][2][3] The term "Communism", usually spelled with the capital letter C, is however often used to refer to a form of government in which the state operates under a one-party system and declares allegiance to Marxism-Leninism or a derivative thereof, even if the party does not actually claim that the society has already reached communism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism# ... s_in_power

Fascism

Fascism, pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/, comprises a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology[1][2][3][4] and a corporatist economic ideology. [5] Fascists believe that nations and/or races are in perpetual conflict whereby only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and by asserting themselves in conflict against the weak.[6] Fascists advocate the creation of a single-party state.[7] Fascist governments forbid and suppress criticism and opposition to the government and the fascist movement.[8] Fascism opposes class conflict, blames capitalist liberal democracies for its creation and communists for exploiting the concept.[9] In the economic sphere, many fascist leaders have claimed to support a "Third Way" in economic policy, which they believed superior to both the rampant individualism of unrestrained capitalism and the severe control of state communism.[10][11] This was to be achieved by establishing significant government control over business and labour (Mussolini called his nation's system "the corporate state").[12][13] No common and concise definition exists for fascism and historians and political scientists disagree on what should be in any concise definition.[14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facism

Note there are some similarities between the theories (especially the regarding the evils of class, capitalism, and individualism, as well as freedom). On a practical basis, there are striking similarities between fascist Germany and communist Russia.

So, next time one of you sees someone who believes they are polar opposite theories or government systems, remind that someone that just because two countries go to war, does not mean they have completely disparate political ideologies.

[pimpdave]

The Communist Manifesto is a little bit more complicated than that.

[Nobunaga]

... Fascism in the 20th Century was fiercely anti-communist.

... Fascism can be socialist, or other. There's the source of confusion.

...

[thegreekdog]

The Communist Manifesto is a little bit more complicated than that.

I agree. I'm not sure what you mean though.

[Snorri1234]

On a practical basis, there are striking similarities between fascist Germany and communist Russia.

Uh yeah did anyone ever claim otherwise? The USSR was fascist.

Communism and Fascism aren't completely opposite ideologies, they're just completely different ideologies.

[thegreekdog]

On a practical basis, there are striking similarities between fascist Germany and communist Russia.

Uh yeah did anyone ever claim otherwise? The USSR was fascist.

Communism and Fascism aren't completely opposite ideologies, they're just completely different ideologies.

Well, I guess not. But people have claimed (in less flowery language) that communism and fascism are mutually exclusive. They aren't.

[pimpdave]

The Communist Manifesto is a little bit more complicated than that.

I agree. I'm not sure what you mean though.

As Freud called it, perhaps this is one of the "infinite limitations of language".

In this case though, I was trying to be vague and open ended, cause I'm poetical like that. So mission accomplished.

[jsholty4690]

Commi-Nazis! I hate Commi-Nazis.

Go UNICEF pennies, help the poor children.

[thegreekdog]

Commi-Nazis! I hate Commi-Nazis.

Go UNICEF pennies, help the poor children.

HA! Love the Simpsons. McBain!

[pimpdave]

[6.57]

I agree. I'm not sure what you mean though.

[PLAYER57832]

So, next time one of you sees someone who believes they are polar opposite theories or government systems, remind that someone that just because two countries go to war, does not mean they have completely disparate political ideologies.

Political thinking IS best described as a circle, rather than a straight line. The further left you go, the further you do start to look like the right.

In their extremes, both Fascism and Communism subject and control people to a horrible extent. However, the mechanisms are quite different. Also, in the "gentler edges", as opposed to the extremes of each system, they are quite different.

Most particularly, Communism focuses a large part on economic "equality" (theoretically) and control (more a true marker), set by a committee. Fascism more often has a single leader and often is more political in nature, though they do wind up controlling economics.

Again, at the extremes, they do approach each other. However, where they "meet" is something neither wholly Communist nor wholly Fascist.

[thegreekdog]

So, next time one of you sees someone who believes they are polar opposite theories or government systems, remind that someone that just because two countries go to war, does not mean they have completely disparate political ideologies.

Political thinking IS best described as a circle, rather than a straight line. The further left you go, the further you do start to look like the right.

In their extremes, both Fascism and Communism subject and control people to a horrible extent. However, the mechanisms are quite different. Also, in the "gentler edges", as opposed to the extremes of each system, they are quite different.

Most particularly, Communism focuses a large part on economic "equality" (theoretically) and control (more a true marker), set by a committee. Fascism more often has a single leader and often is more political in nature, though they do wind up controlling economics.

Again, at the extremes, they do approach each other. However, where they "meet" is something neither wholly Communist nor wholly Fascist.

I still don't see any glaring differences between the two (apart from the Nazis hating the Soviet Union and vice versa).

[thegreekdog]

I agree. I'm not sure what you mean though.

Yes, good job... you pointed out the inconsistency between those two sentences. I'll be sending you a cookie in the mail shortly.

[PLAYER57832]

So, next time one of you sees someone who believes they are polar opposite theories or government systems, remind that someone that just because two countries go to war, does not mean they have completely disparate political ideologies.

Political thinking IS best described as a circle, rather than a straight line. The further left you go, the further you do start to look like the right.

In their extremes, both Fascism and Communism subject and control people to a horrible extent. However, the mechanisms are quite different. Also, in the "gentler edges", as opposed to the extremes of each system, they are quite different.

Most particularly, Communism focuses a large part on economic "equality" (theoretically) and control (more a true marker), set by a committee. Fascism more often has a single leader and often is more political in nature, though they do wind up controlling economics.

Again, at the extremes, they do approach each other. However, where they "meet" is something neither wholly Communist nor wholly Fascist.

I still don't see any glaring differences between the two (apart from the Nazis hating the Soviet Union and vice versa).

Talking about Nazis and the Soviet is not to talk about Fascism and Communism generally. Each was an EXTREME example.

[thegreekdog]

Nevermind Player... just trying to find out what makes these two brands of government so different theoretically and practically.

[6.57]

I agree. I'm not sure what you mean though.

Yes, good job... you pointed out the inconsistency between those two sentences. I'll be sending you a cookie in the mail shortly.

Fangyoo, but I have already consumed enough gloopy american dough in this thread alone.

It looks like england are gonna win the cricket, what? Giving them bloody aussies a good old english seeing to, eh chaps? what?

I went to public school myself, buggered me rotten, enjoyed it all the same, what?

[thegreekdog]

You're in England? I'll have to put the kaibosh on that cookie then my friend; international postage is too expensive.

[ahunda]

As the Wikipedia quotes in the opening post state: Fascism is an authoritarian & nationalist ideology, whilst Communism is about an "egalitarian, classless, or stateless society". With other words anti-authoritarian (egalitarian & classless) and internationalist (stateless). So they are clearly opposed to each other.

Note there are some similarities between the theories (especially the regarding the evils of class, capitalism, and individualism, as well as freedom). On a practical basis, there are striking similarities between fascist Germany and communist Russia.

There are some misunderstandings here: Fascism does not regard classes as evil, rather the opposite. It sees them as natural. Clear hierarchies & the strong leader are essential points in fascist ideology. Human society is often compared to a human body, where the head is the leader, who directs the rest of the body. Fascism does not oppose classes, it opposes "class conflicts".

Fascists dream of an ordered society with a strong government/leader, in which the different classes are content with their roles and work together towards the "greater good". Nation & race are usually used as the common denominator, that binds the people together (and separates them from other nations/races, with whom they are in competition).

Whilst Marxism was in many ways first an economical and only secondary a political concept, with a very extensive analysis & criticism of capitalist economics, fascist ideology has in fact very little to say about economics.

The fascist movements of the 20th century strove for a united people under the banner of nationalism. The nation was elevated to somewhat of a mythical/spiritual concept, that would unite the people and give meaning to their lives and their roles in (the class-) society, but also encompass the economical sphere, so that industry & business would work for the good of the nation. Fascists were not opposed to private ownership or a profit-driven economy per se, but to certain excesses of capitalism, mostly when the egoistical strive for riches was put above the good of the nation.

Whilst Marxs works were based on a scientific analysis of mechanisms in capitalist economies, the fascist ideology was in many ways highly irrational and based on a nation/race cult.

Communism today is usually associated with regimes like 20th centuries Soviet Union, that actually had very little in common with the original communist idea. In the beginnings, there were many different factions in the socialist movement, and the Marxists, that later came to dominate the socialist spectrum, were only one of them.

Some key-issues, that united all the socialist factions, were the strive for a classless society, in which there would be no exploitation of man at the hands of man, where everybody would have the same rights, and nobody would have power over his fellow man. With other words: Freedom. And equality (in the sense of equal rights & standing).

As both words communism & socialism imply, humankind was seen as a kind of family: "We are all together in this." As opposed to the capitalist "Everybody for himself and on his own". The capitalist principles of competition & profit were to be overcome and replaced by co-operation & solidarity.

And: In all socialist ideologies, including the Marxist brand, people were meant to govern themselves. The state was to be dissolved, all forms of formal authority & power abolished.

The main conflict in the socialist movement was, how to achieve their goals. The Marxists went with the approach of organising the workers in a communist party and, when the time was right, take over state power and start the process of forming the new society from above. This was seen as a necessary transition period, including the fight against the expected "counter-revolution" of the old elites, who were expected to fight to re-gain their old positions of power & privileges.

Libertarian socialists & anarchists were opposed to that idea. They feared, that by taking over the old hierarchies & power structures (i.e. the state), a new elite would be born, a new system of inequality & oppression. "Power corrupts". Thus the libertarians suggested to do away with the state & all the old institutions at once. The workers were to take direct control of their work-places & factories, and workers councils & committees to be formed to take care of administration, co-operation & planning.

Whilst the Spanish revolution, that were dominated by anarchist & libertarian socialists, was ultimately defeated by Francos fascists and never had a chance to develop a society based on its ideas, the Russian revolution succeeded. And the Russian Bolsheviks were Marxists, who then followed through with their authoritarian approach. Resulting in todays common perception as them & their politics being synonym for socialist/communist.

Anyway. To the original question: The simple fact is, that socialists & fascists were blood-enemies throughout the 20th century and fought each other all over the world. And this is indeed based in their opposed world-views and ideas. Fascism is the most authoritarian of all political ideologies, whilst Socialism wants to do away with all forms of authority. Even the Marxist ideology, that includes the authoritarian transition period of the "Dictatorship of the proletariat", has this as its end goal.

[thegreekdog]

Good post.

[SultanOfSurreal]

Note there are some similarities between the theories (especially the regarding the evils of class, capitalism, and individualism, as well as freedom). On a practical basis, there are striking similarities between fascist Germany and communist Russia.

you know nothing about communism

or fascism for that matter

[PLAYER57832]

Note there are some similarities between the theories (especially the regarding the evils of class, capitalism, and individualism, as well as freedom). On a practical basis, there are striking similarities between fascist Germany and communist Russia.

you know nothing about communism

or fascism for that matter

I think he does now.


I think one misunderstanding is using the term "Facist" as a synonym for "Totalitarian". Both were totalitarian. Also, Economically, each were planned economies. However, the ideology differs. Saying that Facism is like Communism is like saying that extreme fundamentalist Muslims and extreme fundamentalist Christians are alike. Superficially true, but not in any depth.

[thegreekdog]

Note there are some similarities between the theories (especially the regarding the evils of class, capitalism, and individualism, as well as freedom). On a practical basis, there are striking similarities between fascist Germany and communist Russia.

you know nothing about communism

or fascism for that matter

I'm rubber, you're glue...

Alternatively, you could elaborate, but you won't do that, so I refer to my first statement.

[SultanOfSurreal]

Note there are some similarities between the theories (especially the regarding the evils of class, capitalism, and individualism, as well as freedom). On a practical basis, there are striking similarities between fascist Germany and communist Russia.

you know nothing about communism

or fascism for that matter

I'm rubber, you're glue...

Alternatively, you could elaborate, but you won't do that, so I refer to my first statement.

why should i elaborate when your understanding of communism consists entirely of talking points like "they hate freedom"

maybe you should actually read some marx and think about how stalinism and maoism are different from communism

the same goes for your laughably simplistic conception fascism. one of the central tenants of a fascist system is corporatism, which while not lassiez-faire, is certainly not a repudiation of capitalism. just the opposite. and that's not even getting into the class issue inherent in fascism. ahunda's post on these points was very good, though it only scratches the surface, naturally.

you live in a world where every system that opposes your own narrow experience with capitalism is identical. you use wikipedia as a primary source and fail even to understand that. it is ridiculous and insane and until you take the time to learn a fucking thing, i have no interest in discussing the vagaries of political philosophy with you

[PLAYER57832]

Note there are some similarities between the theories (especially the regarding the evils of class, capitalism, and individualism, as well as freedom). On a practical basis, there are striking similarities between fascist Germany and communist Russia.

you know nothing about communism

or fascism for that matter

I'm rubber, you're glue...

Alternatively, you could elaborate, but you won't do that, so I refer to my first statement.

why should i elaborate when your understanding of communism consists entirely of talking points like "they hate freedom"

maybe you should actually read some marx and think about how stalinism and maoism are different from communism

the same goes for your laughably simplistic conception fascism. one of the central tenants of a fascist system is corporatism, which while not lassiez-faire, is certainly not a repudiation of capitalism. just the opposite. and that's not even getting into the class issue inherent in fascism. ahunda's post on these points was very good, though it only scratches the surface, naturally.

you live in a world where every system that opposes your own narrow experience with capitalism is identical. you use wikipedia as a primary source and fail even to understand that. it is ridiculous and insane and until you take the time to learn a fucking thing, i have no interest in discussing the vagaries of political philosophy with you

You did not like ahunda's post?