Playing with semantics to prove a point is merely sophistry
I’m sorry you think I’m trying to make a point, I think it’s just fun word knowledge. In any case, fascism is populism, coopting language on symbols that have been used for centuries before. US symbolism is full of symbols of the fasces.
I see. I wasn’t sure if you were trying to say it’s fascism to band together, which it certainly isn’t. Fascists do band together, but the only way to defeat them is to band together as well. Fascists also eat food and drink water, but that doesn’t mean eating food and drinking water is inherently fascist.
Also, not all populism is fascistic. Fascism is right-wing, authoritarian, militaristic, nationalistic populism. If it’s missing any of those characteristics, it’s something else, although maybe still something bad. And most of those characteristics usually come together anyway, in a bundle. Typically also with reactionary sensationalism.
One can theoretically have a left-wing populism that’s pacifistic, cosmopolitan, and democratic (or perhaps anarcho-syndicalist). That would be an example of non-fascistic populism.
And yes, fascism does co-opt language and symbols, which is one of its biggest disgraces (though not its biggest atrocity). But that doesn’t make those language and symbols inherently fascistic. A Zen temple displaying the manji or a Hindu home with a swastika doesn’t make them nazis. That symbol belongs to those cultures, it was stolen (appropriated) by the fascists and corrupted into a symbol of hatred and violence, but that doesn’t erase the thousands of years of history and culture that that symbol has in the East.
Likewise, fascists were obsessed with ancient mythologies (Greek, Norse, etc.), even Hebrew mysticism, and appropriated a lot of symbols and concepts from those. But that doesn’t make those mythologies inherently fascist, and it’s entirely possible to have an interest in and study them while also abhoring everything fascism stands for.
People like to accept simplistic definitions of fascism, because it is difficult to define, but that does a disservice because they might overlook the essential components while fixating on auxiliary ones. That’s how people end up shunning someone for having an interest in ancient mythology, while simultaneously falling for the personality cult of a right-wing jingo-nationalist. It misses the point entirely.
This “grand chessboard” is a game played by people who are too “powerful” to matter. fuck 'em and shoot 'em.
As an American, I want the US to be no more of a superpower than the EU, China, or Zimbabwe. We did this posturing in middle school. Has the whole world not evolved past that yet?!
We’ll be better served when we can be cooperative instead of competitive.
I approve of a strong EU. The more “players”, the less power each has, but also the less each has to gain or lose by being an asshole.
We just need a plan to unite without leaving room for a few idiots to get elected and wreck the whole thing,
Why else do you think Putin and now his puppet wants it broken up?
Apes together strong
“Individually we are weak, like a single twig, but as a bundle we form a mighty removed!”
The Latin for “bundle” is fasces and this is the origin of the term “fascism”.
It’s also the root of the term myofascia, a type of muscle tissue. But that doesn’t make all motile organisms fascist.
Playing with semantics to prove a point is merely sophistry
I’m sorry you think I’m trying to make a point, I think it’s just fun word knowledge. In any case, fascism is populism, coopting language on symbols that have been used for centuries before. US symbolism is full of symbols of the fasces.
I see. I wasn’t sure if you were trying to say it’s fascism to band together, which it certainly isn’t. Fascists do band together, but the only way to defeat them is to band together as well. Fascists also eat food and drink water, but that doesn’t mean eating food and drinking water is inherently fascist.
Also, not all populism is fascistic. Fascism is right-wing, authoritarian, militaristic, nationalistic populism. If it’s missing any of those characteristics, it’s something else, although maybe still something bad. And most of those characteristics usually come together anyway, in a bundle. Typically also with reactionary sensationalism.
One can theoretically have a left-wing populism that’s pacifistic, cosmopolitan, and democratic (or perhaps anarcho-syndicalist). That would be an example of non-fascistic populism.
And yes, fascism does co-opt language and symbols, which is one of its biggest disgraces (though not its biggest atrocity). But that doesn’t make those language and symbols inherently fascistic. A Zen temple displaying the manji or a Hindu home with a swastika doesn’t make them nazis. That symbol belongs to those cultures, it was stolen (appropriated) by the fascists and corrupted into a symbol of hatred and violence, but that doesn’t erase the thousands of years of history and culture that that symbol has in the East.
Likewise, fascists were obsessed with ancient mythologies (Greek, Norse, etc.), even Hebrew mysticism, and appropriated a lot of symbols and concepts from those. But that doesn’t make those mythologies inherently fascist, and it’s entirely possible to have an interest in and study them while also abhoring everything fascism stands for.
People like to accept simplistic definitions of fascism, because it is difficult to define, but that does a disservice because they might overlook the essential components while fixating on auxiliary ones. That’s how people end up shunning someone for having an interest in ancient mythology, while simultaneously falling for the personality cult of a right-wing jingo-nationalist. It misses the point entirely.
A Fasces was also a symbol of Roman authority. Usually a bundle of twigs bound by metal rings used by soldiers to beat people.
Putin would need a strong Europe to persist together against the US. The US needs a weak Europe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard
This “grand chessboard” is a game played by people who are too “powerful” to matter. fuck 'em and shoot 'em.
As an American, I want the US to be no more of a superpower than the EU, China, or Zimbabwe. We did this posturing in middle school. Has the whole world not evolved past that yet?!
We’ll be better served when we can be cooperative instead of competitive.
I approve of a strong EU. The more “players”, the less power each has, but also the less each has to gain or lose by being an asshole.
We just need a plan to unite without leaving room for a few idiots to get elected and wreck the whole thing,