fascism: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Philosophy of Politics and Law » fascism » fascism

fascism
a failed movement but a respectable creed

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

fascism

Freigeist
i emit love rays

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 20, 2004
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 226

Posted 03/22/07 - 11:56 PM:	#11
coolazice wrote: Your 'Great Man' Napoleon was nothing more than a warmonger with an inferiority complex and I do not hesitate to mention, a small penis. He was responsible for more death and destruction in Europe than even his bloodthirsty predecessors of the Revolution. Of course, if you are a fascist then perhaps you would join the Spanish in saying 'Viva la muerte!' But this is exactly why sensible people will never become fascists. It is symptomatic of the fascist to hate what others do with their free will, and yet not critically examine their own actions. No he was much more than that. In Addition to being a wormonger, he was a military genius and cultural rejuvenator
For fifteen long centuries we had to toil and suffer owing to that "freedom": but now we have prevailed and our work is done, and well and strongly it is done. Thy people feel fully sure and satisfied of their freedom; and have themselves and of their own free will delivered that freedom unto our hands by placing it submissively at our feet. - F.D.

unrealist42
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 06, 2003
Location: City of Dreams
Total Topics: 6
Total Posts: 1953

Posted 03/23/07 - 07:54 PM:	#12
The last thing the world needs right now is some megalomainac to come along and impose his views on everyone else. It is no longer the 20th century, the window for world domination is closed. The tension of culture clash we see today is far more a jostling for position than a combat for dominance, though that too is occurring even though all combatants will ultimately fail because their time has passed. This century could be the time of resolution, the time when each people asserts its place as an equal on the world stage and is accepted. The alternative is to continues the stupid endless struggle for dominance on a scale that makes it impossible.

Freigeist
i emit love rays

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 20, 2004
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 226

Posted 03/23/07 - 08:28 PM:	#13
Perhaps. But I think its also possible that the world system could disintergrate. We dont yet know how Chine and india are going to be intergrated into the world system, when they obtain hegemonic power. They might abandon the "liberal internationalism" that amareca has bee hegemonizing the world with and turn it back into a direct realpolitikal struggle. And also, another world depression and its a whole new ballgame.
For fifteen long centuries we had to toil and suffer owing to that "freedom": but now we have prevailed and our work is done, and well and strongly it is done. Thy people feel fully sure and satisfied of their freedom; and have themselves and of their own free will delivered that freedom unto our hands by placing it submissively at our feet. - F.D.

nosos
skeptical

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Jul 24, 2004
Location: Coventry, UK
Total Topics: 145
Total Posts: 2290

Posted 03/26/07 - 01:49 AM:	#14
Freigeist wrote: But if some neo-totalitarian force came along I might possibly support it because I would be less bored by it. Oh for the nobility of the bored aesthete! Are they a particular product of modern capitalist liberal democracies? Or have they always been with us?
"The men of the future will yet fight their way to many a liberty that we do not even miss? - Max Stirner "The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." - JS Mill "I'd rather be a crying little pussy than a faggy Goth kid." - Butters

Freigeist
i emit love rays

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 20, 2004
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 226

Posted 03/26/07 - 04:42 AM:	#15
Are bored aesthetes a product of modern capitalist liberal democracies? No, I wouldnt have thought so.... although my boredness is I guess a product of it, so I guess in some cases..
For fifteen long centuries we had to toil and suffer owing to that "freedom": but now we have prevailed and our work is done, and well and strongly it is done. Thy people feel fully sure and satisfied of their freedom; and have themselves and of their own free will delivered that freedom unto our hands by placing it submissively at our feet. - F.D.

Stormtalk
banned

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 25, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 21

Posted 03/26/07 - 08:27 AM:	#16
Freigeist, at the same time as you argue that humans are so flawed that the best political system would involve a fascist leader, you also argue that such leaders have historically been themselves so flawed that their political systems fail. Your suggestion that the success of a fascist leader is idealistic because it would require trascending human flaws is, itself, no less idealistic than suggesting that democracy could succeed, based on the same requirement. Therefore, your affinity for fascism is no more idealistic than someone else's affinity for democracy; disguising your other, unnamed motives as idealism is self-deception.

Stormtalk
banned

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 25, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 21

Posted 03/26/07 - 08:30 AM:	#17
P.S. Since you've spoken about the ubermensch and freedom, you might want to consider that Nietzsche called free will "the metaphysic of the hangman"; i.e., a mechanism which allows society to blame individuals for their actions, despite their ultimate lack of control.

Freigeist
i emit love rays

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 20, 2004
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 226

Posted 03/26/07 - 07:26 PM:	#18
I borrowed the term, but I am not trying to speak nietzschean. Freigeist, at the same time as you argue that humans are so flawed that the best political system would involve a fascist leader, you also argue that such leaders have historically been themselves so flawed that their political systems fail. Your suggestion that the success of a fascist leader is idealistic because it would require trascending human flaws is, itself, no less idealistic than suggesting that democracy could succeed, based on the same requirement. Therefore, your affinity for fascism is no more idealistic than someone else's affinity for democracy; disguising your other, unnamed motives as idealism is self-deception. No its not. But I think mine is a better form of idealism. Democracy seems to me to be born out of complacency. It is predicated on compromise, so its advocates tend not to be super-idealist. Though when you hear Churchill and Jefferson, it does sound idealistic. libertarianism is democratic idealism taken to its extreme. I think that this is democracy and freedom pitted in its most noble manifestation, but as with fascism, it would not work. Edited by Freigeist on 03/27/07 - 04:44 AM
For fifteen long centuries we had to toil and suffer owing to that "freedom": but now we have prevailed and our work is done, and well and strongly it is done. Thy people feel fully sure and satisfied of their freedom; and have themselves and of their own free will delivered that freedom unto our hands by placing it submissively at our feet. - F.D.

unrealist42
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 06, 2003
Location: City of Dreams
Total Topics: 6
Total Posts: 1953

Posted 03/29/07 - 03:01 PM:	#19
Freigeist wrote: Perhaps. But I think its also possible that the world system could disintergrate. We dont yet know how Chine and india are going to be intergrated into the world system, when they obtain hegemonic power. They might abandon the "liberal internationalism" that amareca has bee hegemonizing the world with and turn it back into a direct realpolitikal struggle. And also, another world depression and its a whole new ballgame. It is entirely possible for China to disintegrate in the near future as the current political structure is incompatible with national trends. India has the same problem but disintegration is far less probable. In either case a new paradigm is inevitable and it will be towards greater benign integration with the world, not less. The only country that can upset this continuing world integration is the US. If the US continues its role as world hegemon and insists on its model for world integration, conflict is inevitable. Because its view on liberal internationalism is not the same view that the people of China and India and for that matter Russia and Brazil are willing to wholeheartedly embrace it is up to the US to compromise its views. We see this already in the stalled WTO talks.

Freigeist
i emit love rays

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 20, 2004
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 226

Posted 03/30/07 - 07:19 PM:	#20
You're quite the optimist. What’s the new paradigm? Russia is an interesting country to watch. Have you heard the term 'vengeful phoenix'?. Edited by Freigeist on 03/31/07 - 11:45 PM
For fifteen long centuries we had to toil and suffer owing to that "freedom": but now we have prevailed and our work is done, and well and strongly it is done. Thy people feel fully sure and satisfied of their freedom; and have themselves and of their own free will delivered that freedom unto our hands by placing it submissively at our feet. - F.D.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.