all together against fascism
Discussion
đź«‚
All together against fascism (oppressive governments)? Or...
All together against fAsCiSm (people I don't agree with)?
fascism is a cult of personality. Able to rouse individuals to rally behind a false narrative as nationalism so you will die for your cause.
War used to be professional business, nationalism took it to the masses and fascists used narrative to create people ready to die for the greater good.
define it.
“fascism is a mass political movement that emphasizes extreme nationalism, militarism, and the supremacy of both the nation and the single, powerful leader over the individual citizen”
Its the weaponization of a nation that worries me. Once you fly under a flag you die under it. War used to be expensive mercenaries would leave rather & not get paid than die.
but if you are in america you dont have to worry about it since it's not even a nation.
I live in a multinational nation state.
The USA is a nation state due to their melting pot philosophy.
Your try at a low shot is amusing
low shot ? not sure what you are talking about...
The root of nation is natal, so you can see right there... US not a nation.
As far as the whole melting pot "philosophy" as you call it:
first use of the concept was here:
"whence came all these people? They are a mixture of English, Scotch, Irish, French, Dutch, Germans, and Swedes... What, then, is the American, this new man? He is either a European or the descendant of a European; hence that strange mixture of blood, which you will find in no other country. I could point out to you a family whose grandfather was an Englishman, whose wife was Dutch, whose son married a French woman, and whose present four sons have now four wives of different nations. He is an American, who, leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the new mode of life he has embraced, the new government he obeys, and the new rank he holds.... The Americans were once scattered all over Europe; here they are incorporated into one of the finest systems of population which has ever appeared.
— J. Hector St. John de Crevecoeur, Letters from an American Farmer
and here is Emerson's commentary on the same topic:
The fusing process goes on as in a blast-furnace; one generation, a single year even—transforms the English, the German, the Irish emigrant into an American. Uniform institutions, ideas, language, the influence of the majority, bring us soon to a similar complexion; the individuality of the immigrant, almost even his traits of race and religion, fuse down in the democratic alembic like chips of brass thrown into the melting pot
-------------------
So you can see right there that the original "melting" was never intended to try to graft africans and latinx and martians into the experiment... it was understood as a merging of EUROPEAN peoples... which is actually a semi-realistic aspiration as the European peoples shared a relatively common history and religion...
The modern concept which you seem to be parroting here is just the degenerate hollywood version presented by the Jew Israel Zangwill:
In The Melting Pot (1908), Israel Zangwill combined a romantic denouement with an utopian celebration of complete cultural intermixing.
- and you can see how that went by taking a look in any western city these days...
Nice "nation", bruh.
Penis envy, miss?
đź’Ż
some here in the comments seem to need the definition so here it is from the oxford essential dictionary of the us military.
fascism n.
1 an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
2 (in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.
The term fascism was first used of the totalitarian right-wing nationalist regime of ...fascist n. fascistic adj. from Italian fascismo, from fascio 'bundle, political group,' from Latin fascis 'bundle.' ...
The problem is due to the erosion of the meaning of words and the aggressive labeling of every single group in the world (and I consider this something that both sides engage in) that the definition itself depends upon words that no longer carry meaning.
Words like “right-wing” have no meaning because the “right” is nothing like the “right” historically and they stand for nothing. You could slice the population into segments separated by the decade of birth, and every group would have a completely different definition of “democrat” and “republican,” “left-wing” and “right-wing.” Even worse, someone who is classically liberal can be labeled “right-wing” and “fascist” for being pro-life, even though they are pro-legalization of drugs, pro-lgbtq rights, and pro-social assistance.
Definition two is modern, and an attempt to associate people with someone like Stalin, which is bad faith and I will always reject it.
I see this as no different or any less bad than people referring to modern democrats as “socialists” or even “communists.” It’s wrong both technically and morally to attempt to associate those with whom you disagree with mass murderers, unless they are going around killing 10’s of thousands of people unprovoked.
It is far too easy to say you stand against a vague, anamorphic cloud of an idea than to name the person and the specific policy you are against. Virtue signaling without taking any risk of being required to back it up.
“I have a problem with X leader because of Y policy which is bad because Z” opens up the floor to discussion, debate, and either being proven true or false. “Stand against fascism” does not.
Nuance by its very definition requires specificity, and jargon culture is very much an influential part of the shit show politics has become.