Title: The F-Scale: How Fascist Are You? Source:
The F Scale URL Source:http://www.anesi.com/fscale.htm Published:Jul 9, 2014 Author:Chuck Anesi Post Date:2014-07-09 20:56:37 by X-15 Keywords:None Views:2468 Comments:53
http://www.anesi.com/fscale.htm
Poster Comment:
3.966666666666667 You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.
#7. To: Horse, Jethro Tull, Dakmar, X-15, Lod, Cynicom (#6)
Horse, none of those three questions can directly measure an individual's degree of adherence to any form of fascism. The ADL might think so, but they have ulterior motivations. Some comments in order:
An issue much more broad than one's political faction of choice.
There are any number of reasons to want to stay out of war.
Another broad question with a variety of answers and motivations.
The founding fathers would have been accused of being fascists today, and in almost every history class, are treated like NAZIs. Yet they were in favor of limiting authority. The Marxists among us do not want government power to be limited.
More than ever we need an authority-limiting sort of patriot who is willing to unhand the implements of empire from those who have seized it illegitimately. But should this succeed, preferably via constitutional means, the constitution itself will need to be scrapped and reconstructed along the lines of the Swiss confederacy. Any Swiss canton may leave the confederacy at any time it wishes, for example.
The founding fathers would have been accused of being fascists today, and in almost every history class, are treated like NAZIs. Yet they were in favor of limiting authority.
I always ask left wing loons for one single example of Hitler calling for less government, that usually ends any discussion.
The founding fathers would have been accused of being fascists today, and in almost every history class, are treated like NAZIs. Yet they were in favor of limiting authority.
I always ask left wing loons for one single example of Hitler calling for less government, that usually ends any discussion.
A most excellent rebuttal.
The same applies, of course, to any of the left of center "-isms". As I have argued for a very long time there is essentially no real significant difference between a left wing totalitarianism or a right wing totalitarianism. Both are about command and control uff Der Sheople. Which of course is everyone not in the specified control clique.
As I have argued for a very long time there is essentially no real significant difference between a left wing totalitarianism or a right wing totalitarianism.
Let me enumerate some differences for you:
Communism is international, fascism is national.
Communism destroys culture and identity, fascism seeks to restore and enhance it.
Communism destroys order and builds its grip on citizens via chaos, the dialectic; fascism builds on existing order, and strengthens it.
Communism abhors individualism and exceptional achievement; fascism respects and praises individual accomplishments.
Communism breaks down racial and religious identity; fascism relies on such identities to thrive.
Fascism has long been the enemy of international banking; Allied banking often supported international communism.
The death count from these two forms of government alone should tell you that they are different, drastically different. Fascists even if we can believe the accepted numbers are responsible for millions of deaths, primarily among true enemies of the fascist countries in question. The communists are easily responsible for hundreds of millions of indiscriminate deaths.
The linkage or "wrap around" on the political spectrum between the two is a popular ideology among Americans touched by WWII. It's merely antifascist propaganda, and plays into the hands of "moderate" communists and bankers everywhere.
The only true enemy of the world banking order has been called fascist.
A note on #6: there was international banking support for Germany during the 1930s but this was arguably naive except that it fomented an excuse for war, which the bankers wanted anyway.