← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Franco
Thread ID: 11755 | Posts: 10 | Started: 2004-01-06
2004-01-06 06:06 | User Profile
1-5-04
Thoughts On Fascism
Call Hitler and Mussolini all the nasty names you want, but fascist states are notorious for doing "what is best for the citizens re: their culture." For example, fascist governments expelling alien immigrants, or banning Jews from either their country or from certain vocations within it [both Hitler and Mussolini did that, the latter to a much lesser extent], or curbing the power of the too-often-Jewish/liberal press, or other actions.
Hitler said that the duty of a politician is to do whatever it takes to preserve the culture and health of the citizenry. Yep. Indeed, Germany's culture under Hitler was so strong and unified that even his enemies marveled at that fact. Today's American politician does not protect his people or his culture; instead today's American politician sells out to the most powerful special-interest group and lets U.S. policy hinge on the questions, "is it good for Israel?" and "will newspaper columnists call me a bigot if I do 'x' or suggest 'y'?"
Yes, we know that you don't want to live under a fascist regime and therefore lose your rights. Well, the first U.S. Patriot Act took away a lot of your rights, and the next Patriot Act will complete the picture. Ditto other laws that will no doubt become reality as America's culture becomes increasingly controlled by Jews, Blacks, Mexicans, feminists and homosexuals, who rarely follow the U.S. Constitution in the first place -- e.g. Jewish politicians pushing outrageous gun-control laws; or negro judges making court rulings that would cause our Founder George Washington to keel over dead if he were alive.
2004-01-06 18:42 | User Profile
Be careful, Franco. The usual suspects at OD will take you to task for being a nazi, regardless of how many times you deny being a national socialist. I think the word 'socialist' bothers them terribly and provides them with a convenient though flimsy rationalization for repeating the neokahn fart that the gentlemen of the NSDAP were unregenerate collectivists, i.e., communists. Several million German communists and many tens of millions of other european COMMUNISTS who were actually ON THE SCENE would vehemently disagreee.
Disclaimer: When I use expressions such as 'the usual suspects' I am referring to a handful of people with an pathological antinazi fetish. Thankfully, only a couple have been posting recently. I am laboring under the impression that these people DO NOT represent the community of posters and lurkers who assemble here regularly. If Tex has evidence to the contrary, I wish he would please supply it, or freely admit that he does not speak for the entire board. Along the same lines, if he finds some of my material personally offensive, I wish he would display the good manners not to accuse me of being at variance with the entire board, when it is only he and his coterie of Bible thumpers who are in high dudgeon.
Just for the record, I am NOT a national socialist (in the Hitlerian sense), neither through temperament nor through biology ('National Socialism is not for export', i.e., only Germans can be national socialists). Neither was the banished gentleman from the Faroes nor was Dr. Oliver ("Hitler's FuhrerPrinzip was primitive...") nor is Alex Linder. It is just that we are not degenerate cowards worshipping a fictitious Sky Jew and obsequiously parrotting the litany of tired Jewish calumnies against the last great defenders of western civilization simply because the Jews and their Christian pulpit buttgoys have assured us that the Nazis were bad.
PS Franco, please do not confound fascism with Hitlerian National Socialism. Mussolini despised Hitler's solicitude for racial hygiene. Italian fascism, unlike German National Socialism, had a maximum leader who had no real political philosphy other than self interest. The political philosophy of fascism, such as it was, was cobbled together by a JEW. The architect of the Fascist economy, their minister of finance, already had a day job in his capacity as the Chief Rabbi of Rome (I kid you not). Mussolini was a nationalist in the same sense that Pat Pukeannon is. To him, a nation was not a biological entity, therefore miscegenation was permissible. In fact, he energetically supported race mixing. Though I may have personal reservations about Hitler, I will not insult his memory by likening him to that prancing, strutting buffoon.
2004-01-06 19:58 | User Profile
Alright, now we're talking!
[QUOTE=Marcus Porcius Cato]Be careful, Franco. The usual suspects at OD will take you to task for being a nazi, regardless of how many times you deny being a national socialist. I think the word 'socialist' bothers them terribly and provides them with a convenient though flimsy rationalization for repeating the neokahn fart that the gentlemen of the NSDAP were unregenerate collectivists, i.e., communists.
You're just projecting your own insecurities here. I've seen nothing that warrants such an over-the-top statement.
Disclaimer: When I use expressions such as 'the usual suspects' I am referring to a handful of people with an pathological antinazi fetish.
Are we doing hyperbole? OK.
I am laboring under the impression that these people DO NOT represent the community of posters and lurkers who assemble here regularly. If Tex has evidence to the contrary, I wish he would please supply it, or freely admit that he does not speak for the entire board.
Please cite where I have ever claimed to speak for the entire board. Laughable.
Along the same lines, if he finds some of my material personally offensive, I wish he would display the good manners not to accuse me of being at variance with the entire board, when it is only he and his coterie of Bible thumpers who are in high dudgeon.
You're on a roll, my dear Marcus. :thumbsup:
There's not too much outside of crude profanity and pornography that truly personally offends me. I will admit to not relishing the smutty trash from that cult of personality site, VNN, being posted here. I used to not allow any of it, but I relaxed my standard in the hope that it might bear some positive fruit. Alas, that was a stupid move on my part and am currently rethinking my policy on that.
And how many Bible thumpers does it take to comprise a cotorie? :lol:
It is just that we are not degenerate cowards worshipping a fictitious Sky Jew and obsequiously parrotting the litany of tired Jewish calumnies against the last great defenders of western civilization simply because the Jews and their Christian pulpit buttgoys have assured us that the Nazis were bad.
Thank you for clearing up the matter of who I should worry about wasting my time pursuing dialogue with. Everything you and your cult leader Linder touch is foul and polluted and I've got no use for any of you. Of course, mind you that's just me speaking for me.
God bless,
Jason
2004-01-07 02:15 | User Profile
Ooooo, a fight! I did not mean to start any fight.
Let us now hope that Congress will address our various concerns here in America by voting on those concerns democratically......bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Got any potato chips? Oh, mmmmm.....popcorn! Pass the TV remote...
2004-01-07 18:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Ooooo, a fight! I did not mean to start any fight. [/QUOTE]
No problem, Franco. I think our friend Marcus has been instigating things a bit looking for this conflict. Your post just happened to serve as his launching pad in this case.
I hope my reply doesn't push away any readers or members of good will who are interested in pursuing sincere dialogue on the issues of the day, no matter their philosophy. In my heart that is my upmost desire and it is unfortunate that there are those who only seek to tear things down for whatever reasons I won't speculate on.
2004-01-08 22:29 | User Profile
As an FYI -- [url]http://wsi.matriots.com/italianlaws.html[/url] [Italian laws/Jews]
2004-01-11 19:41 | User Profile
Silly me...i always get so confused..and here i thought we were living in a Plutocratic Oligarchy..ahwell.
I also thought that Mussolini coined the term fascism (at least i thought that is what i read..)he had been calling it Corporatism.. Although the way anti-yuppie is explaining it, it seems TO me that our Jewish population has largely implemented a type of Fascism for over fifty years..it is just not overt.
2004-01-11 20:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Dagmar]I also thought that Mussolini coined the term fascism (at least i thought that is what i read..)he had been calling it Corporatism.. [/QUOTE]
The two meanings of fascismo:
"If classical liberalism spells individualism, Fascism spells government." - Benito Mussolini, What is Fascism, 1932
"The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies 'something not desirable.'" - George Orwell, Politics and the English Language, 1946
[IMG]http://www.legionxxiv.org/fasces%20page/fascesright500.jpg[/IMG]
2004-01-12 02:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]
What Italian Fascism was about at its core is best described in a collection of speeches by Mussolini titled "The Corporate State." [/QUOTE]
This book is swallowed up by the memory hole. Neither my local libraries nor Amazon has a trace of The Corporate State.
2004-01-20 23:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Marcus Porcius Cato]Be careful, Franco. The usual suspects at OD will take you to task for being a nazi, regardless of how many times you deny being a national socialist. I think the word 'socialist' bothers them terribly and provides them with a convenient though flimsy rationalization for repeating the neokahn fart that the gentlemen of the NSDAP were unregenerate collectivists, i.e., communists. Several million German communists and many tens of millions of other european COMMUNISTS who were actually ON THE SCENE would vehemently disagreee.
Disclaimer: When I use expressions such as 'the usual suspects' I am referring to a handful of people with an pathological antinazi fetish. Thankfully, only a couple have been posting recently. I am laboring under the impression that these people DO NOT represent the community of posters and lurkers who assemble here regularly. If Tex has evidence to the contrary, I wish he would please supply it, or freely admit that he does not speak for the entire board. Along the same lines, if he finds some of my material personally offensive, I wish he would display the good manners not to accuse me of being at variance with the entire board, when it is only he and his coterie of Bible thumpers who are in high dudgeon.
Just for the record, I am NOT a national socialist (in the Hitlerian sense), neither through temperament nor through biology ('National Socialism is not for export', i.e., only Germans can be national socialists). Neither was the banished gentleman from the Faroes nor was Dr. Oliver ("Hitler's FuhrerPrinzip was primitive...") nor is Alex Linder. It is just that we are not degenerate cowards worshipping a fictitious Sky Jew and obsequiously parrotting the litany of tired Jewish calumnies against the last great defenders of western civilization simply because the Jews and their Christian pulpit buttgoys have assured us that the Nazis were bad.
PS Franco, please do not confound fascism with Hitlerian National Socialism. Mussolini despised Hitler's solicitude for racial hygiene. Italian fascism, unlike German National Socialism, had a maximum leader who had no real political philosphy other than self interest. The political philosophy of fascism, such as it was, was cobbled together by a JEW. The architect of the Fascist economy, their minister of finance, already had a day job in his capacity as the Chief Rabbi of Rome (I kid you not). Mussolini was a nationalist in the same sense that Pat Pukeannon is. To him, a nation was not a biological entity, therefore miscegenation was permissible. In fact, he energetically supported race mixing. Though I may have personal reservations about Hitler, I will not insult his memory by likening him to that prancing, strutting buffoon.[/QUOTE]
Hello Marcus,
Your post isn't entirely accurate.
I'm posting the best article that I've read recently on the [B] universality [/B] of National Socialism comes from an establishment academic (!) John Lukacs. The article is about eight pages in length, but well worth the time because it succinctly outlines the main differences between Fascism (an Italian phenomenon eventually absorbed by National Socialism) and National Socialism.
Here's the link where you'll find the essay ëThe universality of National Socialism (The mistaken category of 'Fascism')û: [url]http://www.mavicanet.ru/directory/eng/19113.html[/url]
(Scroll down a little.)
Some interesting passages:
[I]Fascism was largely an Italian phenomenon. National socialism was more universal. The origins of fascism were definitely Italian. Those of National Socialism were not purely German. We know that the first prominent appearance of 'fasci' as a political grouping arose among agricultural workers in Sicily around 1892. The first appearance of parties named National Socialist arose in German-speaking Bohemia and Moravia a few years later, whereby it might be argued that fascism preceded National Socialism. This argument is insufficient. Except for the word, the Sicilian 'fasci' of the 1890s had nothing to do with Mussolini's fasci in 1919 and after. Either in its origins or in its development German National Socialism was not fascist, whereas eventually Italian Fascism became more and more National Socialist.[/I] ...
[I]There is, however, one important theoretical difference between the political thinking of Mussolini and Hitler, a distinction with consequences. Mussolini believed in the primary importance of the state. The state had to be strengthened, against the endemic individualism of the Italians. In the fascist manifesto of 1932 Mussolini proclaimed: ' It is not the people who make the state but the state that makes the people.' He tried to institutionalise and enforce the submission of the individual to the state, harking back, at least in some ways, to the idea of the state at the Italian Renaissance. But Hitler had already written in [I]Mein Kampf[/I] that 'the state is but a means to an end'. And in 1929: 'For us the idea of the [I]Volk[/I] is higher than the ideas of the state.' In 1938: 'In the beginning was the [I]Volk[/I], and only then came the [I]Reich[/I]' In 1944: 'The state is only an enforced framework' ['[I]eine[/I] [I]Zwangsform' [/I]]. In 1934, at Nuremberg: 'Foreigners may say that the state created us. No! We are 'The State'. We follow the orders of no earthly power but of God who created the German people! On us depends the state!"[/I]
..
[I]During the quarter century 1920-45, including the Second World War, there were three large forces throughout the world. There was parliamentary democracy, incarnated mostly by the English-speaking nations and the democracies of western and northern Europe. There was communism, represented and incarnated by the Soviet Union. There were National Socialism and fascism, incarnated and represented by the German Third Reich and by Mussolini's Italy. During the Second World War the latter of the three collapsed. Yet, despite their overwhelming manpower and industrial might, neither Soviet Union nor the English-speaking democracies could have conquered National Socialist Germany by themselves. The gigantic and, in many ways, strange [pay no attention to the Jew behind the curtain! FB] alliance of the United States, the British Empire and Soviet Russian were needed to accomplish that. [/I]
Today, I would say that political parties in Europe that are National Socialist in inspiration (such as the French "Front National", a party that has nothing to do with fascism) tend to be nationalist, Anglophobe, anti-Semitic, anti-immigration, and Germanophile.