Current Events > Do you guys even know what is the difference betw. facism and communism?

(+) Yeah! (+)

the far-right are calling the leftists communists
and
the far-left are calling the rightists fascists.

yet somehow I dont think either side knows what both political ideologies really mean

Well, since you clearly know what they are, why don't you give us your definitions for both?

---

All for one and one for all

---

Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy.

Communism is a theory or system of social organization in which all property is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs.

https://www.diffen.com/difference/Communism_vs_Fascism

---

Enlighten us then o enlightened centrist.

---

Garioshi posted...

Well, since you clearly know what they are, why don't you give us your definitions for both?

that's like another way of saying you don't know.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy.

but funny thing is this literally entails how communism ends up as too. Only difference I see is that facism is characterised more strongly by nationalism whereas communism is like a one-world order sorta thing.

Oh, I misjudged. Not an enlightened centrist.

---

AldousIsDead posted...

Oh, I misjudged. Not an enlightened centrist.

well I would'nt be asking this question if i knew.

At least I'm not the one blindly calling others 'facists' or 'communists'

A big part of the problem is a ton of states with various right-wing nationalist authoritarian capitalist systems call themselves socialist or communist and therefore a lot of people claim that is socialist or communist because it has it in the name, which Nazis also had in their name (no Nazis weren't socialist, and neither is North Korea or the PRC, it's not just a matter of calling yourself something).

It's really a shame, because socialism and communism are ideas that should be talked about and taken seriously but there is an entire movement trying to tell people authoritarian state capitalism is socialism and that feeds the right-wing idea that socialism is just when government does stuff.

---

seems like the main difference is privatisation of the economy or not.

Nazi Germany for example (the perfect facist example) had a huge privatisation of industries instead of state-ownership. Despite this, mass corporations were already working alongside the government regime as monopolies so it wasnt' that bad.

In comparison a communist country (ok, socialist if you wanna be technical) like Stalinist Russia had state-ownership at every level. The government controlled everything in terms of resources and what goes where

ssjevot posted...

A big part of the problem is a ton of states with various right-wing nationalist authoritarian capitalist systems call themselves socialist or communist and therefore a lot of people claim that is socialist or communist because it has it in the name, which Nazis also had in their name (no Nazis weren't socialist, and neither is North Korea or the PRC, it's not just a matter of calling yourself something).

It's really a shame, because socialism and communism are ideas that should be talked about and taken seriously but there is an entire movement trying to tell people authoritarian state capitalism is socialism and that feeds the right-wing idea that socialism is just when government does stuff.

Nazi Germany is facist. They were completely enemies with Soviet Russia at the beginning and very anti-communist

Mackorov posted...

well I would'nt be asking this question if i knew.

And yet spent the previous post opinieing a bad take about the similarlity.

---

That's state capitalism though, not socialism:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism

Marx never said take all the profits and give them to the elite and state apparatus while stripping workers of their rights and providing them with the leftovers. Means of production being controlled by the workers is not difficult to understand in theory, but the tankies want you to think it means workers being in bondage under different masters but with some cool red flags, hammers, sickles, and stars.

---

When the left calls someone a fascist, they're usually right. When the right calls someone a communist, they're usually wrong.

Mackorov posted...

Nazi Germany is facist. They were completely enemies with Soviet Russia at the beginning and very anti-communist

They were allied with the Soviet Union at the start of WWII when they invaded Poland, but that isn't the point. My point was the Nazis were fascist regardless of them calling themselves National Socialists. My point is what a regime names itself is irrelevant.

---

jason19192 posted...

When the left calls someone a fascist, they're usually right. When the right calls someone a communist, they're usually wrong.

"It's different when we do it because we're right!"

---

The Nazi party originally had strasserites but they purged them pretty quickly.

Anyway if you can't see the difference between facism and communism you are just trying not to. They aren't in any way similar.

jason19192 posted...

When the left calls someone a fascist, they're usually right. When the right calls someone a communist, they're usually wrong.

It's funny 'cos your statement can be read as... 'right' as in 'rightist'..

fuming posted...

The Nazi party originally had strasserites but they purged them pretty quickly.

Anyway if you can't see the difference between facism and communism you are just trying not to. They aren't in any way similar.

• both have dictatorships
• both have censorship of media and propaganda
• both have nationalism regardless
• both have low human rights, discrimination and history of government abuse

way I see it, both are literally the same. I guess you could only say facists are more intent on expanionism (invading other countries) whereas communists tend to isolate themselves

Also kinda funny since by right, the far-right movement and Republicans should be all in for free trade and privatisation of businesses. Yet we see the exact opposite during the Trump era, when Trump pushed for isolationism and an anti-globalist agenda.

Mackorov posted...

Also kinda funny since by right, the far-right movement and Republicans should be all in for free trade and privatisation of businesses. Yet we see the exact opposite during the Trump era, when Trump pushed for isolationism and an anti-globalist agenda.

Mask off, this is called far right nationalism btw a.k.a fascism.

Mackorov posted...

* both have dictatorships
* both have censorship of media and propaganda
* both have nationalism regardless
* both have low human rights, discrimination and history of government abuse
way I see it, both are literally the same. I guess you could only say facists are more intent on expanionism (invading other countries) whereas communists tend to isolate themselves

See, you're making the mistake I alluded to earlier. State capitalism seen in the USSR and China is not socialism in any way, shape, or form. A good book you can read by a socialist author about why the USSR wasn't socialist is Animal Farm. The socialist rhetoric was just used to replace who exploited the workers. Actual socialism doesn't exploit workers, it gives workers control of the means of production. Now how that should be accomplished and if that's the best system are debates we can have, but if you accept state capitalism as being socialism there isn't any debate. It's just the same shit with a different set of people on top. China has the most billionaires and millionaires in the world and most are members of the communist party. That isn't socialism (though to be fair the PRC officially says it is doing state capitalism now and in 2070, used to be 2050, it will implement socialism, but obviously that won't actually happen).

---

Organic conception of state

---

One is a style of government and the other is an economic system.
---

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1404112?seq=1

---

Mackorov posted...

* both have dictatorships

dictatorship of the proletariat is very different from "dictatorship" in the way it's usually used

* both have censorship of media and propaganda

every capitalist society also has censorship and propaganda

* both have nationalism regardless

every capitalist society also has nationalism. but fascism is literally founded on nationalism

* both have low human rights, discrimination and history of government abuse

every capitalist society also has problems with human rights, discrimination, and history of government abuse

way I see it, both are literally the same.

then you are blind. almost everything you brought up is so generalized that it applies to basically everything. you do not know what communism or fascism are. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and hazard a guess that you also don't know what capitalism is, or how it relates to communism or fascism

---

Mackorov posted...

fuming posted...

The Nazi party originally had strasserites but they purged them pretty quickly.

Anyway if you can't see the difference between facism and communism you are just trying not to. They aren't in any way similar.

• both have dictatorships
• both have censorship of media and propaganda
• both have nationalism regardless
• both have low human rights, discrimination and history of government abuse

way I see it, both are literally the same. I guess you could only say facists are more intent on expanionism (invading other countries) whereas communists tend to isolate themselves

It seems like you don't know the difference. Communism is an economic system. None of those things you mentioned are inherent of Communism.

It just happens that the majority of communist countries have also had a fascist Government.
---

I thought communism was essentially when the state is abolished completely. Feels like nationalism is not really something that is necessary here, especially considering that a lot of Marxists are very deliberately showing international solidarity with workers

---

Mackorov posted...

* both have dictatorships
* both have censorship of media and propaganda
* both have nationalism regardless
* both have low human rights, discrimination and history of government abuse
way I see it, both are literally the same. I guess you could only say facists are more intent on expanionism (invading other countries) whereas communists tend to isolate themselves

All the things you described are the GOALS of facism. The goal of a marxist-lenninist would be a classless, stateless, moneyless society. At this point in time that society hasn't ever been achieved. The states you are thinking about chose, if you believe it was in good faith, to structure their government the way they did as a tactical attempt to theoretically achieve their ultimate goal in the way they thought best to achieve it, but none claim to have achieved communism yet. China allegedly has a timeline to transition to socialism by mid century. Only time will tell if their methods were successful and if not, that doesn't discredit communism, but merely their method of achieving it.

ssjevot posted...

They were allied with the Soviet Union at the start of WWII

Allied is a bit strong. The Soviet Union tried repeatedly to form an alliance with Britain and France against the Nazis and finally signed a nonaggression treaty with Germany when they realized Britain and France werent taking the possibility of war seriously. The USSR hadnt industrialized enough at that point to be able to withstand an invasion from Germany on their own. The treaty was a matter of self-preservation.

Plus, 80% of the Nazis casualties ended up being at the hands of the Soviets.

---

Christ

---

Shablagoo posted...

Allied is a bit strong. The Soviet Union tried repeatedly to form an alliance with Britain and France against the Nazis and finally signed a nonaggression treaty with Germany when they realized Britain and France werent taking the possibility of war seriously. The USSR hadnt industrialized enough at that point to be able to withstand an invasion from Germany on their own. The treaty was a matter of self-preservation.

Plus, 80% of the Nazis casualties ended up being at the hands of the Soviets.

Do you ever get tired of apologizing for tankies? Remember when you used to pretend to be a leftist? Can you maybe do that? You don't see me running around apologizing for all the horrible things the US or UK or whatever state did. They had to ally with the Nazis to self preserve, what a joke. Tell that to all the Eastern Europeans they slaughtered along the way to expanding their empire. Those states couldn't wait to be independent once they got the opportunity and now have strong anticommunist sentiment because of the bullshit the Soviets did that masqueraded as communism. Apologizing for states that weren't leftist just makes leftism look bad. Sometimes I think the goal of tankies is to make leftism look bad because they tie their bullshit ideology to actual people that care about workers, human rights and equality. It's disgusting.

---

Lol what am I apologizing for in this instance? Im just stating what happened. You can read about it on fucking Wikipedia, dude:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany%E2%80%93Soviet_Union_relations,_1918%E2%80%931941

---

Apologize in this context means to make an argument for.

---

Shablagoo posted...

Lol what am I apologizing for in this instance? Im just stating what happened. You can read about it on fucking Wikipedia, dude:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany%E2%80%93Soviet_Union_relations,_1918%E2%80%931941

Self-preservation is not "you get half of Poland and everything west and we get half of Poland and everything east". That's two imperial powers dividing up their conquests. And ally with Nazis is never okay, there is no excuse and any leftist worth anything beyond rhetoric would never conform allying with or working with Nazis in any form.

---

I don't really burn for tankies, but it's interesting to learn about some of the social programs/policies that the Soviet Union implemented. They were very early in legalizing abortion, for example (although Stalin rolled that back), and from what I can tell they also had good literacy programs, as well as things like guaranteed paid leave and other things that still aren't implemented in America.

...that said it's perfectly possible to still criticize the USSR and Stalin's crimes. I just think it's interesting as a layperson, learning a more complete picture about what happened. We tend to get marinated in the view that the Soviet Union was bad in every imaginable way, but in fact there were some interesting things there as well, that sort of gets left out.

---

IMO It's important to look at the Soviet Union not as something to be imitated, but to learn from. It objectively failed to achieve what it set out to achieve. But that doesn't mean it was all bad, too many people get too caught up in defending everything about it because they are leftists, when it should mostly be looked at to figure out what a success, what was a failure, and things to look out for when trying to achieve the same goals in your own country.

Who exactly controls shit in a stateless society? Who makes laws, who enforces those laws, who directs the military and handles defense, who determines how to deal with something like Covid?

---

Fascism has nefarious goals and typically "succeeds" at them.

Communism has admirable goals that almost always fail under human greed.

There is less of a horseshoe and more just an unfortunate reality that things historically trend right.

---

shnangyboos posted...

Who exactly controls shit in a stateless society? Who makes laws, who enforces those laws, who directs the military and handles defense, who determines how to deal with something like Covid?

I bet there are a bunch of different ideas, but no one knows because it hasn't really been implemented. I suppose Rojava is an interesting example to study but they aren't exactly being left alone. Vietnam has some sort of system where citizens are encouraged to join various collectives, and I suppose then that the organization you talk about would happen through such collectives were they to eventually abolish the state and become fully communist. I'm sure Lenin and Ho Chi Minh had similar but also different ideas on how things should be organized. Hopefully one of the commies on here can give you a clearer answer.

I will say this though: If we entertain the thought that some countries turn into actual communist, stateless societies, you can bet they won't look the same. Maybe one of them will have workers' councils, maybe another will have town square meetings, etc. The examples are a bit inane but my point is that it's a little premature to get into the details of a society that doesn't exist yet. Similar to how the great liberal thinkers like Hume etc didn't get into details of how a state should be organized. And IRL, we actually see a whole bunch of different solutions for liberal states; several chambers of parliament, different ideas of representation, etc.

---

jason19192 posted...

When the left calls someone a fascist, they're usually right. When the right calls someone a communist, they're usually wrong.

lol this is gold

---

The funniest thing with dumb americans talking politics is when they call right wing capitalist joe biden a communist because he's not as much of a fash bastard as trump.

---

I agree that both parties tend to proliferate dumb labels, but is there a reason you don't think the GOP and especially Trump, are fascists?

---

fuming posted...

IMO It's important to look at the Soviet Union not as something to be imitated, but to learn from. It objectively failed to achieve what it set out to achieve. But that doesn't mean it was all bad, too many people get too caught up in defending everything about it because they are leftists, when it should mostly be looked at to figure out what a success, what was a failure, and things to look out for when trying to achieve the same goals in your own country.

I agree with this. The problem with tankies is they worship Stalin and regimes like the USSR, North Korea, and the PRC. None of which ever managed to implement a socialist economy and then they defend genocides, mass murders, repression of ethnic and sexual minorities, etc. for no reason. Absolutely nothing about leftism says you need to defend any of that shit and yet they do. Then when you talk about the massive income inequality and lack of workers' rights they just don't care. How someone like that can claim to be leftist is beyond me.

---

I know that you don't know anything if you think there is even a far left. The human ego prevents anyone from subscribing to any actual far left beliefs. (Protip: rightist beliefs promote self-importance and sense of supremacy. Leftist beliefs promote self-sacrifice for the greater good. Humans are NOT very good at that.)

An actual far left ideology would be that of Thanos. It's easy for Thanos to hold such beliefs and even be willing to sacrifice himself for his cause because he is a fictional character and not even human. But good luck finding a human who would actually be able to resist temptation and use the stones to destroy the stones instead of just playing god. (Assuming they can find a way around the whole dying to gamma radiation thing.)

But yes, I know the difference between fascism and communism.

Fascism is DEFINITELY what the far right wants. The far right idolizes Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany was THE fascist state.

Communism is what ants have. Oh yeah. Communism works alright. It's just the violent egotistical balding apes known as humans that can't make it work. Karl Marx himself admitted as such when he wrote about his wonderful dream.....

Yes, I do think you're the one who is lacking in knowledge here. Stop projecting.

fuming posted...

IMO It's important to look at the Soviet Union not as something to be imitated, but to learn from. It objectively failed to achieve what it set out to achieve. But that doesn't mean it was all bad, too many people get too caught up in defending everything about it because they are leftists

This leftist doesn't defend the Soviet Union at all.

They fucked up big time. They didn't even try to follow what Karl Marx actually wrote. The only real mitigating factor in their favor is that they killed more Nazis than anyone else.
---

thanos is nothing like a far left ideology lol he is an ecofacist who believes that doing random genocide of half the population is a more fair way to reduce overconsumption than changing the economic model of society.