When the time comes: Let's discuss fascist rhetoric

[Aexodus]

Anyway, Bolsonaro calling for coups, sterilisation of the poor, whipping of homosexuals and murder of his opponents pretty much qualify him as fascist,

None of those make you a fascist, they are seen in various ideologies be they fascist, conservative, socialist or communist.

He’s clearly authoritarian, but ‘Fascist’ is a reach.

as you had yourself recognized.

I was wrong wasn’t I, having just heard of him for the first time.

[Heathen Hammer]

Bolsonaro is just a Latin version of Reagan. I mean he does the "tough guy" talk, but so far the only thing he should be criticized for environmental policies, which si funny given how it is the liberal and leftist regimes are more prone to abuse the environment.
This somewhat demonstrates the crisis of leftist/liberal rhetoric. Instead of addressing well-deserved criticism, they want everyone to believe that anyone who disagrees with them is fascist/racist/Nazi, alt-right, etc.
Left stopped debating. They no longer care what you think. They'll just throw on a label on you and will roll over you, or at least attempt to do so.

[Bob69Joe]

Kritias,

The problems Greece faces can all be held back with a confederated military. That alone allows the people of their various homes to ensure their continuation and is the only necessary attribute a governmental body must be allowed if any of us could be honest to ourselves and not face condemnation from the masses.

None of the political parties are going to be any different, all appeal to same urge of grouping people into useful subjects of government. That's not a statement out of despair. Every nation has this minority that must be kicked out of power, the political careers. After coming through several centuries of political conflict, ever attempting to maintain vast borders, conglomerated bodies of townships, yet avoiding any mention of imperialism or empire, Europe has been in continual decline through this need to shape people into a mass of useful subjects. Crete, Macedonia, many more islands in the Aegean, from my limited perspective, would do just fine without a governing body of politicians in Athens. Turn off the lights after 7 o'clock, who could be so "disenfranchised" by that? Yet, a confederated military is an absolute necessity.

HAILS

[Kritias]

Apparently for some of you to call someone fascist that person must travel back in time to Italy in 1922, be willing to march on foot all the way to Rome, wear a black shirt, be balding and want to invade Eritrea first and then come back to here and now. This is not a debate in good faith, mates. Is this selective blindness, naivety, what? You can't possibly listen to the things that go out of their mouths and think they are conservatives, unless you believe that conservativism is fascism in essence. Which it isn't. Conservativism is about preserving the mores of a particular culture while advances in technology and science beat it to a slow and mournful death; a great example is the grand debate on abortion now which, on the conservative side, includes a lot of the argumentation conservatives first rose against contraception. Problem is, while fascism camouflages itself by promoting some conservative ideals, it does not promote any of these ideals in actual fact.

@Heathen,

First, support for fascism is not minimal as you can see from the scource I provided. It's spreading through Europe riding a wave of economic catastrophe for the majority of its population. So, no. Secondly, no - Bolsonaro isn't the Latin American 'Reagan' and to even suggest this is beyond ridiculous. It also speaks volumes on how you want to present conservatives in your argumentation - conservatives don't want their opposition murdered, beaten up, whipped or otherwise mistreated. They just want things to keep going as they always have and begrudgingly give in to any new thing.

Second, again you are incorrect. While there are a lot of idiots left and right of the spectrum tossing terms around casually (and these are the ones mostly broadcasted since outrage sells and the media are on to us), this thread is not this case. And when you have a person like Bolsonaro who openly glorifies the fascist juntas of the past and claims that they needed to kill 3o,ooo more people to 'save the country' you bet your sweet ass I am going to call this man a fascist. The problem is, either through ignorance of what this term means or intentionally, you don't.

@Aexodus,

No. Calling for coups, sterilisation of the poor, whipping of homosexuals and murder of opponents are NOT part of all ideologies. Conservatives and socialists definitely do NOT call for any of the above since both groups are democratic entities and not authoritarian advocates. How did you come to this conclusion? I would like you to give me examples.

@Ep1c_Fa1l,

What do you think the bible advocates for, if not monarchy which is by definition illiberal for most of its existence as a governing type?

[Cope]

@Ep1c_Fa1l,

What do you think the bible advocates for, if not monarchy which is by definition illiberal for most of its existence as a governing type?

Scripture doesn't "advocate" for any particular form of temporal government.

[Aexodus]

No. Calling for coups, sterilisation of the poor, whipping of homosexuals and murder of opponents are NOT part of all ideologies. Conservatives and socialists definitely do NOT call for any of the above since both groups are democratic entities and not authoritarian advocates. How did you come to this conclusion? I would like you to give me examples.

Coups are self explanatory, Fabians wanted to sterilise the poor, religious extremist of many stripes want to whip gays, and murder of opponents is again self explanatory.

Apparently for some of you to call someone fascist that person must travel back in time to Italy in 1922, be willing to march on foot all the way to Rome, wear a black shirt, be balding and want to invade Eritrea first and then come back to here and now.

... but they do need to want to at least overthrow democracy.

[Kritias]

Coups are self explanatory, Fabians wanted to sterilise the poor, religious extremist of many stripes want to whip gays, and murder of opponents is again self explanatory.
... but they do need to want to at least overthrow democracy.

Come on, mate. The Fabians didn't want to sterilize the poor; you're rehashing Guido Fawkes here who claims that Archibald Church was a Fabian and he proposed a bill for voluntary sterilization of "those who are in every way a burden to their parents, a misery to themselves and in my opinion a menace to the social life of the community". This is not to say that Fabians weren't complete crap; far from it. But this particular bit is not correct. There's no evidence that the Webbs were in favour of sterilizing the poor, even though they were downright bigoted and prejudiced against the poor thinking that the "procreation of the Irish Catholics and the Polish, Russian and German Jews, on the one hand, and to the thriftless and irresponsible — largely the casual laborers and the other denizens of the one-roomed tenements of our great cities — on the other" was deplorable.

Religious extremists are also just that: extremists. If they self-identify as conservatives or socialists, it doesn't color the ideology itself since it's not a part of it, but an individual's idea who happens to profess being a conservative or a socialist.

But coups and the murder of opposition? This is never seen in the bourgeois parties, be they conservative or liberal, or socialist. Their whole legitimization stems from the moral high ground of enforcing government through the consensus of the majority. It is only met in the extremes of either side - communist and fascist parties.

Perfect. So when Bolsonaro orders celebrations of the military dictatorship that brought Brazilian democracy to an end, that isn't him celebrating the overthrowing of democracy. Or him hinting towards a coup if he failed to be elected. Or him glorifying the dictatorship and one of its greatest torturers. You can find these articles in Adbulmecid's post. So, is he or isn't he a fascist when he calls for these actions? Make up your mind.

@Ep1c Fa1l,

And yet scripture was used for centuries to support monarchies of God throughout Europe. Curious. Perhaps you should re-read the scriptures. I'll assist you and drop some quotes to get you started,

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. ...

“When you come to the land that the Lord your God is giving you, and you possess it and dwell in it and then say, ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me,’ you may indeed set a king over you whom the Lord your God will choose. One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother. Only he must not acquire many horses for himself or cause the people to return to Egypt in order to acquire many horses, since the Lord has said to you, ‘You shall never return that way again.’ And he shall not acquire many wives for himself, lest his heart turn away, nor shall he acquire for himself excessive silver and gold. “And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests..."

[Cope]

Come on, mate. The Fabians didn't want to sterilize the poor; you're rehashing Guido Fawkes here who claims that Archibald Church was a Fabian and he proposed a bill for voluntary sterilization of "those who are in every way a burden to their parents, a misery to themselves and in my opinion a menace to the social life of the community". This is not to say that Fabians weren't complete crap; far from it. But this particular bit is not correct. There's no evidence that the Webbs were in favour of sterilizing the poor, even though they were downright bigoted and prejudiced against the poor thinking that the "procreation of the Irish Catholics and the Polish, Russian and German Jews, on the one hand, and to the thriftless and irresponsible — largely the casual laborers and the other denizens of the one-roomed tenements of our great cities — on the other" was deplorable.

Religious extremists are also just that: extremists. If they self-identify as conservatives or socialists, it doesn't color the ideology itself since it's not a part of it, but an individual's idea who happens to profess being a conservative or a socialist.

But coups and the murder of opposition? This is never seen in the bourgeois parties, be they conservative or liberal, or socialist. Their whole legitimization stems from the moral high ground of enforcing government through the consensus of the majority. It is only met in the extremes of either side - communist and fascist parties.

Perfect. So when Bolsonaro orders celebrations of the military dictatorship that brought Brazilian democracy to an end, that isn't him celebrating the overthrowing of democracy. Or him hinting towards a coup if he failed to be elected. Or him glorifying the dictatorship and one of its greatest torturers. You can find these articles in Adbulmecid's post. So, is he or isn't he a fascist when he calls for these actions? Make up your mind.

@Ep1c Fa1l,

And yet scripture was used for centuries to support monarchies of God throughout Europe. Curious. Perhaps you should re-read the scriptures. I'll assist you and drop some quotes to get you started,

Scripture has been used to justify or "support" a great many things; that doesn't mean that it advocates for a particular form of temporal government. The first quote from Romans is simply an injunction to avoid rebellion as is consistent with Christ's message in Matthew 22:21. It isn't a specific instruction to enable monarchical rule. The second quote prophesizes the events of Samuel 8:1 when the Israelites insisted that a king be placed over them, despite being warned that they would "cry out for relief from the king you [they] have chosen but the Lord will not answer you [them] in that day." The fact that God acceded to the Israelites' request does not prove that He favours monarhical government. This is clearly shown, first by His initial decision to appoint Judges as the rulers of the Israelites prior to the time of Saul, second by the devastation wrought upon the children of Israel by a series of failed kings and third by Christ's insistence that the politics of the flesh are an irrelevance by comparison to the cultivation of the spirit.

[Aexodus]

Come on, mate. The Fabians didn't want to sterilize the poor; you're rehashing Guido Fawkes here who claims that Archibald Church was a Fabian and he proposed a bill for voluntary sterilization of "those who are in every way a burden to their parents, a misery to themselves and in my opinion a menace to the social life of the community". This is not to say that Fabians weren't complete crap; far from it. But this particular bit is not correct. There's no evidence that the Webbs were in favour of sterilizing the poor, even though they were downright bigoted and prejudiced against the poor thinking that the "procreation of the Irish Catholics and the Polish, Russian and German Jews, on the one hand, and to the thriftless and irresponsible — largely the casual laborers and the other denizens of the one-roomed tenements of our great cities — on the other" was deplorable.

Religious extremists are also just that: extremists. If they self-identify as conservatives or socialists, it doesn't color the ideology itself since it's not a part of it, but an individual's idea who happens to profess being a conservative or a socialist.

But coups and the murder of opposition? This is never seen in the bourgeois parties, be they conservative or liberal, or socialist. Their whole legitimization stems from the moral high ground of enforcing government through the consensus of the majority. It is only met in the extremes of either side - communist and fascist parties.

Perfect. So when Bolsonaro orders celebrations of the military dictatorship that brought Brazilian democracy to an end, that isn't him celebrating the overthrowing of democracy. Or him hinting towards a coup if he failed to be elected. Or him glorifying the dictatorship and one of its greatest torturers. You can find these articles in Adbulmecid's post. So, is he or isn't he a fascist when he calls for these actions? Make up your mind.

@Ep1c Fa1l,

And yet scripture was used for centuries to support monarchies of God throughout Europe. Curious. Perhaps you should re-read the scriptures. I'll assist you and drop some quotes to get you started,

Glorifying the Junta makes him authoritarian, not a Fascist.

The junta itself was not Fascist, why would Bolsonaro?

[Kritias]

Glorifying the Junta makes him authoritarian, not a Fascist.

The junta itself was not Fascist, why would Bolsonaro?

Fascism is an authoritarian type of government. Saying that something isn't fascist because its authoritarian as if they were two different things and not encompassing each other is an oxymoron.

Either provide evidence that the program of the regime wasn't fascist, or accept it and let's move on.

[Aexodus]

I should have said he is authoritarian, but not fascist.

Why should I have to prove a negative? You prove the Brazilian Junta was a Fascist regime, therefore making Bolsonaro a celebrator of a Fascist regime.

[Kritias]

Because I just proved to you with a series of articles that major publications classify Jair Bolsonaro as a fascist. Then I told you that Bolsonaro glorifies a military dictatorship and has called for the overthrowing of the democracy which, according to you, would signify someone is a fascist. And you denied it in spite that, without offering any conflicting evidence other than your opinion. And frankly, it's getting tiring to keep providing evidence just for people to brush it away.

Post Scriptum: .....Fine. Here's another article from Hareetz. I quote,

By the time it ended in 1985, Brazil’s military dictatorship was a last remnant of an once-rampant political ideology rife with fascist influences. It is also a sign of the return of a repressive and nationalistic understanding of the state and its foreign policies that came to a head in pre-war Nazi Germany, spread west to the United States, and was pushed by successive U.S. administrations as a strategic necessity for South America. First gaining prominence as a staunch defender of the legacy of Brazil’s military dictatorship, which gained power in a 1964 coup, Bolsonaro’s anti-LGBQT, racist, and misogynistic platform is part of his general disdain for democracy. He has advocated sterilization for the poor to stave off "chaos."

More articles proving that Bolsonaro is indeed a fascist. Read here, here, here, here and here.

[Aexodus]

The Guardian can kiss my ass as far as it’s concerned. You can’t argue from authority here by saying ‘the media said it so it must be true’.

[Kritias]

The Guardian can kiss my ass as far as it’s concerned. You can’t argue from authority here by saying ‘the media said it so it must be true’.

This is not a debate in good faith, mate. What kind of evidence do you need exactly? Should I go there and ask him personally, for example? Either accept it, or provide some evidence to contradict it. Saying it's not true because you say so won't cut it.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Its pointless to discuss with Aexodus. You waste your time discussing with him.

[Aexodus]

You haven’t given me any evidence thst he’s a fascist beyond saying he supports coups, homophobia, and eugenics. None of that makes someone a Fascist. It makes them an ultra-authoritarian. I don’t like the guy but if you want to argue against him don’t contort the (nowadays useless) meaning of the word ‘Fascist’. Well, that and the Guardian says so.

Give me some relevant qualitative similarities between Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Bolsonaro’s ideology that would make him a Fascist. Does he want to overthrow liberal democracy, approve of political violence, desire autarky, hyper-militarism, anti individualistic, ethnonationalist, anti-Liberalism, anti-Conservatism, anti-Communism, is he revolutionary.

[Kritias]

Its pointless to discuss with Aexodus. You waste your time discussing with him.

That's unacceptable. Of course we need to discuss because at some point, maybe many years from now something will click, he'll maybe reconsider one tiny thing and then Aexodus will see this image flash across his mind and remember me.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Give me some relevant qualitative similarities between Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Bolsonaro’s ideology that would make him a Fascist. Does he want to overthrow liberal democracy, approve of political violence, desire autarky, hyper-militarism, anti individualistic, ethnonationalist, anti-Liberalism, anti-Conservatism, anti-Communism, is he revolutionary.

Ah. So you didn't read the articles. Open the links, read the articles. Your list checks out.

[Aexodus]

You’re gonna have to tell me where those articles prove he’s fascist, because I read them, and the thing they all seemed to talk about was Bolsonaro saying he would ‘jail red outlaws’ aka leftists. I do believe he is referring to Lula who was jailed on corruption charges. Again, imprisoning (or murdering and the like) political opponents is practiced by many different political groups and isn’t unique to Fascism.

[Kritias]

You’re gonna have to tell me where those articles prove he’s fascist, because I read them, and the thing they all seemed to talk about was Bolsonaro saying he would ‘jail red outlaws’ aka leftists. I do believe he is referring to Lula who was jailed on corruption charges. Again, imprisoning (or murdering and the like) political opponents is practiced by many different political groups and isn’t unique to Fascism.

Read them again; the articles show a wide variety of things this man has said before his election, and during it. He threatened to turn to the army for a coup if he wasn't elected; he definitely approves of political violence; he's suporting militarism and the rule of the army, via military dictatorship if necessary; he's an ethnonationalist, claiming that he'll further restrict the indigenous people of the Amazon and banish or jail his political opponents; he was heard shouting "Death to communists" on his victory fiesta; he advocates for whipping homosexuals; he's fervently anti-liberal and pro corporatist. What else do you need to see that he's a fascist? Because this is as textbook as it goes.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Bolsonaro promotes violence against political opponents.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/10/opinion/brazil-bolsonaro-militias.html

Brazil’s police 'kill five people daily' in brutal crackdown on crime in Rio


President Jair Bolsonaro supports letting police open fire on suspected criminals more easily


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/10/opinion/brazil-bolsonaro-militias.html