Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Its just inaccurate to say socialism/fascism. Definitionally inaccurate. Nothing ruffled and I didn’t express any opinion. I don’t plan on voting for either socialism or fascism, but you can’t just lump all ideologies you consider to be extreme together as if they are the same thing and expect to be taken seriously. For instance, some who dislike Trump might even say he has fascist tendencies, but would never label him a socialist. Likewise, those who dislike Bernie Sanders might call him a socialist (he might not even mind if you did), but would never call him a fascist.Simply put- there is no simple here. Both of these things defy easy definition, but fascism is by far the more slippery to define.
Socialism is a spectrum of economic and social theories contending that matters of economic concern (means of production, etc) should be regulated or owned by society, in the public interest. There's a lot of disagreement among socialists about whether it should be owned or regulated by the public. Democratic socialism falls on the 'regulate' end of this spectrum- These folks are capitalists, and seek to use public power to regulate the excesses of capitalism.
Like socialism, fascism is also a spectrum of political/economic ideas that purport to organize society- but unlike socialism, fascism didn’t have anything like a set of founding documents or definitive source material until well after it achieved a sort of viral success in politics- which means that any documents purporting to be authoritative (such as this translation of Mussolini’s doctrine of fascism) only speak for one faction or aspect of what we consider to be fascism, per se.
Both Socialism and Fascism arose in the late-industrial-revolution period in Europe, a time and place in which the world order was fast-changing- Dynastic monarchies had fallen to republican governments in the space of a few generation’s time, there was a massive oversupply of productive capacity relative to the economy’s consumptive capacity, and this meant the regular guy would periodically find himself jobless, inflation would wipe out whatever savings he had… the days of traditional roles in life were strained, perhaps a distant memory. It was the Socialists who started pushing to regulate or overthrow the current order (in which new Barons of Industry were consolidating their fortunes and power), and in large part Fascism arose (with support from those new elites) as a bulwark to stop the Socialists.
Instead of emerging as coherent a set of philosophies (as socialism did via Marx and Engels), fascism emerged as a mass movement (of disparate groups who supported Italy’s intervention in WWI) and would mutate according to the political needs of those calling themselves fascists. Being an insurgent political movement, those included recruiting from very different political quarters, consolidating power, and then, extending influence elsewhere. Philosophically, fascism is the chameleon of politics; it will mutate and borrow aspects of anything from anywhere to suit itself.
During the period of its ascendancy in Italy in the early 1900s, it was purposefully vague and undefined- a quality that would allow it to appeal to different audiences that might otherwise find themselves un-unifiable. In this sense, it could proffer un-objectionable, meaningless vagaries- essentially, the “Make Italy Great Again” of its time.
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, as well as strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. ... Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society's economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.
Marxism is a political and economic way of organizing society, where the workers own the means of production. Socialism is a way of organizing a society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the proletariat. Marx proposed that this was the next necessary step in the progress of history.
Marx himself did not use the term socialism to refer to this development. Instead, Marx called it a communist society that has not yet reached its higher-stage. ... Monetary relations in the form of exchange-value, profit, interest and wage labor would not operate and apply to Marxist socialism.
Socialism is at its core an economic philosophy, whereas Communism is economic and political in its requirement that government be the central owner and decision maker in all matters. Communism rejects any religion and in a true Communist state religion is effectively abolished.
"As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer."
You people who are socials and fascists do get ruffled feathers when a comparison is made. I don't know which one you are, but neither is good for this country. You vote for this (either), you are destroying any hope that your children or grandchild will ever have.
I love the idea of players ideas bringing in the team and university leadership for a solid message that is not in anyway affiliated with the BLM organization.
This could be a huge platform to actually bring the awareness and unity needed without any political influences.
i am sure ESPN or someone else will politicize it. But this will be done in a good way.
I'll take the over on the number of fans who mute the games this year.
I really wish a positive movement for the black community would come out that doesn’t share the same words and letters as a Marxist organization that operates behind a shield of anti-racism and a movement that picks and chooses what black lives get to matter.You can declare that black lives matter without supporting the organization BLM.
Somebody has been hitting up Wikipedia. 😂Simply put- there is no simple here. Both of these things defy easy definition, but fascism is by far the more slippery to define.
Socialism is a spectrum of economic and social theories contending that matters of economic concern (means of production, etc) should be regulated or owned by society, in the public interest. There's a lot of disagreement among socialists about whether it should be owned or regulated by the public. Democratic socialism falls on the 'regulate' end of this spectrum- These folks are capitalists, and seek to use public power to regulate the excesses of capitalism.
Like socialism, fascism is also a spectrum of political/economic ideas that purport to organize society- but unlike socialism, fascism didn’t have anything like a set of founding documents or definitive source material until well after it achieved a sort of viral success in politics- which means that any documents purporting to be authoritative (such as this translation of Mussolini’s doctrine of fascism) only speak for one faction or aspect of what we consider to be fascism, per se.
Both Socialism and Fascism arose in the late-industrial-revolution period in Europe, a time and place in which the world order was fast-changing- Dynastic monarchies had fallen to republican governments in the space of a few generation’s time, there was a massive oversupply of productive capacity relative to the economy’s consumptive capacity, and this meant the regular guy would periodically find himself jobless, inflation would wipe out whatever savings he had… the days of traditional roles in life were strained, perhaps a distant memory. It was the Socialists who started pushing to regulate or overthrow the current order (in which new Barons of Industry were consolidating their fortunes and power), and in large part Fascism arose (with support from those new elites) as a bulwark to stop the Socialists.
Instead of emerging as coherent a set of philosophies (as socialism did via Marx and Engels), fascism emerged as a mass movement (of disparate groups who supported Italy’s intervention in WWI) and would mutate according to the political needs of those calling themselves fascists. Being an insurgent political movement, those included recruiting from very different political quarters, consolidating power, and then, extending influence elsewhere. Philosophically, fascism is the chameleon of politics; it will mutate and borrow aspects of anything from anywhere to suit itself.
During the period of its ascendancy in Italy in the early 1900s, it was purposefully vague and undefined- a quality that would allow it to appeal to different audiences that might otherwise find themselves un-unifiable. In this sense, it could proffer un-objectionable, meaningless vagaries- essentially, the “Make Italy Great Again” of its time.
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, as well as strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. ... Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society's economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.
Marxism is a political and economic way of organizing society, where the workers own the means of production. Socialism is a way of organizing a society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the proletariat. Marx proposed that this was the next necessary step in the progress of history.
Marx himself did not use the term socialism to refer to this development. Instead, Marx called it a communist society that has not yet reached its higher-stage. ... Monetary relations in the form of exchange-value, profit, interest and wage labor would not operate and apply to Marxist socialism.
Socialism is at its core an economic philosophy, whereas Communism is economic and political in its requirement that government be the central owner and decision maker in all matters. Communism rejects any religion and in a true Communist state religion is effectively abolished.
"As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer."
You people who are socials and fascists do get ruffled feathers when a comparison is made. I don't know which one you are, but neither is good for this country. You vote for this (either), you are destroying any hope that your children or grandchild will ever have.
I really wish a positive movement for the black community would come out that doesn’t share the same words and letters as a Marxist organization that operates behind a shield of anti-racism and a movement that picks and chooses what black lives get to matter.
Peace out Ol head... the fact that so many people on this board get all hyped up is so funnyIf Clemson football aligns with blm I’ll be done with Clemson
No, they are the same. Just different labels to achieve the same goal.Socialism and fascism are literally at opposite ends of the political spectrum.
"You've got two coconuts and yer banging em' together"Simply put- there is no simple here. Both of these things defy easy definition, but fascism is by far the more slippery to define.
Socialism is a spectrum of economic and social theories contending that matters of economic concern (means of production, etc) should be regulated or owned by society, in the public interest. There's a lot of disagreement among socialists about whether it should be owned or regulated by the public. Democratic socialism falls on the 'regulate' end of this spectrum- These folks are capitalists, and seek to use public power to regulate the excesses of capitalism.
Like socialism, fascism is also a spectrum of political/economic ideas that purport to organize society- but unlike socialism, fascism didn’t have anything like a set of founding documents or definitive source material until well after it achieved a sort of viral success in politics- which means that any documents purporting to be authoritative (such as this translation of Mussolini’s doctrine of fascism) only speak for one faction or aspect of what we consider to be fascism, per se.
Both Socialism and Fascism arose in the late-industrial-revolution period in Europe, a time and place in which the world order was fast-changing- Dynastic monarchies had fallen to republican governments in the space of a few generation’s time, there was a massive oversupply of productive capacity relative to the economy’s consumptive capacity, and this meant the regular guy would periodically find himself jobless, inflation would wipe out whatever savings he had… the days of traditional roles in life were strained, perhaps a distant memory. It was the Socialists who started pushing to regulate or overthrow the current order (in which new Barons of Industry were consolidating their fortunes and power), and in large part Fascism arose (with support from those new elites) as a bulwark to stop the Socialists.
Instead of emerging as coherent a set of philosophies (as socialism did via Marx and Engels), fascism emerged as a mass movement (of disparate groups who supported Italy’s intervention in WWI) and would mutate according to the political needs of those calling themselves fascists. Being an insurgent political movement, those included recruiting from very different political quarters, consolidating power, and then, extending influence elsewhere. Philosophically, fascism is the chameleon of politics; it will mutate and borrow aspects of anything from anywhere to suit itself.
During the period of its ascendancy in Italy in the early 1900s, it was purposefully vague and undefined- a quality that would allow it to appeal to different audiences that might otherwise find themselves un-unifiable. In this sense, it could proffer un-objectionable, meaningless vagaries- essentially, the “Make Italy Great Again” of its time.
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, as well as strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. ... Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society's economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.
Marxism is a political and economic way of organizing society, where the workers own the means of production. Socialism is a way of organizing a society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the proletariat. Marx proposed that this was the next necessary step in the progress of history.
Marx himself did not use the term socialism to refer to this development. Instead, Marx called it a communist society that has not yet reached its higher-stage. ... Monetary relations in the form of exchange-value, profit, interest and wage labor would not operate and apply to Marxist socialism.
Socialism is at its core an economic philosophy, whereas Communism is economic and political in its requirement that government be the central owner and decision maker in all matters. Communism rejects any religion and in a true Communist state religion is effectively abolished.
"As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer."
You people who are socials and fascists do get ruffled feathers when a comparison is made. I don't know which one you are, but neither is good for this country. You vote for this (either), you are destroying any hope that your children or grandchild will ever have.
“Can’t you see the violence inherent in the system?”"You've got two coconuts and yer banging em' together"
I’d guess .5% of people even know the BLM org even exists when they stand for BLM the movement.
People need to drop this lazy argument.
You almost got it. (Hint, I was kidding.)Racist much?
Could you summarize what the BLM movement is? How is it that nobody knows that the BLM organization exists, and yet its activists are leading the movement and are usually the ones quoted by reporters? If you can come up with some sort of non-controversial version of what the BLM movement is, then why is it they don’t repudiate the extremism of the official organization?I’d guess .5% of people even know the BLM org even exists when they stand for BLM the movement.
People need to drop this lazy argument.
I will and do stand with any group that emphatically states that Black Lives Matter and I will say I absolutely 100% support Law Enforcement reform (i.e the “War on Drugs” is a waste a a corrupt method to funnel money to politicians)Peace out Ol head... the fact that so many people on this board get all hyped up is so funny
Dude are you serious with these block paragraphs? We have google, calm down. It’s unnecessary, nobody really cares about anyone else’s opinions, and you aren’t changing minds. Go mutter to yourself with Hannity on in the background if it makes you feel better. FFS.Simply put- there is no simple here. Both of these things defy easy definition, but fascism is by far the more slippery to define.
Socialism is a spectrum of economic and social theories contending that matters of economic concern (means of production, etc) should be regulated or owned by society, in the public interest. There's a lot of disagreement among socialists about whether it should be owned or regulated by the public. Democratic socialism falls on the 'regulate' end of this spectrum- These folks are capitalists, and seek to use public power to regulate the excesses of capitalism.
Like socialism, fascism is also a spectrum of political/economic ideas that purport to organize society- but unlike socialism, fascism didn’t have anything like a set of founding documents or definitive source material until well after it achieved a sort of viral success in politics- which means that any documents purporting to be authoritative (such as this translation of Mussolini’s doctrine of fascism) only speak for one faction or aspect of what we consider to be fascism, per se.
Both Socialism and Fascism arose in the late-industrial-revolution period in Europe, a time and place in which the world order was fast-changing- Dynastic monarchies had fallen to republican governments in the space of a few generation’s time, there was a massive oversupply of productive capacity relative to the economy’s consumptive capacity, and this meant the regular guy would periodically find himself jobless, inflation would wipe out whatever savings he had… the days of traditional roles in life were strained, perhaps a distant memory. It was the Socialists who started pushing to regulate or overthrow the current order (in which new Barons of Industry were consolidating their fortunes and power), and in large part Fascism arose (with support from those new elites) as a bulwark to stop the Socialists.
Instead of emerging as coherent a set of philosophies (as socialism did via Marx and Engels), fascism emerged as a mass movement (of disparate groups who supported Italy’s intervention in WWI) and would mutate according to the political needs of those calling themselves fascists. Being an insurgent political movement, those included recruiting from very different political quarters, consolidating power, and then, extending influence elsewhere. Philosophically, fascism is the chameleon of politics; it will mutate and borrow aspects of anything from anywhere to suit itself.
During the period of its ascendancy in Italy in the early 1900s, it was purposefully vague and undefined- a quality that would allow it to appeal to different audiences that might otherwise find themselves un-unifiable. In this sense, it could proffer un-objectionable, meaningless vagaries- essentially, the “Make Italy Great Again” of its time.
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, as well as strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. ... Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society's economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.
Marxism is a political and economic way of organizing society, where the workers own the means of production. Socialism is a way of organizing a society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the proletariat. Marx proposed that this was the next necessary step in the progress of history.
Marx himself did not use the term socialism to refer to this development. Instead, Marx called it a communist society that has not yet reached its higher-stage. ... Monetary relations in the form of exchange-value, profit, interest and wage labor would not operate and apply to Marxist socialism.
Socialism is at its core an economic philosophy, whereas Communism is economic and political in its requirement that government be the central owner and decision maker in all matters. Communism rejects any religion and in a true Communist state religion is effectively abolished.
"As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer."
You people who are socials and fascists do get ruffled feathers when a comparison is made. I don't know which one you are, but neither is good for this country. You vote for this (either), you are destroying any hope that your children or grandchild will ever have.
Nobody said that so I guess you are arguing with yourself. I said fascism was an off shoot from socialism and I noted the Nazi's were the National Socialist German Workers Party. It simply allowed a lunatic, in Hitler, to hijack the movement into, instead of a ruling class(democrats like to say democratically elected, Putin says hello) controlling all the assets of a country, he would be in control of an entire country's assets. He just also happened to be a whack job so racism, the occult and a whole bunch of other cooky things became a part of it. His "Vitamin"" he took was crystal meth. Mussolini didn't particularly care about racism so that was not a major part of their platform. Whether you were ruled by Hitler or Stalin it was not much different. Either way the individual was not important and had very little power to change their existence. Both methods control citizens rights, ways of thought, economic choices and end in no middle class, but the rulers live like kings.Its just inaccurate to say socialism/fascism. Definitionally inaccurate. Nothing ruffled and I didn’t express any opinion. I don’t plan on voting for either socialism or fascism, but you can’t just lump all ideologies you consider to be extreme together as if they are the same thing and expect to be taken seriously. For instance, some who dislike Trump might even say he has fascist tendencies, but would never label him a socialist. Likewise, those who dislike Bernie Sanders might call him a socialist (he might not even mind if you did), but would never call him a fascist.
I wasn’t responding to you. Treetiger used “socialism/fascism” and then defended the use. And some other person said they are the same thing. They aren’t.Nobody said that so I guess you are arguing with yourself. I said fascism was an off shoot from socialism and I noted the Nazi's were the National Socialist German Workers Party. It simply allowed a lunatic, in Hitler, to hijack the movement into, instead of a ruling class(democrats like to say democratically elected, Putin says hello) controlling all the assets of a country, he would be in control of an entire country's assets. He just also happened to be a whack job so racism, the occult and a whole bunch of other cooky things became a part of it. His "Vitamin"" he took was crystal meth. Mussolini didn't particularly care about racism so that was not a major part of their platform. Whether you were ruled by Hitler or Stalin it was not much different. Either way the individual was not important and had very little power to change their existence. Both methods control citizens rights, ways of thought, economic choices and end in no middle class, but the rulers live like kings.
If Clemson football aligns with blm I’ll be done with Clemson
I am for peace. That's why I want no association with blm. They're anarchists. Lives matter.Peace out Ol head... the fact that so many people on this board get all hyped up is so funny
This is sort of on topic with what this thread had turned into. Has anybody seen the Hodge twins latest video going after Kirk Herbstreit. It is pretty good.
Clemson won't caresounds like a movie night instead of poltical s
same here
not another penny will go to clemson
This response reflects ignorance, laziness and a vulnerability to foolishness that is beyond description.Racist much?
Clemson won't care
Yo wassup with u? you really have issues.. EVERY post you in here talking crazy...It's almost like your obsessed.... If this topic bothers you so much, like I said come to Philly..Let's make a differencebottom line
no other race on earth than those of european origin have treated peoples of african origin any better
to take a look at where many african americans are today in their careers, their families, and their communities
do you think i care if clemson cares?
Yo wassup with u? you really have issues.. EVERY post you in here talking crazy...It's almost like your obsessed.... If this topic bothers you so much, like I said come to Philly..Let's make a difference
we can do that too...But you gotta get ya hands dirty first...see the environment, the conditions...I have a HUGE Social Media platform in Philly..Let's work..Let's prove that ALL LIVES MATTERglady drink a beer with ya
we can do that too...But you gotta get ya hands dirty first...see the environment, the conditions...I have a HUGE Social Media platform in Philly..Let's work..Let's prove that ALL LIVES MATTER
we can do that too...But you gotta get ya hands dirty first...see the environment, the conditions...I have a HUGE Social Media platform in Philly..Let's work..Let's prove that ALL LIVES MATTER