Fascism is also the natural result of unchecked progressivism. Since what you mean by "fascist" is just "Authoritarian."
Clearly, as we've seen globally and historically, Authoritarianism is the rule rather than the exception whenever extreme right and left wing politics go unchecked. Internally, the left wing Soviets appeared pretty much identical to the right wing Nazis in function, since their attempt at implementing communism was just a state/party run economy.
I'm so sick of this revisionist history "if we just keep going left nothing "fascist"/Authoritarian can ever happen" bullshit.
Fascism is also the natural result of unchecked progressivism.
Can you give an example? You cited 1940's Russia, but Soviet Marxist-Leninism was not progressivism. It was also not leftism, despite decades of conservative deception on this topic.
Marxist–Leninists in the Soviet Union were famously opposed to "left communism" and social democracy. They openly opposed liberal democracy. They also supported an authoritarian style of government, which is definitionally opposite of progressivism.
Here's a link to a wikipedia page on the ideological foundation of the Soviet Union (Marxist-Leninism) to support my position that their government was neither "left" nor "progressive". The points in my paragraph above are stated almost verbatim in this wikipedia entry.
To use the Soviet Union as an example of a left or progressive government, you would first need to change the definitions of "left" or "progressive".
Alright so clearly you're going to just "no true scotsman" any and all examples that I could give, how about you show me the unrestricted left wing utopia that exists somewhere in the world? Or has no one ever attempted "true left wing" policies as you dictate them to be?
You've got some nerve citing fallacies when you're the one who started out with a massive strawman argument and a balance fallacy. First of all, no, the guy you replied to clearly did not mean "fascism" as a synonym for authoritarianism in general like you pretended he did; these days when we say it, we really do mean specifically that thing that matches Umberto Eco's 14 points (or a similar definition). Second, no, there's no unchecked left-wing authoritarianism going on here; you pulled that entirely out of your ass so you could make a bullshit "both sides" argument.
Do you have any? I’d be really interested to learn more. I wouldn’t have thought progressivism unchecked would lead to fascism. Without balance I guess I don’t know what it would lead to.
I would actually only think it would lead to fascism as an extreme reaction against progressivism, ala Weimar Republic.
There are plenty of countries in the EU that have favorable worker's rights, free education and healthcare, and a healthy social safety net. Compared to the US at least.
You can’t just go around calling yourself or others Scotsman when you’re actually from Antarctica and have never set foot in Scotland but like to put on an accent.
What next the Nazis were socialists because they had socialism in their name? North Korea’s democratic because it’s in their name?
The Nazis had socialist in their name to sucker socialists into being useful idiots for them.
You'd think socialists would learn from that. Socialists aren't immune from getting suckered into a fascist movement. But unfortunately many "socialists" see a red flag with some yellow symbols on it and are all "sign me up!"
In the end all ideology is just a scam to convince people to go along with a group without thinking too hard about it. Political thought for the intellectually lazy.
Maybe we should think about each issue individually? That's hard and I won't have a political "home"! I'll just go along with everything the whateverists say even if it doesn't make sense. Yay I'm in a group!
Fascism is also the natural result of unchecked progressivism. Since what you mean by "fascist" is just "Authoritarian."
Clearly, as we've seen globally and historically, Authoritarianism is the rule rather than the exception whenever extreme right and left wing politics go unchecked. Internally, the left wing Soviets appeared pretty much identical to the right wing Nazis in function, since their attempt at implementing communism was just a state/party run economy.
I'm so sick of this revisionist history "if we just keep going left nothing "fascist"/Authoritarian can ever happen" bullshit.
Can you give an example? You cited 1940's Russia, but Soviet Marxist-Leninism was not progressivism. It was also not leftism, despite decades of conservative deception on this topic.
Marxist–Leninists in the Soviet Union were famously opposed to "left communism" and social democracy. They openly opposed liberal democracy. They also supported an authoritarian style of government, which is definitionally opposite of progressivism.
Here's a link to a wikipedia page on the ideological foundation of the Soviet Union (Marxist-Leninism) to support my position that their government was neither "left" nor "progressive". The points in my paragraph above are stated almost verbatim in this wikipedia entry.
To use the Soviet Union as an example of a left or progressive government, you would first need to change the definitions of "left" or "progressive".
Alright so clearly you're going to just "no true scotsman" any and all examples that I could give, how about you show me the unrestricted left wing utopia that exists somewhere in the world? Or has no one ever attempted "true left wing" policies as you dictate them to be?
You've got some nerve citing fallacies when you're the one who started out with a massive strawman argument and a balance fallacy. First of all, no, the guy you replied to clearly did not mean "fascism" as a synonym for authoritarianism in general like you pretended he did; these days when we say it, we really do mean specifically that thing that matches Umberto Eco's 14 points (or a similar definition). Second, no, there's no unchecked left-wing authoritarianism going on here; you pulled that entirely out of your ass so you could make a bullshit "both sides" argument.
Do you have any? I’d be really interested to learn more. I wouldn’t have thought progressivism unchecked would lead to fascism. Without balance I guess I don’t know what it would lead to.
I would actually only think it would lead to fascism as an extreme reaction against progressivism, ala Weimar Republic.
There are plenty of countries in the EU that have favorable worker's rights, free education and healthcare, and a healthy social safety net. Compared to the US at least.
You can’t just go around calling yourself or others Scotsman when you’re actually from Antarctica and have never set foot in Scotland but like to put on an accent.
What next the Nazis were socialists because they had socialism in their name? North Korea’s democratic because it’s in their name?
The Nazis had socialist in their name to sucker socialists into being useful idiots for them.
You'd think socialists would learn from that. Socialists aren't immune from getting suckered into a fascist movement. But unfortunately many "socialists" see a red flag with some yellow symbols on it and are all "sign me up!"
In the end all ideology is just a scam to convince people to go along with a group without thinking too hard about it. Political thought for the intellectually lazy.
Maybe we should think about each issue individually? That's hard and I won't have a political "home"! I'll just go along with everything the whateverists say even if it doesn't make sense. Yay I'm in a group!
Oh, I'd love to know which extreme left wing politics have gone unchecked.
I bet it's "treating LGBTQ people as humans worthy of dignity." That really seems to piss off conservatives.
Nothing about human rights is extreme in any capacity, and not even remotely what im talking about.
I noticed you still didn't give an example.
Perhaps you can give some examples since many of us have no clue what you're talking about.
u wot.
What would you describe as extreme left wing problems? I know there will be no response since you’re entirely full of shit.
Edit : wow crickets what a surprise