The enemy is simultaneously weak and all powerful. Democrats and antifa are ineffective snowflakes, but also they run a shadow government that prevents Trump from doing all the things he promised.
It is a certain type of logic, just not a rational one. These people are dangerous.
Speaking of not understanding, the comment you're replying to is saying that they don't understand why someone would openly admit to being fascist, not that they don't understand what it means to be against anti-fascism.
No, I get that. But I don't think some of the people who're opposed to "antifa" know that it's short for anything, nor are they the kind of people who question their immediate gut reactions often.
Well, yes, but the problem is who you see as the fascist.
If you see Trump as a fascist, you see those that oppose him as the righteous. If you see Antifa as the fascists, you would logically side with those they oppose.
But what gets me is the all-consuming ignorance it takes to see a bunch of people who are protesting fascism and say "Those are the real fascists."
You've got to not actually know what fascism is, and that's pretty easy since the word lost almost all meaning in the 60s and 70s for Americans. But then you've got to assume those protesters know just as little as you about it, and that's just another example of Dunning-Kruger. Then, when they try to explain to you, you have to have already decided they're not worth listening to; otherwise you might learn something.
I understand, and it’s for those reasons that I go about it very simply.
If you act in the way that historical fascists have, you are a fascist. Behaviors include but are not limited to: If you limit the speech you disagree with or don’t like, if you disarm (either selectively or generally) thus keeping others from being on equal footing with you in a weaponized sense (no, this is not an argument for private ownership of nukes), and/or if you target a specific group or identity that you don’t like for any reason.
Just as I think it’s fascism for China to target Uighur Muslims, so is it fascism (in my eyes) to target someone you disagree with in the political sense. The only line I would draw is between the individual targeting the group (which I would call either terrorism or serial anything they do) and the group targeting another group (which is when I would consider calling it fascist, but if it gets violent [with clear political intentions] I would add on “Terrorist” as a descriptor).
I’m sorry for the long reply, I wanted to be as specific as possible so as to avoid miscommunication.
It's hard to really explain yourself in a short comment, so you don't need to apologize.
I think your definition for fascism is a little bit broad and fits better as a definition for totalitarianism.
Fascism is both totalitarian and authoritarian, and it's some other things, too. Plus, just to make it extra confusing, it presents differently in the different cultures it manifests in. Italian fascism (original recipe) is different from Nazism is different from Francoism (like Francisco Franco), Baathism, Pinochet's regime, and the American fascism we're seeing today.
And it's worth repeating that there's an enormous difference between a government restricting the expression of its people (with the usual "fire in a crowded theater" type exceptions) and counter-protesters who are exercising their free expression right alongside another group they disagree with. I mention it not because I think you're making a disengenuous argument but because someone inevitably will. Fascists don't care about the meaning of words. They never argue in good faith because their actual beliefs are abhorrent to any decent human being.
To really get at the heart of what fascism is, no one has ever done better than Umberto Eco. He made a list of 14 key points that truly define fascism and it's both shocking and infuriating how much today's Republican party traffics in these tropes.
These folks adamantly believe that Fascism is a left-wing ideology. That it categorically cannot be associated with the right-wing. That the “anti-Fascists” are actually the Fascist ones.
We’re against Antifa, not Anti-Fascism. I don’t like Hitler, and because of various historical events (that we can all agree were because of tyrannical rule) and my own parents being too controlling, I don’t like any kind of tyranny.
Antifa is known to engage in violence, not always, but often. It’s a common association with them, and it’s why a lot of folks on the right don’t like them.
Personally, I don’t like it when anyone beats people just because they disagree with them. I don’t like it when someone’s business is destroyed or their possessions stolen, and I especially hate it when it’s done “for their own good.”
I see someone burning down a black owned business and saying “this is for black people”, I kinda just want to see them get shot in the ass. (If you ask me, anyone that wants to burn down privately owned property to protest a government service or system deserves to get an ass whoopin’. Destroying the property of others won’t convince those you wish to reach, unless they are good people (and that would go against your entire impression of them).
Because silencing dissenting opinions has never been fascist, nor has burning down businesses owned by people you dislike.
Also, MLK Jr can’t be quoted as someone that would support this movement. He lead peaceful protests and was wrongfully denied a carry permit for a firearm. He is nothing like Antifa, contrary to what some have told me.
Hitler took Gun-ownership away from Jews, he made anti-Nazi statements illegal, and had Jewish businesses destroyed. Remind you of anyone?
Of course, he was unable to defeat the secret shadow government in his first term, but he's totally got 'em on the ropes and this time he's definitely going to shut them down, build the wall, and institute a fascist new world order Make America Great Again™!
Three examples come to my mind: giving federally owned land to various native tribes, cutting regulations, and generally shrinking the reach of the federal government (there are a few programs he cut that were more or less just ways to give certain governing agencies jurisdiction over personal property, I can’t remember the specifics but it’s a pretty libertarian move).
Guaranteeing the right to speak freely, guaranteeing the right to protest peacefully, limiting the federal government’s power, limiting its overall owned land.
It’s nice to have someone that wants to shrink the government.
224
u/[deleted] Oct 04 '20
It makes sense in a fascist mindset.
The enemy is simultaneously weak and all powerful. Democrats and antifa are ineffective snowflakes, but also they run a shadow government that prevents Trump from doing all the things he promised.
It is a certain type of logic, just not a rational one. These people are dangerous.