A fascist to me is someone, like the literal Nazis (and not just the hyperbolic use of the word today), who (by force [very important context]) wanted to enact their beliefs and doctrine. I didn’t see Charlie going around to campuses and forcibly ending people who disagree with him or trying to put people into camps for thinking differently than him.
No, he didn’t go to campuses to forcibly end people who disagreed with him, instead he loaded buses full of armed and violent extremists and set them loose on the capital building in Washington D.C.
getdafugouttahere with this man of peace bullshit.
LillyPip@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
So you agree that fascism is far-right, authoritarian, and ultra-nationalist, you’re inly haggling that it’s ‘by force’.
Can you give me any citations that say fascism is only fascism once it uses force?
I am not throwing around that term, I assure you, and it seems so far that you don’t actually understand what that word means.
It’s a political ideology, nearly the opposite of socialism.
So, again, can you explain why you said my comment was fascist? By your definition, I did not use force. What about my comment, or my ideology that you seemed to get from it, was fascist?
glowie@infosec.pub 1 day ago
You missed the part where I said my reply wasn’t entirely directed at yours and was speaking more broadly?
Can you name large groups of fascists that didn’t use force to further along fascism? Nazis, Mussolini, Vargas, etc are the largest groups in history to be fascist and they all achieved their goals by force.
LillyPip@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
I’ll remind you of your comment that sparked this subthread.
I said Kirk was a fascist, and you said: ‘Hilarious how the people saying he was a fascist are themselves the fascists’.
Anyone with a brain would easily see you’re saying I am actually the fascist. Would you like to try again?
I’d love to have a conversation with you about this, but we both need to be honest.