The Fascist Virus: Defeat

[Cainad (dec.)]

Wow. Just wow.

Let me get this straight: If Cain says "If you think __ you are seriously deluded" Or
(something to the effect of) "Why don't you read some REAL history books instead of reciting right-wing talking points"
and I feel a little insulted by that, that's me taking it the wrong way when he's trying to educate me.

Yes, actually, in this context.

But when I say "I've outgrown the desire to play the internet one-upmanship game," and someone gets all butthurt over it and I'm kind enough to explain profusely that "no, I really did mean that in earnest. I don't think it makes me superior, I'm just personally bored with it," and she refuses to believe that I meant it at face-value, that's aggression.

Well, yes, she is being aggressive. Or do you want to re-phrase that sentence?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

When Nigel superfluously throws out the uncalled for statement: "I have some friends in Mobile, but I doubt they'd like you." That's just her making observations.

I know some wonderful people from Mobile, BTW. I doubt you'd get along with them, though.

Reading comprehension issues, maybe? Perhaps everything is turning into something else inside your head, and that's why you respond the way you do? You did it with what Cain said, too:

Try reading some actual history books.  You know, the sort written by people who can read German and Italian, and have had access to primary sources from the period as well as later analysis.  The sort of thing historians write, I guess is what I'm saying.

Also, if you think the above described policies are a core part of the Democratic party, then you are seriously deluded.

That was pretty strongly worded, but it was still an attack of the ideas you were presenting, and not of your personhood.

But when I say "I've outgrown the desire to play the internet one-upmanship game," and someone gets all butthurt over it and I'm kind enough to explain profusely that "no, I really did mean that in earnest. I don't think it makes me superior, I'm just personally bored with it," and she refuses to believe that I meant it at face-value, that's aggression.

Okay, got it.

Sigh. Full breakdown: When you say

I just want to be able to post here and share laughs with people and giggle and act silly and maybe get turned on to some new things/learn some stuff but it's always so competitive. I don't want to be competitive with people on the internet anymore..I guess I've sort of outgrown all that.

I don't know; maybe y'all are so used to people getting all aggro over everything that you expect me to do the same thing and sort of auto-correct for that.

That is PASSIVE wording that conveys a NEGATIVE about the people here who aren't you. "I guess I've sort of ouutgrown all that" directly imlies that it is juvenile behavior, and that those of us who have (implied in your statement) not yet "outgrown" it are  not as mature as you are. Classic passive-aggressive statement, as is "maybe y'all are so used to people getting all aggro over everything". It's chock-full of passive implication, whether you consciously realize that or not. The fact that you DON'T consciously realize it acyually makes you harder to communicate with.

[Cainad (dec.)]

Way to put in effort, Nigel. All I have the energy for is making fun of a dangling modifier.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I wonder if you can spot what makes these notes passive-aggressive: http://www.passiveaggressivenotes.com/

[Cainad (dec.)]

I wonder if you can spot what makes these notes passive-aggressive: http://www.passiveaggressivenotes.com/

Holy crap I am reading the FUCK out of this blog. These are hilarious!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Way to put in effort, Nigel. All I have the energy for is making fun of a dangling modifier.

Yeah, I think I'm about to give up, though. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I wonder if you can spot what makes these notes passive-aggressive: http://www.passiveaggressivenotes.com/

Holy crap I am reading the FUCK out of this blog. These are hilarious!

I know! They make me lol.

[Cainad (dec.)]

Way to put in effort, Nigel. All I have the energy for is making fun of a dangling modifier.

Yeah, I think I'm about to give up, though. 

Nitpick grammar and formatting instead. It's easy and fun.

Here, like this:

Doesn't passive agressiveness require aggression and therefore: intent?  If I say "I've outgrown a, b and c" and I mean exactly that, if someone else decides to take that as a thinly-veiled attack anyway, that's not my problem.

I'm telling you I did not intend that as a back-handed insult and she's telling me I did whether I realize it or not. I beg pardon, but I don't think that's her place to say.

Also: "coming off as abrasive" and veiled aggression are two separate things entirely. It's absolutely true that I unintentionally come off as abrasive sometimes. I catch it when I can and apologize when I'm wrong. Sometimes I just have to eat my foot and deal with the consequences. As do we all.

Now, we can go on for another two pages nitpicking my words and looking for flaws to prove what she thinks I meant, or we can accept my explanation, believe me when I say I meant it in earnest, and move on.

I choose b please.

Thank you.

*clears throat* You use too many italics. Some of them don't make much sense.





See? Easiest thing in the world, and the feeling of smugness can last for up to five minutes on a good day.

[navkat]

I almost posted that link but I didn't think it would make a difference.
But yeah: read those and THEN tell me how my saying I've outgrown something equates to "This is why my country runs the world and yours does not."

I did not say "This is why I'm [something superior] and you are not." I even explained that I don't think competing in battles of the wits makes y'all inferior somehow...just that I'm over it. I'm jaded. whatever you want to call it. I've outgrown all that.

In order for it to be passive aggressive it needs to imply some sort of superiority or some way that I'm positioning myself over you. I'm not doing that. I've outgrown the competition. I'm saying I've outgrown it because it used to be fun before but now it is not. I've outgrown enjoyment for it like I've outgrown interest in my satellite radio. I've outgrown laughing at HomestarRunner. I've outgrown it. It doesn't suit me anymore.

If you choose to be insulted by that, I can't do anything about it. It's still the truth. I spoke my mind and I meant it.

[navkat]

I don't know; maybe y'all are so used to people getting all aggro over everything that you expect me to do the same thing and sort of auto-correct for that.

That is PASSIVE wording that conveys a NEGATIVE about the people here who aren't you. "I guess I've sort of ouutgrown all that" directly imlies that it is juvenile behavior, and that those of us who have (implied in your statement) not yet "outgrown" it are  not as mature as you are. Classic passive-aggressive statement, as is "maybe y'all are so used to people getting all aggro over everything". It's chock-full of passive implication, whether you consciously realize that or not. The fact that you DON'T consciously realize it acyually makes you harder to communicate with.

Okay, I understand where the confusion is. Let me explain:
When I say you guys are used to people getting aggro over shit, I mean dumbshits who come in here, try to compete and then when they lose the game, they start getting downright nasty. Like wade. Or who was that other guy? The one who made threats of physical violence against Roger? Like that.

I figured since I don't stick around for very long periods, you guys might be expecting me to behave in that category. I'm telling you that's not me. I'm telling you I'd rather be nice and if I disagree with you, I'll stick to my guns, but I will not resort to personal attacks.

I realize fully that I haven't exactly given you guys a good chance to get to know me. I pop on here, enjoy it for awhile and then get busy or get annoyed by something and pop off for awhile.  All I'm asking is if you think I'm being mean, I probably truly don't mean it that way. I'm asking you to not nail me to the wall for it, just ask me.

I think we're saying the same thing here: that I tend to come off as abrasive when I'm not trying to convey that to but I think where the confusion is is intent. You think I have this ill-will when I'm saying the things I'm saying and I really don't. To put it simply: I really am that clueless.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Or you could try to learn from it when people misunderstand you and explain why, and try to adapt your behavior to make it less adversarial.

In any exchange, you share responsibility for communication. If you don't want to try to improve your ability to communicate, I see no point in trying to talk to you at all. That goes for anyone.

[LMNO]

Would you fucking fuckers stop fucking around with your fucking feelings getting fucking hurt, and get back to the fucking point?

Now, where were we?

1.  Not so much as you would think.  The vast majority of historians who specialize in the period agree that Fascism was anti-liberalism, anti-conservatism and anti-Communist, nationalist, revolutionary, racist, sexist and expansionist.  The debate mostly comes from political hacks with partisan agendas to pursue (cf, Jonah Goldberg).  Ironically, many of those who claim fascism as a left wing phenomenon claim left-right distinctions are useless just before claiming this



3.  You're missing massive amounts of context here.  After WWI, there was a massive influx of Italian immigration and many of these Italians considered themselves liberal or socialist in origin.  They actually didn't care much for Mussolini and considered him an autocrat who was undermining the Italian democracy and rule of law.  However, immigration laws in the 20s were passed to limit the amount of Italian immigration.  This law suggested that Italian-Americans were an unwanted minority group, and caused many of them to turn to Fascist Italian nationalism as a source of ethnic pride and camaraderie.

Also, within Italy, Fascists deliberately targeted the left on numerous occasions. The talented Marxist philosopher and leader of the Italian Communist party, Antonio Gramsci, was arrested and kept in a small dirty cell, which caused his health to suffer until he died, at the age of 46.  In the north, fascism portrayed itself as the alternative to workers' revolution; in the south, fascist armed gangs broke the back of  the peasants' campaign for land.  In the summer of 1922, fascist gangs seized the city halls in Milan and Livorno and occupied the Genoa docks in order to break the unions. There were waves of repression against trade unionists in 1921, 1923 and 1924. In 1925, all remaining independent trade unions were closed down. Wage rates were decided by the company and workers lost any right of representation. Between 1927 and 1932, according to official statistics, nominal wages were cut by 50 per cent. In 1935, the government placed all workers connected directly or indirectly with war production under military discipline. All other workers were subject to the decisions of the Labour Court. Strikers were punished with imprisonment.

The class which benefited most from fascist rule was the upper class, especially nobles and business owners. They gained from the privatisation of the insurance sector, the telephone service, the match monopoly and the municipal power companies. The capital tax was abolished, as was inheritance tax, the tax on war profits and the taxes on managers and directors.  Mussolini received large sums of money from the Milan business community and also from the great landowners in 1919, when he founded his party. 

There were official attacks on Jews from 1934 and the state adopted Nazi-style race laws in 1938. Between 8,500 and 15,000 Italian Jews died in the Holocaust.  From 1930, the regime had plans to expand its empire in Ethiopia and Tunisia. These plans were justified in explicitly racist language. Blacks and Arabs were considered non-human. The war in Abyssinia from October 1935 was defended using racism – it was claimed that the Ethiopians were incapable of ruling themselves. The war was also conducted in a racist way: because the fascist state considered that the indigenous people were less than human, it butchered them with poison gas like animals.

Doesn't sound like a very left wing or liberal program to me.  Similar happened in Nazi Germany too, though right now I don't have the time to grab the exact dates and figures.  Believe me though, when I say I know this subject inside out.

4.  Wrong.  Hitler tolerated religion insofar as it did not overshadow him.  He didn't like Christianity much despite his support among certain Protestants (not to mention the cowardice of the Catholic Party in standing up to him) but he tolerated Nazi forays into Odinism and occult belief systems.  Mussolini famously allied himself with the Vatican when he signed the Lateran Treaty, giving them full sovereignty and recognition as an independent nation.  Oh and big lump sums of money.  In return, the Vatican kept its mouth shut and didn't get involved in Italian politics, ever.

Claseless society?  Don't make me laugh.  Even ignoring what I said above, the fascist assault on genuine working class movements and support from the upper classes of society because of this, you fail to take into account fascist policies towards Jews, Romany gypsies, homosexuals and Slavs.  All of which were considered subhuman and were butchered because of it.  And women's sufferage?  German fascists thought a woman's place was in the kitchen or making good little Aryan troopers.  Women who actually worked were despised by fascists, who had a highly traditional view of society in that (and many other) respects.  Fascism was only anti aristocracy insofar as aristocrats were traditional conservatives (and allied with them anyway, when it suited their needs) and were anti-capitalist in rhetoric only, with all genuine anti-capitalist fascists either ending up dead or out of positions of influence once fascist parties came to power.

Ok.  Does anyone have anything to say about this post?

[navkat]

Man's got a point.

[navkat]

I'd like to say that I'd like Cain to recommend some more books that I can buy or to which the DL links are not broken.

EDIT: I mean I'd like cain to recommend books that specifically address/counter the "Fascism is derived from liberal ideals" point so I can read the opposing side.

[LMNO]

Wilhelm Reich's "The Mass Psychology of Facism" makes a very good case that Facism did not arise because of Marxism, but it arose when the Marxist revolution failed in the 1930s.