It isn’t clear at all, actually, and your dedication to vaguely gesture at Wikipedia articles doesn’t discredit that. I don’t see how not allowing liberals, fascists, or Tsarists into government is synonymous with “only accepting undying loyalty.”
I mean, im not the one trying to make a claim that they were democratic while forbiding any ideology that opposes theirs. The mental gymnastics involved here could be the next Olympic event.
Fascism, Capitalism, and Monarchism should be allowed within a Socialist system why? The economy was far more democratic than under the Tsars or under the current Russian Federation. Democracy doesn’t have to include freedom for fascists, the bougeoisie, or monarchists, and in fact shouldn’t for the Proletariat to have full control.
Who is the proletariat but people? What if they wanted any of those things? Their ideas are qlworthless because they dont fit your very narrow view? You are no better than the US republicans who label everyone they dont like as “communists”.
The Proletariat is the people indeed, and the people supported the purges. They had already spent years in a civil war against the Tsarists, were invaded by 14 Capitalist nations, and fascists in Nazi Germany were killing Communists from day 1. The re-introduction of Capitalism resulted in 7 million excess deaths.
Yes, Monarchism, Capitalism, and fascism are worthless.
Sounds like anti-fascism, anti-capitalism, and anti-monarchism is… fascism? Do you read what you write? Again, I’ll direct you over to Dr. Michael Parenti’s Blackshirts and Reds.
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.
authoritarian: check
dictatorial leader: check
militarism: check
forcible suppression of opposition: check
subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation: check
strong regimentation of society and the economy: check
It may claim to be a turkey, but its seems to be clucking a lot like a chicken.
Certainly less authoritarian than Tsarism, Capitalism, or fascism, didn’t have a dictatorial leader, genuinely served the interests of the individual and the collective, and reduced regimentation of society and the economy compared to Tsarism, Capitalism, and fascism. The only point you have was the millitarism.
Again, read Blackshirts and Reds. The Communists and fascists were entirely antagonistic and served different classes, the Communists served the proletariat while the fascists served the bourgeoisie.
The political orthodoxy that demonizes communism permeates the entire political perspective. Even people on the Left have internalized the liberal/conservative ideology that equates fascism and communism as equally evil totalitarian twins, two major mass movements of the twentieth century. This book attempts to show the enormous differences between fascism and communism both past and present, both in theory and practice, especially in regard to questions of social equality, private capital accumulation, and class interest.
The orthodox mythology also would have us believe that the Western democracies (with the United States leading the way) have opposed both totalitarian systems with equal vigor. In fact, U.S. leaders have been dedicated above all to making the world safe for global corporate investment and the private profit system. Pursuant of this goal, they have used fascism to protect capitalism, while claiming to be saving democracy from communism.
In the pages ahead I discuss how capitalism propagates and profits from fascism, the value of revolution in the advancement of the human condition, the causes and effects of the destruction of communism, the continuing relevance of Marxism and class analysis, and the heartless nature of corporate-class power.
It isn’t clear at all, actually, and your dedication to vaguely gesture at Wikipedia articles doesn’t discredit that. I don’t see how not allowing liberals, fascists, or Tsarists into government is synonymous with “only accepting undying loyalty.”
I mean, im not the one trying to make a claim that they were democratic while forbiding any ideology that opposes theirs. The mental gymnastics involved here could be the next Olympic event.
Fascism, Capitalism, and Monarchism should be allowed within a Socialist system why? The economy was far more democratic than under the Tsars or under the current Russian Federation. Democracy doesn’t have to include freedom for fascists, the bougeoisie, or monarchists, and in fact shouldn’t for the Proletariat to have full control.
Who is the proletariat but people? What if they wanted any of those things? Their ideas are qlworthless because they dont fit your very narrow view? You are no better than the US republicans who label everyone they dont like as “communists”.
The Proletariat is the people indeed, and the people supported the purges. They had already spent years in a civil war against the Tsarists, were invaded by 14 Capitalist nations, and fascists in Nazi Germany were killing Communists from day 1. The re-introduction of Capitalism resulted in 7 million excess deaths.
Yes, Monarchism, Capitalism, and fascism are worthless.
Sounds a lot like facism in a trench coat.
Sounds like anti-fascism, anti-capitalism, and anti-monarchism is… fascism? Do you read what you write? Again, I’ll direct you over to Dr. Michael Parenti’s Blackshirts and Reds.
Lets see here… the definition of facism
authoritarian: check dictatorial leader: check militarism: check forcible suppression of opposition: check subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation: check strong regimentation of society and the economy: check
It may claim to be a turkey, but its seems to be clucking a lot like a chicken.
Certainly less authoritarian than Tsarism, Capitalism, or fascism, didn’t have a dictatorial leader, genuinely served the interests of the individual and the collective, and reduced regimentation of society and the economy compared to Tsarism, Capitalism, and fascism. The only point you have was the millitarism.
Again, read Blackshirts and Reds. The Communists and fascists were entirely antagonistic and served different classes, the Communists served the proletariat while the fascists served the bourgeoisie.
Read it, you need to understand history.