I agree with a lot of your content, but saying it's "provably" bad is a stretch. A lot of no-platforming increases the speaker's fame and perceived victimhood, particularly when their ideas are never steel-manned and addressed.
-
I think the difference there is that the Nazis' genocide was entirely consistent with fascism. Stalin's wasn't consistent with communism. Stalin failed the ideological project of communism, Hitler achieved it for fascism. There is no good fascism, there could be good communism.
Fascism doesn't mean much more than ultranational authoritarianism. Not all fascist regimes committed genocide or were ideological like the Nazis. (not defending fascism) One could say that totalitarianism is likely in fascism and communism, which itself leads to atrocities.
-
-
The question here isn't so much what fascism means, it's what fascism's logical conclusion necessarily is. That's the point of the 5th part. I won't recount Olly's whole argument, you've seen the vid. But I think he pretty clearly shows why fascism eventually results in genocide
-
Again, you're talking about the logical conclusions of Nazism, not of fascism.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
It's baked into the logical structure of the ideology, it's unavoidable. That's not the case with communism. Like I argued yesterday: there can be good communism but there can never good fascism.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.