Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 31 to 40 of 40

Thread: Fascism in the UK

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Oxfordshire
    Posts
    2,152
    Thanks
    861
    Thanked 893 Times in 602 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by grumzed View Post
    There have been those who benefit and those who lose out whenever a government changes anything or even if circumstances change whilst a particular party is in control. There are many factors involved here and the rights and wrongs of how the overall system is managed, or if it is managed well or badly, affect all of us for better or worse. In any case I have never voted on the basis of how a goverment's policies would affect me personally but on how I see it would affect the long term nature of the country and it's people in the longer term. There are difficult decisions to be made because we are living in a relatively privileged state in a world of competition and where much of the rest of the world is in dire conditions of war and poverty, or where other parts are in competition. I can see many things wrong with wealth distribution in the UK but it is a lot better for the worst-off than it was 50 years ago (even if the well-off are better off) and much, much better than 100 years ago. The pattern continues back to the middle ages where the poor were VERY poor and a very few were very rich indeed. I think it is progress and it is always easy to point out the things that are wrong when you do not have to deal with how to fix things without breaking the whole system. However, I agree it could be better!

    I am now going to watch some cricket!
    Some sensible points here Grumzed, particularly the last!

    As Churchill said 'The main vice of capitalism is the uneven distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the even distribution of misery'

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    1,058
    Thanks
    360
    Thanked 100 Times in 83 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Know it View Post
    You are referring to behaviour rather than belief. AFIFA (for example) are a left wing group, but behave in the manner you refer. They believe in denying others of their beliefs, and are prepared to use violence to prove their point. To me this fascism.
    I too have never heard of AFIFA, nor are they on the internet.
    those princes have accomplished most who paid little heed to keeping their promises, but who knew how to manipulate the minds of men craftily.

    Machiavelli, The Prince

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    611
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 18 Times in 14 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by scott777 View Post
    I too have never heard of AFIFA, nor are they on the internet.
    Sorry, a typing error, should have read ANTIFA. Youtube clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pvf...has_verified=1
    Keep Britain British, whoops, it's too late

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    12,840
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked 343 Times in 298 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Know it View Post
    Sorry, a typing error, should have read ANTIFA.

    David Cameron signed the founding statment of ANTIFA, so I am a tad suspicous of calling ANTIFA left wing.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    932
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 139 Times in 116 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Major Sinic View Post
    You miss the point because I suspect it suits you to do so.

    Left and right are irrelevant to the definition of Fascism so it can be either totalitarian right like Italy and Germany in the 1930s and 40s or totalitarian left like communist USSR, Cuba, Mao's China, Sadam's Iraq or the object of Corbyn's admiration; Maduro's Venezuela.
    Germany was not fascist, but National Socialist. The USSR, Cuba, Mao's China were not fascist, but communist. Maduro's Venezuela is authoritarian socialist, but not entirely socialist because it does not have a centralized economy. Saddam's Iraq was Baathist, which is not even remotely related to fascism. Baathism embodies elements from both political spectrums.

    Fascism is not a term to describe a generic totalitarian system. It isn't a "generic word" to describe a "somewhat authoritarian system".

    Fascism is a unique IDEOLOGY with a specific doctrine and specific peculiarities directly connected to Italian nationalism and Italian folklore, therefor it cannot be adopted by any country other than Italy, because unlike communism, Fascism was never meant to be exported or to become a global ideology. Fascism never implied a "fascist world government", unlike communism. Fascism was adopted only by ONE SINGLE COUNTRY and that country was Italy. No other country EVER adopted fascism as its state ideology, except Albania during the italian protectorate.
    «The Muslims refuse our culture and try to impose their culture on us. I reject them, and this is not only my duty toward my culture - it is toward my values, my principles, my civilization.» - Oriana Fallaci

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,440
    Thanks
    123
    Thanked 279 Times in 219 Posts
    Benacus, the definition of fascism has been broadened since the days of Mussolini. It still does not describe a "general totalitarian system" but it is generally accepted to have a wider meaning now than it did in the 1920's and 1930's. An acceptable discussion is here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    611
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 18 Times in 14 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by grumzed View Post
    Benacus, the definition of fascism has been broadened since the days of Mussolini. It still does not describe a "general totalitarian system" but it is generally accepted to have a wider meaning now than it did in the 1920's and 1930's. An acceptable discussion is here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
    Thanks you, at last some sense spoken. The modern day meaning of fascism is quite different to it's original meaning. Most people would understand it as meaning "a person with radical views who is not prepared to acknowledge somebody else's opinions". My thread was started on the assumption other site members would take the word quite so literally. Unfortunately we are several pages in and all we have talked about is the meaning of the word, rather than the topic.
    Keep Britain British, whoops, it's too late

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    1,058
    Thanks
    360
    Thanked 100 Times in 83 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Know it View Post
    Sorry, a typing error, should have read ANTIFA. Youtube clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pvf...has_verified=1
    What kind of beliefs does Antifa deny with violence?
    those princes have accomplished most who paid little heed to keeping their promises, but who knew how to manipulate the minds of men craftily.

    Machiavelli, The Prince

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    932
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 139 Times in 116 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by grumzed View Post
    Benacus, the definition of fascism has been broadened since the days of Mussolini. It still does not describe a "general totalitarian system" but it is generally accepted to have a wider meaning now than it did in the 1920's and 1930's. An acceptable discussion is here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
    The "modern definition" of "fascism" was invented by liberals who began labeling "fascists" all the people they disagree with. It is generally accepted, because people are generally ignorant. But fascism isn't just a totalitarian system, it is much more than that.
    «The Muslims refuse our culture and try to impose their culture on us. I reject them, and this is not only my duty toward my culture - it is toward my values, my principles, my civilization.» - Oriana Fallaci

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,440
    Thanks
    123
    Thanked 279 Times in 219 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benacus View Post
    The "modern definition" of "fascism" was invented by liberals who began labeling "fascists" all the people they disagree with. It is generally accepted, because people are generally ignorant. But fascism isn't just a totalitarian system, it is much more than that.
    You may be right about how the meaning has changed but when in a discussion it is wise to ensure everyone is speaking about the same subject. The meaning of the word "fascism" has changed. Perhaps the word neo-fascist would be more applicable to today. However I don't really think Mussolini's National Fascist party was any better whatever it's stated ideals - even if the trains ran on time. I would rather have a bumbling government that did its best to act for all the people fairly than an overpowering, arrogant and corrupt one-party state that can never be changed without armed revolution. Your repeated arguments suggest that the latter is your preference. I hope you and your like-minded compatriots remain a minority in your beautiful country.

Similar Threads

  1. More health fascism
    By uganda in forum Political Correctness Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-02-2015, 01:27 AM
  2. Is the USA in danger of Fascism?
    By Tarn in forum United States Politics Forum
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 23-04-2013, 08:59 PM
  3. Authoritarianism; Is fascism for you?
    By SailAway in forum United Kingdom Politics & Political Forum
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 23-11-2011, 11:32 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •