But a fascist by definition (not our own personal meaning, but the actual meaning) is:
‘a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement’
and that’s how I was using it. By that definition, which is the standard definition, Charlie Kirk was a fascist. He would have agreed with all of those things: he was far-right, authoritarian, and ultra-nationalist. (e: and I can give you examples in his own words where he proudly agreed with those things)
So, I am using the actual definition, where you are using your own personal definition.
That is one part of the definition and isn’t including the important part that the reason it’s authoritarian is by its use of force to enact its beliefs.
My comment about those throwing around the term fascist being the fascist wasn’t directed at you and was broadly applicable to the people who are (by force) trying to silence anyone who disagrees with them.
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.
So you agree that fascism is far-right, authoritarian, and ultra-nationalist, you’re only 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?
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.
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.
No, I can’t name any fascist movements that didn’t end in violence. That’s why it’s so terribly deadly, and why we can’t allow it to fester. They don’t start with violence, though. They start with populism.
Can you please explain what about my comment made you say it was fascist? Are you still confident you know what that word means?
e: now you’ve run away, and are trolling others in this thread instead. I hope someday soon you’ll try to learn something rather than insisting on your own ignorance. We’ve all been wrong. It’s okay.
Okay, thanks.
But a fascist by definition (not our own personal meaning, but the actual meaning) is:
‘a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement’
and that’s how I was using it. By that definition, which is the standard definition, Charlie Kirk was a fascist. He would have agreed with all of those things: he was far-right, authoritarian, and ultra-nationalist. (e: and I can give you examples in his own words where he proudly agreed with those things)
So, I am using the actual definition, where you are using your own personal definition.
Now, can you explain how I am a fascist?
That is one part of the definition and isn’t including the important part that the reason it’s authoritarian is by its use of force to enact its beliefs.
My comment about those throwing around the term fascist being the fascist wasn’t directed at you and was broadly applicable to the people who are (by force) trying to silence anyone who disagrees with them.
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.
So you agree that fascism is far-right, authoritarian, and ultra-nationalist, you’re only 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?
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.
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.
No, I can’t name any fascist movements that didn’t end in violence. That’s why it’s so terribly deadly, and why we can’t allow it to fester. They don’t start with violence, though. They start with populism.
Can you please explain what about my comment made you say it was fascist? Are you still confident you know what that word means?
e: now you’ve run away, and are trolling others in this thread instead. I hope someday soon you’ll try to learn something rather than insisting on your own ignorance. We’ve all been wrong. It’s okay.