Giovanni Gentile, the father of Fascism

If you ever wondered who created the philosophy of fascism it would be no surprise if you didn't know who that was. There is a good reason that you would not know, most of education is occupied by liberal professors. It would be inconvenient to find out the creator of Fascism was aligned with left wing ideology.

Fascism rejects the idea of individualism (a conservative value) and accepts collectivism (a liberal value) with the state as the ultimate location of authority and loyalty outside of which the individuality had no meaning (a far left value).

 

Proof?

 

“...a Christian society would be what we now call Leftist....We should feel that its economic life was very socialistic and, in that sense,"advanced..."- Theologian C.S. Lewis wrote in his book, Mere Christianity, p. 80.

During the 1970’s the English Christian Theologian C.S. Lewis was becoming very popular with American Protestant Christians. He was educated at Oxford University and later held the position of Professor of Medieval and Renaissance Literature at Cambridge. His most popular book was Merely Christianity, (Macmillan Publishing, 1943). Lewis was also a close friend of J.R.R. Tokein and also wrote allegorical science fiction such as the seven novels know as The Chronicles of Narnia, and The Space Trilogy. Those novels were really about imperialism and capitalism. Lewis called himself a Christian, a Humanist rejecting Free Market Ideology being popularized by Friedrich von Hayek at the time.

“Moses and Aristotle and the Christians agreed in forbidding interest. . . . three great civilisations had agreed . . . in condemning the very thing on which we have based our whole life”—capitalism. C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity.

So what does C.S. Lewis’ Christianity look like? It would look like Christian Democratic Socialism:
CS Lewis Was a Red by Mervyn Nicholson

 

I love it when the right wing tries claiming co-opting libertarianism. No, there are plenty of times the RW prioritizes collectivism over individualism. That's actually a big part of nationalism.

 

History. Try it.

 

Not surprised a lefty tries to make things up. One of our national identities is individualism, the exact opposite of collectivism the left adheres to.

Collectivism - the practice or principle of giving a group priority over each individual in it.

Nationalism - identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

 

Lol, no. Nationalism is just another form of collectivism that asks people to sacrifice their INDIVIDUAL interests and rights for the COLLECTIVE "rights" of the nation. Pure individualism would involve open borders, for example, and a complete lack of tariffs. The right doesn't like either of those things. There is a pro-libertarian wing of the right that favors individual rights. The current power dynamic stands against it in favor of anti-individualist protectionist nationalism. Cute try, though.

The fact that you have to characterize actual individualism and libertarianism as "lefty" kind of shows you don't understand the concepts.

 

LOL, inventing new definitions. To be expected.

 

Correct. Nationalism collectivism can and often do go together

 

Just the capability for understanding what nationalism actually is. The fact that this is confusing for you is expected, but sad.

Try an example: is it individualist or collectivist for the State to take land from an individual, against their will, to build a wall? Have fun dancing around your answer.

 

Just because you make up new definitions then actually believe them certainly has a name for it in psychology.

 

Not really. And I love the desperate dodge. I can ask more questions that demonstrate your fallacy, but it doesn't look like you'll ever get around to answering the first one, or get around to pointing out anything wrong with the definition. Big surprise.

 

LOL, you are projecting again. Notice your dodging of the OP trying to distract from it with your invented descriptions.

 

The real political spectrum stretches from anarchy and libertarianism on one end and totalitarianism on the other.

"Between his assumption of power in 1933 and the Soviet-Nazi Pact of 1939, Germany and the Soviet Union were, or pretended to be, on the worst of possible terms. They assailed each other with abusive material stressing the ideological incompatibility of Communism and National Socialism, while studiously ignoring the obvious similarities between the two systems...." Ronald Hingley, "Joseph Stalin" p. 292.

 

Duplicate

 

Your reply would be dandy if Mussolini had not proclaimed that another name for fascism could be 'corporatocracy'. Seems to me that would put fascism firmly in the right wing.

In truth, politics is a science of analyzing gray areas. 'Left' and 'right' are not as obvious as it would seem. There are at least two axes in politics: authoritarianism/anarchy and communism/capitalism.

 

LOL, sure thing. The two main sides are totalitarianism and anarchy. The US was founded right of center towards anarchy whereas most left wing ideology sides left of center toward's totalitarianism. Currently the far left of the democratic party side with more totalitarianism with opposition to free speech and more limits on freedom.

 

Meh. Currently the US is in the authoritarian/capitalist quadrant as far as I can see and heading farther to the authoritarian side. Currently both parties have an authoritarian agenda. The GOP intends to silence its opposition as much as the Dems. Neither side has our best interests at heart.

 

How? PC? Totally left wing.

 

You yourself have pointed out the Dem agenda.

Nunes is suing Twitter.
AOC is being sued for blocking critics on twitter.
Ted Cruz has threatened to regulate social media due to perceived bias.

All of this points to an authoritarian bias by both sides.

PRISM began under Bush II and continues to this day.

The NDAA 2012 provides for indefinite detention incommunicado and remains intact today as far as I can tell.

 

You mean the advocacy of freedom is authoritarian? You mean stopping the left wing from using it's corporate influence to affect an election is authoritarian?

 

And it was the conservatives on Wall Street who financed fascism while liberals FDR and Truman defeated it.

 

Link?

 

I mean using the gov't to stifle freedom of speech is authoritarian. I think listening to citizens without their consent or a warrant is authoritarian. Using the media to influence an election has been done since Washington was elected.

 

Cesar Sayoc who sent a dozen pipe bombs to a dozen democratic politicians and actors partially blamed the president Trump's rhetoric in a court of law. Sayoc's victims included Clinton, Soros, CNN and De Niro; former President Barack Obama; former Vice President Joe Biden; former Attorney General Eric Holder; former CIA Director John Brennan; Sens. Cory Booker, D-N.J.,; Kamala Harris, D-Calif.; Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif.; activist Tom Steyer; and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

Sayoc got a lighter sentence as a result of his defense argument.

Even the Mafios are showing up in court repeating Trump slogans. Anthony Comello, suspected of fatally shooting alleged New York crime boss Francesco "Franky boy" Cali shows up in court with Trump slogans written on his hands.

...let that sink in.