I stopped reading here, for obvious reasons - - - Updated - - - Right wing authoritarianism is a well researched phenomenon.
Working with a phone, give my typos a break. In any event, learn their history, rea their writings, they talk about socialism often, and break away from it just to add some racism/nationalism. They still like its economic mechanisms. Right wing authoritarianism is a well researched phenomenon.[/QUOTE] But leftism isn't? lol... Who controls your economic decisions in a free market? Who does when the government can intervene in the economy all it wants? I know you have no ideas and all, but can you try to describe one socialist mechanism, just one, without resorting to authoritarianism and control by the powerful? Just one.
Algebra refers to a school of math, but algebra isn't math. Are you having trouble following the thread? The appeal is not obvious at all, where do you get these opinions? You ignore the millions have died at the hand of a government they blindly handed unlimited power? What sales pitch was used to get unlimited power? Can't make a coherent argument, so your changing topics - how Reiver Another Reiver misdirection. Libertarians are right wingers, right wingers support coercion. Classic Abby Hoffman school of debate.
You never say anything. See question below for confirmation You were asked a simple question. Name one political economist who says blind faith in the altruism of government delivers fascism and/or state capitalism? Nearly right. You forgot to include 'fake'. However, its good to see some progress in your comment
It is quite evident that this is merely intended as a dig at FNC--and, by extension, a dig at its viewers (and at Americans in general). Would you care to supply a link, please? Oh, and would you be so kind as to explain their preferred methodology, in arriving at their conclusions? As well as noting their political-philisophy biases? A mere assertion, with no evidence to support it... Nazism was hardly garden-variety "[f]ascism"; so please do not attempt to pretend as if it were. Your scathing contempt for "the Fox News viewer" (as if that were some sort of monolithic creature) comes through, loud and clear. Obviously, you consider yourself more intellectually sophisticated than those of us who like FNC. Some people might describe that as elitism (mingled with conceit)... I am thoroughly opposed to the doctrine of egalitarianism; and I feel no compulsion to march in lockstep with anyone else--even with someone whom I generally admire for his beliefs. But I shall reiterate: John Maynard Keynes and Adam Smith did not have even somewhat similar views, as regarding the essence of capitalism...
Its much more than that: it is a call for the search of knowledge. Its an econometric treatment approach, investigating whether there are any statistically significant effects Hitler was a fascist and fascism, as I've shown without doubt, is inconsistent with socialism. The herd effect is but an empirical reality. I wouldn't be herded by a poor media resource. However, that's just the application of common sense. So is Smith one of these leftists now? They were both supporters of capitalism. Their focus was different because Keynes was focused on behavioural economics and economic uncertainty, whilst Smith was focused on moral justice.
Fascism works just like socialism when you get to the mechanics, it was born of the socialist movement, Keynes applauded it at first, as did when socialists world wide. You have not made that argument, only assertions. All of socialism starts with the control of people, and economic outcomes. Same with fascism. That is why you never go into specifics, they would start with "I believe in taking from some people unlike me...."
“Reminiscent of Fascism is the principle that the state no longer leaves the economy to its own devices. … Without question, the mood accompanying this sea change resembles that of Fascism.” "Fascism entirely agrees with Mr. Maynard Keynes, despite the latter’s prominent position as a Liberal. In fact, Mr. Keynes’ excellent little book, The End of Laissez-Faire (l926) might, so far as it goes, serve as a useful introduction to fascist economics. There is scarcely anything to object to in it and there is much to applaud." "All this is pure fascist premises and I cordially recommend Mr. Keynes to proceed to Italy and there to study Fascism with an open mind and with the same scrupulous care as he has studied Bolshevism. An essay from his pen on Fascism would doubtless prove a most valuable piece on constructive criticism" -Benito Mussolini ". . . the line between fascism and Fabian socialism is very thin. Fabian socialism is the dream. Fascism is Fabian socialism plus the inevitable dictator." John Flynn
By referring directly to the grandfather of fascism, I've already shown that attitude is inconsistent with the reality of political economy.
No, you haven't shown anything except your goals. Lets see how you get there- without dictating market outcomes, taking from others, and forcing others to do your bidding.
Again, I've referred to the grandfather of fascism and illustrated how fascism is based on tenets alien to socialism. If you can critique anything said then be my guest. So far you're producing nothing more than noise
this still holds true. You cant get into specifics because socialism is pretty much the same economic model of fascism.
Again, fascism doesn't have an economic model. It would perhaps help if you actually read what I said and tried to critique it. The methods you use can be seen as less than honest!
yes it is, it is all about this long standing history of socialists on the left trying to push for "social justice" as if the term means anything they can put in concrete terms. Fascists and socialists both tried to accomplish the same economic goal via the same mechanism - force. Hitler cried out about how the poor were being taken advantage of by rich greedy Jews, just like you complain about rich greedy corporate types. Same thing. Both are people that have done nothing to you.
I disagree with this one , the economic patterns of fascism can be easily observed in Noble Republics like this of Venice where corporate heads became the state and what was good for them was good for the state . Things like unchained capitalism , relegation of the middle class into an obedient sheep herd , importation of foreign labor , imperialistic expansion , manipulation of prices , foggy practices on the financial institutions and so on. As Benitto called it : corporatocracy , the autocracy of money.
There isn't a fascist economic model. There is reference to corporatism, but then its typically economics by mistake rather than design. Take, for example, the notion of state control and Nazi Germany. Buchheim and Scherner (2007, The Role of Private Property in the Nazi Economy: The Case of Industry, Journal of Economic History, Vol 66, pp 390-416) note: Private property in the industry of the Third Reich is often considered a mere nominal provision without much substance. However, that is not correct, because firms, despite the rationing and licensing activities of the state, still had ample scope to devise their own production and investment profiles. Even regarding war-related projects, freedom of contract was generally respected; instead of using power, the state offered firms a number of contract options to choose from. There were several motives behind this attitude of the regime, among them the conviction that private property provided important incentives for increasing efficiency. There is no clear means to understand economic outcome in fascism as there are no guiding economic principles
The corporazzos are basically socialist leaders of an industry. Mussolinis model was very close to market socialism, no difference in the economics, but most market socialist call for tyranny of the masses instead of just one tyrant.
Another silly comment, as I've already shown. There is no common political economy between socialism and fascism. And market socialism? The individual is empowered.
We used a Kenisian model to invest $350 K for a return of 13 million. The new boss hated the model and moved forward to close two wings of the hospital. He had been a labor negotiator in a former life.
Since you are not capable of showing any specifics otherwise, I will just go on believing that you basically support everything Mussolini did, except maybe the invasion of North Africa, everything else sticks.
I've given a list of factors that show the distinction between fascism and socialism. Try and dispute any of them
Presumably, you consider yourself (and other acolytes of leftist dogma) to be "knowledge[able]" (oh, yes: and enlightened); and the rest of us to be, well, mere rubes... Which says nothing at all about the methodology used; and it certainly does not address the matter of possible bias on the part of those conducting the "study"... Mussolini was a fascist; Hitler was a National Socialist. We have only your ipse dixit for the assertion that those of us who are of a center-right persuasion are mere victims of some "herd effect"... (1) I prefer to march in lockstep with no one. (2) Your jaundiced description of FNC (as "a poor media source") is really much more telling about you than it is about FNC... As I have previously noted, I prefer not to march in lockstep with anyone else. By contemporary American political-philosophy standards, Adam Smith would be found very far from the leftmost portion of the political spectrum. (In fact, he would probably fit in rather well with Chicago-school economics, as typified by the late Milton Friedman; or even with Austrian-school economics, as typified by Ludwig von Mises and his protege, F.A. Hayek.) John Maynard Keynes, on the other hand, would be very close to the leftmost portion of that spectrum... And this says it all. Precisely because you (apparently) are imbued with a very severe distaste for capitalism, in any of its forms, you can see no difference between the capitalism of the center-left and the capitalism of the center-right. You remind me very much of those who view Democrats and Republicans as being essentially the same in their political philosophy...
