What's new
Frozen In Carbonite

Welcome to FIC! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is fascism really THAT bad?

Sarcobite

THE DONALD TRUMP PROTECTS!!!!!
Author
So is fascism really that bad? Given that communism has killed millions too and communism is a "acceptable" political stance nowadays, can we say that fascism should be normalized?
 

Lord Kragan

The one and only Lord of Mutton Chops.
So is fascism really that bad? Given that communism has killed millions too and communism is a "acceptable" political stance nowadays, can we say that fascism should be normalized?

Fascism is bad. Communism killed millions due to poorly implemented/thought out policy. Fascism killed millions due to properly implemented policy. One is a bug, the other is a feature.
 

Durabys

A Cheshire Exile
I think of Fascism as the ultimate slippery slope. It may come as a good idea during a big political crisis but it is impossible to prevent its eventual slide into barbarity...well more then mere barbarity.
Even Genghis Khan killed people for a purpose: Holding onto and expanding his empire. Fascism may end with the purpose being the killing itself.
 

Lord Inquisitor Adornable

The Community Outreach Mod
Moderator
Fascism is bad. Communism killed millions due to poorly implemented/thought out policy. Fascism killed millions due to properly implemented policy. One is a bug, the other is a feature.
Yes comrade Kragan, Stalin's explicit orders to massacre the kulaks, to commit the Holodomor, and execute order 00447 were all just bugs in the system needing to be patched like a Bethesda game.
 

Rabe

I identfy as a 9000 series intelligences
the key feature of fascism is blaming someone for a complicated problem, instead of fixing it, eventfully you run out of scapegoats and the system will likely implode on it's own if not destroyed by outside forces due to retaliation by victims of belligerence
 

Nurgle Tank

Barney-01
Explicit orders?

You have the sources on stalin personally and explicitly ordering those things, yes?
https://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/111stalin.html
Here, note the use of “replace as a class” as euphemism for killing.

Also, the Harvest of Sorrow (go to the Fate of Kulaks) mentions killing them.

Also, I can use the same logic to defend Pinochet.
Show me a citation for Pinochet approving of rape dogs.
(Unironically tho, I suppose that Morphile will use this argument someday).

As for Sarcobite’s question, fuck no. Fascism has no way of working without turning into violent, genicodal mess.
 

Realmfighter

Well-known member
Are you really going to sit there and try to defend Stalin?
As far as my historical research goes, at least with holodomor, Ukrainian authorities had a large amount of leeway, to the point of lying to stalin and doing their own thing.

The statement "he explicitly ordered it" is a very strong one, and if you can't support it dont try and defend it by acting outraged
 

Lord Inquisitor Adornable

The Community Outreach Mod
Moderator
As far as my historical research goes, at least with holodomor, Ukrainian authorities had a large amount of leeway, to the point of lying to stalin and doing their own thing.

The statement "he explicitly ordered it" is a very strong one, and if you can't support it dont try and defend it by acting outraged
The Holodomor's status as an intentional genocide has been argued over in Ukrainian Courts and judges have rules that given the evidence provide, that yes Holodomor was an intentional act by the Stalin lead Bolshevik regime, and that Stalin as an autocrat would of defently given orders at one point or another.


Oh and 15 other nations including the US have looked over the evidence available and concluded the Holodomor was indeed an intentional genocide.
 

ScreenXSurfer

Ain't no bitch who can do it like me
As far as my historical research goes, at least with holodomor, Ukrainian authorities had a large amount of leeway, to the point of lying to stalin and doing their own thing.

The statement "he explicitly ordered it" is a very strong one, and if you can't support it dont try and defend it by acting outraged
Explicitly ordered is a strong statement that I really don't care about. If a genocide happens under a government, then that government either approved of it for whatever reason or the system was so fucking broken that we shouldn't ever try to emulate it. Either way, Stalin is one of the most degenerate pieces of shit in history and I'm always confused when Stalin apologist come out of the woodworks. It's like defending Hitler.
 

Lord Kragan

The one and only Lord of Mutton Chops.
With all due respect, equating stalis
Yes comrade Kragan, Stalin's explicit orders to massacre the kulaks, to commit the Holodomor, and execute order 00447 were all just bugs in the system needing to be patched like a Bethesda game.
It really is, all things considered. Stalinism is the Tsarist system with a flaming asshole on top.
 

Realmfighter

Well-known member
yes Holodomor was an intentional act by the Stalin lead Bolshevik regime, and that Stalin as an autocrat would of defently given orders at one point or another.
Well, sure, but soviet records have been released, and "explicitly ordering" is far different than what you're saying here.

Explicitly ordered is a strong statement that I really don't care about. If a genocide happens under a government, then that government either approved of it for whatever reason or the system was so fucking broken that we shouldn't ever try to emulate it.
Yeah and if someone said "Hitler directly and personally killed dozens of Jews with his own hands" that statement doesn't stand without proof just cause Hitler was evil.
 

Lord Inquisitor Adornable

The Community Outreach Mod
Moderator
Well, sure, but soviet records have been released, and "explicitly ordering" is far different than what you're saying here
Stalin was Autocratic ruler of the Soviet Union his stamp of approval was needed for everything and it's well known he had prejudice views of the ethnic Ukrainians.

Also why are we trusting the famously well doctored Soviet Records anyway?
 

Realmfighter

Well-known member
Stalin was Autocratic ruler of the Soviet Union his stamp of approval was needed for everything and it's well known he had prejudice views of the ethnic Ukrainians.

Also why are we trusting the famously well doctored Soviet Records anyway?
If we're rejecting internal governmental records due to bias, why am I believing governments who considered the soviet union an existential threat are treating this objectively?

That Stalin's stamp was required is something I've seen often questioned in historical literature, both in terms of far away government structures lying and doing their own thing, to him personally being weirded out when subordinates took charge on ideological subjects without his input
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top