It’s bad because it’s incoherent, unformed, and easily co-potable
This means that when fascism arises in capitalist modes of society, they’re an easy vehicle for capitalist power to fully exercise their oppressive muscle under the state due to their neglect of the realities of the societies they inheret
mans said co-potable
potable
Fit to drink.
Fit to be drunk; drinkable.
Good for drinking without fear of poisoning or disease.
this is still the case in these types of communities 
open secret that the dude who runs the alt-right magazine Counter-Currents (Greg Johnson) and many other modern white nationalists in the organized alt-right movement use white nationalist organizing as a means of preying on young men. there's some firing range/camp out in the south where some alt-right dudes formerly affiliated with richard spencer try to fly young men out to to prey on. 
Greg Johnson has wrote extensively on why the far right should go back to man-boy love because of ancient greece
holy f***ing s***
we can't fight climate change without space exploration tho
especially when we send robots on mars because we learn a lot on soil deterioration, the near future of our atmosphere, how to save biodiversity, etc, basically what's coming for earth
rn they're sending seeds on the ISS that get so traumatized by the lack of gravity they come back on earth strong enough to survive global warming and can keep feeding us
damn
ill keep it real this the first time i heard this take
so far, my thoughts on @krishna_bound post, and mind you, i am a novice just overall when it comes to the wide world of ideology imo (thats at least how i feel)
It's interesting that I'm artistically and philosophically fascinated with many of the concepts that inform fascism: absurdism, nihilism, and the mention of Dadaism... (part of me was like: "Damn I enjoy thinking about these and feel disconnected... wait am I a fasc- nahhh" ) lmao.
Then I had a question: "Is fascism just an aimless rejection of the current order of things, creating intentional confusion when used politically, so people grasp the disapproval of society at large but aren't able to follow what's being done with the support until its too late? (this sounds absolutely incoherent, seemingly like fascism) (basically, is it used as a confusion tactic, somewhat like a populism)
then the preservation of life as we know it is more important than anything
^ so is this one of the potential links to conservatism? (as we see the US embracing more and more nonsensical s*** on the further right wing, and then absolute inaction by way of centrism by the democrats,
because change leads to disruptions in the status quo
this s*** is heady as f***
i feel like any attempt to reiterate what I read will be just as nonsensical and scattered
It's time to read Blackshirts and Reds soon.
I wouldn't say that Fascism is really a tactic per-se, at least if you're going by the origin of the belief system. The original leaders who supposed the ideology genuinely believed in their hearts they were representing the best interests of their culture and nation and reconstructing a national rebirth fueled by the will of the people. The later influence and construction of Nazism and the absorption of the entire belief system as a derivative of Nazism - an ideology ironically which had nothing to do with actual Fascist philosophy - has very much skewed what the ideology actually means.
Populism and Fascism are definitely linked in practicality, so I do think there's a comparison to be linked there (namely because there is logically a limited set of means of possible political organization/structures in general which can be fulfilled to begin with), but the main difference is kind of the goals. Populism is kind of arbitrary, Fascism is very pointed by comparison - it draws very specific conclusions from its root philosophy and how to deal with it; the issue is, of course, that Fascism is more a philosophy than a real political structure - so it's kind of impossible to maintain because there's no real political action or structure associated with it, and its ideas are so grandiose they require a full grasp of all things in society - cultural, politics, economics, international relationships, etc. ; this is obviously virtually impossible. at the same time, the ideology however does not actually have any non-philosophical actual political theory for any of this - any political theory came essentially far later.
the latter link to conservatism is kind of broad - i hesitate on it because conservatism and fascism aren't inherently linked. you could draw that conclusion, but it's important to note that again, fascism isn't really like a tactic or classification - it's not like "authoritarian" or "populist". it's a very specific set of beliefs with historical context which has since been lost and heavily changed due to events. I think there's overlaps to be made or comparisons to be drawn, but much of this tends to be due to historical counterparts i think more than overtly ideological ones. The kind of root fascist pre-cursor to traditionalist thinking doesn't necessarily exist in a modern sense; the current conservative mindset is way more outwardly reactionary - original fascists tried to avoid any form of reactionary philosophy, but practically were pushed into it logically due to historical pretexts.
While there's a lot of nonsense relating to political theory of Fascism due to its development, there are many post-fascist philosophers who are worth reading to get a better grasp of how not necessarily fascist, but far-right politics and worldview operates; particularly Carl Schmitt is probably the best example
mans said co-potable
potable
Fit to drink.
Fit to be drunk; drinkable.
Good for drinking without fear of poisoning or disease.
Co-optable
I wouldn't say that Fascism is really a tactic per-se, at least if you're going by the origin of the belief system. The original leaders who supposed the ideology genuinely believed in their hearts they were representing the best interests of their culture and nation and reconstructing a national rebirth fueled by the will of the people. The later influence and construction of Nazism and the absorption of the entire belief system as a derivative of Nazism - an ideology ironically which had nothing to do with actual Fascist philosophy - has very much skewed what the ideology actually means.
Populism and Fascism are definitely linked in practicality, so I do think there's a comparison to be linked there (namely because there is logically a limited set of means of possible political organization/structures in general which can be fulfilled to begin with), but the main difference is kind of the goals. Populism is kind of arbitrary, Fascism is very pointed by comparison - it draws very specific conclusions from its root philosophy and how to deal with it; the issue is, of course, that Fascism is more a philosophy than a real political structure - so it's kind of impossible to maintain because there's no real political action or structure associated with it, and its ideas are so grandiose they require a full grasp of all things in society - cultural, politics, economics, international relationships, etc. ; this is obviously virtually impossible. at the same time, the ideology however does not actually have any non-philosophical actual political theory for any of this - any political theory came essentially far later.
the latter link to conservatism is kind of broad - i hesitate on it because conservatism and fascism aren't inherently linked. you could draw that conclusion, but it's important to note that again, fascism isn't really like a tactic or classification - it's not like "authoritarian" or "populist". it's a very specific set of beliefs with historical context which has since been lost and heavily changed due to events. I think there's overlaps to be made or comparisons to be drawn, but much of this tends to be due to historical counterparts i think more than overtly ideological ones. The kind of root fascist pre-cursor to traditionalist thinking doesn't necessarily exist in a modern sense; the current conservative mindset is way more outwardly reactionary - original fascists tried to avoid any form of reactionary philosophy, but practically were pushed into it logically due to historical pretexts.
While there's a lot of nonsense relating to political theory of Fascism due to its development, there are many post-fascist philosophers who are worth reading to get a better grasp of how not necessarily fascist, but far-right politics and worldview operates; particularly Carl Schmitt is probably the best example
so basically when it comes to modern discourse a lot of the time people use ‘fascist’ arbitrarily they’re just referring to reactionary right wing political attitudes?
i think people use it just to insult far right attitudes which, fair sure (using nazi/fascist) interchangeably
but also there are blatant white supremacists/nazi sympathizers (swastika flags at right wing rallies, next to confederate flags etc) getting involved with political apparatuses and getting traction by being racist xenophobic and white supremacist/nationalist,
i guess all those wrapped up into one people would call fascist with other qualifier prefixes
Richard Wolff really turned out to be a disgrace
He still cool in general just dismiss anything he says abt mandates lol
he do something recently?
Supports the freedom convoy and somehow thinks the left can assimilate and take over the protests. It’s an extremely settler-colonial and amateur take tbh
Supports the freedom convoy and somehow thinks the left can assimilate and take over the protests. It’s an extremely settler-colonial and amateur take tbh
Such a bad take
He still cool in general just dismiss anything he says abt mandates lol
He’s a decent intro to Marxism but tbh his “socialism is worker co-ops” and his other socdem positions have always come across as absurd
He’s a decent intro to Marxism but tbh his “socialism is worker co-ops” and his other socdem positions have always come across as absurd
Sometimes i cant telll if his worker coop thing is just meant as a way to introduce westerners who clutch their pearls at any mention of socialism or if he's actually a titoist lol
https://www.tiktok.com/@kylethecowboy/video/7065045252016688431
Lmao this came on my fyp too
Sometimes i cant telll if his worker coop thing is just meant as a way to introduce westerners who clutch their pearls at any mention of socialism or if he's actually a titoist lol
I remember there being a Q&A and him saying he would prefer a planned economy
I remember there being a Q&A and him saying he would prefer a planned economy
Das my king
was watching ep 1 of Louis Theroux's documentary on the internet far right and was thinking man this s*** is so beyond embarrassing Louis doesn't even need to do anything to make these people look bad, they're basically losing the political battle just by existing. However then I realized if he was to do the equivalent on the internet "left" it would probably still manage to look far worse so I probably shouldn't take that as a given and just be thankful he hasn't decided to do that yet
was watching ep 1 of Louis Theroux's documentary on the internet far right and was thinking man this s*** is so beyond embarrassing Louis doesn't even need to do anything to make these people look bad, they're basically losing the political battle just by existing. However then I realized if he was to do the equivalent on the internet "left" it would probably still manage to look far worse so I probably shouldn't take that as a given and just be thankful he hasn't decided to do that yet
Politics, although important, will always be inevitably cringe....
was watching ep 1 of Louis Theroux's documentary on the internet far right and was thinking man this s*** is so beyond embarrassing Louis doesn't even need to do anything to make these people look bad, they're basically losing the political battle just by existing. However then I realized if he was to do the equivalent on the internet "left" it would probably still manage to look far worse so I probably shouldn't take that as a given and just be thankful he hasn't decided to do that yet
Anyone who uses their political views as a personality trait is cringe
was watching ep 1 of Louis Theroux's documentary on the internet far right and was thinking man this s*** is so beyond embarrassing Louis doesn't even need to do anything to make these people look bad, they're basically losing the political battle just by existing. However then I realized if he was to do the equivalent on the internet "left" it would probably still manage to look far worse so I probably shouldn't take that as a given and just be thankful he hasn't decided to do that yet
link?
Politics, although important, will always be inevitably cringe....
What pod do u recommend