Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Deleted post.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:05:28 PM
Fascism has nothing to do with the far right. It's a common misconception. If anything, fascism was totalitarian centrism.

If you want to talk about the misconception of Neitzche that's fine and well, but do it in a way that is free of the pithy moral platitudes.
Far right ideals like eugenics or nationalism leads to fascism, always, as you need a strong head and military guard to intimidate the masses into accepting policies which would be rejected by thinkers and the public automatically. A cultural revolution or great leap forward, for example.

Pithy moral platitudes? What? The whole point of my posts have been to attack the morality of politics, whether left or right.

NHA

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:07:52 PM
Quote
Fascism has nothing to do with the far right. It's a common misconception.

Just because fascism is nuanced and hard to place on the spectrum doesn't mean that it has nothing to do with the far right.

The left/right scale is overly simplistic, to the point of being useless, for anything other than propaganda purposes - i.e. we're on this side; if you are on the other, then you are a horrible person, tsk tsk.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:09:51 PM
Thinkers and the public? Are those two groups somehow connected?
My own experience of fascists is that they are, without exception, left-wingers who excel in projecting their own mental state onto anyone who is not like them.


NHA

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:15:15 PM
Thinkers and the public? Are those two groups somehow connected?
My own experience of fascists is that they are, without exception, left-wingers who excel in projecting their own mental state onto anyone who is not like them.

Anti-egalitarianism is central to fascism making any sense at all - a concept the left begins foaming at the mouth when confronted with.

No doubt though, fascism has certain elements of the left in it.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:16:44 PM
Thinkers and the public? Are those two groups somehow connected?
My own experience of fascists is that they are, without exception, left-wingers who excel in projecting their own mental state onto anyone who is not like them.

Without the public, thinkers would not go through turmoil to become thinkers. The public also represent the social currents of the time, and the actions or inaction of the public sphere represent how open a society is, and open societies allow extreme thought from any orientation. In Mao's time, philosophy didn't exist, look further, and you see a muzzled and brainwashed public. 

Really? Stalin enacted almost all the ideals treasured here, not to mention the news updates which praised Kim Jung Il etc.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:19:08 PM
So thinkers are - in fact - a big mess, filled with angst and inner turmoil. That's what I've been claiming all along.
Good for you, coming to that all by yourself.


Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:30:08 PM
RE: Fascism.

First, I agree that left/right is past its pull date, but that's besides the point.

First off, the actual fascists movements set out to transform every dimension of society, not just the political dimension.

Each fascist regime openly opposed Marxism, liberalism and conservatism. This is a matter of recorded historical fact.

The conservatives of that period supported aristocracy, localism and the like. Fascists emphasized a totality in which traditional hierarchies were abandoned.

Racial preferences was common at the time of the last major outbreak of ffascist movements. For that matter so was militarism and eugenics. These are crucial points. The liberal parties of that period were pro-imperialism and pro-military expansion for example. The fascists were generally populists who used common peripheral talking points to gain support coupled with a desire to overturn the existing stale-mates by positing meaningful corrective action to the problems of that time period in a way that the existing leadership failed to do.

The democratic systems of the time were gridlocked. Charismatic leaders seized the opportunity by saying what was on everyone's mind, but going the step further to dissolve the frozen democratic systems and establish a new modern order.



Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:33:50 PM
A bit like slavery then: seemed like a good idea at the time, but as times changed, that good idea became a bad one.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:38:02 PM
A bit like slavery then: seemed like a good idea at the time, but as times changed, that good idea became a bad one.

That's how it ended up, because fascism, like all Utopian movements, posit Reformations that in one way or another, leave out a few human quirks here and there. Thus, when they get into power, they enact tyranny and genocide because those little quirks stand in the way of the "New Order." Their conception of humanity is always counter propositional to the way humanity behaves.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:40:13 PM
I must be ahead of my time.
I have become very aware that humans are a lost cause, and no matter what, will always revert to whatever sludge they temporarily arose from.
That's a shame. But there it is.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:40:30 PM
I went fishing this morning, and hooked the largest trout I have ever seen in person.  She fought hard—so hard, in fact, that her little two-chambered heart just couldn't keep up in the end.  After several minutes, it became apparent that she just wasn't going to be able to swim away.  It was for me a moment both sad and beautiful.  Sad because I really came with no intent to harm such a lovely creature, but beautiful in the fashion that the struggle of life is always beautiful, be it ever so futile.  Here was something that, incapable of even the thought of being something it was not, died simply to be what it was. 

It's strange how much effort humans devote to showing themselves to the world to be something other than what they are, how much energy most of us devote to convincing the folks around us—and ourselves—that the image we project is the substance of being.  If other living things had time to worry about something other than being what they are, I suspect they'd hold us in quite a bit of contempt.  I know I do.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:44:10 PM
I must be ahead of my time.
I have become very aware that humans are a lost cause, and no matter what, will always revert to whatever sludge they temporarily arose from.
That's a shame. But there it is.

I guess we differ. I'm perfectly fine with being what we are.  When I was younger, I used to care more about what "could" be. I care less now and knowing what happens when we try to attain various visions of what "could" be by our own hands, I'll leave such notions at the door.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:46:33 PM
As Dylar just so eloquently described: if we were what we are, and nothing else, there would not be a problem.
It would be what it really is: beautiful and right.
But insofar as humans seem unable to ever be what they are, their useless doom is the inevitable result.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:51:59 PM
I have a hard time seeing how this:

"It's strange how much effort humans devote to showing themselves to the world to be something other than what they are, how much energy most of us devote to convincing the folks around us—and ourselves—that the image we project is the substance of being.  If other living things had time to worry about something other than being what they are, I suspect they'd hold us in quite a bit of contempt.  I know I do."

Is not humanity being humanity. That's the difference.

Re: Deleted post.
March 12, 2014, 07:55:50 PM
Makes me wonder if I didn't become something other than human, at some point in my mystical development.
Others have observed that I don't just call myself 'crow', I am a crow.
Suits me. It has long been a source of embarrassment to be taken for a human.