• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fascism: Would it work.

John2.0

Banned
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
84
Reaction score
4
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Default Fascism: Is it a good system

Hi everyone. I am a history and economics major at my college and throughout the course of my studies I learned a lot about different economic and political systems, and one that I was always found really interesting was fascism. I know that typically people like to talk bad about fascism because of Hitler and Mussolini, but I got to thinking that besides those two bad apples, this system might have something to it.

Fascism basically offers an alternative to both laisse-faire capitalism and socialism. It offers a system based off the concept of "corporatism". Basically, it implies that the state will take a guiding hand in the economy through making corporate-state partnerships, something that is not all that uncommon today.

Fascism also offers a society built on the cultural norms of the nation, as well as a strong devotion to nationalism and the military.

So, I want to know what you think. Is fascism a workable system?

Note: Just for the record I am not a Nazi, nor am I defending the atrocities of the third Reich and other fascists.
Last edited by RobMan121 : Today at 05:36 PM.
 
I don't think your question should be whether or not 'Fascism' would work but who it would work for. Under Pinochet, Chile tried its had at fascism and they only seemed to benefit the people at the top. A large percentage of Chileans remained slum dwellers who banded in cooperatives. Whether or not an economic system works is dependent on how many people can actually benefit from it. Considering the fact that on average the only ones who seem to benefit from Fascism the most are those in charge [i.e. the government] then no, I do not think 'Fascism' works.
 
Historically I've seen fascism be amongst the most successful forms of governing and tackling an economy. Most of the reason it didn't do wonders for Chile at that time was because it was still reeling from the catastrophic damage Allende did under his Marxist reign of terror. When you suffer hyperinflation to the point where your money literally isn't worth the paper it's written on overnight, a fix is not in your near future.

Germany under the Third Reich was very prosperous, as was Italy (although not nearly as much). I'd even argue that Spain under Franco didn't do too bad either.
 
That's not true at all Hautey. Chile under Pinochet didn't have fascism, they had laisse-faire capitalism with a dictator. Fascism is system that benefits the workers and the state. If you look at Germany under Hitler for example, you'll see that for the most part it did very well economically, the only bad part was the wars. In fact, much of the new deal was modeled after fascist Italy, as was Winston Churchill in England
 
Last edited:
Any governmental system can work, given perfect conditions. But only a few can work well without those perfect conditions. Fascism, along with Communism, works only in perfect worlds, but people aren't perfect.
 
Fascism would work, just not for the Jews.

Fascism works for the Jews, just look at Israel.
 
Fascism, along with Communism, works only in perfect worlds, but people aren't perfect.

I'd argue that fascism doesn't need a 'perfect world' to work because it doesn't have an inbuilt long-term emancipatory goal. Marxism preaches the eventual withering away of the state and the development of a classless society. A priori fascism doesn't really have anything similar. However, fascists have found ways in the past to incorporate a utopian ideal into their ideologies, such as Mussolini's 'New Rome' and Hitler's Final Solution.

So does fascism 'work'? I'd argue yes, because it can construct a stable and legitimate (if somewhat authoritarian) state in 'ordinary' political contexts, without becoming totalitarian and without inbuilt reference to utopian ideals.
 
Last edited:

Fascism will never work because it is an inherently tyrannical system. It automatically gives preference to one group of people over the opposition. When the opposition is repressed with government support, the people will not bear that government for long. Either the government will imprison or kill the opposition, resulting in a drain of resources, or the opposition will flee to some other country which will benefit from those resources. So, ultimately, no, it can't work.
 

This is simply incorrect. If anything Pinochet dove further into socialist policies than Allende by nationalizing a myriad of industries. Ironically he forced policies which made the overall income of Chileans dropped all the while increasing military spending for one of the few countries in Latin America who did not have a history of armed conflict like say Colombia or Venezuela. The damage to the Chilean economy came as a result of a global drop in copper prices, Chile's main export. They rebounded during the late 70s.

Economy of Chile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

This might be true, but doesn't necessarily mean that fascism doesn't work. In fact, imprisoning the opposition might be just what the nation needs to get it going again. In many cases, democracy has failed because have fighting in the streets between political parties and riots by anarchists. All these problem eventually being fixed however, by the implementation of a strong fascist state.
 
In the strict legalistic sense, yes you could technically get Fascism to work. As others have pointed out, countries like Italy and Germany did fairly well under Fascism.

The problem is do you WANT it to work?

Facism is a very short hop away from a completely totalitarian system whereby people are no longer actual people, but cogs in the machine of the state. I level the same criticism at Fascism that I do at Communism in that respect. However I feel that Fascism is a much worse idea on the basis that it requires the de-humanization of it's charges.

The people under the system cannot freely express themselves without the state clamping down on it. The only expression allowed is one that portrays the state in a positive light. This is contrary to the needs of humanity.

Aside from this, Facism quite frequently seems to stoke the flames of xenophobia and racism. Building a society where anything or anyone different from the majority is a dangerous road to travel and one which does a grave disservice to humanity as a whole.

I dont see how modern Fascism could feasibly be put into practice without it being overthrown.
 
Fascism would work, just not for the Jews.

Facism worked for Jews just like anyone else. It was Nazism that didn't work well for Jews. In Facist Italy and Spain, Jews did just fine.
 

We pretty much have that in the US. The only variant to the traditional unholy corporate/government alliance is that the government is controlled by the corporation instead of the more traditional view. The result is the same: the nation and its people exist to serve the interests of the few.
 
Fair enough

Fascism also offers a society built on the cultural norms of the nation,
No, it offers a society built on what the rulers decide should be the "cultural norms" of the nation (in Nazi Germany's case, Jews were deemed "culturally inferior" and were systematically exterminated) - so if you dissent from the state or dare to be an individual, then you're ****ed.

as well as a strong devotion to nationalism and the military.
You mean blind worship of the state, regardless of how corrupt it is (out of fear of being imprisoned or executed for criticizing it).

So, I want to know what you think. Is fascism a workable system?
Workable but terrible for everyone except the heads of the regime or the ruling class. Be careful what you wish for...
 
Facism worked for Jews just like anyone else. It was Nazism that didn't work well for Jews. In Facist Italy and Spain, Jews did just fine.

Francisco Franco - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Italy's Fascist Dictator: The Rise and Fall of Fascism in Italy


Who is 'anyone' else?
 
I'd consider fascism to be a poor system for either running a consumer economy or a militaristic state. The market is infinitely better at determining consumer needs than a central government. If you just want to build military equipment, having a pure command economy without interference is a more efficient method. If you look at WW2, fascism did poorly on a poor economic scale vs both communist and democratic opponents.
 
That's not true at all Hautey.

It is true indeed.

Chile under Pinochet didn't have fascism, they had laisse-faire capitalism with a dictator.

This is laughable. Laissez Faire? The Chilean government under Pinochet nationalized core industries within the Chilean economy. The fact that they had a dictator only cements my claim. Fascism by nature is authoritarian, anti-democratic and anti-Proletariat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile_under_Pinochet


http://ecologics.wordpress.com/2007/12/12/northern-rock-neo-liberalism-and-the-ghost-of-pinochet/



Nonsense. For some it was communist. For others it was fascist. The reality lays in how they were implemented. Fascism is dictatorial and vehemently anti-Proletarian. I challenge you to find a single Fascist regime which has benefited the working class in any sense of the word.

In Germany:

- wages dropped,
- trade unions were abolished,
- the basic rights of workers were completely removed,
- small businesses were destroyed

and the destruction of the German economy went on through to 1939. When the 1940s hit it got to the point where Germany now had to abduct people to work for them as slaves. Seriously, for somebody who's a history major this shouldn't be news to you.
 
Last edited:
Fascism cannot work in the long run.
 
Others may define fascism differently. In my opinion, fascism in its mature form has only existed in Germany and Italy during WW2. It is a political behavoir that is obsessed by victimhood or community decline, which eventually leads to some form of redemptive violence. It inevitibely will collapse since its only form of legitamacy comes from a continual radicalization that eventaully leads to war; which is the mechanism used to fulfill the fascist states goals of social darwinism, as well as a "cleansing" of enemies within, and an expansion of the state beyond its original borders to fulfill its destiny as master race,state,etc.
 
Last edited:
Facism worked for Jews just like anyone else. It was Nazism that didn't work well for Jews. In Facist Italy and Spain, Jews did just fine.

Every Fascist regime has its own specific "enemy" that is contribiting to what it sees as its communities ultimate decline. That is why the germans killed the jews, they thought they were the ones causing all of their problems. In america we had/have a similar group, though it has never attained power, known as the KKK.
 

I'm not sure you can truly assign any sort of economic system to fascism in general. Its not any sort of formal political ideology like liberalism or communism, its a form of political behavior. The only economic policy fascists tended to support in general were ones that united the nation towards one single goal, which in every case of mature fascism meant preparing the nation for war. I guess the only thing I would call it would be a command economy, which I think we all know the disadvantages of.
 

But that's very similar to Legalism used in Asia, and that didn't work either because the punishments for crimes were too harsh. I mean you could make the punishment for jaywalking be life imprisonment, but that won't act as a deterrent. The people will just shrug and jaywalk anyways and accept all the harsher penalties.

And then what happens when you've got more of the population imprisoned than you do free? It takes manpower and resources to imprison criminals. The more criminals you have, the more of a drain on resources it is. At some point it doesn't become worth it to imprison the people.

However, if you don't imprison the people who go against the fascist state, you no longer have fascism because those in power can longer rule from the top.

Thus, fascism doesn't work.
 

Actually, I believe it was Legalism that ended the era of the warring states in China.


Banishment, or capital punishment for serious crimes against the state.


However, if you don't imprison the people who go against the fascist state, you no longer have fascism because those in power can longer rule from the top.

Many fascist states did the have the support of the majority of the population.
 

Actually the economic crisis that Chile had during the Allende years (short period of time) was due to US government policies. Nixon had the US government take policies that caused the Chilean economy to scream.


From organizing labour unions in Chile to strike, to dumping copper on the world market to hurt Chile's main export the US government under Nixon caused much of the economic problems in Chile during the Allende years


Do a search on Nixon and Chile using this quote "''make the economy of Chile scream"
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…