• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What is the more devestating form of government: Fascism or Communism?

What is the more devestating form of government: Fascism or Communism?

  • Communism

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • Fascism

    Votes: 4 57.1%

  • Total voters
    7

George_Washington

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
0
Location
United States of America and proud of it!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
What do you guys think?

I think they are both pretty devestating but if I had to choose living under either, I suppose I would choose fascism just because of the possiblity that maybe I'd be allowed a little more control over the amount of money I was allowed to make and what I could do with it. And at least I might not face as much religious persecution under fascism as I would under communism.

Shoot, I forgot to make a poll for this thread. Can someone put it in there for me? My bad.
 
Comrade Brian said:
Fascism is indeed worse. The state controls what you do.

Sad partisan ignorence.

I'm assuming by Communism, George, that you're reffering to the manner of autocratic/authoritarian socialism practiced by the Soviets and the Chinese, among others. This is effectively the same thing as fascism. Two systems of extremity brought on by lack of worldly equilibrium. One for the right, one for the left. Either in the name of sovriegnty, or in the name of resiliancy. Both looping back unto the ultimate middle ground of extreme statist behavior: despotism; "the state controlling what you do."

That's why America is as worthwile as it is, because its ultimate purpose is to strike a balance beween the abstracts of the right and left. Associating cooperation and competition, using community and individuality to their best advantage. Anyone unwilling to do that either can't see the two for what they are, or are prejudiced by those similarly unaware and influenced by extreme, isolated circumstance (Lenin, Hitler etc.).

The first thing anyone should ever consider politically is that, paradoxically, the right and left are the same thing often used towards the same ends.
 
"In capitalism man exploits man. In communism it's the other way around".

Yeah...so I don't know. Pure communism, the evil Oh-my-god-they-have-nukes-too Communists that Americans were scared of..they were pretty bad. But so were facists.

Communism, the way most people see it (i.e., the authoritarian state dominated government type) is just as bad as facism.

Facism is supported by the poor, in hopes that the facists will improve their lives and make their country better.

Communism is supported by the poor, in hopes that the communists will improve their lives and make their country better.

A punch in the face from a left hand hurts just the same as one from the right.
 
Yes, the USSR and China were usually rather fascist, but how bad they were usually depended on the leader. Stalin I find to be as bad as Hitler. But if you then look at Krushchev, well, he wasn't too bad.
 
Comrade Brian said:
Yes, the USSR and China were usually rather fascist, but how bad they were usually depended on the leader. Stalin I find to be as bad as Hitler. But if you then look at Krushchev, well, he wasn't too bad.

Ok, so Stalin equates to Hitler and Krushchev equates to Moussolini.
 
If you think of the ways we perceive communism today and facism as well, don't you think they are both the same? I'm actually very interested in learning more about socialism not because I think that it might actually work but because I think its possible that some of those ideas can be developed but it would have to be workable.
 
Back
Top Bottom