I had some pretty brutal discussions with my dad who is a hardcore liberal of the “the answer lies somewhere between the middle of left and right” type. He agrees with a lot of socialist stances and class war but refuses to acknowledge that a revolution is needed to achieve socialism, that killing people wouldn’t make us better than the owning class and that violence is bad and that we should try to change the system by voting that voting will bring lasting change and not a revolution…all this kind of crap. He thinks that i got too “radicalized” and that im stuck in a bubble of propaganda and now he wants to have more control of the media i consume and that when he sees me watching or reading an article that i show him the sources of these articles. He really wants me to “keep an open-mind” which to him literally just means returning to being a liberal. The more of these discussions i have with my father the more i feel a distance between us and i would love if we just ignored our political opinions and kept living our lives how we always did but he insists that i am being groomed by some megalomaniac organization or a goofy ah evil person to join some kind of leftist jihad: “Yes you are entitled to have your opinion but you should also keep an open mind but the problem is that your opinion is not correct” that all i hear from him.
That doesn’t track with my understanding. What’s your definition of fascism?
Edit: to be clear, a socialist revolution is the triumph of the worker majority over the oppressive owner class. Not “overthrow of the majority”.
You don’t think that violently installing yourselves as minority leaders of a majority in order to suppress opposition and subordinate individual interests is fascism? Well then, fuck. What is your definition?
Edit: To be clear, OP, a child, disagrees with their dads view that -
The top commenter agreed that this is a reasonable position for a leftist with different ideas. You suggested that this is not a reasonable position. It’s fair to conclude then that you are pro-violence. As a pro-violence adherent of a globally unpopular economic and political movement you and OP proposing to install your movement “as minority leaders of a majority in order to suppress opposition and subordinate individual interests” meets the literal textbook definition of fascism that I linked you to.
Play whatever weasel word games you like, but the political spectrum is a teardrop and your call for violence puts you right back at fascism. If you don’t like this, maybe be a little less fasc-y?
That’s not what I said. What’s your definition of fascism?
how about you answer the question first, buckaroo
You’re right, Bob’s Guns is a great track. I’ve never listened to Ludique before!
I’d also like to recommend Bones by Be Svendsen.
I dig it, thanks for sharing!
You’ve edited in a significant amount, to avoid the fact that you’re ducking the question.
I’ve already addressed that your characterization of a socialist revolution being some minority enacting violence on a majority is inaccurate.
Not a quote from the wiki article, or from what I’ve said.
Again, in your own words, can you share what you consider fascism to be?
Or are you unable to come up with a definition that matches your argument?
^ lemmygrads, this is why I hate the term fascism. It lets white supremacist liberals like the one above off the hook for the atrocities committed by their own countries. The only difference between the US and Nazi germany, is that the US was successful at carrying out its planned program of genocide and native eviction; the nazis failed at their attempt at copying the US model.
The only difference between the two capitalist-imperialist forms of government, is that bourgeois democracy is far better at genocide than any other form.