Christopher was smarter and better read, but shared some of the same fundamentals problems. I don't know how Chris would handled pandemic era, that would be good test. Chris would probably stick to his principles of free speech, I assume he would be for pro choice. I think Chris attacked Mother Theresa and Henry Kissinger and Tony Blair. It would be interesting to see what he would say about Trump and would he end up also infected by TDS.

Hitler at least did not have a teleprompter and did not shake hands with ghosts day after speech. But attempt to paint Biden as dictator to be afraid off , was clearly the intention of decorator who came up with this dumb idea. It will backfire like everything they tried so far.

@Krunoslav

Both are demented though - and it will backfire - its obvious the Democrats are extremely nervous & concerned.

@Krunoslav interesting, I forgot about Hydra. There is a US Space Force group, Delta 22, I guess is the name, basic same logo

at 56:40 is where the information starts

@Weltansicht My god, that was cringe as hell, especially with that voice. The inflated egos and self congratulations these boneheads have is amazing.

@Krunoslav it is kind of weird, Delta 18 at Hanger 18 (where the Roswell saucer was alleged to be taken to) and seen a comment on there about it being 6-24-2022 = 6 + (2+4) + (2+0+2+2) = 666 whatever

on the Tucker Carlson meme about semi-fascism, reminded me of a screenshot that I seen earlier today, I don't recollect where it is from, but the analysis reasoning of WHY the socialist democrats are accusing the fascism is because of their fear of it, it's militancy and willingness to stand up to the bullying volition volatility of the marxist insurgents, historically speaking of course

@Weltansicht "on the Tucker Carlson meme about semi-fascism, reminded me of a screenshot that I seen earlier today, I don't recollect where it is from, but the analysis reasoning of WHY the socialist democrats are accusing the fascism is because of their fear of it, it's militancy and willingness to stand up to the bullying volition volatility of the marxist insurgents, historically speaking of course"

Well, Italian fascism, German National Socialism and Russian Marxist-Leninism, were all three totalitarian systems, all three as ideologies grew out of the sociopolitical foundations set by liberalism, all three use similar methods for preserving power, although they very in effectiveness, and technically speaking all three came to power with semi-revolutionary methods and all three had similar approach to nationalizing as much as possible of the economy. They adopted all these to their particular time and place off course.

Ideologically or religiously they do are different, and while Fascism and National Socialism could and did corporate , the Nazis in particular were hostile to communists.

I think its inaccurate to call National Socialist in Germany fascist and their ideology fascism. The article you show does get the first part correct.

"Fascism, the bitterest enemy of Socialism-Communism, resembles Socialism in the respect that it gives great power to the State and dictatorship over all industry, employment, education, freedom of the press, etc. The points of difference which make it violently hated by the Reds are: its opposition to the “class struggle” and the subjugation of the bourgeoisie by the dictatorship of the proletariat. Rather, it seeks a harmony between all classes and concedes to industrialists, white collar, professional, as well as laboring workers, a place in the social order as necessary parts, not “class enemies,” of the whole, but under State control. It defends some property rights and religion. It opposes Marxist philosophy and the Communist and Socialist Marxian parties."

I agree with this for the most part. Although Mussolini did start off first as a Marxist and at Salo, the puppet state he was in charge in towards the end of the WWII, was fully socialist. So its a mix bag.

"Fascism in Italy is not anti-Semitic. The problem of the large number of revolutionary Russian Jews in Germany doubtless contributed toward making Fascist Germany anti-Semitic. ""

It is true that Fascism in Italy is not Anti-Semitic, but it is not true that Germany was fascist. They called themselves National Socialists, and they had a distinctly different ideology than Fascist in Italy. It is a fallacy to call Nazis fascists , as much as it is fallacy to call them right wing, but many do it and that is what I disagree with.

"Fascism arose in Italy and Germany as the result of the weakness of Democracy in combatting the Marxian poison which had been allowed to disintegrate the entire social fabric of these nations with agitations for strife and disunity. It took over power at a time in both countries when the choice lay between Fascist or Red dictatorship. It is the only enemy feared by the Reds, because it is the only system which opposes militancy with militancy and puts down one dictatorship by means of another. "

The author repeats this mistake by stating that fascism was both in Italy and Germany. It was not. Only Italy was fascist.

The result was not weakness of democracy. That is another arrogant and ignorant statement. Democracy is not a system of goverment in Italy , it was not even a republic, and it was not a weakness of "democracy" that was the cause of the changes. Clearly this is written by someone who uses term democracy as if was a superior moral position no one can question. lol

Mussolini was originally a socialist politician and a journalist at the Avanti! newspaper. In 1912, he became a member of the National Directorate of the Italian Socialist Party (PSI),[7] but he was expelled from the PSI for advocating military intervention in World War I, in opposition to the party's stance on neutrality. In 1914, Mussolini founded a new journal, Il Popolo d'Italia, and served in the Royal Italian Army during the war until he was wounded and discharged in 1917.

Mussolini denounced the PSI, his views now centering on Italian nationalism instead of socialism, and later founded the fascist movement which came to oppose egalitarianism and class conflict, instead advocating "revolutionary nationalism" transcending class lines.

On 31 October 1922, following the March on Rome (28–30 October), Mussolini was appointed prime minister by King Victor Emmanuel III, becoming the youngest individual to hold the office up to that time. After removing all political opposition through his secret police and outlawing labor strikes,[10] Mussolini and his followers consolidated power through a series of laws that transformed the nation into a one-party dictatorship. Within five years, Mussolini had established dictatorial authority by both legal and illegal means and aspired to create a totalitarian state. In 1929, Mussolini signed the Lateran Treaty with the Holy See to establish Vatican City.

The Kingdom of Italy was theoretically a constitutional monarchy. Executive power belonged to the monarch, who exercised his power through appointed ministers. The legislative branch was a bicameral Parliament comprising an appointive Senate and an elective Chamber of Deputies. The kingdom's constitution was the Statuto Albertino, the former governing document of the Kingdom of Sardinia. In theory, ministers were solely responsible to the king. However, by this time it was impossible for a king to appoint a government entirely of his own choosing or keep it in office, against the express will of Parliament.

Members of the Chamber of Deputies were elected by plurality voting system elections in uninominal districts. A candidate needed the support of 50% of those voting and of 25% of all enrolled voters to be elected on the first round of balloting. If not all seats were filled on the first ballot, a runoff was held shortly afterwards for the remaining vacancies.

After a brief multinominal experimentation in 1882, proportional representation into large, regional, multi-seat electoral constituencies was introduced after World War I. Socialists became the major party, but they were unable to form a government in a parliament split into three different factions, with Christian populists and classical liberals. Elections took place in 1919, 1921 and 1924: in this last occasion, Mussolini abolished proportional representation, replacing it with the Acerbo Law, by which the party that won the largest share of the votes got two-thirds of the seats, which gave the Fascist Party an absolute majority of the Chamber seats.

Between 1925 and 1943, Italy was a quasi-de jure Fascist dictatorship, as the constitution formally remained in effect without alteration by the Fascists, though the monarchy also formally accepted Fascist policies and Fascist institutions. Changes in politics occurred, consisting of the establishment of the Grand Council of Fascism as a government body in 1928, which took control of the government system, as well as the Chamber of Deputies being replaced with the Chamber of Fasces and Corporations as of 1939.

From 1919 to 1920, Italy was shocked by a period of intense social conflict following the First World War known as the Biennio Rosso (Red Biennium). The revolutionary period was followed by the violent reaction of the Fascist Blackshirt militia and eventually by the March on Rome of Benito Mussolini in 1922.

In the general election of 1921, the Liberal governing coalition, strengthened by the joining of Fascist candidates in the National Bloc (33 of whom were elected deputies), came short of a majority. The Italian Socialist Party, weakened by the split of the Communist Party of Italy, lost many votes and seats, while the Italian People's Party was steady around 20%. The Socialists were stronger in Lombardy (41.9%), than in their historical strongholds of Piedmont (28.6%), Emilia-Romagna (33.4%) and Tuscany (31.0%), due to the presence of the Communists (11.9, 5.2 and 10.5%), while the Populars were confirmed the largest party of Veneto (36.5%) and the Liberal parties in most Southern regions.[

The Biennio Rosso took place in a context of economic crisis at the end of the war, with high unemployment and political instability. It was characterized by mass strikes, worker manifestations as well as self-management experiments through land and factories occupations.[4] In Turin and Milan, workers councils were formed and many factory occupations took place under the leadership of anarcho-syndicalists. The agitations also extended to the agricultural areas of the Po Valley and were accompanied by peasant strikes, rural unrests and guerrilla conflicts between left-wing and right-wing militias.

@Weltansicht In your article the author says "The price of Democratic freedom is eternal vigilance. When a people are too indifferent to the loss of their liberty, too blind to see that unchecked Marxism will result in complete chaos, disunity and national helplessness, too lazy to bother to protect their form of government, or to govern themselves, then some form of dictatorship will arise to take over the task for them. "

Sounds like a liberal or something related to that ideology. Democratic freedom, whatever that means for the author is not a good thing. Weather you use the euphemism of democracy for system of goverment that is in fact republic or not. There is so much to criticize it for. And clearly in all states where it has been implicated it has failed miserably to do what he thinks it does.

The author says: "Unless large numbers of Americans shake off their present indifference to fast disappearing liberty and to danger from within, and combat Socialism- Communism vigorously, some form of Fascism will arise in America to do battle with Socialism for the dictatorship over the indifferent. As the strength of Socialism-Communism increases, the chance to preserve Democracy de- creases, until eventually Fascism becomes the only alternative to Socialism- Communism. It is late, but not too late to save American Democracy if Americans will awaken—now/ Where are America’s leaders?"

Clearly he is locked in liberal mindset of limited thinking and does not realize that they are both...

Two Sides of the Same Coin

"Just as popular influence over the state’s ability to project power abroad foments among the people the international avarice and belligerence of nationalism, popular influence over the state’s ability to exercise power domestically stirs among the people the interclass avarice and belligerence of socialism.

And class warfare breeds collectivism and mindless conformity for the same basic reason that international warfare does: overwhelming and plundering enemy classes (whether in the streets or in the voting booths) requires group unity and strength in numbers. So, just as nationalists demand rigid “national allegiance” and rail against “national traitors,” socialists demand rigid “class solidarity” and inveigh against “class traitors.”

As Ludwig von Mises insightfully wrote:

“Nationalist ideology divides society vertically; the socialist ideology divides society horizontally.”

Mises referred to such doctrines as types of “warfare sociology.” He brilliantly identified the intellectual fallacies of warfare sociology as the philosophical basis for the 20th century quasi-religion of “etatism”: faith in and devotion to the omnipotent state. What Mises didn’t fully realize was that it was the institutional incentives of the people’s state (which he too thought was a necessary bulwark for liberty) that made warfare sociology—nationalism and socialism—so alluring.

Revolutionary France was the birthplace of the thoroughgoing modern people’s state. Because of that, it was also the cradle of modern nationalism and socialism."

• Dan Sanchez

@Weltansicht

Origins of Fascism and National Socialism

"Fascism and National Socialism are often mistaken for being one and the same. Yes, these ideologies did have a lot in common; however, some of the differences are substantial. Hitler and Mussolini didn’t always share the same ideas.

Fascism originated in Italy around 1919, when then-Marxist Benito Mussolini—yes, Italy’s former Duce was a Marxist at first!—founded the so-called ‘Fasci di Combattimiento’, fighting forces consisting of World War I veterans. Its purpose was to restore order in Italy and give the country what (in their opinion) it was entitled to have.

It’s remarkable to note that National Socialism, a political ideology developed by Adolf Hitler, was based on Fascism. This was caused by the fact that Hitler admired Mussolini and incorporated many of his ideas in his own ideology that would later be known as National Socialism or Nazism. Mussolini's March on Rome, inspired Hitlers March on Berlin.

Italy’s dictator ‘rewarded’ Hitler for his admiration by considering himself to be his ‘mentor’, even by the time the latter had surpassed him in power by a landslide."

Remember, it was WWI that created condition for Fascism in Italy, National Socialism in Germany and Marxist-Leninism in Russia to arose. If WWI did not create those conditions, it would be very hard for Lenin, Mussolini and Hitler to come to power. So they all have that in common.

Similarities

There are many similarities between Fascism and National Socialism. As such, both pursue collectivism (ownership of the land and the means of production by the state) as a part of an economy led by the state, the establishment of a dictatorship led by a leader who literally has all power and glorify violence, imperialism, and militarism. Furthermore, they reject democracy and traditional left- and right-wing parties, oppose freedom of speech and are strongly against communism and capitalism, feminism and homosexuality alike.

Their promotion of nationalism is being taken to an extreme and they aim for unity within their own respective states by holding mass demonstrations and military parades. Another similarity can be found in the fact that both are totalitarian ideologies, which means that they seek to control all aspects of public and private life alike. And finally, neither believes in class conflicts and conflicts of interest as a result of their idea of class collaboration instead of class struggle (this is where both ideologies find themselves directly opposing socialism and communism).

Differences

The most important difference between Fascism and National Socialism is the latter’s racist character and accent on ethnicity. Furthermore, National Socialism in Germany was very focused on Eugenics, inspired by ideas and methods from the USA eugenics project.Which still continues in USA today.

Granted, Mussolini’s regime in a later stage did contain racist elements, but this was due mainly to its ties with Hitler and the Nazis. Other Fascist regimes that were established around the same time in Europe—the ones in Spain under Franco and Portugal under Salazar—could not be accused of fundamentally embracing racism either. As a result, Fascist-like regimes tended not to have any problems with Jews either and if they did, it was—just like Italy—due to their ties with Nazi-Germany. This enabled some Jews, like Mussolini’s mistress Margherita Sarfatti, to eventually become Fascists themselves. In the Netherlands, even the National Socialist Movement had some Jewish members at first since it did not start out as an anti-Semitic organization.

Racism is another misconception about National Socialist. They did not understood what race is nor did they have reliable means of DNA testing to determine it other than by clear visual distinctions.

The so called Aryan Race mythology was as much myth as it was myth about Jewish Race. They were not true, but served an ideological purpose of National Socialists.

That is why they could not distinguish between Germany Jew an non Jew who looked often too similar to tell. You can imagine confusion and accusations and opportunism because of this. The stories I could tell you hehe

Another important difference is that Fascists favor corporatism (meaning that the sociopolitical organization of a society is to be led by large interest groups) whereas Nazis don’t. Taken everything in consideration, it may be stated that the main difference between Fascism and National Socialism can be described as follows: Fascists focused more on their own state, whereas this mythical "race" narrative was more important to the Nazis.

Even when it comes to art, some major differences exist between the two ideologies. Nazis had no positive attitude towards Modernism, which they considered to be a sign of Bolshevism and cultural degeneration. Instead, they much rather promote art reflecting the Nazi doctrine. Fascists on the other hand generally had no problem with Modernism. For example, the Italian Fascists didn’t restrict artistic expression and even encouraged creativity. The artistic differences between Fascism and Nazism can be noted in architecture as well: the former embraced various styles (including Modernism) while the latter strongly favored Neoclassicism.

Fascism, Nazism, and Religion

When it comes to religion, both similarities and differences exist. The most important similarity can be found in the fact that theoretically, neither Fascism nor Nazism can ever embrace religion since it claims—just like the two ideologies—the whole of an individual. Both Fascists and Nazis recognize the fact that there are numerous religious people, causing both groups to approach religion with caution while seeking to find it a purpose that would benefit their respective regimes.

This is where the differences come in. Though originally an atheist, Mussolini actively endorsed the Roman Catholic Church for political legitimacy while Hitler founded Positive Christianity as an attempt to redefine the Christian belief in such a way that it would benefit his anti-Semitic rule. Proof for that can be found in the fact that his version of Christianity had a little surprising interpretation of the Bible: Jesus Christ was the son of God indeed, but he was not Jewish. Instead, so the Nazis claimed, he despised the Jews and it was them who ended up killing him.

Despite the fact that it’s theoretically impossible for Fascism or Nazism to ever truly be connected to religion, and they themselves are political religions, sometimes called ideologies., there is a fascinating example of a movement that had a lot of Fascist traits while it had fiercely embraced Roman Catholicism at the same time. I’m talking about the Ustaše, a Croatian nationalist organization between 1930 and 1945 that identified Catholicism with Croatian nationalism. Its leader, Ante Pavelić, had modeled the movement significantly after the doctrines of Hitler and Mussolini. What truly set the Ustaše apart, however, was the fact that they considered both Catholicism and Islam to be the beliefs of the Croatian people, thus uniting two entirely different religions into one Fascist movement.

• 2015 Victor Brenntice

Yeah, his treatment of the weinseins and continued refusal to apologize has me done with him. He moved the ball a couple yards but he's off track now. Too bad. He's got some serious hp.