Your definition of "fascism."

and would be an oxymoron.

 

I concur

Twitter and Facebook too

 

One aspect of fascism inheres in the invasion of university campuses by masked protesters who use force and invective to shout down free speech and to impose ad hoc, gratuitous moral codes governing what terminologies are acceptable to the party and what terminologies will result in individuals being driven into exile or penury. It is rule by the mob - generally those who are less - or much less - educated than those they attack. In order to reinforce their attacks on free speech and polite civil discourse they set police vehicles on fire and break the windows of banks.

In short, they deploy terror to intimidate and vanquish those who, for any momentary reason, annoy them.

Some of their actions are reminiscent of the last days of the Weimar Republic or of the early stages of the Russian Revolution when periods of anarchy and factional warfare reigned.

Fascism has other characteristics which have been listed elsewhere in this thread

 

I would be careful of bandying the word 'rich' around because no one in forums generally knows what 'rich' means, Rich means, inter alia, being able to pay for chopper support any time one likes - that's the measure. Short of that you're just 'well off' or 'better off'. Scandinavian countries progressively tax the better off. Rich people are a small minority, particularly in Norway where it's very poor form indeed to flaunt or even accumulate inordinate wealth. People throw the word 'rich' around willy nilly, thinking that even people on a decent salary are 'rich', which they are not. Most of them have never had even one taste of chopper support. The rich use helicopters as taxis - except for short trips. Rich means having an absolute shitlocker of greenbacks.

Incidentally, if you tax the rich into the ground one of two things happens. They take their ball and go home or, they soon necome NOT rich and you run out of rich people to tax - what then, Einstein?

 

How would you differentiate between fascism and authoritarianism or totalitarianism?

 

Fascism is most accurately described as simply an authoritarian, dictatorial government that tramples on the freedoms of the people. You might just as well call it communism since both rely on the consolidation and centralization of wealth and power.

Fascism has also been defined as a sort of merger between the state and corporations (aka corporatism).

Both of these we see today.

All these "isms" are one and the same thing.

 

Singapore is authoritarian but neither fascist nor totalitarian

 

Communism and fascism are almost the same politically. They're both right-wing authoritarian governments. Communism has a left-wing economic system, which is why many people call it leftist, but authoritarianism is a right-wing political ideology.

 

You or anyone else trying to tell me what I can or can't do or own because you only consider your opinion or view of things

 

Fascism is a form of totalitarianism. I've already mentioned its characteristics. Communism is another form of totalitarianism. The two forms differ in the extent to which they permit private ownership of the means of production and distribution and in their ideological messaging (nationalism vs class warfare & internationalism). As jpdonleavy pointed out, Singapore is authoritarian but not fascist or communist. Singapore is also not totalitarianism, in that the government is content to hold a monopoly on governnent authority and doesn't try to penetrate all aspects of society and mobilize the citizenry for its agendas. A totalitarian system tries to control not only all economic and political matters but the attitudes, values, and beliefs of its population, erasing the distinction between state and society. Of course, totalitarian systems are also authoritarian, but not all authoritarian systems are totalitarian.

 

I think your usage isn't widely shared. Authoritarianism doesn't have a wing. The terms right wing and left wing derive from seating in the French National Assembly in the eighteenth century. Parties on the right identified with the privileged elite--nobility and clergy; those on the left were the opposition to said elite--non-aristocratic middle class. The terms have come to be associated with positions toward inequality vs. equality.
"Left-wing politics aims to confront social inequality and to provide as much governmental control over economics and social processes in society as possible. Left-wing politics in general takes care of groups and individuals in society that do not do too well or are being oppressed.

Right-wing politics in general can be defined as politics that puts the individual’s rights before everything else, thus minimizing the role of the government in politics. Right-wing politicians push for a market regulated economy as opposed to a government regulated economy. Being predominantly conservative, right-wing politics supports traditional institutions of a given country, such as religion and marriage."
Left vs Right Wing Politics - Difference Between

 

To describe fascism that way is to rob the term of any distinctive qualities that would differentiate it from being bossy.

 

Definition of "rich":"having abundant possessions and especially material wealth." Definition of RICH
Obviously, the term is relative and general, and to use it more precisely would require more specific measures. I don't know of anyone other than you who defines it as "being able to pay for chopper support any time one likes" and "having an absolute shitlocker of greenbacks", but if you want to define it that way, fine. You seem to agree that "Scandinavian countries progressively tax the better off." That's good enough for me to distinguish the Scandinavian system from the U.S. Your aside about the consequences of taxing the rich seems to go beyond defining socialism into an argument on the merits of the system, which is beyond the scope of the distinction I was making.

 

I think you're talking about Antifa. They resemble fascist brown shirts in some respects, but the content of their ideology tends not to be nationalist/nativist or racist--quite the opposite. Ideologically, they tend to be Anarchist or Marxist, and would therefore best be described as the "hard" (authoritarian) left.

 

Here's a pretty good definition of right vs left from historian and textbook author Andrew Heywood:

"Generally, the left-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "ideas such as freedom, equality, fraternity, rights, progress, reform and internationalism", while the right-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "notions such as authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism"."

 

Antifa is not a government entity, nor are they fighting for a political leader, so they can't accurately be described as "Brownshirts" or "fascists." They're fighting against oppression, racism, and injustice. Their exercise of free speech has shut down fascist gatherings.

 

When Italian Fascism died , cannibals ate its heart .

 

LGBT rallies are fascist gatherings now?!

Antifa Disrupts LGBT Parade; Claims Gay People Are Offensive To Muslims
Infidel Bloggers Alliance: Antifa Disrupts LGBT Parade; Claims Gay People Are Offensive To Muslims

 

Except the far (Communist) left doesn't seem particularly interested in freedom and individual rights, and is revolutionary rather than reformist in character..

 

Brownshirts weren't a governnent entity either. But you're right, they aren;t rallying around a leader--one reason they're called Anitifa (Anti-Fascist).