Modern "Facism"

[hollodero]

(12-21-2016, 12:41 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It appears to depend on who you ask.  For many it has become a catch all word for a person with totalitarian right wing leanings.  Like many epithets it is rapidly losing any real impact as a pejorative due to rampant overuse.  The article does an excellent job of defining it in terms of governance.  As far as use on a personal level, I'd say it encompasses anyone who stifles dissent as a reflex and allows for no differing opinions.  In reality there is little difference between fascism, as a government and what is supposed to be it's polar opposite communism as practiced in the Soviet Union.  Both were autocratic, surveillance police states in which dissent was brutally suppressed.

Oh, Fascism... allright then.
well, there seems to be no distinct definition of that. Which kind of might be the point here. Nationalistic, authoritarian, these are sure necessary things to be defined as fascist, but apart from that it's not an ideology, but to me seems to be the absence of a clear-cut ideology. A Fascist has the will to rise to power, without any distinct flag but the one of his own persona. He uses force and probably oligarchs to reach power and then governs as a superior human being with superior, "healthy" ideas reigning over lesser individuals. A hierarchy and leader cult propped by force, if you will.