fascist or communist?

[enraged-fish]

Would you rather live in a fascist of communist America?

personally I would rather live in a fascist country because communist nations don't have much of an ecomy due to lack of motivation. think about it. if all the diners paid there workers the same amount were would the competition go? What about the quality?

[Drah]

DINERS?
You're thinking about DINERS?!

Let's have a look: Paper boy, no education, relatively easy job.
Surgeon, long education, grueling job.
Same pay.
Why the hell would ANYONE even get an education in the first place?

[enraged-fish]

that was just an example

Yea at least facism has econimic freedom. Hell I wouldn't mind facism if I had to choose.

[Hexter66]

To me it a hard choice there no democracy on either side of the debate, so 50/50 to me.

At 3/4/07 05:12 PM, zeus-almighty wrote: Yea at least facism has econimic freedom. Hell I wouldn't mind facism if I had to choose.

But then again like that other guys said I could be set for life just by throwing propaganda newspapers every morning.....

[phantom-drummer]

At 3/4/07 03:47 PM, enraged-fish wrote: Would you rather live in a fascist of communist America?

personally I would rather live in a fascist country because communist nations don't have much of an ecomy due to lack of motivation. think about it. if all the diners paid there workers the same amount were would the competition go? What about the quality?

You seem to have lost sight of the definition of your own personally defined terms. A communist government has no commanding officer what-so-ever (after the temporary dictator steps down like he should.) In the original idea of marxist socialism, the idea of money no longer exists. Everyone has a particular duty or function to perform with what the people produce for the community. Almost the same as the idea of getting free lunches at public school systems. Everyone provides for each other and thus no revenue is ever generated nor is there ever an economy to build upon, eliminating the possibility of widescale economic bankruptcy. Fascist government however, is complete and utter totalitarian dictatorship. No one has to make a certain amount of money if any at all because the government said so. They can make no revenue and let their people starve to death, or they can make little revenue and jack the price of living up 10 fold in order to scare the citizens into providing for the common "cause." Which, ironically, in most cases is the dictator. It makes a lot more sense for one to not have any money and have everything he or she needs right there, than to not know if they will ever get money or the next time they will eat.

[Engelsman]

I'd rather just not live in America.

[enraged-fish]

At 3/4/07 05:57 PM, phantom-drummer wrote: You seem to have lost sight of the definition of your own personally defined terms. A communist government has no commanding officer what-so-ever (after the temporary dictator steps down like he should.) In the original idea of marxist socialism, the idea of money no longer exists. Everyone has a particular duty or function to perform with what the people produce for the community. Almost the same as the idea of getting free lunches at public school systems. Everyone provides for each other and thus no revenue is ever generated nor is there ever an economy to build upon, eliminating the possibility of widescale economic bankruptcy. Fascist government however, is complete and utter totalitarian dictatorship. No one has to make a certain amount of money if any at all because the government said so. They can make no revenue and let their people starve to death, or they can make little revenue and jack the price of living up 10 fold in order to scare the citizens into providing for the common "cause." Which, ironically, in most cases is the dictator. It makes a lot more sense for one to not have any money and have everything he or she needs right there, than to not know if they will ever get money or the next time they will eat.

In theory communism works. in practice it fails utterly. see in the REAL WORLD, if someone has power, he doesn't want to lose it. Think about stalin. he kept power. and soviet russia had money. there were two classes, very very poor, and very very rich. see most people were poor because they didn't have government connections and were paid the exact same thing. In fascist italy how ever there was still a dictater and a midddle class

[phantom-drummer]

At 3/4/07 06:23 PM, enraged-fish wrote:

At 3/4/07 05:57 PM, phantom-drummer wrote: You seem to have lost sight of the definition of your own personally defined terms. A communist government has no commanding officer what-so-ever (after the temporary dictator steps down like he should.) In the original idea of marxist socialism, the idea of money no longer exists. Everyone has a particular duty or function to perform with what the people produce for the community. Almost the same as the idea of getting free lunches at public school systems. Everyone provides for each other and thus no revenue is ever generated nor is there ever an economy to build upon, eliminating the possibility of widescale economic bankruptcy. Fascist government however, is complete and utter totalitarian dictatorship. No one has to make a certain amount of money if any at all because the government said so. They can make no revenue and let their people starve to death, or they can make little revenue and jack the price of living up 10 fold in order to scare the citizens into providing for the common "cause." Which, ironically, in most cases is the dictator. It makes a lot more sense for one to not have any money and have everything he or she needs right there, than to not know if they will ever get money or the next time they will eat.

In theory communism works. in practice it fails utterly. see in the REAL WORLD, if someone has power, he doesn't want to lose it.

I thought I made that quite apparent seeing as how I made reference to modern communism by saying (after the temporary dictator steps down like he should.) This would imply that very few, if any, communist leaders acctually keep their part of the deal by becoming one of the society functioners. Also, that they are ridiculously power hungry and usually end up becoming fascist leaders. Read the post next time.

[enraged-fish]

At 3/4/07 07:21 PM, phantom-drummer wrote: I thought I made that quite apparent seeing as how I made reference to modern communism by saying (after the temporary dictator steps down like he should.) This would imply that very few, if any, communist leaders acctually keep their part of the deal by becoming one of the society functioners. Also, that they are ridiculously power hungry and usually end up becoming fascist leaders. Read the post next time.

why are you argueing with me if communism doesn't work? And stalin (" a ridiculusly power hungry" dictater) did not become a fascist. Neither did lenin. Or most "ridiculusly power hungry" communist leaders. No, they stuck to the good old failed social experiment known as communism.

[Eoewe]

Communism has become one of the ambiguous terms that can have multiple, and very similar, meanings. Authoritarianism and totalitarianism both are other terms that can also be applied.

[phantom-drummer]

why are you argueing with me if communism doesn't work? And stalin (" a ridiculusly power hungry" dictater) did not become a fascist. Neither did lenin. Or most "ridiculusly power hungry" communist leaders. No, they stuck to the good old failed social experiment known as communism.

I'm not bein a dick, I simply said read the post next time. Because clearly, you didn't. I never said anything about stalin or lenin. That was brought about on your own terms. You made a post on newgrounds and not everyone shares your opinion. Don't ask why someone is arguing because it WILL happen. I respect your thoughts, views, and opinions. I just ask you not be so oblivious to your own thread.

[BlueEyesWhiteDevil]

I'm a fascist. Are you?

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

Considering the differences between the two are minimal at best I'll just say it doesn't matter.

There is Governmental control in both systems, when put into practice, in all areas of the nation, so saying one is better than the other is silly as they are more or less identical in the beliefs. The only thing that changes is their jusitifcation.

[Leonardo-Da-Finchy]

I'd say communism, at least in the definition I have would be the better way to go. Again, theoretically, whereas in practice it wouldn't work.

However, have any of you heard of the wheel of politics? It describes how communism and fascism are ultimately the same thing.

Draw a circle in your mind. At the top is Liberalism. It's placed centrally purely because it's the middle of the Fascist-Communist "scale" usually drawn in a line, on top because there's less oppression in practice, usually.

To the left of Liberalism, in-keeping with left-wing politics, are the various shades of socialism. To the right, right-wing politics, various shades of conservativism.

As you go further round left-ways (anti-clockwise) you get more benefits/welfare, public services like health services, but generally less individual income, through higher taxes, or generally lower wages. Working harder benefits the society more than yourself, but more skilled work still gets you benefits over those in simpler professions.

Further right-ways (clockwise) you get less benefits/welfare and more privatisation, Lower taxes due to less public services means higher personal income, but much of this may be spent on paying for medical care and other services that are provided in a socialist state. Working harder benefits yourself more than society.

At the bottom of the wheel, the right and left join, because you ultimately have one situation. Absolute equality. Right fascism ejects everyone who is different, left communism ignores those differences to the detriment of those with special needs. The problem is humans can't deal with absolute equality, so a lot of force is required to keep the state on way or the other, be it the SS or the KGB, and as such a dictator usually sits atop the system, voiding the ideals the state is built on.

[Korruption]

fascism hands down

the Russians would've been much cooler if they wernt communists I believe.

I cant back that up with any experience or whatever exept for the fact that I played Call Of Duty.
Those russians were damn brave. [/respect]

anyway ... whatever

[Istentelen]

There is a good anecdote about this: someone asked an ex-KGB agent, what was the difference between Hitlers Germany and Stalins Soviet Union. He answered that Moscow is much colder than Berlin.
Anyway, the difference between dictatorships are not only the left-right sides. A dictature has degrees too: for example it was not indifferent in the time of the communism, that in wich communist cuontry you lived: China, the SSSR, DDR and Romania were really bad places, Poland, Czehslovakia and Jugoslavia were not that bad, and Hungary was slightly good (they called it the happies barrack).
I say a soft communism is better than any faschism becouse the faschizm is based on hate, so it can't become as soft as a communism can.

At 3/5/07 05:10 PM, Istentelen wrote: I say a soft communism is better than any faschism becouse the faschizm is based on hate, so it can't become as soft as a communism can.

How do you know there can't be soft facism. I mean seriously.

[TheMason]

At 3/4/07 05:16 PM, Hexter66 wrote: To me it a hard choice there no democracy on either side of the debate, so 50/50 to me.

Actually when you get into advanced Democratic theory you see that democracy can co-exist with fascists, communists and other authoritarian/totalitarian regimes. For example the government of North Korea (other than the Kims) is elected and the country does have universal sufferage (a benchmark of modern/advanced democracies). In fact many of the world's most brutal regimes are democratic in nature.

What most in the West think Democracy is, is actually constitutional liberalism underwhich everyone is subject to the rule of law.

So I add this question to the mix: "which is better a liberal dictatorship (actually often fascist) or an authoritarian democracy (actually often communist).

[fastbow]

I vote fascism, considering we are heading that way quickly, and I need to score points with the overlords so they shall grant me a quick death in the camps....

/I for one welcome our new fascist overlords...

At 3/5/07 06:01 PM, fastbow wrote: /I for one welcome our new fascist overlords...

What fascist overlords?

[d3c0y2]

At 3/4/07 04:33 PM, Drah wrote: DINERS?
You're thinking about DINERS?!

Let's have a look: Paper boy, no education, relatively easy job.
Surgeon, long education, grueling job.
Same pay.
Why the hell would ANYONE even get an education in the first place?

Sorry, one flaw in your argument... your thinking like a capatalist, Money is not the Goal of communism, human rights and a stronger social structure en masse is the goal, if you just think about money it will fail.

[fastbow]

At 3/5/07 06:09 PM, zeus-almighty wrote: What fascist overlords?

ALL HAIL OUR GLORIOUS EMPORER BUSH II!

Forgive him, sire, for he knows not his treason....

At 3/5/07 06:10 PM, fastbow wrote: ALL HAIL OUR GLORIOUS EMPORER BUSH II!

Forgive him, sire, for he knows not his treason....

What are you retarded? Shit if Bush actually had some balls then we would really have a fascist society and everything would be sweel.

Too bad he is such a damn pussy!

[uhnoesanoob]

At 3/5/07 06:10 PM, fastbow wrote:

At 3/5/07 06:09 PM, zeus-almighty wrote: What fascist overlords?

ALL HAIL OUR GLORIOUS EMPORER BUSH II!

Forgive him, sire, for he knows not his treason....

Nice spelling there chief. I WILL CALL BUSH TO KILL YOU FOR YOUR TREASON ON HIS MAJESTY OVERLORD JESUS-NESS.

[Sigma-Lambda]

At 3/4/07 10:33 PM, BlueEyesWhiteDevil wrote: I'm a fascist. Are you?

No you aren't. You're 19, and from what I determined, you live in some rich European country. You have no fucking idea what living under fascism is you spoiled teenage brat. You've just gotten so caught up in your masturbatory racist ideals that think you understand fascism. Why don't you try spending a few years in a Gulag, why don't you try getting tortured for speaking up against what you believe is wrong, and then we'll see if you still support fascism. So why don't you just shut up your spoiled teenage mouth about things you have no idea of comprehending.

[fastbow]

Spelling mistake? Where? Please assist...

Forgive me, emporer!

[uhnoesanoob]

It is not that you spelled wrong.... it is THAT YOU SPELLED RIGHT! HOW DARE YOU HAVE A VOCAULARY BETTER THEN OUR HOLINESS DELIVERED GOD OF FREEDOM?!?!??!?!?!

[fastbow]

FURGIVE ME EMPERER!!!

I IZ NOT AZ REDNECK AS U!!!

/ have I paid enough penance now?