Definition of Fascism by Merriam-Webster is wrong

The dictionary definition of fascism is wrong:

includes the statement

A political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

It is right in so many respects, yet becomes PC in one: it claims that fascism is racist; “exalts nation and often race”. Whie true that the facists (under Mussolini) attacked Ethiopia, where people of a different race lived. But this was only done for the greater glory of the political monstrosity called the nation.
Fascism wasn’t racist; at least it was not anti-semitic, there were some prominent fascists who were jews. It was only when the frustrated German socialists yanked the fascist strings (and even invaded Italy at one point) when jews got persecuted for their race.

Fascism was the ultimate expression of politics, and its spirit still lives on. The greater glory of the political construct (hence fable) was elevated above all other interests, including (especially) those of the people. This is eerily similar to the right-wing:

  • The right wing sacrifices the interests of the people to big business
  • The left wing sacrifices the interests of the people to their own petty pleasures.

One iftose pleasures will likely be “basking in the glory of a great nation”, this is were the lines between left and right blur: the left will find part of their desired glory in economic power (which led to Stalin’s Gulag slavery).

This is where the myth comes from that fascism means the integration of the state and the corporation: politics finds particular glory in economic power, sobusinesses get preferetial treatment. Also, because fascism is socialism, corporations were nationalized, which also fed the myth.


Charging Al Gore with attempted democide

Why hasn’t Al #Gore yet been charged with attempted democide? For his deliberately high #carbon #footprint, (limo to be driven to his private jet, owning several mansions), his only possible defense would be to claim he never believed in global #warming. No judge worth his salt would believe a word of that (given Gore’s track record as the main consistent champion of the Big Lie), and would sentence him to a fine of $1, to be paid to each one of the American people, meaning a total fine of $320mln, which he can surely afford after having coerced/bribed every government in the world to buy products/services from the companies he bought cheap stock in.

Sentencing him to a 6000 year prison sentence seems a bit pointless, because:

he’ll have died of natural causes after having served only a fraction of the time,

It only serves to enable him recommence his evil lying from behind bars, martyring him, which will lead to rioting on the streets by leftist bastards, vandalizing whatever they can, to vent their frustration with their plans having been thwarted.

He’ll once again live at the expense of the tax payer – in what way is that justice?

Any way you look at it: the Gore is gonna have to pay up: either for deceiving so many of the world’s leaders, or for attempting to murder every single one of us. (Or for financially profitting from the suffering of the world’s population).

I’m being generous here: limit the fine to each of the 320mln Americans. There’s no need to pay each one of the 7 bln world citizens, given that paying a mere $0.01 to each of his worldwide victims would cost him $70mln, which is beyond his capacity to pay. Unlike prison sentences, this would deter him from re-engaging in his hideous practices, since he’d not have the money to do that.

In the style of Vincent Bugliosi’s “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder”.

That oughtta teach the bastards a lesson, and hopefully inspire people around the world to press charges against their national politicians, thus purging the system’s evil components (which, given the nature of government, would likely empty the entire system.)

Because: I don’t know about you, but I’m quite scared of governments which have turned against the people, not just the officially communist ones, but all of them (including the unofficially #communist ones). According to professor Paul Gottfried, one aspect of Mussolini’s fascist government was, that they considered the state as a sentient being. which is really what they all do, and they all did (going back at least as far as the USSR’s #Gulag, but really any despot that introduced a secret police, to fight anyone of the citizens that thought government should serve them, instead of vice versa). I won’t expect #AntiFa to protest against that.

No, Hitler wasn’t a fascist (& Stalin)

#Hitler was a socialist, although socialism was international and the National Socialist Hitler wasn’t internationally minded – as witnessed by his attempting to bring so many nations under the umbrella of one single nation, the third Reich. That he was in charge of (of course, who else?)
Also, he was quite the racist (though perhaps he wasn’t, deep down inside; maybe he only used persecution of Unermenschen as a tool for getting elected. – divide and conquer. He was callous, in his readiness to sacrifice other people’s lives to make his own happy dream true. And Mussolini’s party even had a few jewish members. Black leaders were very positive about him (until the invasion of Ethiopia, of course.)
But Stalin was quite fascistic, though: one of the features of fascism was that the state was considered a sentient being in its own right. Stalin famously (notoriously) instated the Gulag, the Main Directorate of Corrective labour camps.
Good, grief! Let that sink in for a bit: the state deigns to reeducate (correct) the people! The people it is entirely dependent upon for its mere existence!

AntiFa breeds its own reason d’être

Since Fascism originated in reaction to revolutionary socialism, and #AntiFas are left-wingers trying to impose their will on society (as the left-wing tends to do) (how’s that not revolutionary?), anyone who opposes them is by their definition a fascist. (Helped by the fact that fascists are the very definition of evil, according to the hysterics of AntiFa, and who’d disagree with them?) And because it is possible to fit every human being in the one-dimensional political spectrum of left-right: everyone who is against AntiFa is right-wing.
Any which way you look at it: AntiFa are howler monkeys.

Also, by being that violent, they obviously exhibit fascist tendencies themselves. So being antifafa (anti-fascism fascists) they are against themselves.  That explains theirconfusion. Next time they’re on TV, keep that thought in the back of your mind, and feel the understanding creeping in. Not “understanding” as in acceptance, but rather as in identification of their motives.

Fascism = socialism

The socialist Mussolini loved what WW1 did to Italian society: it made everyone band together to fight the enemy, instead of each pursuing his or her own interests.
– aka it imposed #socialism.

Each pursuing his own interests is what makes a country of milions of individual citizens run smoothly, each citizen adapting to his own surroundings and finding ways to make do as best as they can.

– Adam Smith wrote something along these lines (not quoting verbatim):

“It isn’t from their benevolence that we expect the baker to supply us with bread and the farmer with vegetables, it is their own care for their own self-interests that makes them want to satisfy our needs to enable them to satisfy their own needs.”

Leaving aside that socialism depends on central planning to have everyone’s needs met, which can’t be planned (as proven by the evils of the USSR) meaning the smooth system of every citizen causing their own needs to be met, can’t exist in socialism, denying some the possibility of meeting their own needs. Central planning is chunky & bumpy, not smooth.

Homo homini lupus est 2: Gulag 1

I just got back from the Resistance Museum in Amsterdam (, they have a very good exposition, today there was also a special feature on The Gulag.
This inspired me to write a bit more on “Homo Homini Lupus Est”, Hobbes’s phrase meaning that “man is a wolf to his fellow man”. Especially so, when given power over said fellow man. There were some video segments of a documentary about the Gulag.
One of those segments, they portrayed a Russian classroom when the subject of the Gulag was brought up. One of the pupils was asked: “Was the terror and murder of millions worth the economic benefits the Gulag-system, yielded?” And the boy actually weighed the pros and cons!
Let me first say that the economic benefits were not all so great: Stalin wanted a railway through Siberia: after several tens of thousands had perished there, Stalin died, the project was halted and never resumed. But the project would never yield a return on investment. It’s just that everyone was too scared of Stalin to stop his preposterously grandioze plan.
I would answer the question as follows: “Who is supposed to benefit from the economic development? The glorious leader? Or the population.? (By whose grace the self-deluding despot’s job exists at all?)”