masquenox
@masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Atheism is the opiate of the insufferable.
That is all.
- Comment on Why do conservatives define being fascist solely as "being violent?" 44 minutes ago:
If they a re not conservative what are they?
What they are in reality is an extremist, fundamentalist and far-right strain of liberal. Liberalism has always really just been the fig-leaf ideology behind which capitalism hides… but these people calling themselves “conservatives” are really just capitalists that don’t see the need to bother with a fig-leaf at all. Simply consider the behaviour of people like Trump, Musk and all the other billionaires that barely hide their contempt for the working class. They are not true fascists, but I don’t see a problem with people calling them that - they certainly would like to be true fascists but lack the connection to the working class to actually do that like Hitler or Mussolini did. They are just extremely spoilt rich people living in bubbles of privilege… unlike the fascists of old.
Conservatism itself is essentially a dead ideology - the conservatives of Abraham Lincoln’s time would sound like radical leftists in comparison to the people using that label today.
- Comment on Why do conservatives define being fascist solely as "being violent?" 8 hours ago:
Firstly - there is no workable “definition” of fascism that’s remotely useful. Not yet, anyway. It probably has something to do with the fact that fascism isn’t so much an ideology but more a function within the modern liberal nation state - ie, the people who perform the violent repression for the benefit of the rich elites at the top. Sometimes, the elites become so frightened that they will literally hand the very state over to these people in it’s entirety - as happened in Germany and Italy (and other places).
Secondly - these people calling themselves “conservatives” and/or “libertarians” don’t actually care much about labels. The fact that they actually call themselves “conservatives” (essentially a dead ideology they wouldn’t recognise if it bit them on their behinds) and “libertarians” (a term that originally described anarchist and other libertarian socialists) without having the foggiest clue what those terms really mean is a clue. The only thing they understand is that it’s a term they can throw at any people pushing back against their vile (and often fascist or fascist-adjacent) narratives.
That’s pretty much it.