Return of fascism?

[balanbalis]

I’m too lazy to double check sources but off the top of my head I’m using information found in Umberto Eco’s Ur-Fascism and Payne’s History of Fascism.

Fascist parallels in the West to 1900s Europe

1) Rejection of modernity
Historically: Rejection of the rationalist movement spawned by the enlightenment, a want to return to the past (traditional live style)
Modern day: Rejection of feminism, ‘DEI’, ‘LGBT’, climate change etc, a want to return to the past (cottagecore, trad wife, old money, clean girl etc)

2) The hypocritical move to also want to develop quickly
Historically: The Nazi clumsy industrialisation, Italy similar
Modern day: Trumps tariffs? Ignoring climate restrictions

3) Oppression of opponent ideologies
Historically: Anti-communism, anti-liberalism, anti-capitalism etc
Modern day: Anti-communism, anti-socialism, anti-democracy (lol)

4) Expansionsm
Historically: Nazis taking Poland, general western imperialism
Modern day: Trump & Greenland, Israel & Palestine, Russia & Ukraine

5) Extreme nationalism and racism (punishment for disloyalty included)
Historically: Nazi Germany and the Holocaust
Modern day: ICE/Trump deportations, tightening borders and immigration in general

Fascist traits I DON’T see yet

1) Militarisation and Revolution — Trump is trying to make America his kingdom and failed to take the capitol just as fascist Japanese movement attempted to also take over government

2) Charismatic leaders - I’m not sure other than Trump (but I wouldn’t even count him) if anyone would qualify as a potential dictator

I know this is surface level but what do people think

 

[jusbrowsin]

Gonna read the Richard J. Evans books to see wag1

 

[The truth seeker]

More like the return of nationalism the liberal western project is coming to an end


The biggest sign of Greater Isreal being right around the corner is all these Islamic insurgents who are really controlled opposition suddenly rise to power in the Arab world


Mass immigration will turn whites into a minority in there own homeland , economy has been stagnating since 2008 , and there welfare system as economists are saying is unsustainable no wonder there turning to right wing leaders they’ve been sold out by the so called “progressives ” and neoliberals

 

[balanbalis]

Mass immigration will turn whites into a minority in there own homeland , economy has been stagnating since 2008 , and there welfare system as economists are saying is unsustainable no wonder there turning to right wing leaders they’ve been sold out by the so called “progressives ” and neoliberals

This train of thought is a product of fascism. Wanting to return to the past, blaming immigrants trying to survive before they blame class system.

The greatest enemy of the working class white is the ruling class white. The ruling class don’t care about immigration, Trump’s rule has been inviting more Indians to come work in good positions in the USA. What they do care about is being in control, and getting rid of working class immigrants who they see as a removable drain on their government. If they could deport their own citizens

The level of immigrants has become overly exaggerated to the point where arguing about a ‘replacement theory’ is embarrassing.

A lot of this — especially the degrading of the welfare state — is simply capitalistic tactic to further privatise economies until the average worker can’t afford to take their children to school or turn the heater on at night. Businesses don’t care about the consumer, price will soar higher than before and they already have for many industries

The turn towards right wing leaders is a tale as old as time. And one key fact is that the right wing party is never popular enough to legitimately become the only ruling party, there is always a resurrection — a revolution. Keep an eye on Trump before he attempts to take Capitol again

Furthermore, the entire West isn’t becoming right wing because people truly blame immigrants and the welfare state. A lot of the working class has been groomed to think this way.

Just as the Trump supporters will soon come to understand, they voted for someone based on ideas that they do not truly understand. They vote because society tells them to and do not try think for themselves

 

[The truth seeker]

I’m too lazy to double check sources but off the top of my head I’m using information found in Umberto Eco’s Ur-Fascism and Payne’s History of Fascism.

Fascist parallels in the West to 1900s Europe

1) Rejection of modernity
Historically: Rejection of the rationalist movement spawned by the enlightenment, a want to return to the past (traditional live style)
Modern day: Rejection of feminism, ‘DEI’, ‘LGBT’, climate change etc, a want to return to the past (cottagecore, trad wife, old money, clean girl etc)

2) The hypocritical move to also want to develop quickly
Historically: The Nazi clumsy industrialisation, Italy similar
Modern day: Trumps tariffs? Ignoring climate restrictions

3) Oppression of opponent ideologies
Historically: Anti-communism, anti-liberalism, anti-capitalism etc
Modern day: Anti-communism, anti-socialism, anti-democracy (lol)

4) Expansionsm
Historically: Nazis taking Poland, general western imperialism
Modern day: Trump & Greenland, Israel & Palestine, Russia & Ukraine

Economic devlopment in Russia (shock therapy )failed miserably Jeffrey Sachs’s should be ashamed his action led to the rise of Putin and the Russian oligarchy

USA has always been an extremely raicict country (Jim Crow slavery ,KKKetc) I don’t see the rest of the west being obsessed with race that Maurice but then again when people feel like there being replaced and are losing there national identity they tend to turn to facisam


Neoliberals and peoelel who follow the Austrian school of economic hate any sort of govemrnt interference in the economy that includes climate change restrictions look at cananda and how furious people are at the climate tax


2008 financial crisis was a truing point the austerity measures imposed in The EU and the collapse in oil prices in 2014 are partly why Europe and Canada are economically stagnating and are facing a decline in living standards obviously when you see all these new immigrants showing up by the hundreds of thousands you’ll blame them for the country’s issues



Despite the trend of westernization and Americanization as a result of Hollywood , internet , and social media around the world we are witnessing an era of de secularization Islamists are rising and muslims will soon be the global majority faith by a huge margin and young men in the west are totally anti feminist to the core



Major African economics look like there about to implode and living standards are diminishing (Ethiopia , Kenya ,Nigeria ) these countries have a high birth rate and tens on millions of citizens with the massive droughts that will soon hit the continent I’m predicting the biggest refugee crisis of the century if these people flood Europe before the right wing parties come to power the continent will without a doubt be majority Muslim and African

 

[cunug3aad]

Despite the trend of westernization and Americanization as a result of Hollywood , internet , and social media around the world we are witnessing an era of de secularization Islamists are rising and muslims will soon be the global majority faith by a huge margin and young men in the west are totally anti feminist to the core

Not necessarily a huge margin but i agree that there are already more muslims than christians, because a lot more christians don't practice properly their religion unlike muslims, islamist forces will not be the reason for this overtake it is always Birth Rates
Also i dont even know what feminism or anti feminism means anymore its been warped so much by both sides, Usa needs to split to 2 countries cos these utes cant stand each other

Major African economics look like there about to implode and living standards are diminishing (Ethiopia , Kenya ,Nigeria ) these countries have a high birth rate and tens on millions of citizens with the massive droughts that will soon hit the continent I’m predicting the biggest refugee crisis of the century if these people flood Europe before the right wing parties come to power the continent will without a doubt be majority Muslim and African

The west is not gonna take in as much refugees as it used to, theres more anti migrant sentiment than in the 80s and 90s, also its not as easy as print a passport in the suuq and fly as a fake family to the west, the refugees won't end up with a good life they will just die trying to get there instead

 

[NordicSomali]

I can see right parties gaining more and more political power because immigrants are continuously crossing the border.

 

[OOScoe]

My take.

They're testing waters & biding time to see what sticks & what doesn't

Boogeyman Tactics: ( us... "YT America" vs Them "Colored Undesirables")

Hispanics are 1st on the chopping block because they're the easiest to manufacture consent against (migration rhetoric)

Next?..
Maybe anti establishment journalist/politicians

Or maybe even us.
They're already attempting to loophole things like birthright citizenship.
So if that gets axxed shit gon get grimey.

In regards to us.
We might be okay until they aim their propaganda machine back towards Africa.

As fragmented as we are as a people,
once that avenue opens - make no mistake they're gonna start shaking us down too & we gon find out 1st hand WHY we all we got!

For all the dumb niggas here that believe ur exceptional enough that maybe they'll make u an honorary house nigga.. A super coon!

Imagine being bombarded with daily subliminal & plain talk rhetoric insinuating ur inferior on a national level! & not being able to pushback because they gon criminalize yo black ass.
That's already the sentimental undertone regarding us in this society.

When the African games begin - Multiply their usual BS x100.
If the continent starts to turn up, better believe the pinks will do the same - ON US



Mf's forgot how Liberia became Liberia!

Buh buh buh, muh rights! & american citizenship

 

[OOScoe]

My take.

They're testing waters & biding time to see what sticks & what doesn't

Boogeyman Tactics: ( us... "YT America" vs Them "Colored Undesirables")

Hispanics are 1st on the chopping block because they're the easiest to manufacture consent against (migration rhetoric)

Next?..
Maybe anti establishment journalist/politicians

Or maybe even us.
They're already attempting to loophole things like birthright citizenship.
So if that gets axxed shit gon get grimey.

In regards to us.
We might be okay until they aim their propaganda machine back towards Africa.

As fragmented as we are as a people,
once that avenue opens - make no mistake they're gonna start shaking us down too & we gon find out 1st hand WHY we all we got!

For all the dumb niggas here that believe ur exceptional enough that maybe they'll make u an honorary house nigga.. A super coon!

Imagine being bombarded with daily subliminal & plain talk rhetoric insinuating ur inferior on a national level! & not being able to pushback because they gon criminalize yo black ass.
That's already the sentimental undertone regarding us in this society.

When the African games begin - Multiply their usual BS x100.
If the continent starts to turn up, better believe the pinks will do the same - ON US



Mf's forgot how Liberia became Liberia!View attachment 359523

Buh buh buh, muh rights! & american citizenship View attachment 359525View attachment 359526

 

[The alchemist]

Fascism is modernity. Hitler's Germany was the most advanced country on the planet at the time. Those people were not traditionalists at all, despite seeing traditionalist ideals as a way to ground their native sentiments for their ethnocentric racialism.

Fascism only came about through the modern nation state, not traditional forces. Nazis are not traditional people.

A lot of the ideas that fueled fascism were actually colonial-era, enlightenment-influenced liberals. The colonialist that Hitler was a big fan of, who arranged people into categories influenced by Social Darwinism, were liberals. But that liberalism was exclusive to whom? "Civilized Western Europeans."

Fascism is a component of Western "modernity" gone to one extreme. The reason why the Germans could do so much harm to the Jews because they systematized things in a very scientific way. So the mass killings were a function of a systemic infrastructure.

Everything I say here is backed by scholarship, by the way. In fact, a Jewish scholar had made that claim, and here is my understanding of it from an older post:

"It came from the bureaucratic, scientific, social-engineering, and technological systematization of society, which placed the human within that context, not outside it as something special. In fact, that's why all that infrastructure was as if they were moving stuff logistically, through an optimized efficient factory. Placing animals, minerals, or whatever goods in those systems, would suddenly look like the best technology and be of good use for humanity, using the same pervasive calculative principles. But what came with that stuff, was a materialistic reductionist view of the human condition of a great cynical filter, where the human status devalued. That's why processing people to be killed was actually just a natural part of that society that placed "things" and the study of it above humans, even putting humans as just among the things. To even go further with the insight, making the human working the system, just a function of the system too, the person primed to think and act machine-like for professionalism, productivity, and the like."

That is basically my summary and personal framing of the work of Zygmunt Bauman, a Polish-Jewish sociologist and philosopher who wrote the book 'Modernity and the Holocaust' (1989).

As such, fascism is modernity. Modernity is not just progressive liberalism. Remember, Liberalism was always highly racist. I was going to post a long post about and I might as well just drop it whenever. Because a lot of people don't understand that much of what they think of liberalism is a reflection of what liberals say and not how it actually is, which one can easily find through their history and salient, continual activities.

 

[Taintedlove]

My take.

They're testing waters & biding time to see what sticks & what doesn't

Boogeyman Tactics: ( us... "YT America" vs Them "Colored Undesirables")

Hispanics are 1st on the chopping block because they're the easiest to manufacture consent against (migration rhetoric)

Next?..
Maybe anti establishment journalist/politicians

Or maybe even us.
They're already attempting to loophole things like birthright citizenship.
So if that gets axxed shit gon get grimey.

In regards to us.
We might be okay until they aim their propaganda machine back towards Africa.

As fragmented as we are as a people,
once that avenue opens - make no mistake they're gonna start shaking us down too & we gon find out 1st hand WHY we all we got!

For all the dumb niggas here that believe ur exceptional enough that maybe they'll make u an honorary house nigga.. A super coon!

Imagine being bombarded with daily subliminal & plain talk rhetoric insinuating ur inferior on a national level! & not being able to pushback because they gon criminalize yo black ass.
That's already the sentimental undertone regarding us in this society.

When the African games begin - Multiply their usual BS x100.
If the continent starts to turn up, better believe the pinks will do the same - ON US



Mf's forgot how Liberia became Liberia!View attachment 359523

Buh buh buh, muh rights! & american citizenship View attachment 359525View attachment 359526

The Liberia project was largely a failed one, just like the entire back-to-africa movement. Deporting black Americans is a sailed ship. They're already weaponising black Americans against Hispanic Americans with his "they're taking black jobs" statement

 

[balanbalis]

Fascism is modernity. Hitler's Germany was the most advanced country on the planet at the time. Those people were not traditionalists at all, despite seeing traditionalist ideals as a way to ground their native sentiments for their ethnocentric racialism.

Fascism only came about through the modern nation state, not traditional forces. Nazis are not traditional people.

A lot of the ideas that fueled fascism were actually colonial-era, enlightenment-influenced liberals. The colonialist that Hitler was a big fan of, who arranged people into categories influenced by Social Darwinism, were liberals. But that liberalism was exclusive to whom? "Civilized Western Europeans."

Fascism is a component of Western "modernity" gone to one extreme. The reason why the Germans could do so much harm to the Jews because they systematized things in a very scientific way. So the mass killings were a function of a systemic infrastructure.

Everything I say here is backed by scholarship, by the way. In fact, a Jewish scholar had made that claim, and here is my understanding of it from an older post:

"It came from the bureaucratic, scientific, social-engineering, and technological systematization of society, which placed the human within that context, not outside it as something special. In fact, that's why all that infrastructure was as if they were moving stuff logistically, through an optimized efficient factory. Placing animals, minerals, or whatever goods in those systems, would suddenly look like the best technology and be of good use for humanity, using the same pervasive calculative principles. But what came with that stuff, was a materialistic reductionist view of the human condition of a great cynical filter, where the human status devalued. That's why processing people to be killed was actually just a natural part of that society that placed "things" and the study of it above humans, even putting humans as just among the things. To even go further with the insight, making the human working the system, just a function of the system too, the person primed to think and act machine-like for professionalism, productivity, and the like."

That is basically my summary and personal framing of the work of Zygmunt Bauman, a Polish-Jewish sociologist and philosopher who wrote the book 'Modernity and the Holocaust' (1989).

As such, fascism is modernity. Modernity is not just progressive liberalism. Remember, Liberalism was always highly racist. I was going to post a long post about and I might as well just drop it whenever. Because a lot of people don't understand that much of what they think of liberalism is a reflection of what liberals say and not how it actually is, which one can easily find through their history and salient, continual activities.

Economists have noted how clumsy and in efficient Hitler’s economy was. Why? Because one of the key aspects of fascism is being contradictory.

Hitler DID want to return to tradition - house wife, 5 kids, cottage and growing your own crops. At the same time they wanted to revolutionise and beat other countries that were also industrialising at the same time. This led to the inhumane experiments on Jewish prisoners during the holocaust.

I do agree with the points you make, they are more than valid alternative arguements HOWEVER other countries such as Japan did almost become fascist because of the same reasons.

As mentioned before, fascism is contradictory:
So fascist regimes want to return to the perfect past before immigration and when people grew crops BUT they also want to modernise industrialise and become a superpower consuming all nearby countries.
Fascist regimes reject all other ideologies such as liberalism communism and socialism BUT they typically ally with right wing movements and parties (as Hitler did to secure a majority in government) why? Because they had closer beliefs and because conservatism (aka returning to the past) is a right wing ideology

 

[The truth seeker]

The Liberia project was largely a failed one, just like the entire back-to-africa movement. Deporting black Americans is a sailed ship. They're already weaponising black Americans against Hispanic Americans with his "they're taking black jobs" statement

Abraham Lincoln wanted to send blacks to the American vassal known as Panama


Hispanics have cali on lock they taking over the southwest San Diego home prices are outrageous and the job market is shit in high school in the parking lot there would always be a fight between a group of AAs and Latinos

Hispanics used to be solid democrat votes everyone in 2011 thought a republican would never be elected president but through genius messaging and democrat incompetence they became swing voters

 

[The truth seeker]

I can see right parties gaining more and more political power because immigrants are continuously crossing the border.

Nobody wants to be a minority in there own homeland the people on this forum need to get this through there thick heads

 

[The alchemist]

Economists have noted how clumsy and in efficient Hitler’s economy was. Why? Because one of the key aspects of fascism is being contradictory.

Hitler DID want to return to tradition - house wife, 5 kids, cottage and growing your own crops. At the same time they wanted to revolutionise and beat other countries that were also industrialising at the same time. This led to the inhumane experiments on Jewish prisoners during the holocaust.

I do agree with the points you make, they are more than valid alternative arguements HOWEVER other countries such as Japan did almost become fascist because of the same reasons.

As mentioned before, fascism is contradictory:
So fascist regimes want to return to the perfect past before immigration and when people grew crops BUT they also want to modernise industrialise and become a superpower consuming all nearby countries.
Fascist regimes reject all other ideologies such as liberalism communism and socialism BUT they typically ally with right wing movements and parties (as Hitler did to secure a majority in government) why? Because they had closer beliefs and because conservatism (aka returning to the past) is a right wing ideology

Hitler loved modernity. If you read Mein Kampf, he exalts liberal institutions to a disproportionate level. The guy loved that stuff, be he was a racist who only wanted to function for his race and wanted such systems only to be of the DNA of German development, not adopt other symbols of other people's influence.

Again, you have to remember the prescriptive reasons they wanted 5 children. It was to demographically grow, not as much in reverse to older ways. Recall what I said, an appeal to traditionalism for fascism is to redirect to nativist sentiments that are racial and cultural. It is not to go back in time when life was simple. That is just not true.

Other fascist systems, Italy and Japan, were very advanced, and they were systemic in that same sense. Their industrial and organizational capacity, coupled with human capital, was advanced, and they worked inexorably to propel that drive further. Well, for Italy, it was the imperial type bureaucracy and infrastructure, and political woodworks rather than industry.

All these systems were drawn out of modernity, not of traditionalism. The future they wanted was an expansion of that, not a reversion. If people paint an archetype of an ideal person, that is not necessarily how that country wants to be, but it represents a reminder of what they think is important. Sort of a reminder of their identity, not how they view ideal life.

If you know Hitler's view, he was no different than a liberal man in the 1800s. This is the advanced understanding you get when you read European history. Fascism rejected the (then) current liberal political will, but fascism is really of a liberal soil that goes to the extreme, reacts to certain aspects within it (the liberalism of Hitler's day), and tries to separate itself as something distinct. But when you read Hitler, that guy was giving much glory to the pre-fascist Germany and Austria (the one he grew up with) and all their liberal structures and institutions. Let me quote:

"The pattern for this corporate body was obviously that which existed in England, the land of classic democracy. The whole of that excellent organization was bodily transferred to Austria with as little alteration as possible. As the Austrian counterpart to the British two-chamber system a Chamber of Deputies and a House of Lords (Herrenhaus) were established in Vienna. The Houses themselves, considered as buildings were somewhat different. When Barry built his palaces, or, as we say the Houses of Parliament, on the shore of the Thames, he could look to the history of the British Empire for the inspiration of his work. In that history he found sufficient material to fill and decorate the 1,200 niches, brackets, and pillars of his magnificent edifice. His statues and paintings made the House of Lords and the House of Commons temples dedicated to the glory of the nation."

Do you know why he called this excellent, yet did not want it? He wanted to build it in a German way. So nativist but not really repelled by its so-called glory. Fascist are sucker for these things. They don't like the simple. The simple is, in their mind, primitive. They're advanced and the better race, and need to prove it in their advanced processes. This is quintessential in their thinking. They have little respect for hunter-gatherers.

Also, I think I need to make something very clear for the readers. Liberalism is not the narrow liberalism that people think of, which in academic circles is better defined as progressive Liberalism. Liberalism is a much broader system. You see, every Western conservative who votes right, such as Trump, and frankly every other populist and bureaucratic right-leaning individual, is "Classical Liberal." Hitler was, in true respect, a classical Liberal who was extreme. That is all. This is actually something you find out when you do a deeper dive than read the superficial texts that make the reductive and misleading claims that Fascism and Liberalism are two entirely separate things. They are not.

Hitler echoed 19th-century liberalism. He was a big fan of those people, he was of the same mind and did not like the progressive aspects and the "oper society" liberal kind. Though he obsessed about the so-called enlightenment values about advancement, civilizational build based on proper values, even "progress" and human excellence. He was much fan of many things of enlightenment. He was an old liberal. Racism and a colonial mindset were essential for this, and so were the earlier liberals.

All the people who traveled to the Somali region were racist but also very liberal. Hitler agrees with them to 90%. The rest is his obsession with how all of that needed to be done in a German way. And of course, more imperial. Hitler was a big-time imperialist, and it ran through his every other thought.

So I disagree with you that fascism is a figment of people's contradictory dualism. It is the ones who don't understand it and its roots that think so because they have latched themselves to often often-repeated, non-academic, mythologized version of fascism. Often, this comes from liberals themselves, who are uncomfortable admitting that fascism is just their filth. This is very easy to point out. Just 80 years before WW2, much of Liberal Europe was very similar to the Hitlerian worldview. Fascism grew out of the European variation of thinking. It was never a fresh beginning, and neither was it a complete contradiction. That is a lie.

What the thing is, Hitler was really not left or right, either. What he believed was very mixed and had several extremes. Certain things were very much divorced from a traditionalist sense. He loved the hyper-modern industrialization that traditionalists hated, but he was not a materialist. He was a very structuralist and pragmatic institutionalist. At the same time, he was not a big fan of capitalism in the American way. Only as far as it was tailored and directed for the German people and their betterment and benefit.

The technology and bureaucracy of Hitler's Germany were the best in the world. Their level of systemic productivity was unmatched. Extremely modern and something a real traditionalist would barf at. I promise you, the Unamboer would not find peace with Hitler's vision.

Hitler's worldview was essentially a re-interpretation of the European thinking of where things should be headed. It was never divorced from that; it was very European, very enlightening in many ways, and almost superimposed on the liberal thinking of the people prior to his time.

Honestly, I am giving you some game that your teachers probably don't have the depth to gather because a lot of Westerners peddle information without understanding anything. Much of what they believe further influences their opinions they shape around a matter. It's crucial for classical and progressive liberals to say, fascism is a complete rejection and anti liberalism and the Enlightenment. This is not true. Fascism might have an issue with the parliamentary liberalist classical idea, but not with liberalism overall. They are more expansionist than conservatives. A lot of fascists have issues with conservatives and traditionalists because those groups are either very much in support of the status quo, or they want to change in another direction.

This is something I arrived at personally. But I am pretty sure you can find top scholars who say this because it is apparent when you read beyond Wikipedia or a textbook.

Fascism was an experimental resourcefulness with a sense of aesthetic appeal of existing components, including a compulsion of political actionism. When Hitler came, he appealed to the people more than requiring them to change their appeals. For example, he conformed to them by trying to propagandize economic productivity. He did not totally define a new governmental system, but he tightened the rope of executive power and gave himself more power while actually making the bureaucratic system that he just placed himself in, more efficient. This is not someone who comes to uproot everything. Much of what he did was to work on the systems that already existed and direct them differently.

 

[The alchemist]

....

Marxists, on the other hand, totally uprooted the Tsar elites and created something completely different. Stalin's regime had no likeness to what existed before the Bolsheviks came to the scene. Hitler jumped in as a politician and changed things from within. There is a continuity there that makes Europeans uncomfortable. Why? Because it says a lot about liberal modernity, doesn't it? Liberals need to frame fascism as a completely separate thing for many reasons, some of which I have mentioned. Since it was the boogeyman, he cannot be like us. When in reality, he grew up in their house. He hung around them. He learned, took notes, and now wants a change using the same vernacular, while you pretend he speaks a separate language.

 

[Taintedlove]

Nobody wants to be a minority in there own homeland the people on this forum need to get this through there thick heads

I think you need stop playing here for cadaans who's "homeland" is in Europe, not north america.

 

[The truth seeker]

I think you need stop playing here for cadaans who's "homeland" is in Europe, not north america.

I was talking about Europe naturally the native group will feel resentment about the fact that there becoming a minority

Even in North America people are upset about mass immigration especially in Canada where they have taken in way to much and don’t have enough houses nor the adequate infrastructure to support this massive population increase

 

[Keep it a boqol]

Fascism and socialism, as they emerged in the 20th century, were in part reactions to economic and social instability. In both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, extreme economic hardship, Germany’s post-WWI depression and hyperinflation, and Russia’s post-tsarist collapse and civil war, created fertile ground for radical ideologies. The Nazis pursued a fascist, nationalist, and authoritarian path, while the Soviets embraced Marxist socialism, aiming for a classless, state-controlled economy.

 

[The truth seeker]

Facism and Socialism are reactions to economic conditions. Both Nazi Germany and the soviets went their respective economic routes due to the piss poor conditions their nations were in at the time.

Weimar Germany was debt trapped ,was facing hyperinflation inflation and they still felt humiliation from the defeat of World War One no shit they turned to Hitler


liberal politicians in the west use “nazis ”as an excuse to smear anyone who does agree with there views remember the freedom convoy those truckers found out the hard away what that the “humanitarian ”Justin and does says are tow different things