frame

Fascism is good

Opening Argument

Fascism in history may have been bad due to racism, and intolerance, but the fundamental principles of fascism aren't evil. Capitalism and Socialism both have their strengths and weaknesses. Fascism combines their strengths. 

Persuade me why fascism is bad. 
yolostideaarongMax_Air29northsouthkoreacomey_testifySilverishGoldNovaGhosty
  1. Is fascism generally bad?

    25 votes
    1. Yes
      56.00%
    2. No
      44.00%
«1

Status: Open Debate


Arguments

  • Fascism is not good due to its horrible acts in history such as World War Two and the Holocaust which killed millions of Jews and people. The from of government was not successful in many ways in Nazi Germany, Germany, etc.
    Max_Air29George_HorseMarcusTulliusCiceroSilverishGoldNovaGhosty
  • FascismFascism 230 Pts
    @yolostide Every type of government and country had its fair share of horrible acts in history. It doesn't make their fundamental theories evil. It is not required that fascist countries have to kill millions of Jews. 

    The Roman Empire had a type of fascist government. It was successful. 
    Max_Air29

  • loading...


  • The Roman Empire was not completely successful and that is proven due to its span not being around now. Nazi Germany was under fascist rule during modern times and proves that it is not successful for the past, modern, or future globes.
    George_HorseMarcusTulliusCicero
  • Fascism said:
    @yolostide Every type of government and country had its fair share of horrible acts in history. It doesn't make their fundamental theories evil. It is not required that fascist countries have to kill millions of Jews. 

    The Roman Empire had a type of fascist government. It was successful. 
    No, it was not. Rome fell.

    Before the dictators of Rome appeared, Rome was a republic. That is what built the greatness of Rome. It was so successful it took several dictators to destroy it.

    BaconToes
  • Fascism can only be implemented through dictators and oligarchies. It is a form of theft of property by the government. It has never worked. People don't like to have control of their property and labor stolen from them. It always turns brutal to any dissidents that want to speak out.


    northsouthkoreaBaconToes
  • FascismFascism 230 Pts
    There is an end to everything. That doesn't mean it isn't successful. Martin Luther King is dead, but successful because he accomplished something. The roman empire conquered a large amount of the world, and spread its technology and ideas around. It accomplished an aim or a purpose. That is what makes it successful. If something isn't successful because it ended, then everything is unsuccessful, or bound to be unsuccessful. @Nightwing @Max_Air29

    It took 20 countries and an idiotic leader to take down Nazi Germany. If that isn't the case, who knows what a fascist nation can accomplish. By the way, I don't support Nazism. Nazism is racist, and doesn't represent all of fascism. 

    The timeline of Rome:
    http://www.softschools.com/timelines/roman_empire/timeline_9/
    Both the republic and the dictators made mistakes. The dictatorship in Rome lasted longer than the republic. The dictatorship continued the Roman empire with the Byzantine Empire, but everything is bound to fall eventually. Plus what your argument implies here is that the republic was making Rome great, but right after the dictators came everything went downhill. Rome was developed by the dictators as well, although I agree, it was a dictator which made it fall in the end. However, my next argument proves that fascist can be a republic anyways. 

    Fascism can't "only be implemented through dictators and oligarchies." There are many types of fascism, some which are democratic. Even during world war II, there were fascist parties who supported democracy, including some in fascist Italy. 

    Fascism doesn't steal property from anyone. It implements a command economy. 
    BaconToes
  • VaulkVaulk 288 Pts
    edited October 1

    The defining characteristics of fascism are that is it is authoritarian, nationalist, and anti-rationalist. As an authoritarian system it is opposed to individual rights and of course...personal worth. The individual only exists to serve the powers that be and this is the reigning symbol, one straw can crack and breaks easily but a hay bale is strong. Instead of giving power to the people, to help each person reach excellence, fascism makes the individual a faceless member of a mob.

    Except for the Great Leader...of course.  Fascism is based on a dark romanticism. While romanticism has its bright side, it can also be abused to turn people against rationality, to make them think that reason or logic is unnecessary rather than helping them to see that reason is necessary but not sufficient. Fascism creates a romantic tale of a people struggling against a foe; at their head, a Great Leader who embodies the divine order of the cosmos, a divine order than has been disturbed but will now be set straight. The allure of fascism is that you, friend, can be part of that legendary struggle!  Join our Great Leader, let some of his cosmic energy fill you up!

    The problem here is that this struggle requires an enemy. As a nationalist system fascism will always include some people and exclude the rest, and those excluded are the enemies. The Italian Fascists and the Nazis used ethnic nationalism, racism, and antisemitism to do the including and excluding, but really any us-versus-them dynamic will do.

    Fascism seeks the total mobilization of society under that Great Leader — nothing held back, everything devoted to the cause. Anything less might leave space for reason to spring up; a constant state of crisis keeps the rational faculties submerged. And so the fascist state must continually find enemies to fight. It can never be at peace.

    And that is why even if you don’t care about individual rights, even if you don’t care about human rights or democracy or egalitarianism or rationality or any of the other gifts of Athena that we have neglected so badly, fascism still fails. A fascist state will eventually be forced to make enemies out of some part of itself — to eat itself. It cannot last. But it can certainly do a lot of damage before it falls apart.


    agsrMissDMeanorGhosty
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • FascismFascism 230 Pts
    edited October 2
    @Vaulk
    "The defining characteristics of fascism are that is it is authoritarian, nationalist, and anti-rationalist. As an authoritarian system it is opposed to individual rights and of course...personal worth. The individual only exists to serve the powers that be and this is the reigning symbol, one straw can crack and breaks easily but a hay bale is strong. Instead of giving power to the people, to help each person reach excellence, fascism makes the individual a faceless member of a mob." 

    Just because a government is authoritarian doesn't mean it is opposed to individual rights and personal worth. Extensive authoritarianism is bad, however, not all fascist governments have this characteristic. The authoritarianism is to keep businesses and the economy in check. It isn't to regulate individual behaviour. Nazi Germany doesn't represent all fascism. Having unity doesn't mean making everyone a faceless member of a mob. It means cooperating and working together to achieve a common goal. Giving power to the people has obviously not helped each person reach excellence. Every class is fighting for itself in this world. Fascism allows people to have personal property unlike socialism, but also doesn't give all the power to the upper class. Fascism suppresses businesses that harm the lower classes, and keep the businesses that support the economy in power. 
    There is even a theory that if the American government suppressed businesses that supported Nazi Germany by giving it oil, Nazi Germany might not have even had enough oil to drag out the war to the extent it had done so. I don't know if the theory is completely accurate, but a fascist government in place of the American government would never have let that happen. This isn't facelessness. It is unity. 

    "Except for the Great Leader...of course.  Fascism is based on a dark romanticism. While romanticism has its bright side, it can also be abused to turn people against rationality, to make them think that reason or logic is unnecessary rather than helping them to see that reason is necessary but not sufficient. Fascism creates a romantic tale of a people struggling against a foe; at their head, a Great Leader who embodies the divine order of the cosmos, a divine order than has been disturbed but will now be set straight. The allure of fascism is that you, friend, can be part of that legendary struggle!  Join our Great Leader, let some of his cosmic energy fill you up!" 

    This describes the process which ww2 fascists used to become dictators. Doesn't represent fascism, and once again, unity isn't like being in a faceless mob. 

    "The problem here is that this struggle requires an enemy. As a nationalist system fascism will always include some people and exclude the rest, and those excluded are the enemies. The Italian Fascists and the Nazis used ethnic nationalism, racism, and antisemitism to do the including and excluding, but really any us-versus-them dynamic will do.
    Fascism seeks the total mobilization of society under that Great Leader — nothing held back, everything devoted to the cause. Anything less might leave space for reason to spring up; a constant state of crisis keeps the rational faculties submerged. And so the fascist state must continually find enemies to fight. It can never be at peace.
    And that is why even if you don’t care about individual rights, even if you don’t care about human rights or democracy or egalitarianism or rationality or any of the other gifts of Athena that we have neglected so badly, fascism still fails. A fascist state will eventually be forced to make enemies out of some part of itself — to eat itself. It cannot last. But it can certainly do a lot of damage before it falls apart."

    This is plain false. Fascism doesn't need an enemy to fight. It needs a to goal achieve. This is because it has a command economy. Normal capitalism sort of just develops on its own, but a command economy required planning, which in turn, requires a goal. This is where unity comes in. If everyone is just trying to make profits, this goal will never be achieved. 

    When trying to refute fascism, don't look at one particular type of fascism. In this case you only described ww2 fascism. The myth that all fascism is anti rational, and constantly needs an enemy is a result from the incompetent leaders such as Mussolini and Hitler. Mussolini didn't invent fascism. He merely popularized a name for it and gave it a country. 
    northsouthkoreaGhosty
  • Fascism is not good in anyway. It is responsible for the death of many innocent Jews and people.
    ErfisflatSilverishGoldNova
  • VaulkVaulk 288 Pts
    edited October 3
    @Fascism

    Look I might just be completely ignorant on the following point...but what instance of Fascism are you referencing?  You've been adamant that not all Fascism is one way or the other and that the examples I used were narrow focused upon bad instances.  So what exactly would be your prime example of a flourishing Fascist Country in today's World?
    comey_testify
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • @Vaulk , Fascism is a horrible system that is responsible for the deaths of millions of Jews and people. It has been used by Nazi Germany and Germany as well. Other countries have used it, but failed.
  • FascismFascism 230 Pts
    @northsouthkorea @comey_testify All types of governments have committed atrocities in history. The system itself isn't bad, but people who used it are bad. The fundamental rules for fascism are not inherently bad. There were countries which used fascism without failing. I've already mentioned the Roman Empire, but as I will explain in my next argument, Spain has also been successful, to a certain extent. 
  • FascismFascism 230 Pts
    edited October 4
    @Vaulk
    Fascism usually has the following characteristics: 
    Corporatism - this is the middle ground between French Integralism, where all businesses are combined into one and forced to work together, and free-market capitalism, where businesses are separate and have a mostly free economy, with some exceptions. 
    Nationalism - not necessarily racism. 
    Authoritarianism - strict government control. 
    Elements of both capitalism and socialism - both have their strengths and weaknesses. Combing their strengths is the purpose of fascism. 
    Collectivism - opposite of individualism. 
    Defined class structures - makes it easier to appeal to each group individually, and organize citizens into groups of interest. Also prevents incompetents from doing jobs they weren't trained to do. 
    Militarism - spending a lot on military 
    Freedom of speech for the educated only - prevents idiots from voting, and causing cancer. 

    I believe that collectivism should be kept at a low level, nationalism should be kept at a high level, and everything else to be at a mediocre level. 

    I don't really believe in a particular type of fascism, but my beliefs most closely associate with late 1970s falangism. This type of government supports capitalism more than socialism, monoculturalism, freedom of speech from the educated only, limited collectivism, and authoritarianism. I don't completely agree with this type of fascism, since it is an autocratic dictatorship, but it is probably the closest. In reality I believe in a collective group of fascism types. 

    Spain was the fascist country which used falangism. Early Falangism was actually a failure, but it developed and changed over the years to become an effective governing style. Spain's failing economy was brought up to compete with other European nations, before falangism ended when Franco the dictator died. This is the problem with an autocratic dictatorship, since once the dictator dies, the whole system can be destroyed or changed. 

    I wasn't necessarily defending a type of fascism. I was just defending the characteristics of fascism which I listed above, which are evident in every fascist organization, at different amounts. 
  • Fascism said:
    There is an end to everything. That doesn't mean it isn't successful. Martin Luther King is dead, but successful because he accomplished something. The roman empire conquered a large amount of the world, and spread its technology and ideas around. It accomplished an aim or a purpose. That is what makes it successful. If something isn't successful because it ended, then everything is unsuccessful, or bound to be unsuccessful. @Nightwing @Max_Air29

    It took 20 countries and an idiotic leader to take down Nazi Germany. If that isn't the case, who knows what a fascist nation can accomplish. By the way, I don't support Nazism. Nazism is racist, and doesn't represent all of fascism. 

    The timeline of Rome:
    http://www.softschools.com/timelines/roman_empire/timeline_9/
    Both the republic and the dictators made mistakes. The dictatorship in Rome lasted longer than the republic. The dictatorship continued the Roman empire with the Byzantine Empire, but everything is bound to fall eventually. Plus what your argument implies here is that the republic was making Rome great, but right after the dictators came everything went downhill. Rome was developed by the dictators as well, although I agree, it was a dictator which made it fall in the end. However, my next argument proves that fascist can be a republic anyways. 

    Fascism can't "only be implemented through dictators and oligarchies." There are many types of fascism, some which are democratic. Even during world war II, there were fascist parties who supported democracy, including some in fascist Italy. 

    Fascism doesn't steal property from anyone. It implements a command economy. 
    The only way to implement a command economy is to command the property of others. That's effectively theft.

    Rome lasted and prospered until fascism came in the form of the Roman dictators.

    Rome was a republic for almost 500 years. The rule of dictators was for less then 150 years before Rome began to suffer burnings, sackings, confiscatory taxes, and eventually its fall. I'll take the republic.

    Dictators of fascism don't suffer pretenders to the throne. Italy didn't either.

    A republic can be successful as long as the republican form of government is maintained. Once a constitution is abandoned, its all over.

  • VaulkVaulk 288 Pts
    @Fascism.

    So I must've missed it so I guess I'll re-post here: What flourishing Fascist Countries are there in existence today?  Looking for "Today", meaning: Currently. 
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • FascismFascism 230 Pts
    edited October 5
    @Vaulk There are none. No one even dares to look into a possibility of a fascist government, since they won't get support. They only look at the atrocities fascist dictators have done in the past, but they don't look at it as a possibility as a good form of government. 

    This doesn't make it a bad government form. People nowadays only study what has already been studied to look book smart in front of their friends, or gain popular support. No one is trying to try new things. Every type of government was initially formed with speculation. Leaders speculated that certain type of government would work, and tried it out. There doesn't have to be a fascist country as of now. Nowadays a politician is more likely to repeat the same mistakes the past made, instead of coming up with new solutions. I'm always glad to hear a leader or macroeconomist comes up with a new idea. 

    WW2 is relatively recent and it shows that fascism has potential, if you don't commit genocide, and don't declare war against 20 countries. Spain is even more recent at the late 1970s. 

    There are only fascist movements and organizations today. No countries. 
  • FascismFascism 230 Pts
    @Nightwing
    That isn't theft. That is called the people's entitlement to the state. If a command economy is theft, then taxation is theft, since both of them control the wealth of the citizens for the greater good. America itself has resorted to command economy during times of crisis or war: The Civil War, WW2, The Great Depression, WW1. Other countries do this as well. Germany as of now has a form of command economy, and its economy is booming. 

    I've already proven that fascism can have democracy. Also the dictatorship continued into the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine Empire is a continuation of the Roman Empire. The only difference is that they don't have Rome, so they couldn't be called the Roman Empire anymore. The Byzantine Empire flourished with dictatorship.  

    "Dictators of fascism don't suffer pretenders to the throne. Italy didn't either."
    What do you mean here? Sorry I didn't understand the point your trying to make here. 

    "A republic can be successful as long as the republican form of government is maintained. Once a constitution is abandoned, its all over."
    Agreed. The government needs rules. 
  • VaulkVaulk 288 Pts
    You know, the Swastika isn't fundamentally evil, it never was and actually never will be as the Nazis in Germany did not create the Swastika and had zero influence or impact on what it was created to be.  This being said, who here would consider flying the Swastika on their home, office or even on your car? 

    Fascism is similar in that it's not fundamentally Evil however the prominent example of Fascism in history is...well it's really bad.  So until anyone here is willing to proudly fly the Swastika...I'd contend that there's equal reason behind rejecting Fascism as well.
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • Fascism said:
    @Nightwing
    That isn't theft. That is called the people's entitlement to the state. If a command economy is theft, then taxation is theft, since both of them control the wealth of the citizens for the greater good. America itself has resorted to command economy during times of crisis or war: The Civil War, WW2, The Great Depression, WW1. Other countries do this as well. Germany as of now has a form of command economy, and its economy is booming. 

    I've already proven that fascism can have democracy. Also the dictatorship continued into the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine Empire is a continuation of the Roman Empire. The only difference is that they don't have Rome, so they couldn't be called the Roman Empire anymore. The Byzantine Empire flourished with dictatorship.  

    "Dictators of fascism don't suffer pretenders to the throne. Italy didn't either."
    What do you mean here? Sorry I didn't understand the point your trying to make here. 

    "A republic can be successful as long as the republican form of government is maintained. Once a constitution is abandoned, its all over."
    Agreed. The government needs rules. 
    It is theft. It is the taking of the control of property by force.

    Taxation can certainly be theft. It doesn't have to be.

    America's history of major wars was not a command economy. It was an economy based on producing articles of war, since that was where the market was. There have been attempts by the government of the United States to place price controls on things too. That IS fascism, and it has never worked. It always produces shortages and mismanagement of that thing. It is also illegal under the Constitution of the United States. Cities do it too with things like rent control programs. Same result.

    Democracies are destructive forms of governments. That's why the United States is not organized as one.

    Your fixation on the end of Rome is not the point. The point is that life under dictatorial Rome was miserable.

    The only form of government with 'rules' is a republic. No other form has any 'rules.'. They operate at the whim of a dictator, oligarchy, or whatever the most powerful mob is. They can do anything. No rules.

  • FascismFascism 230 Pts
    @Vaulk
    I know about the swastika. Indian culture used it as a symbol of good luck, and other good elements of life. Native Americans also used it. 

    "Fascism is similar in that it's not fundamentally Evil however the prominent example of Fascism in history is...well it's really bad.  So until anyone here is willing to proudly fly the Swastika...I'd contend that there's equal reason behind rejecting Fascism as well."

    So just because other people don't know the truth about fascism, no one should accept fascism? I don't care about other people's delicate feelings. The truth doesn't care either. The truth is that, fascism isn't fundamentally evil, and since I know that, I am fascist. 

    I'm not saying you should be fascist because you believe fascism isn't fundamentally evil. There is more to believing in something, but the reason to not be fascist shouldn't be because other people are ignorant about what it is. 

    "So until anyone here is willing to proudly fly the Swastika...I'd contend that there's equal reason behind rejecting Fascism as well."

    Just because people think the Swastika is bad in every culture doesn't stop me from proudly flying it. It is part of my culture, and I although I haven't flown a flag with the symbol on it literally (because they weren't made for usage on flags.), I have used it proudly in other situations. 

    This logic implies that you can only use the swastika in India, which is not true. The swastika is good in my culture and the way I express it isn't evil. The only situation where I shouldn't use it, is when I'm clearly going to get a lot of attention from people who don't know what it is, for my own safety. 
  • FascismFascism 230 Pts
    @Nightwing
    "Taxation can certainly be theft. It doesn't have to be."

    Same thing with a command economy. It can be theft, if used at a high rate, but if it used at a low level, it most certainly isn't theft. 

    "America's history of major wars was not a command economy."

    During WW2, the USA stopped American businesses from collaborating with Nazi Germany. That falls under the definition of a command economy. During the Great Depression, FDR also implemented a command economy. 

    "That IS fascism, and it has never worked."

    Works now. Look up mixed economy. It is a form of command economy which has low levels of government intervention, but it still works. Much of Europe is now even going towards a mixed economy.

    The United States is a democratic republic. It has democracy and a republic. It isn't pure democracy, but still a type of democracy. 

    "Your fixation on the end of Rome is not the point. The point is that life under dictatorial Rome was miserable."

    The republic wasn't all good either. Life back then was generally miserable. 

    "The only form of government with 'rules' is a republic. No other form has any 'rules.'. They operate at the whim of a dictator, oligarchy, or whatever the most powerful mob is. They can do anything. No rules."

    Yes I agree. I would like the government to have restrictions and a constitution. 
  • NightwingNightwing 49 Pts
    edited October 10
    Fascism said:
    @Nightwing
    "Taxation can certainly be theft. It doesn't have to be."

    "Same thing with a command economy. It can be theft, if used at a high rate, but if it used at a low level, it most certainly isn't theft. "
    Yes it is. It is the taking of property by edict, not by a vote of the people being taxed.

    "America's history of major wars was not a command economy."

    "During WW2, the USA stopped American businesses from collaborating with Nazi Germany. That falls under the definition of a command economy. During the Great Depression, FDR also implemented a command economy. "
    That is not a command economy. That is restriction of trade with the enemy. International trade is subject to treaties and agreements you know.

    "That IS fascism, and it has never worked."

    "Works now. Look up mixed economy. It is a form of command economy which has low levels of government intervention, but it still works. Much of Europe is now even going towards a mixed economy."
    No, it doesn't. Everywhere it is tried the portion of economy managed by the government proves to be a disaster.

    "The United States is a democratic republic. It has democracy and a republic. It isn't pure democracy, but still a type of democracy. "
    The United States is organized as a federated republic. There is no such thing as a democratic republic. The two terms are exclusive of each other. The vote we take to elect certain officers to that government is not democracy. It is part of the republic. That vote runs UNDER the constitutions involved.

    "Your fixation on the end of Rome is not the point. The point is that life under dictatorial Rome was miserable."

    "The republic wasn't all good either. Life back then was generally miserable. "
    The Republic of Rome is what made Rome great. Life was very profitable under Rome as a republic. The logical extension to your argument that 'life back then was miserable' is that ALL life is miserable.

    "The only form of government with 'rules' is a republic. No other form has any 'rules.'. They operate at the whim of a dictator, oligarchy, or whatever the most powerful mob is. They can do anything. No rules."

    "Yes I agree. I would like the government to have restrictions and a constitution. "
    Then why argue for fascism? That form of government does not have a constitution.



  • loading...


  • @Nightwing
    The format in which you responded is kind of confusing. Sorry if I miss something. 

    "That is not a command economy. That is restriction of trade with the enemy. International trade is subject to treaties and agreements you know."

    Command economy - 
    an economy in which production, investment, prices, and incomes are determined centrally by a government.

    So basically, an economy which is controlled by the government is a command economy. FDR's plan for The Great Depression was a command economy. Just like in WW1 and WW2, he artificially raised the prices of goods, and regulated trade, and income. This is a command economy. Although it isn't used extensively, it still counts as one. 

    "No, it doesn't. Everywhere it is tried the portion of economy managed by the government proves to be a disaster."

    It wasn't a disaster in Nazi Germany, Francoist Spain, Fascist Italy, Imperial Japan, Modern Japan, US, Modern China, Early Soviet Union, Social Democracy, etc. A command economy fails when there is no defined goal. In Nazi Germany's case, the goal was to take over some land with military power, which is why it succeeded. Early Soviet Union also succeeded because it had a clear goal. However, over time the goal was blurred, because of the people not willing to work towards it anymore. This is why it failed. If the Soviet Union had capitalism, then the people would have still been willing to work and it still would have succeeded. China realized that it needed capitalism, and a mixed economy. Its economy is now developing at a good rate due to its realization. 

    "The Republic of Rome is what made Rome great. Life was very profitable under Rome as a republic. The logical extension to your argument that 'life back then was miserable' is that ALL life is miserable."

    Explain to me how life was better under the republic. Also my statement "life back then was miserable" implies that life back then was generally more miserable than modern day life, in a developed nation. 

    "Then why argue for fascism? That form of government does not have a constitution."

    This would be proven wrong due to the fact that there were and are fascist movements where a constitutional republic is supported: AFM is an example. 

    "The United States is organized as a federated republic. There is no such thing as a democratic republic. The two terms are exclusive of each other. The vote we take to elect certain officers to that government is not democracy. It is part of the republic. That vote runs UNDER the constitutions involved."

    I think it is best not to argue under this topic, because there are different uses for the word republic. My use referred to "representative democracy". Also it doesn't really matter in this debate. 
  • Fascism said:
    @Nightwing
    "Command economy - 
    an economy in which production, investment, prices, and incomes are determined centrally by a government.

    So basically, an economy which is controlled by the government is a command economy. FDR's plan for The Great Depression was a command economy."
    It was also illegal, and caused the downturn to be a Great Depression.
    "Just like in WW1 and WW2, he artificially raised the prices of goods,"
    FDR implemented price controls. They never work. The action is illegal in the United States Constitution.
     "and regulated trade, and income."
    He is not allowed to do that under the Constitution.
    "This is a command economy. Although it isn't used extensively, it still counts as one."
    Big hairy deal. It deepened the downturn into the Great Depression.
    "It wasn't a disaster in Nazi Germany,"
    Yes, it was. Germany couldn't even feed its war machine anymore.
    "Francoist Spain,"
    Same thing.
    "Fascist Italy,"
    Same thing.
    "Imperial Japan,"
    Same thing.
    "Modern Japan,"
    Modern Japan is not a fascist or socialist nation. It is now organized as a republic.
    "US,"
    The United States is organized as a republic, not as a fascist government.
    "Modern China,"
    Chins is organized as a socialist government, not a fascist one. It is suffering badly under it, too.
    "Early Soviet Union,"
    The USSR is organized as a socialist government. It is suffering too.
    :A command economy fails when there is no defined goal."
    A command economy fails...period.
    "China realized that it needed capitalism, and a mixed economy. Its economy is now developing at a good rate due to its realization."
    China is not capitalism. It is a socialist nation. It is falling apart. It is NOT doing well at all. I suspect a violent revolt will rock China yet again in the near future.
    "Explain to me how life was better under the [Roman] republic."
    It's what make Rome great. It produced the wealth that made Rome the society that it was, before the dictators came along.
    "Also my statement "life back then was miserable" implies that life back then was generally more miserable than modern day life, in a developed nation. "
    This is a fallacy, known as 'presentism'. It is the imposition of today's standards on yesterday.
    "This would be proven wrong due to the fact that there were and are fascist movements where a constitutional republic is supported: AFM is an example."
    Fascism and republics are mutually exclusive. What is the 'AFM'?
    "I think it is best not to argue under this topic, because there are different uses for the word republic."
    Only one. A republic is a government by law, not by men. It is government by a constitution, agreed upon by the people of that nation.
    "My use referred to 'representative democracy'."
    Democracies fail, usually quickly. It is mob rule. There is no constitution to stop it. The little guy gets crushed, and the usual result is anarchy, followed by an oligarchy or dictatorship.
    " Also it doesn't really matter in this debate. "
    It does. Indeed, you are still trying to say the two are compatible.




  • @Nightwing
    "It was also illegal, and caused the downturn to be a Great Depression. ... FDR implemented price controls. They never work. The action is illegal in the United States Constitution."

    It was illegal in the US, but it shouldn't be illegal. It was done for a solution for the Great Depression, it didn't cause the Great Depression. It didn't work when FDR did it, but it worked in WW1 where the same plan of controlling price worked. What FDR did wrong was that he didn't implement his controlling of price to accomplish his goal. He thought that after increasing prices, the economy will do it itself, but unlike in WW1 where the economy had incentive for the war, there was no incentive during the Great Depression. 

    "'This is a command economy. Although it isn't used extensively, it still counts as one.'
    Big hairy deal. It deepened the downturn into the Great Depression."

    The original reason I brought this up wasn't because I was trying to prove that it works. I was trying to prove that it doesn't infringe people's rights. I also used other examples which prove that it works if done right. 

    ""It wasn't a disaster in Nazi Germany,"
    Yes, it was. Germany couldn't even feed its war machine anymore.
    "Francoist Spain,"
    Same thing.
    "Fascist Italy,"
    Same thing.
    "Imperial Japan,"
    Same thing.
    "Modern Japan,"
    Modern Japan is not a fascist or socialist nation. It is now organized as a republic.
    "US,"
    The United States is organized as a republic, not as a fascist government.
    "Modern China,"
    Chins is organized as a socialist government, not a fascist one. It is suffering badly under it, too.
    "Early Soviet Union,"
    The USSR is organized as a socialist government. It is suffering too.
    :A command economy fails when there is no defined goal."
    A command economy fails...period.
    "China realized that it needed capitalism, and a mixed economy. Its economy is now developing at a good rate due to its realization."
    China is not capitalism. It is a socialist nation. It is falling apart. It is NOT doing well at all. I suspect a violent revolt will rock China yet again in the near future."

    In each one of these countries I mentioned, I was referring to there economy, not there governmental form, or there military success. The original conversation had to do with a command economy, and if it actually benefits the economy or not. Not if fascism as a governmental form succeeds or not. Here are the quotes of the conversation:

    You: "No, it doesn't. Everywhere it is tried the portion of economy managed by the government proves to be a disaster."
    (referring to a command economy)

    Me: "It wasn't a disaster in Nazi Germany, Francoist Spain, Fascist Italy, Imperial Japan, Modern Japan, US, Modern China, Early Soviet Union, Social Democracy, etc."

    So to counter what you said:

    "It wasn't a disaster in Nazi Germany,"
    Yes, it was. Germany couldn't even feed its war machine anymore.

    Nazi Germany's economy itself was doing good. Their downfall was caused by declaring war against too many people, and causing racism which cost them much. They also ran out of natural resources by not trading with other countries. The military suffered due to bad leadership, but the economy was doing fine. 

    "Francoist Spain,"
    Same thing.

    Francoist Spain was never a war machine. Its economy started off faltering because they were leaning towards socialist values and it had an extensive command economy. But afterwards, they relaxed their control and turned into a mixed economy favoring capitalist values, which led them to have an improving economy. They didn't fail because of their command economy, rather because it was an autocratic dictatorship. This led to confusion after Francisco Franco died, and led fascism to go out of Spain. 

    "Fascist Italy,"
    Same thing.

    Fascist Italy, like Nazi Germany, went out of its economic depression due to a command economy. 

    "Imperial Japan,"
    Same thing.

    Imperial Japan suffered not because of a command economy, but because of lack of resources on its lands, to supply its military. If it had traded with other countries, then this wouldn't have happened, as they were doing better when the US was trading with them beforehand. 

    "Modern Japan,"
    Modern Japan is not a fascist or socialist nation. It is now organized as a republic.

    Yes, but we're talking about command economies. Right after WW2, the US, in an attempt to restore Japan's economy, used a command economy to bring it up. It is true that it doesn't have a command economy as of now, but its economic restoration is partially credited to the mixed economy that the US put in. 

    "US,"
    The United States is organized as a republic, not as a fascist government.

    WW1. FDR tried copying it, as stated before, but didn't use the right method. 

    "Modern China,"
    Chins is organized as a socialist government, not a fascist one. It is suffering badly under it, too.

    The people are suffering, but the economy isn't. We are talking about the economy. 

    "Early Soviet Union,"
    The USSR is organized as a socialist government. It is suffering too.

    During the end it suffered because it lost incentive. If it had turned into a mixed economy, then its economy would have still lasted like China's. 

    :A command economy fails when there is no defined goal."
    A command economy fails...period.

    My statement was based on my examples. The examples were refuted for being unsuccessful or not being fascist, but not whether or not the command economy worked. 

    "China realized that it needed capitalism, and a mixed economy. Its economy is now developing at a good rate due to its realization."
    China is not capitalism. It is a socialist nation. It is falling apart. It is NOT doing well at all. I suspect a violent revolt will rock China yet again in the near future.

    China is still socialist, but it is adopting capitalist values. https://www.cato.org/policy-report/januaryfebruary-2013/how-china-became-capitalist
    Chinese people now have private property, businesses, and differing classes. 
    However, I do believe that China will have a revolt due to its mistreatment of its people, but that's not about the economy. 

    "Explain to me how life was better under the [Roman] republic."
    It's what make Rome great. It produced the wealth that made Rome the society that it was, before the dictators came along.

    There was wealth produced during the dictatorships too. The height of the Roman Empire was during the reign of a dictator. Standard of living was also at its peak during a dictatorship. 

    "Also my statement "life back then was miserable" implies that life back then was generally more miserable than modern day life, in a developed nation. "
    This is a fallacy, known as 'presentism'. It is the imposition of today's standards on yesterday.

    The reason this fallacy was made was to prevent people from saying things such as "Life under the rule of Genghis Khan was bad compared to today. Therefore, Genghis Khan was bad." The statement I made was different. I was stating that "Life under the dictatorship was bad, but so was life under the republic. Compared to today, both of them were bad." I'm not saying that the republic and the dictatorship were both bad because they don't meet today's standards, but that they are both equally bad in the eyes of someone from today, therefore you can't only blame the dictatorship for bad living standards. 

    AFM is American Fascist Movement. This isn't the only one. The Unity Party of Alberta, Integralists, Early Traditional Fascism, and other nameless movements. 
    Also I don't see why "fascist can't be a republic". Originally, fascist writers never put this requirement. They even referred the Roman Republic as fascist. Look at my previous arguments for what fascism is. It is authoritarian, but that doesn't mean there can't be a republic. Just because a bunch of WW2 leaders didn't have a republic doesn't mean fascism can't have a republic. 

    "I think it is best not to argue under this topic, because there are different uses for the word republic."
    Only one. A republic is a government by law, not by men. It is government by a constitution, agreed upon by the people of that nation.

    Language is malleable. My usage refers to the common usage of a republic. Even if it isn't correct in a scholarly perspective, it is still applicable. A republic also doesn't require a constitution. There is a reason some governments are called republics, and others are called constitutional republics. 

    "My use referred to 'representative democracy'."
    Democracies fail, usually quickly. It is mob rule. There is no constitution to stop it. The little guy gets crushed, and the usual result is anarchy, followed by an oligarchy or dictatorship.

    Same thing with a republic. Only if it's a constitutional republic does it have a constitution. I was only telling you my definition of republic which I use, but as I previously stated, I support a constitutional republic, which is a constitutional representative democracy. 

    "Also it doesn't really matter in this debate. "
    It does. Indeed, you are still trying to say the two are compatible.

    I was talking about the argument of what republic means. 
    SilverishGoldNova
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Website!

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2017 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch