The Student Room Group

Would you rather live in a communist or fascist state?

Scroll to see replies

Its a daft question really. You would need to define fascism as most people have no idea about what fascist states were actually like. See viddy referring to fascist Spain when no such thing actually existed.
I would rather live in a High Tory state.
Original post by CalT8
That's gone completely past my extremely limited political knowledge haha. I was just interested in seeing if people would rather an extreme left or extreme right government, as the left seems to be taking bit of a beating recently.


Well you political view of of what extremes are is limited in it having to be tied around the idea of a government/state. Anarchist is extreme left and anti state. :tongue:

It isn't simple.
Original post by The_Mighty_Bush
Its a daft question really. You would need to define fascism as most people have no idea about what fascist states were actually like. See viddy referring to fascist Spain when no such thing actually existed.


I'd rather have not lived under Franco. Nor the increasingly totalitarian republic...

Franco was pretty fascist lol
(edited 8 years ago)
Fascist state.

Take a look at Nazi-Germany and how successful that was, excluding the fact that Hitler went a bit overboard with the whole 'declare war on the world' thing. Before WWII he was widely respected as the man who brought Germany back to it's former strength from WWI.

In a communist state, no one wants to work hard. Look at China's economy for an example; before the capitalist movement that's been happening in the past decade, Chinese goods were low quality and cheap as the workers were all paid similar wages and they had no incentive to produce better work since their extra effort goes unrewarded. And for the people talking about how neurosurgeons would become neurosurgeons just because they want to, no they obviously would not. People are inherently lazy or 'efficient', so naturally the majority of would be surgeons would avoid doing that kind of extremely intense work if they could get the same reward for being a professional gamer or something.
Original post by viddy9
I believe that the vast majority of societies in the world today have mixed-market economies, but range from 'more socialist', such as in Scandinavia, to 'more capitalist', such as in the United States. Social democracies, such as those in Scandinavia, seem to combine the best elements of socialism and capitalism.

Fascism, of course, has been just as brutal, most prominently in Nazi Germany, as well as in Spain, Portugal and elsewhere.

When I talk of state socialism, I am not making any assumptions as to whether it would be totalitarian or not. Fascism, by contrast, is inherently authoritarian.

If the OP is asking whether I'd rather have lived in the USSR or Nazi Germany, I'd have chosen the USSR. If it were between the USSR and fascist Spain, I'd have chosen the USSR, particularly after Stalin had died.

And, generically, there's no reason whatsoever for a state socialist society to be authoritarian or totalitarian. The main requirement is that the public own all of the means of production.


viddy, would you therefore consider Marxism-Leninism to be an oxymoron, as Marxism calls for a stateless and classless utopia, whereas Leninism calls for a ruling vanguard party, which contradicts Marx.
(edited 8 years ago)
Reply 26
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Well you political view of of what extremes are is limited in it having to be tied around the idea of a government/state. Anarchist is extreme left and anti state. :tongue:

It isn't simple.



Yeah I'm aware of what anarchy is, I touched on that along with marxism/communism when studying Tsarist Russia in AS History, Nazi Germany, 1984 and a couple of other books is where the rest of my knowledge comes from haha
Reply 27
Original post by The_Mighty_Bush
Its a daft question really. You would need to define fascism as most people have no idea about what fascist states were actually like. See viddy referring to fascist Spain when no such thing actually existed.


I didn't think 'most people' would be on this particular forum area, believing people with more political knowledge than myself could share their opinions in full knowledge of what fascism is.
Although I would prefer to live in neither a communist or facist state, I would have to choose a facist state.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
I'd rather have not lived under Franco. Nor the increasing totalitarian republic...

Franco was pretty fascist lol

There were fascists in the nationalist camp but did they actually end up with significant political power after the war was won? The answer is no. They were sidelined and some were imprisoned. Franco's state was authoritarian Catholic and not really fascist in any real sense.

The only real examples of fascist governance we have are Mussolini's Italy. The Nazis are a weird one and quite different from the fascists they are grouped with. Would I have rather lived in Mussolini's Italy than the USSR or Maoist Chuna? Yes I would because in reality Mussolini's Italy wasn't close to the the genocidal lunacy of the Nazis and was just a strong anti-communist state. They even kept the Monarchy which is an institution that the Nazis were decidedly opposed to.
Fascist by far.

Both kinds of regimes are awful, but at least in Fascist states the economy is not so controlled. Fukuyama, I think, suggests that totalitarianism is a fundamentally leftist creation because it requires a kind of total control that Fascist states don't really adopt - at least in comparison to 'Communist' states. They tend to have a smoother transition to democracy too, I guess, so there's that as well if it can qualify as part of the reason.
Original post by The_Mighty_Bush
There were fascists in the nationalist camp but did they actually end up with significant political power after the war was won? The answer is no. They were sidelined and some were imprisoned. Franco's state was authoritarian Catholic and not really fascist in any real sense.

The only real examples of fascist governance we have are Mussolini's Italy. The Nazis are a weird one and quite different from the fascists they are grouped with. Would I have rather lived in Mussolini's Italy than the USSR or Maoist Chuna? Yes I would because in reality Mussolini's Italy wasn't close to the the genocidal lunacy of the Nazis and was just a strong anti-communist state. They even kept the Monarchy which is an institution that the Nazis were decidedly opposed to.


Out of those I'd probably live in Italy as well. At least the trains ran on time :tongue:

I've actually been on those trains recently. You can see the railways and stations Mussolini's Italy built :beard:

As to all this anti-communist state stuff... you got two authoritarian ideologies fighting each other. Both of them are awful from a humanist perspective. Communist and fascists alike squashed many popular struggles. Being anti-communist means nothing to me if you share the tendencies of the 'communists', both show disdain for democracy. I'm with Orwell.
(edited 8 years ago)
Reply 32
Original post by flibber
viddy, would you therefore consider Marxism-Leninism to be an oxymoron, as Marxism calls for a stateless and classless utopia, whereas Leninism calls for a ruling vanguard party, which contradicts Marx.


Absolutely. Marx never called for any ruling vanguard party.

He believed that democratic, state socialism would replace capitalism, which in turn would decay into the communism I described. Marx's vision of communism and the anarchist vision of communism are therefore one and the same, meaning that there's no such thing as a communist state, and "anarcho-communism" is just communism.

In theory (if I didn't have any practical objections), I support anarchism/communism. In practice, I think the best we'll get (unless we achieve a post-scarcity world) is a social democracy in which: citizens actively participate in decision-making, perhaps through expansion of a system of direct democracy; workers' self-management is implemented in workplaces in nationalised industries or workers' co-operatives; and economic and social inequality is reduced through stronger trade unions and new forms of taxation such as the Land Value Tax.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by viddy9



In theory (if I didn't have any practical objections), I support anarchism/communism. In practice, I think the best we'll get (unless we achieve a post-scarcity world) is a social democracy in which: citizens actively participate in decision-making, perhaps through expansion of a system of direct democracy; workers' self-management is implemented in workplaces in nationalised industries or workers' co-operatives; and economic and social inequality is reduced through stronger trade unions and new forms of taxation such as the Land Value Tax.


Yup. Make sure the unions are not ran by Stalinists though.
Reply 34
A fascist state as long as it provides social and economic stability. Also because communists are anti traditional,anti religious, generally are void or morals and values and have a suppressed economic system which is undynamic and dysfunctional.
Fascist
communism is just left wing fascism without, necessarily, the nationalist element
so if you're asking if I'd rather live in a right wing fascist state, or a left wing one, I'd choose the right wing one - fascist
but I completely disagree with the concept of authoritarianism - communism simply has the most authoritarianism by comparison - that's the only way I can choose
In order of preference..

1) Capitalist society
2) Social democracy
3) Facist (Pinochet, not Hitler.. That's national socialism)
4) Socialism (however I'd defect)
5) Communism
Fascist.

I cannot stand forced equality and success punishment. At least fascism does it in a nicer way by limiting it to your people only rather than giving your money to the whole world, so you have to pay less. I don't trust communism to enforce peace either, it's basically anarchy.
Original post by slade p
Also because communists are anti traditional


Are they?

Quick Reply

Latest