Wrong use of "Fascism"

The ideology ITSELF is not unique of fascism - but Fascism is unique of the only nation who used Fasci as their symbol.
Saying Nazism is para-fascism is correct, but saying Nazism IS Fascism is incorrect.
But that's precisely the problem: describing Nazism as "para-fascism" is also wrong. The ideological link isn't really there.

When we talk about fascist movements, we're looking more at things like the Falange or the BUF. Ones that had a direct and close ideological connection to fascismo.
It gets even more tricky when you are trying to distinguish between Groucho Marxism and Harpo Marxism. Mark's Cubanism does contain a German element though.
You are a national treasure. :love:
 
English native-speakers often have little time or ability to learn the correct etymology of foreign terms, so they replace it with their own (eg Tyrant, which just means one who rose to power in an illegal way, not one who is by definition cruel).

To be fair, all languages adopt foreign words into their vocabulary. And once adopted, those words will undergo shifts in meaning through time. Knowing the etymology isn't going to stop that - and frankly I don't think it's something we should even try to stop. Languages change.
 
I thought we had been letting fascist and Fascist co-exist alongside each other.
 
You are right. It is overly pedantic.

Even capitalized "Fascism" refers to any government which has the same basic characteristics of the Italian Fascisti, including the Nazis and Francoist Spain.

Lower case "fascism" has come to mean any strongly authoritarian regime.

axeswithnames.gif
 
Hmm. I wouldn't be happy describing Stalin or Mao as fascists though. Even though they were undoubtedly strongly authoritarian, and probably totalitarian too.
 
Fascism is far less racially oriented than NSism. Very strictly speaking, Fascism doesn't need to be racist (though it doesn't rule it out either), and Fascist xenophobia is usually limited to cultural and citizenship factors than descent, notwithstanding opportunistic implementations of racial discrimination to become friends with the Nazis.

However, during WWII, the Nazis were referred to as Fascists too; that's historical fact.

We MLs, starting with Dimitroff, use the term "fascism" to describe a period of capitalism where the forces most opposed to the organized sector of the working class (big business, central government, and the bribed labour sector) are united and the organzed sector of the working class (and its communist and non-communist leadership) has bee routed.


It does not, as the OP states, apply to every "dictatorship.". Not all "fascism" is created equal, either, as even Mussolini and Hitler had their differences. But under the rubric of which I. spoke, this made 1952 Cuba a fascist state, as well as 1927 to 1949 China.

On a browser on my mobile, so I am writing less than I need to explain everything.
 
Fascist is just this word I mumble under my breath, after being told to do something that I don't want to do by somebody I don't feel able to argue with constructively.

I don't really care what it means. Or has meant.
 
Even in Company of Heroes 2, Russians call the Germans as Fascists.

"Smyert' Fashisti" was a common battle cry and even political slogan in WWII Soviet Union. They are merely being historical. It's incorrect to call Germans Jerries, and yet you also hear that constantly from British characters in games and movies from the time period.

Fascism comes from "fasci", in Italian that means a bunch of rods tied up to an axe that Romans used as emblem of power back then.
That's why Mussolini used the symbol, and called his ideal "fascism".
So if there are no fasces and short bald guys with black shirts involved, it's not fascism.
Call it dictatorship or whatever you want, but fascism itself specifically died dozens of years ago with Mussolini hanging in the square.

Sorry to sound pedantic but I'm tired of hearing fascism as synonim of dictatorship.
It's like calling Nazism as Stalinism, it's irritating.

The ideology ITSELF is not unique of fascism - but Fascism is unique of the only nation who used Fasci as their symbol.
Saying Nazism is para-fascism is correct, but saying Nazism IS Fascism is incorrect.

It sounds like you're basically saying that the identifier of Fascism is its symbolism and not its political ideology. People refer to Hitler, Franco, Peron, O'Duffy, and others as Fascists because their political ideology matches, in various amounts, to Mussolini's conception of Fascism as a modernist counter-ideology to Marxist Socialism. They see society as tragically polarized by class conflict, which damages the supremacy of the state, and individuality which endangers the nation in its eternal conflict with other nation-states. These states partner with big business to destroy all organizations of class conflict, including labor movements and market initiatives, and harmonize these relationships by teaching all their place as cogs in the Machine of The Nation-State. Whether or not they greet each other with "bongiorno" and hold Roman symbols of magistration is wholly irrelevant.

It thus also becomes appropriate to refer to "fascist tendencies" in other states, which edge toward these practices.
 
English native-speakers often have little time or ability to learn the correct etymology of foreign terms, so they replace it with their own (eg Tyrant, which just means one who rose to power in an illegal way, not one who is by definition cruel).
English-speakers don't use their own language with strict etymological correctness. It's not some uniquely Anglo-Saxon arrogance, it's just how languages work when their speakers don't need to rely on billion year old dinosaur poetry to maintain their sense of self-worth.

But that's precisely the problem: describing Nazism as "para-fascism" is also wrong. The ideological link isn't really there.
I think "para-fascism" is usually intended to describe movements which paralleled the political and aesthetic forms of fascism, rather than to suggest ideological similarity. As I've heard it used, it would include things like "Austrofascism" and pre-1942 Francoism, which were in essence straightforward Catholic reaction.
 
English native-speakers often have little time or ability to learn the correct etymology of foreign terms, so they replace it with their own (eg Tyrant, which just means one who rose to power in an illegal way, not one who is by definition cruel).

This isn't true. Etymology isn't a particularly difficult subject, and it's quite easy to find out from any decent dictionary. (Assuming it gives a correct etymology of course.)

Derrida made a whole career in philosophy out of etymology. Though he's not English, I know. (And I don't like him.)

And if it comes to it, all words in all languages are "foreign" in origin. Even in Greek!

Well, maybe not all. I daresay some words are just made up on the spot. But most have a foreign origin.
 
Even in Company of Heroes 2, Russians call the Germans as Fascists.
So people who only inform themselves through medias (the majority, sadly) will have a distorted view on these things.

Er, um...

Fascism comes from "fasci", in Italian that means a bunch of rods tied up to an axe that Romans used as emblem of power back then.
That's why Mussolini used the symbol, and called his ideal "fascism".
So if there are no fasces and short bald guys with black shirts involved, it's not fascism.

So can we say the U.S. Mint used to be Fascist:
Mercury%20dime

(I'm sure there must have been at least one short, bald guy with a thing for black shirts working there at the time.)

I sympathize with your general argument, but small-f fascism has long ago been co-opted and assimilated into the English language.
 
So I can call Europe as america: lower-case guys, thefore I win. Meh.
Alright, I'll accept that Americans use F(f)ascism to describe dictatorships in general, though I still believe that the existence of dictatorship/autarchy/authoritary regime etc already fullfill the role.
 
So I can call Europe as america: lower-case guys, thefore I win. Meh.
Alright, I'll accept that Americans use F(f)ascism to describe dictatorships in general, though I still believe that the existence of dictatorship/autarchy/authoritary regime etc already fullfill the role.

There's no standard usage of small-a America, so no. If such becomes the case, then yes, despite the howls of protest from pedants.

And non-American Anglophones don't "misuse" fascist?
 
English native-speakers often have little time or ability to learn the correct etymology of foreign terms, so they replace it with their own (eg Tyrant, which just means one who rose to power in an illegal way, not one who is by definition cruel).

Iirc in Australia they even are too bored to keep using some English terms, and break them up to simpler English ones. For example an author is just called "a writer of books" (i guess in juxtaposition to a writer of airplanes)
Saying that Australians don't understand what 'author' means is one of the weirder things I've heard today...Maybe consider the specifics that said syntagm will more ably capture.
 
Back
Top Bottom