6 8

The word Fascist is thrown around a lot these days as the universal and frequently unchallenged label attached to host of cultural and political organizations. Wikpedia incorrectly describes it this way “ Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, as well as strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century”. This is an interesting re write of history but a not uncommon device of current political groups and should give you some insight into their dangerous agendas.

Here is a bit of analysis which much more accurately describes the most widely known and referenced fascists, their roots and public theory: []

more historical analysis: []

The point being that it does not have right wing roots, not now not ever, in fact it shares a great deal with communism philosophically. When looking at what is going on right now in the western world one can easily see the fascist tendencies in the leftist movement(s) and their friends and supporters in the Democratic party and the media. (in Canada we are further down the rabbit hole with Liberals and NDP sharing platforms and ideals almost universally). Here are just a few illustrative examples that should cause you to worry about current events:

Breakdown cultural norms and religions: we can see this is a hallmark of current leftist thinking from attacks on traditional families, to defunding the police “progressivism” is clearly on a seek and destroy mission of all cultural tradition and use racism, whiteness and victimhood as their weapons.

Authoritarianism: Clearly the leftist/ democrat leaders show their authoritarian tendencies when they promote government intervention in virtually all aspects of life and forcefully seek to remove, silence and/or destroy their “enemies”.

Oppression of alternative views: Cancel culture and its various manifestations in the media, on college campuses and in other business environments are all very clear indications of the leftist tendency to oppress and /or silence opposing views.

Cooperation between government and business to achieve the movements goals without nationalizing industry. We can clearly see that not only big tech but a variety of industries are quick to get in line with the leftist-democrat agenda through a variety of means and they work together for their mutual benefit.

So next time you hear someone called a fascist think about how accurate that accusation might actually be and recall the theory of transference and how it has been used in the past. History is indeed repeating itself, and we would be wise to inform ourselves of accurate history not the leftist re-writes that are currently in vogue.

Recall that Germans gravitated to Nazism, after a fairly short period of indoctrination they willingly got on board, Russians similarly followed Stalin into the abyss thinking a brighter more fair future was on the horizon. Here and now we are far along a similar revolution, we have allowed the indoctrination in the media and education system, we have identified the victims and the perpetrators and have recently moved into the punitive re-distributive stage, like all of the above revolutions it is based on fairness and equity, and like in all other examples it will lead to neither.

dirtbill 6 July 31
You must be a member of this group before commenting. Join Group

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


Yup. I posted about this as well.

“The further Fascism receded into history and the fewer visible fascists there were on display, the more self-proclaimed anti-fascists needed fascism to retain any semblance of political virtue or purpose. It proved politically useful to describe as fascist people who were not Fascists , just as it proved politically useful to describe as racist people who were not racists.” ― Douglas Murray, The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam

“In Italy, Fascists divide themselves into two categories: Fascists and Anti-Fascists.”
— Ennio Flaiano

The term "fascist" has been used as a pejorative, regarding varying movements across the far right of the political spectrum. George Orwell wrote in 1944 that "the word 'Fascism' is almost entirely meaningless ... almost any English person would accept 'bully' as a synonym for 'Fascist'".

Communist states have sometimes been referred to as "fascist", typically as an insult. For example, it has been applied to Marxist regimes in Cuba under Fidel Castro and Vietnam under Ho Chi Minh. Chinese Marxists used the term to denounce the Soviet Union during the Sino-Soviet Split, and likewise the Soviets used the term to denounce Chinese Marxists and social democracy (coining a new term in "social fascism" ).In the United States, Herbert Matthews of The New York Times asked in 1946: "Should we now place Stalinist Russia in the same category as Hitlerite Germany? Should we say that she is Fascist?". J. Edgar Hoover, longtime FBI director and ardent anti-communist, wrote extensively of "Red Fascism". The Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s was sometimes called "fascist". Historian Peter Amann states that, "Undeniably, the Klan had some traits in common with European fascism—chauvinism, racism, a mystique of violence, an affirmation of a certain kind of archaic traditionalism—yet their differences were fundamental....[the KKK] never envisioned a change of political or economic system."

Professor Richard Griffiths of the University of Wales wrote in 2005 that "fascism" is the "most misused, and over-used word, of our times".

"In short, “fascist” is a modern word for “heretic,” branding an individual worthy of excommunication from the body politic. The left uses other words—“racist,” “sexist,” “homophobe,” “christianist”—for similar purposes, but these words have less elastic meanings. Fascism, however, is the gift that keeps on giving. George Orwell noted this tendency as early as 1946 in his famous essay “Politics and the English Language”: “The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable.

American Progressivism—the moralistic social crusade from which modern liberals proudly claim descent—is in some respects the major source of the fascist ideas applied in Europe by Mussolini and Hitler." - Dinesh D'Souza

KrunoS Level 7 July 31, 2020

Meanwhile, the conservative movement continues to mine Nazi philosophers for new material.

Care to share evidence?

Or are you trying to say that the 5 neo Nazis left somehow presents the “conservative movement”.

Of course, the truth is exactly the opposite... the main stream left movements are all following communist ideology...

I really laughed when you said Tim Pool is a fascist... really proves the OP statement.

@Hanno Schmitt and Evola.

@Hanno Read my follow up about Tim.

@WilyRickWiles Aside from Steve Bannon who else has mention Evola? If Evola were alive today he would certainly not agree with Bannon, Trump, or any conservative that I can think of. The only people I can think of who have mentioned Schmitt are Richard Spencer and Augustus Invictus. Spencer isn't a conservative a Invictus is a revolutionary conservative who wouldn't fit into any mainstream conservative group. Evola, BTW, wasn't a Nazi or even a fascist. Indeed, he wrote two short books critiquing both of them (though in fairness he did find some aspects of both agreeable).

@Leroy_Dumonde Schmitt is en vogue in conservative institutions right now. Notable figures he has influenced include Michael Anton, Bill Barr, and Adrian Vermuele. He also influenced Leo Strauss who has had a big influence on neoconservatives. Moreover, he has influenced the Eurasianist philosophy of Dugin in Russia that influenced Trump's policies on immigration and foreign policy.

Never heard of them.... I think if we offer $100 prizes to the first 100 conservatives to tell you who they were... you would not loose a lot of money.
Conservatives today are influences by the likes of Jordan Peterson etc...

You mean Bill Barr wants to restore law and order and therefore he must be Nazi influenced?
Never heard of Anton and Vermeule... so I was right..: you picked 5 neo Nazis no one know about or is of no importance and you call them representatives of the “conservative movement”.

Again... modern leftist follow Marx and his merry mates to the letter.
You are as usual trying to deflect.

@Hanno No, Bill Barr's theory of the unitary executive is inspired by Schmitt. Anton was also in the Trump administration and pseudonymously wrote a widely-read intellectual justification for Trumpism called "The Flight 93 Election." []

@Hanno I'd be willing to bet quite a few of the judges Trump is packing the judicial system with are Schmittians as well.

Stalin also said eat your vegetables everyday is good for health (he said many such things)... just because he said it, does not mean it is wrong or no one else thinks it is a good idea.
Many ideas of the Nazis was not unique to them and some were and are still good ideas because they are universally true. Other ideas not so much.

Furthermore, quoting one or two people who may or may not have the same views of Nazis does not mean it is the whole conservative movement looking at Nazis for inspiration.

Now of course we can go the other way and start looking who are influencing Bernie Sanders etc... now there is a concern!

@Hanno But I mean Schmitt and Strauss are the conservative movement's most recent fertile ground. Why Schmitt? Because he provides a justification for more authoritarianism, which is needed to preserve the power of conservatives as their base ages and the population diversifies.

I find it interesting that both the far right and the far left accuse each other of authoritarianism.
Therefor it is good that both the far left communists and the far right Holocaust deniers pick fights with me. 🙂

When the Trump judges or advisors start advocating authoritarian rule I will get upset. Or when they actually propose Nazi exclusive ideology. So far I have not seen it, however it may have happened without me noticing.

Authoritarian rule is not exclusive to Nazi thought... to the contrary, it would be last avenue I would pursue if I want to get that type of power.
The current socialist revolution we are seeing is a much more likely route to authoritarian rule.

@Hanno Then it will be too late. Why do you conflate mere social democrats with Stalinists?

The exact argument could be made about Bernie Sanders and the other far left leaders we have today.
The difference is of course that you have to jump through hoops to connect Trump judges and advisors with Nazi ideology ... however Bernie makes no secret of his communist influences.

Soooo... I am much more concerned about a socialist authoritarian state than a Nazi authoritarian state...

@Hanno Bernie makes no secret of what?

Sorry, I edited it later... his communist influences.

@Hanno Which are?

Look up Democratic Socialists of America...
you directed me to them and I read most of their web pages. Thanks, it was very educational.

I much more concerned about the rise of DSA than the perceived risk of neo Nazis. The hatred and fear of anything Nazi is well established in that no one has achieved anything in that realm since 1945... and only fringe groups still support it... we are a long way from having anything like that again.

Socialism and all its horrors were repeated again and again in many countries always with the same outcome... and yet we still have prominent politicians pushing it.

@Hanno DSA isn't that extreme. Moreover, it has less than 100,000 members. Bernie is not one of them!

Thank you! You finally get it!

  1. Extreme is dependent on your frame of reference.
    To you Trump advisors are extreme... to others the DSA is extreme. It does not mean either are or are not.
  2. Because some members of a group believes something does not mean all members do. Especially if you arbitrarily made the groups.
    I cannot just include Bernie with other Democratic Socialists even if they all call themselves that... you also cannot lump “conservatives” together and say they are influences the same.

@Hanno I tend to think that people in power and shaping the law, who were voted in by a unified conservative movement, are the most relevant for discussion.

Exactly... shall we start with your House of Representatives... who “were voted in by a unified socialist movement”.
Or the Governor of California or New York... or... I hope you see where I am heading..
Of course we will have the same discussion when Biden/Harris wins the election...

@Hanno You have to be kidding.

@Hanno Where have you been the last four years? Have you studied Trump's voters at all? It is almost entirely older, white conservatives. The Democratic Party has become a big tent including diverse members of the center-right, center-left, and the left. "Socialists" are a small part of that, though if you lump together all "progressives," the greater left is approaching half of the party. They were divided between Sanders and Warren during the primary and utterly lost to Biden's centrist coalition.

Are you beginning to see your inability to think critically?
You did not catch that I just used your own arguments to show how inappropriate to the situation they are.

Of course at no point did I actually think that the Democratic House of Reps were elected by a “unified socialist movement “. It is utterly ridiculous.
So was your comment about the current Republican members being elected by a “unified conservative movement”.
The fraction blacks and hispanics voting for Trump was unbelievable high... they are not conservatives... they are fed up with the corruption and empty words from Obama and Clinton.
You completely missed that and that is why you are still stuck with your group think.

@Hanno Alright, what percentage do you consider "unbelievable high." This should be interesting.

It is of course relative. If you expected 1% of blacks and 2% of Hispanics for Trump... and it turns out to be 5% an 10% it is unbelievable high.
However if you expected 20 and 30%, and you “only” got 10%, then it is low.

The point is 1. Not only the Nazi supporting far right voted for Trump as you would wanted to believe.
2. A lot of non-conservatives of all ages are voting not for Trump but against what the modern Democratic Party stands for.

So I want to get back to your original comment. There is no unified conservative movement. Just as their is no unified socialist movement.
The vast majority of “conservative” leaning voters are not influenced by Nazi thought.
As is the majority of “progressive” leaning voters are not Marxists.

Trying to put all these people in little boxes is why you keep on failing.


Recall that Germans gravitated to Nazism, after a fairly short period of indoctrination they willingly got on board, Russians similarly followed Stalin into the abyss thinking a brighter more fair future was on the horizon.

These are both ignorant portrayals of the history. Germans embraced Hitler's program due to rampant Jewish subversion and brutal restrictions and punishments of Germany following WWI. []

The Jewish/Bolshevik takeover of Russia was a well-financed coup, not a popular uprising.

Thaw Level 6 July 31, 2020

The great irony is that it was the German government which helped fund the communist uprising in Russia, along with (((New York and London))) banks.


Sporting associations are also jumping on board with cooperation between government entities with the new jersey slogans taking effect in basketball. But isnt the season over until right around election.


re fascism:

The point being that it does not have right wing roots, not now not ever, in fact it shares a great deal with communism philosophically. When looking at what is going on right now in the western world one can easily see the fascist tendencies in the leftist movement(s) and their friends and supporters in the Democratic party and the media. (in Canada we are further down the rabbit hole with Liberals and NDP sharing platforms and ideals almost universally).

I think this needs to be (and has been) repeated often. However, the Left has their fingers permanently locked in their ears as to ANYTHING not vetted and approved by their handlers.


"Fascism" as it is popularly used, is the embodiment of Jewish fears. Its practical meaning today is "white authoritarianism." Its historic and true meaning is "tradition-based policies promoting social unity in a white society." Jews know that, if whites seek social unity based on anything like traditional values, the first thing those whites will realize is that Jews are the primary subversive force that must be dealt with.

Frankfurt school intellectuals, all Jews, obsessed on fascism, and turned it into a dirty word, and broadened its definition so any wholesome or defensive action by whites is "fascism."

Intellectual James Lindsay, although he does not dare mention that he is only discussing Jewish subversion, describes the process on his website, New Discourses: []

Thaw Level 6 July 31, 2020

I will steer clear of the Jewish angle since a lot of water has passed under the bridge since the original Frankfort School. The socialist/ communist movement and ideology has been well impregnated in the skulls of a wide array of both the dispossessed millennial and the elitist leftists.

@dirtbill There is no other angle. As Lindsay shows, that is the source of the entire paradigm. If Jewish activism in media, academia, etc. was ended today, the paranoia surrounding fascism would disappear in a very short period of time.

With him and some of the other contributors here.... it is all about the jews.

@Hanno Just following the data. []

@Hanno Seems ever since they brought the white supremacist Paul Ramsey in as a contributor. []

@WilyRickWiles, @Hanno Wonder why nobody wants to debate those "white supremacists"? They're so obviously wrong, it should be easy to show them up, yet all of you are terrified of engaging...

@Thaw to the contrary... I did engage with you and defeated you in about three minutes... both you and 1959.

And we can debate again... it is tedious though.

Like I said, hate Jews all you want... but don’t come and tell us that history did not happen just because it does not suit your current hatred.

@Hanno In the thread I believe you are referring to you offered some very weak arguments and then gave up. []

@Thaw just because you could not follow the reasoning does not mean the arguments are weak... you just lack the cognitive ability to understand them.

Have you actually ever met a real German? They are the most stubborn and single minded people in the world... it is a joke to think some Americans are going to convince them they killed millions of people when they did not do it...especially when there is no evidence... yeah right.

@Hanno lol yeah must be my cognitive ability....Your fallacy is called hypothesis contrary to fact. This is where an arguer sets up arbitrary parameters regarding past or future events that make the arguer's conclusion the only possibility. So you're arguing that if x is the case (the Holocaust is a hoax) then Germans would definitely respond in y way (resolute exposure of the hoax) therefore, since y didn't happen, x cannot be the case. This is faulty reasoning because y is nothing but a random guess.

Your claim does not take into account measures to control the thought of Germans such as indoctrination from early in life, takeover of German media by hostile outsiders, and the outlawing of open debate on the Holocaust in Germany.

Within that fallacious reasoning you are using anecdotal fallacy, claiming your experience of Germans is the final word on the character of Germans as a whole.

Because all the Germans who were involved born BEFORE the war... they were all of course indoctrinated as children... before the fact.
Hundreds of Germans were brought before trial and they did not claim otherwise...

And of course the millions of missing people all are alive and well living in Argentina....
Polish, German, Austrian etc government records all faked... no missing people.
The thousands of government officials involved are of course Jews who fabricated everything years before the war just in case Germany start a war...
Super jews they are!

The death camps are all fake mockups made in a just a few hours after being liberated and then photographed... thousands of Americans soldiers all lied about what they found. They were all of course special Jewish battalions who all lied ... haha.
Go and look at them yourself. They are major facilities purpose built over many months...

Like I said it is very tedious... the evidence is overwhelming however it does not matter to you.
You have never been to Europe have you?
You never met a real German or a Jew have you?

@Hanno You are now using the fallacy called argument from incredulity which describes making a generalization based on supposed common sense, but not examining the actual evidence.

The death camp aspects of the camps have been shown to be fabrications. Many, many practical problems with the official story. The staining on the walls as a scientist named Rudolf, who had to flee Germany, has explained...the color of the corpses, the height of the smoke stacks, wooden doors that open outward on gas chambers, faked photos and stories that turned out to be false such as the human soap and lampshades, and of course the ability to burn the corpses at the rate required for the claimed numbers to be true.

The world almanac total Jewish population also shows an increase between 1933 and 1948.

As far as controlling what gets into the official record, that is the easiest of all to hoax. Simply throttle certain information and promote other information. Don't forget, this is the same group that came up with the theory that races don't exist, and even that males and females are not defined biologically, and now has all official institutions, across the whole Western world, pushing these ideas.

@Thaw and hence my very simple question:

Have YOU been to the death camps.

I had a school friend who had all the same stories... his favourite was that the gas chamber and German officer sewers were linked and therefore not possible to have been poisoning gas.

At Dachau it was the first question my wife asked ... the guide laughed and then showed the most obvious BS made up by denialists as simply rubbish. No... the sewers are seperate and sealed during operation. As well as many of the “errors” such as smoke stacks photos etc and whatever else.

Of course, I will not argue that there are exaggerations and folk tales made up that are not true... however there is no question that vast numbers of people were massacred in these camps.

Have YOU been to the death camps.

This is idiotic. It equates walking through a carefully presented site with understanding scientific and logical arguments.

Next paragraph is a straw man. What your friend said has nothing to do with the anomalies I cited.

Next paragraph is anecdotal fallacy and straw man. You conflate a tour guide, who is paid to be biased, supposedly refuting your friend's statement with the question of the smokestacks not being high enough to disperse the toxic materials.

Last paragraph is just equivocation and restating something that you have failed to prove.

Yup... guilty as charged if you are going to try and expect anything better on an online discussion.
It is still miles better than the arguments you have made that are all based on ignorance.
Hence you dismiss my very real questions as “fallacies” while not answering the questions.
Everyone of your “anomalies” can be explained through other means and has been done by others.
None of the real questions you refuse to answer can be explained.
Funny how no one who actually been to these sites claims the events did not happen...

@Hanno No, I answered your questions and told you why they are not relevant, because they are argument from incredulity i.e., just general belief that such a thing could not be hoaxed. Nothing specific or substantive.

My arguments are based on many different failings of the official story noted by many different people. For example, a scientist named Nicholas Kollerstrom wrote a book, banned everywhere, which outlines the most striking problems with the official story. Here's the link: [] Wonder why his book is banned everywhere. Wonder why other scientists and historians did not simply debunk his arguments and make a fool of him?

Funny how no one who actually been to these sites claims the events did not happen...

Here is Jewish revisionist David Cole touring Aushwitz, debunking numerous aspects of the official story:

Write Comment