I suspect, for the same reason, that political opponents first called ‘ Communists ‘ as a word of words (and in some countries commies & Socialists are still dirty terms with which you do not want to be compared).
Fascism and Communism are both political systems that still exist as Spectre in our society, because of their historical context.We grew up with this in our minds, events where you cannot cope with your mind that it can go so wrong in a society.
If you have a political movement that you do not agree with at all, choose you are afraid that they are pulling society all the wrong way, then you will soon call them fascist or communist.
These have thrown such a great cultural shadow on our society in the aftermath of the Second World War and the cold War that it is an easy way to make your point, because everyone knows what you mean.It is not a good argument, but it does have emotional impact and people are often out of it. Whether they want to show their own dislike of the opponent by pulling the equation, or only want their audience to hear the equation is here.
But well, the answer is historical context, and if you knew that yourself and only asked the question to express your dissatisfaction or provoke a response.. Maybe more convenient to do that on Twitter next time.
I wonder if Romans in the time of August called their opponents Republicans…
For some people, the word is just a dished word.Women call their ex a narscist, and men call their ex a Borderliner.
Some people who are politically left-oriented call everyone who sits to the right of the CDA a fascist, while from the right wing everyone who is left of D66 is for communist or Stalinist.
In The US, Republicans call the Democrats Socialists, while the average Democrat is still comparing the bestcte with a VVDer
People who crowning these kinds of crits are usually popusts who do not know what the difference is between fascism, communism, or a bar stool.
I regard it as a form of intellectual poverty, often quickly getting the toughest qualifications of stable.It is a form of schelden. The argumentation behind it is often flawed.
Sometimes it’s a way to disqualify an opponent.Fascism applies in the countries that have experienced the Nazi occupation as the absolute evil. Sometimes it is also an adequate term to describe one’s views. So no one will be fooled if you call Mussolini a fascist.
Now no one will propagate fascism from the ‘ 30s nowadays.However, there are politicians who are predating elements of former fascism.
Because the current extreme right-wing parties show quite a few things we saw at the fascist parties in Germany and Italy before they came to power
In the first instance, shortly by the bend, certain politicians are called fascists because some parties use a rhetoric reminiscent of Italy and Germany in the 30s.You are referring to:
- Forming an in-group by nationalism, and continuing to affirm the inherent goodness of that group;
- Forming an out-group by repeating assumptions about minorities, and continuing to affirm the inherent wickedness of that group;
- Fuelling distrust through conspiracy theories, such as e.g. A secret elite who actively works against the people (e.g.
The Jews, cultural Marxism and other international conspiracies);
In the next source you will see the answer to Quora by Robin van Wateringen, which contains a statement of the message in Mein Kampf.[1 I suggest that when in doubt you read this source, so that I do not have to take the fact that ‘ R ‘ n is parallel between the 30s Germany and contemporary populism.
I would like to clarify a few other laden terms, to make it clear that I am not speaking from emotionally spilled or played indignation.
I would like to make the note that I do not have one specific party to the NSDAP.It is more about agreement of a certain political strategy combined with nationalistic ideas.
With extreme right I mean that the emphasis is on a vertical society, classified by inherent properties, such as descent, gender, sexual orientation, skin color, etc.This is more extreme than centre-right, which also emphasizes a vertical society, only then classified by performance and share in the free market.
With populism, I mean the political strategy by which the electorate is talking to the mouth by reconfirming stereotypes.Even if ‘ R ‘ n core of truth would sit in some stereotypes; Increasing the gap does not solve anything, it does not succeed to bully the people that one wants to see away from the plague; Both the elite and not the minorities. The only effect is distrust, with increased likelihood of escalation.
In the second instance, to come back to the question of why politicians or groups are sometimes called fascistic; Some parties accused of fascism take over the accusation and make their opponents out for fascists, by way of quid pro quo.This is especially Retorica, better known as “no You”. The accusation to the left has little content beyond the conspiracy thought that a secret liberal-Progressive diary practices censorship, which is nonsense as may be seen from the fact that extreme right-wing propaganda can be found everywhere, even on public broadcasting. The result of the quid pro quo is that the term ‘ fascism ‘ loses its original meaning, and is interpreted in particular as a dramatic way to express mistrust.Overuse of leftist activists has also not done well. Farmers from the bio-industry or liberal politicians are not fascists, and it is awkwardly awkward to use that kind of terms within such a context.
So you can’t really use the word ‘ fascism ‘ anymore, as one uses the word ‘ communism ‘, and that’s a bit of language poverty.There is more meaning in the word as the emotional charge. In ‘ Communism ‘ there is much more the significance of the political idea in mind and not the goelags, where ‘ fascism ‘ does not understand the political ideology, but above all sees the Holocaust. (Almost) No one wants to be Nazi, but not all fascists are Nazi, just as not all Communists are Stalinist. Fascism, like Communism, is a political ideology, which has its pros and cons. The intended benefits of fascism ensure that it always remains attractive for some people. This is the reason that the fascist thinking is not yet extinct and perhaps never will do, just as communism remains attractive to some people. However, the disadvantages associated with creating an out-group can be extremely dangerous, as history has shown, and the right-wing aspect of the extreme right makes a certain proportion of the population to be the victim, NML. The group at the bottom of a rigid vertical society. This makes the fascist ideology indefensible in my eyes.
I use ‘ fascism ‘ as the name of a certain ideology combined with a certain strategy, but I try to use the word as small as possible, even if I think it is a current political movement.When using the word ‘ fascism ‘, one quickly feels that a rhetorical move is made that the public wants to manipulate by fear. This is not always the case, but in all honesty, unfortunately still regularly. It would be nonsense to deny this, and fascism is not a neutral term. Especially on the Internet people want to be quite messy with their choice of words. When you then come across someone using the word ‘ fascism ‘ to give emotional charge to the text without understanding what the term means, as a reader, keep in mind that for some people it actually feels very frightening to Fascistic groups like Pegida or NVU in action to see. One can panic too pas and UNPAs determined behavior for fascist prestige. The violent language reflects fierce worries. In a sense, if you need a comparison to understand it better, you could compare the fear of the anti-fascist group with the fear that a large group of Fascists feels for an international elite who is attempting a secret agenda to Culture, Christians and the white skin color of the Earth’s soil (this is called ‘ omperking ‘ or ‘white displacement‘, and is ‘ n ‘ thing among fascists).I do not know the cause of the behavior to talk well, but only to indicate where the behaviour is coming from.
Understand well that anti-fascism and fascism are not equal to each other.When Antifa arrives at a fascist, ‘ N ‘ fascist has the choice to swear off his fascism. If someone chooses not to turn his fascism into action, anti-fascism has nothing to do with that person. If the fascist arrives at ‘ N Negro, ‘ n Homo, or ‘ n lvb’er, then ‘ r is not a choice. Whether the fascists lose, or you hold on with existence.
Fortunately, the opponents of extreme right populism have other methods to express themselves than by references to WWII.The word ‘ fascism ‘ does not need to be used, despite the fact that it does appoint something topical. It Is perhaps more desirable to appoint in detail where the thought of extremism goes wrong and where it is dangerous. (This is why this answer has been extended all the time.) In this answer, I would particularly like to make it clear that the use of ‘ fascism ‘ can be justified, but you have to make ‘ r ‘ work to use the term responsibly. In the end, this is naturally mopping open with the crane when fascists successfully achieve inflation of the term and left the term used to attack liberals.
For the lefts of us: If you are unsure whether your audience understands the term ‘ fascism ‘ properly, it may be more convenient to leave it.For even if you use it well, but the other does not understand, it contributes to inflation.
I prefer to use the term ‘ extreme right ‘, even though this term is very laden, for lack of better.I prefer this term because I can’t explain it more easily (see above… Somewhere). It Is also more visible, given that these parties are so right that they cannot do so with the VVD or similar right-liberals by one door.
If the extreme right comes with a new word (e.g.Alt-Right, Identitarian or rasrealist) to cover itself, you can safely talk about it and link this new word to the ideas of previous generations. Making the continuity of extreme right and fascism within society understandable helps people see the ‘ new ‘ groups for what they are; Same old crap with ‘ n new bow tie around it. When the extreme right is about censorship, they mainly mean that most people have bad associations with racism, fascism, and other forms of hatred. It costs social capital if you want to wear hate, and that’s a good thing. It is the task of journalists and leftist activists to denote the language from the right when it becomes crypto.
Should you be very positive against the use of ‘ fascism ‘ or ‘ extreme right ‘; If you can find the terms that sound less judging than ‘ fascism ‘ or ‘ extreme right ‘ without contributing to normalization of the far right agenda, then I would love to hear it.Have fun with that paradox.
It will automatically turn out whether I give too much confidence to the Quorans when I use fraught language as ‘ fascism ‘ and ‘ extreme right ‘ to write an answer, but it’s worth trying to find the above points worthwhile to Communicate.I hope that the detail of my argumentation justifies the use of such terms here. Thanks for the Read!
[1 response from Robin van Wateringen on when I was little, we learned that reading “Mein Kampf” was very dangerous to do.Will it still be seen today? Why?
Lack of actual arguments.
When you paint someone like an extreme left or right-wing fanticus, you give the signal to other people that you do not have to deal with that kind.In fact, there is no discussion with fundamentalists, so you get the luxury that you should not go into the arguments of your opponent and they can refuse out of hand.