Comments by "Some Canine" (@SomeCanine) on "Youtube Begins Paying Vapid, Meaningless "Celebs" to Make Videos" video.

It's a weird fusion of corporatism and communism.
156
@electricdreams8237 No. They're strictly anti-nationalist. You have to be a nationalist and a socialist to be a fascist.
6
@harrymills2770 No, if the focus was on socialism they would be called socialists. Even communists of the 20th century were also nationalists. They just didn't consider it a core part of their ideology. I honestly don't know how much they tried to take over the world because they failed pretty miserably at even feeding their own people. I guess you could say that they were early globalists in that they didn't have a strictly nationalist platform like the fascists did.
2
@electricdreams8237 Nationalism didn't even have an ethnicity component until Nazism when they went after the Jews/gypsies/etc. This is because most nations didn't have many people of other ethnic groups really. Jews had been spreading out over Europe, but this really was around the time when people were barely beginning to have mobility. Before then it took great effort to move to another country. The auto industry was still starting up and it was really only in big cities. I could go on but my main point is that it only barely started to have an ethnic component around this time. Around this point in history is when all the mass immigration really kicked off. The ethnicity and immigration angles are newer in the debate. Socialism is far older.
2
@haydencapps There's a difference between having similar behavior and having the same ideology. The Bolsheviks, being Jewish, wouldn't have lasted long if they made it racial. There's an interesting argument to be had as to whether they would have if they weren't Jewish, though.
2
@haydencapps I understand your point, I just disagree that they have the same belief system. Left wing populism is pathological altruism to the extent that they actively kill everyone trying to make it more fair. Right wing populism clearly identifies a priority system where the majority ethnicity is paramount and the further down on the list you go the more they mistreat and punish you. The motivations are only similar in that they're extremely totalitarian and power hungry. They way they manifest are VERY similar because there are limited ways to exert control on the population. The need to control is the main problem.
1
@WeWereTheStorm What do you mean, "corporate side of fascism"? I've had a few people make similar points but I have no idea what they're talking about. Nazis were socialists complete with price controls and forced itineraries to try to balance the goods required to keep society functioning. All of the crap you see Venezuela doing to companies, the Nazis did.
1
@haydencapps Well yeah, what they tell themselves is that they're being altruistic. In reality, they're just promoting themselves as a savior. That's a selfish act. They're trying to get the dopamine hit of generosity without actually being generous.
1
@TheGoodGuys_gg Very long well-articulated statement that had nothing to do with what I typed. Of course nations were closely tied to ethnicity before the combustion engine. National-ISM is not nation. Nationalism is the belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals. Just having nation states war and be racist against each other is not nationalism.
1
@lupe556 It doesn't matter if they claim to oppose socialism. They implement socialist plans like price fixing and forcing businesses to make x amount of y goods. That's seizing the means of production. It's fine if they oppose that in theory, but if what they do in practice is the complete opposite then it doesn't hold up. Like feminists, they can claim that they want equality and don't hate men all day, but if presented with a plan that helps equality by helping men they will never agree to help men.
1
@TheGoodGuys_gg Yes and no. One main reason why I believe that people shouldn't get too hung up on nationalism is because a lot of the race stuff is implied even if it's not explicit. So maybe you're right in a way that even if it isn't their main argument for nationality, it's one of their motivators and the motivation of their supporters. So I was referring to the explicit nature of the race as it pertains to nationalism. That is new where previously it was just implied.
1
@lupe556 There's still private production in socialist countries. It's not universal. Venezuela still has private industry, although most have just left.
1
@lupe556 What do you mean by corporatism? I have a sneaking suspicion that our definitions differ.
1
@lupe556 How far would you go in the state collaboration with corporations? Are patents state collaboration? Copyright law state collaboration? I don't mean to be combative. I'm curious where you draw the line.
1