The right is more against regulations in business related matters, while the left is willing to plaster regulation after regulation upon companies. (For examples, look to California, arguably the most liberal state in the united states, and has incredible levels of restrictions upon businesses) for better or worse, control of industries, at the current moment, is indeed more left than right, if you look on a state by state basis, the redder the state, the fewer the regulations, and the bluer the state, the more the regulations. Fascism, would be more aligned with the left here as well.
But so are most fascist parties though. Like I said. The Nazi's privatised all stateheld companies and all the regulations they placed on them had to do with tradionalism and for the sake of the state, not protection of the customer, which is the end goal for the left leaning parties.
Again, the right wishes for a smaller government, (even if they desire a larger millitary). That puts them at direct odds with a core desire of fascism, that desire being authoritarian control. It doesn't have to be a murderous or destructive regime, but even you would agree that a fascist regime would be an authoritarian regime right? How exactly can that be done by shrinking the government? there may be right wing tenets and influences within fascism, but it definitely holds more sway from the left. At least as far as modern politics is concerned.
I'm obviously not saying the Republican party is fascist. This argument assumes I am. I am not. I am simply saying that the Republican party has more in common with fascists than the Democratic party.
The current right wing pillars are clearly against suppressing anything within the country by force. Military does not count in this instance, because military relates to out of country matters. Fascism is not (completely) a stance on the military policy, it's an internal policy of how to run the country.
Military does count. Look at the civil wars in the Middle East.
Fascism not a stance on military policy? Flat out wrong. Fascism was founded on the idea of Total War. It's not a coincidence that both Germany and Italy were very expansionist. And a part of fascism is the praise of the military.
Traditional values are, as far as the right wing goes, more related to family than to policy. It's the belief in the standard household. it does not say anything about the collective, but is more of a take on the individual (household). Family traditions are not fascist, any more than they'd be communist or socialist, or capitalist. it's an invalid comparison.
Again, this is something I just did not say. I didn't argue that family vallues are fascist. I said family vallues are one of the many thing fascist strive for.
Religion is separate from state, by law, and modern republicans have made no overt efforts to change that, but let's say it were connected. What does religion do for fascism? If we've learned anything from past religious regimes, it's that the religion, if taken too far, will eventually overpower the regime in question. Fascism and religion are not the same thing. Hell, even two religions under the same deity can be leagues apart in practice. Putting any of them to fascism inevitably puts fascism at odds with every other remaining religion simply because the question becomes: Which ideology is fascism going to align with more, and thus favor more heavily (notice how this still ignores the individual, and thus remains a valid complaint.) so with all that said, I'm gonna have to say separation of church and state makes that clusterfuck of an equation null and void (thankfully). there's far more i can go into to debunk religion+fascism=anything other than a complete mess, but i assume you get the point.
They have. They have very much made an effort to change that. The entire gay marriage thing, which is very much a partisan issue, is completely based on religion and traditional vallues. You also conveniantly forgot about the fact that religion was just an example of a traditional vallues which the Republicans hold.
Also, fascist don't just work on traditional vallues in law. But they also just propagate total return to it on your own merrit.
Forcible suppression of opposition, as far as fascism would be directly related, is something that is currently more of a left wing stance than a right wing stance. The current right wing pillars are clearly against suppressing anything within the country by force. and in that facet, the current left (especially Europe, with it's budding "free speech" laws at the moment) would fit that bill far more then the right.
I already granted you this one. No need to hammer down on it.
Also, what left wing parties are you seeing in Europe? I can name exactly 1 party in my country (out of, like, 20 something) that wants to "prevent rascism" as they call it. And they didn't even get enough votes to show up on the show up on the vote count charts. And it is heavily ridiculed by both left and right for being "cringy".
In fact, over here in Europe, the left is actively trying to unban things like "Mein Kampf" but the RIGHT is stopping them.
And if you think that SJW's are trying to take your freedom of speech away. Well, some of them are. But that's a VERY small minority. The ideology of Social Justice is actually to not censor but simply speak out and actively oppose what they view as "hatespeech". And its not like the right doesn't actively oppose what they view as the wrong opinions.
- Phantom Roxas likes this