Justin Mohn, a 32-year-old Pennsylvania man, is in police custody after allegedly murdering and decapitating his father, claiming the latter was a “federal employee” and a “traitor.” Before his arrest, Mohn posted a 14-minute video to YouTube in which he displayed his father’s severed head, proclaiming: "This is the head of Mike Mohn, a federal

  • Corgi Ergo Sum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Compulsory alliance is sort of a core feature of fascism so you really must be either fascist or anti-fascist.

    If fascist government is in power, it will creat a system in which non-partisan participation furthers and advances the fascist state, so one cannot “opt out”. Since a fascist system won’t entertain neutral, the question “Are you fascist or anti-fascist? You can only pick one.” Is not inherently disingenuous.

    Communism does not force people into supporting it, there “neither” is an acceptable answer to “Are you communist or anti-communist” in a way that cannot be applied to fascism.

    Well, Communism doesn’t force participation as long as you don’t ask the tankiis, but fuck the tankies.

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      non-partisan participation furthers and advances the fascist state, so one cannot “opt out”

      The same is true of the UK monarchy, yet plenty of Brits are neither for nor against it.

      • Corgi Ergo Sum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m not familiar with the British Monarchy so I can’t really comment on how appropriate your framing is.

        What I can point out is that your statement is logically inconsistent on its face.

        One can’t be neutral towards a fascist state because the fascist state won’t allow one neutral. In such a condition, anyone who claims to be neither for fascism or actively anti-fascism is pro-fascism because the condition of fascist power will direct all the labour and efforts of participants to the support of the fascist state. In such a condition, pro-fascist is the default condition, and anti-fascism can only be achieved through conscious effort and educated and effective praxis. There is no neutrality. One is not neutral in the face of fascism simply because one declares to be so.

        So, if the same conditions essential to fascism are true of the British Monarchy, then the nature of the political situation is stopping Brits from being neither for or against Monarchy. If your assumption that fascism is like the British Monarchy is true, then one could only be pro-monarchy, or achieve anti-monarchy through conscious and intentional effort.

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          In such a condition, anyone who claims to be neither for fascism or actively anti-fascism is pro-fascism

          You are not making any distinction between those who would want a fascist state to endure and those who would be indifferent to replacing it with something else. But I think that distinction gets to the heart of the question.

          You are also assuming that fascists and anti-fascists are only concerned about their own condition. Suppose you asked an American their opinion of Mussolini and they responded “He was terrible”. That’s clearly anti-fascist. But what if they responded “Never heard of him”? That’s neither pro or anti fascist, yet the neutral response won’t advance a fascist regime.