2191
Comments (273)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
-4
Quixotic -4 points ago +4 / -8

Can you please explain how it is hard communism and not hard fascism that was described?

Of course you can’t. So stop it.

16
Liam_Clancy 16 points ago +16 / -0

Both are collectivist philosophies so the distinction is irrelevant for the purpose of this argument. Both systems place the collective need higher than individual liberty and neither system allowed other political viewpoints to be represented.

2
iDinduNuffin 2 points ago +2 / -0

The purpose of the argument was about fake voting, collectivism has nothing to do with that. Communism is the one that deceitfully presents itself as a populist ideology carrying out the will of the people, hence calling their countries republics and holding "elections" even when there's only one candidate allowed.

Fascism doesn't pretend to be democratic in the slightest.

1
Liam_Clancy 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's a fair point.

6
Yaemz123 6 points ago +8 / -2

They are the same thing.

In fascism, someone "owns" a company, but government beaurocrats decide how he should run it, and government taxes him as much as they like to take all the profits.

In Communism, someone "runs" a company that the government owns, but government beaurocrats decide how he should run it and the government takes all the profits since they own it.

Different words but same idea: total government control where people are all basically slaves.

2
Quixotic 2 points ago +2 / -0

yep

1
iDinduNuffin 1 point ago +1 / -0

In fascism, someone "owns" a company, but government beaurocrats decide how he should run it, and government taxes him as much as they like to take all the profits.

Do you have any examples for this, or somewhere to read more?