REPOST: Re: Sociology of Fascism?
From: Comm (tjsrno_at_spampost.com)
Date: 03/16/05
- Next message: Eric Chomko: "Re: Sneezing on Greenpeace"
- Previous message: Eric Chomko: "Re: Sneezing on Greenpeace"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:17:53 GMT
double posts, see in please.
"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e00d3113jgg2orhnscihscsn6q90ttairt@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:34:56 GMT, "Comm" <tjsrno@spampost.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"frank" <odlh90@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:eeb9b0bf.0503140415.32555981@posting.google.com...
>>> Hi, I'm writing an essay on Durkheim and will be discussing his views
>>> on socialism and the sense in which he views socialism as a social
>>> pathology.
>>
>>Socialism is? Socialism is basically a system of cooperation where people
>>share common goods. There is nothing so pathological about it.
>>Capitalism
>>is a hell of lot more patholocial - even psychopathic, if you realy look
>>at
>>it.
>>>
>>> I'm assuming he would consider fascism in the same manner. However I
>>> would like to reference a text in which an author or even Durkheim
>>> himself states as much.
>>
>>Fascism is not socialism. Fascism is rule by the state in cooperation
>>with
>>the military and big business (like what USA is heading toward - or is USA
>>already there?)
>
> It seems that a great many people, especially Americans, confuse socialism
> with National Socialism. They have apparently not yet learned that the use
> of
> words in the names of political parties can be misleading.
Well, nationalism plus socialism = socialism in one country, almost tribal,
like primitive communalism, but up to date - and Germany may have well been
that, at first.
>
>>> Does anyone know of any such texts dealing with the sociology of
>>> fascism?
>>
>>E. Fromm. W. Reich too. Fromm's the best one. Reich gets weird. But -
>>he's
>>against fascism (so am I - IF it's against me - big qualifier). Fasicism
>>seems to work in the sense of that "united we stand, divided we fall"
>>psychology. It's from the Roman "fasces." It is a REaction to something
>>very real - and it seems to be a very normal human reaction (contrary to
>>the
>>psychobabble). There is nothing pathological about it - people in groups,
>>or nations, tend to go for fascism after they have been *defeated* and are
>>in a
>>miserable state of affairs, or when they see their nations falling into
>>chaos
>>and disorder and want to straighten things out and get back some quality
>>of
>>life. After they do, they tend to better themselves. Where it goes from
>>there is anyone's guess. Fascist states haven't lasted long enough to
>>really see that.
That word should be defeated. Not deafed. Also, quality of life, not
qualify. Damned typos.
>
> Cross-posted to soc.culture.south-africa where a similar topic has been
> discussed, with even more ignorance displayed.
How is that ignorant? Do tell me. Take it small. A band of bullies is
afoot. Everyone cowers when they come around, everyone is afraid.
Suddenly, someone that's had enough of it gets the idea to unite against
them. They unite. They clobber the bullies. And they stay united.
That's how it starts. Nations that do this are just bigger. It's the same
idea. And it does come from the Roman idea of the fasces. There is no
reason in the world that socialism can't exist in one country. That term
"country" can be defined along geographical lines and borders - OR it can be
defined in terms of the tribal - in which case it would mean one tribe - or
"race." That people do tend to do that is a no-brainer. To top that off,
it is limbic - instinctive - TO do that. It comes from kin-bonding. People
do it from the small (cliques in schools, eg) to the big (nations). The
point is that people don't get the idea to "unite as a group" like that, in
that way, unless they are uniting AGAINST something. Again, no-brainer.
There is nothing ignorant or irrational about doing that. It's an immediate
reaction - with not much care for forethought (like, what happens after we
unite, get what we want, and defeat those against us?). I have no idea
what's going on in South Africa - but if the people on that newsgroup are
there and they are white, it would be very wise to get the hell out of there
BEFORE something happens to them. I'd bet money that something will happen,
if not now - later. Think: dead farmers in Rhodesia - oh, excuse me, I
meant Zimbabwe.
>
>
> --
> Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
> E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop
> uk
- Next message: Eric Chomko: "Re: Sneezing on Greenpeace"
- Previous message: Eric Chomko: "Re: Sneezing on Greenpeace"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
