this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2025
967 points (93.1% liked)

Comic Strips

14250 readers
2945 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/26512687

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yunxiaoli@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

That's not the definition of the term, by any ones analysis. The simplest, original definition is that fascism is state and corporate power combined. Like the US has been for half a century.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 0 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Didn't the state own all the corporations in the USSR? How would that not be state and corporate power combined?

[–] yunxiaoli@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

There were no corporations in the ussr. There were business, not multi regional conglomerates.

And even then the purpose of a corporation is to profit. That is it's sole goal.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

That doesn't change that the powers of governance and commerce were in the same hands. Changing what you call it is just semantics.

[–] yunxiaoli@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Intent is incredibly important. In all systems trade happens. The idea that capitalism=markets is incredibly stupid, equally stupid is the idea that all work is done under a corporation for the sole purpose of making someone else rich, as you have suggested here.

The problem is not that things are done for the sake of the state or not, but what purpose things are done for. In fascism the state is owned by corporate interests, the leading interest being whatever dictator sits at the top. Work is done solely to make those corporate owners privately rich, nothing more. Each system is built openly for class oppression.

Even in the most brain rotted American views the ussr is nothing like that. You'd have to be a fascist or brain damaged to even try to argue it.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

the leading interest being whatever dictator sits at the top.

This is the part that matters. This is also true for Soviet communism or really any real life communism. The instruments are different, but the song is the same.

[–] yunxiaoli@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

Nope, it truly isn't. A lot of very rich people that currently own the US have paid a ridiculous amount of money to convince you that's the case, but any dual citizen of China will tell you xi's not a dictator like Biden or Trump.

The same was true in the ussr. Or any communist party controlling a socialist state. Your ignorance doesn't change reality, neither does your gullibility.