What's the difference between Communism and Fascism?

[Chris_Sleeps]

Which part of history are you referring to,from the beginning of its history or through all its history up to the present?

The bit where The Catholic Church held the jewish people as a race guilty for the crimes of some people in that past. That part of the history.

I hardly think that many Catholics would hate Jews,when he was Jewish himself and attended the synagogue,what kind of logic would that be

What has logic got to do with it?

If the church taught Catholics to hate Jews why would they have chosen to include the books of the history of Jews in the bible.

I never said they taught them to hate.

 

I said that European antisemitic thought rests on a foundation of Christian teaching. It's true.

[janie48]

The bit where The Catholic Church held the jewish people as a race guilty for the crimes of some people in that past. That part of the history.

 

What has logic got to do with it?

 

I never said they taught them to hate.

 

I said that European antisemitic thought rests on a foundation of Christian teaching. It's true.

I'm glad i've found some names of those jewish people i was referring to,now you can't accuse me of making it up.

 

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/judaism/gratitude.htm

[Chris_Sleeps]

now you can't accuse me of making it up.

I never did. I said it was hotly contested history that isn't helped by the restriction that the Vatican has placed on its archives.

 

Time will tell, like in a lot of things.

[epiphany]

As far as individual liberty is concerned, very little difference. Both severely undermine it.

 

Not all forms of communism aim to centralise ownership of the means of production, however, regardless of whether the outcome of a dictatorship of one group over another is inevitable. Anarcho-communism (or "left" communism), for example, has always distinguished itself from schools of Marxist communism (i.e. the system developed by Lenin).

 

Soviet-style communism should not have a monopoly over the definition of communism, as it was a very specific experiment in capital allocation and had traits that distinguish it quite sharply from other schools of communist thought. This can be seen in critical literature of so-called left wing schools at the time of the Bolshevik revolution.

 

What we can learn from both fascist and communist experiments throughout history is simple - do not let government get too large! Do not give away dictatorial powers to government to "save us" from crises! Be reluctant to sacrifice your individual liberty for security.

[Harleyman]

I have heard about it,and have seen past tv documentary interviews with many ordinary Jews whose lives were saved, but am am unable to recall any names of the Rabbis.

 

Which part of history are you referring to,from the beginning of its history or through all its history up to the present?

I hardly think that many Catholics would hate Jews,when he was Jewish himself and attended the synagogue,what kind of logic would that be,especially when the early apostles were Jews also.

If the church taught Catholics to hate Jews why would they have chosen to include the books of the history of Jews in the bible.

 

You would be amazed at how many peoples of the Nazi occupied eastern European states, Poland, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Russia proper were only too willing to assist the Gestapo and SS in rounding up Jews.

 

In the Baltic states as well as the Ukraine, part of the Jewish unpopularity was due to the power many Jews held in the hated Communist regimes that had previously ruled before the Nazis arrived

[LeMaquis]

Yes i can guess what your view is on Catholicism, i've seen some of your posts to give me some idea of that.

 

I'm no more opposed to Catholicism than I am to any other religion. If I've highlighted Catholicism in a debate on here it would be over paedophilia and abortion. I assume you would be with me on paedophilia. On abortion the Catholic Church - as on many other issues - is still in centuries gone by.

 

Generally Catholics are not representative of the Vatican,so what point are you making? And actually Catholics are representative of people who are probably the most diverse cross section of people in any one religion.

 

If Catholics are a more diverse cross section than other religions that's not saying much. All religious people live in a narrow set of beliefs unless they choose to be non-believers on any particular issue. I am reminded of the Jesuits' saying - give us the boy and we'll give you the man.

 

Which historical reading of Pope Pius do you recommend, from a Left wing atheist perspective, Communist or Catholic etc?

No doubt there will be contradictive references between them all so i don't think i'll bother.

 

There can only be two points of view about Hitler's Pope. Either you're bothered about him being Adolf's big mate in the Vatican or you're not. You're obviously not or you'd bother. Your religious attitude sums up the hypocrisy of religion. Anyone prepared to turn a blind eye towards your ex-leader's friendship towards one of the biggest mass murderers of the last century has got warped morals. I bet you're more incensed by abortionists than you are by Hitler.

[janie48]

I'm no more opposed to Catholicism than I am to any other religion. If I've highlighted Catholicism in a debate on here it would be over paedophilia and abortion. I assume you would be with me on paedophilia. On abortion the Catholic Church - as on many other issues - is still in centuries gone by.

 

 

 

If Catholics are a more diverse cross section than other religions that's not saying much. All religious people live in a narrow set of beliefs unless they choose to be non-believers on any particular issue. I am reminded of the Jesuits' saying - give us the boy and we'll give you the man.

 

 

 

There can only be two points of view about Hitler's Pope. Either you're bothered about him being Adolf's big mate in the Vatican or you're not. You're obviously not or you'd bother. Your religious attitude sums up the hypocrisy of religion. Anyone prepared to turn a blind eye towards your ex-leader's friendship towards one of the biggest mass murderers of the last century has got warped morals. I bet you're more incensed by abortionists than you are by Hitler.

I do hope you are feeling much better now you've got all that off your chest.

[neepsendlane]

I think this question has already been answered if you really look at the current politico-economic situation.

 

Capitalism relies upon 3% compound growth to exist 'healthily', but it has recently begun to hit its limits both geographically (with the opening up of the USSR and China to the global market) and productively (with the difficulties of obtaining some key diminishing raw material resources) so now Europe and North America are undergoing a 'Structural Adjustment Program' known commonly as 'austerity' in order to allow the market to take over the profitable functions of the state through privatisation and to dismantle the welfare state. These are the basic tenets of Thatcherist/ Reaganist neoliberalism- this was when the revolution began and it's still quietly going on today, supported by all of the main political parties.

 

It's supported by the parties because if they were to get into power and not support this capitalist revolution they would be ousted and replaced by technocrats, as happened in Italy- that's our form of democracy. Since the demise of US hegemony in the late 80's we've had a growing global financial power elite that now dictate to western state politicians (or is comprised in part by them) how they will run their countries whilst our national democracy gradually becomes more localised and meaningless- such as the elected police commissioners fiasco- it's all an illusion to make us feel that a vote counts for something, that we're still democratic.

 

Capitalism is no longer primarily about production it's about devising 'fictitious capital' in such a clever way that those participating in the market don't realise that the bonds they hold are complete rubbish (ie 'money that is thrown into circulation as capital without any material basis in commodities or productive activity') until the markets crash. Vast amounts of money can now be made from money and simply sucked out of the economy so capitalists no longer care about production, even if people formed Unions and went on constant strike it wouldn't bother most of the financial elite anymore.

 

So workers can't revolt to fight back at this and they can't vote it away, unless somebody very smart sees another way we simply have to wait for this fraud we call Capitalism to end, as it inevitably must, and hope that we're not too shattered as a society to pick up the pieces and begin something new.

Thanks for a splended post Cavegirl.

Perhaps the new World order [in Europe anyway] is just round the corner as the poorer people will look to leaders with different solutions before much longer, as has happened before.

Ignore history and it will repeat its self comes to mind.

 

---------- Post added 21-01-2013 at 23:00 ----------

 

As far as individual liberty is concerned, very little difference. Both severely undermine it.

 

Not all forms of communism aim to centralise ownership of the means of production, however, regardless of whether the outcome of a dictatorship of one group over another is inevitable. Anarcho-communism (or "left" communism), for example, has always distinguished itself from schools of Marxist communism (i.e. the system developed by Lenin).

 

Soviet-style communism should not have a monopoly over the definition of communism, as it was a very specific experiment in capital allocation and had traits that distinguish it quite sharply from other schools of communist thought. This can be seen in critical literature of so-called left wing schools at the time of the Bolshevik revolution.

 

What we can learn from both fascist and communist experiments throughout history is simple - do not let government get too large! Do not give away dictatorial powers to government to "save us" from crises! Be reluctant to sacrifice your individual liberty for security.

You have just described the European Union.

[Obelix]

I do hope you are feeling much better now you've got all that off your chest.

 

Do you have anything meaningful to say about what he posted, rather than just snide remarks designed to divert attention? I found it quite interesting, but somehow I knew what your response would be before I read it.

[janie48]

Do you have anything meaningful to say about what he posted, rather than just snide remarks designed to divert attention? I found it quite interesting, but somehow I knew what your response would be before I read it.

 

What issues in his post did you find the most interesting, the reference to paedophilia,my presumed worship of Hitler, my "warped morals" my assumed views on abortion or the narrow views religious people have? as opposed to the broader views of the more liberal minded moral atheists like yourself?

 

There are too many issues to deal with in the post you refer to on a thread about Communism and Fascism so i'll decline your suggestion of supplying anything meaningful for the time being, if you don't mind.

 

Perhaps you have something meaningful to offer on the thread topic instead?