not a perfect translation, but pretty good.
https://www.openculture.com/2016/11/umberto-eco-makes-a-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html These don’t line up very well. 2/14 is a failing grade.
yeah they don’t line up exactly, but I think each one is still applicable to other points.
I could only read this in Jeff Foxworthy’s voice, which made it…. weird.
Pretty factual.
He was one of the best writers ever too 😥
Is Foxworthy still a Trumper?
no idea, the redneck joke phrasing just came to mind as I was reading.
I would disagree with 1 and 3, but I could just be over thinking.
A strong leader can solve all the problems- by developing teamwork, collaboration and understanding, and inspiring others to address these issues.
“Real” citizens are those with citizenship. Doesn’t mean residents or illegal residents aren’t people or important, just not citizens.
Unfortunately for both we know what fascists actually do.
With #1, strong leader probably means the strong-handed over-enforcing leader who’s tough on crime to solve problems. In your example I agree, but I’d also argue the leader is guiding society in that case and it takes everyone to solve problems.
With #3, I think it’s referring to a subset of actual citizens who are treated like “real” citizens over other citizens. Whether it’s by race, class, religion, etc. Some minority of the population is made the boogeyman.
Yeah, strong leader usually refers to dictators, not “good” leaders.
It references exactly what is meant, for the people in my home country Hitler was considered a strong handed, good, democratically ellected leader. For a lot of people in america trump is a strong handed, democratically elected, good leader, for a lot of people meloni is a strong handed, democratically elected leader.
The very point is, that people fall for fascists, believing they are “strong handed” and “people who get the job done, even if the means of archiving it are hard”
The point is that the trope of “having a vision/plan better then everyone else, which you demand is followed strictly is always the first step in delegitimizing opposing voice, minorities, foreigners etc. The first step in taking power is always to convince the public you know better then everyone else (usually with scapegoats which in your narrative only you can fight, mostly you use the groups you delegitimsed before). Then you get power and take mesures to secure that power, normally by silencing or buying the press. You give yourself ever more freedom to do what you want (like spy on everyone) and your reason why this is OK are always those scapegoats or general " terrorism”
If you collected enough power, you can prevent the next elections or fake them.
Trump tried this. He is exactly the bilderbuch example for why this point is in the list
Fascists never come and say “hi, I am the fascist and I want to opress 80% of you, please elect me” They come and say “look, those 5%, they are the root of all your problems, but I can save you from them, all others are to blind to see, but I will finally put drastic measures in place to save you from them! I am the strong leader who will get you through this”
Wise people on the other hand mostly talk about where they’re unsure in their theories, what could go wrong, and mist importantly listen to their opposition and other opinions
In the scale of nations I would disagree. A single strong leader can"t solve all the problems. No matter how “good”, progressive, collaborative etc. He is.
As soon as one holds all the power people around them will start to please them for their own benefit instead of telling the truth so it becomes impossible for the leader to make I formed decisions in the spirit of ALL the people In a whole nation
If you’re surrounding yourself with ass kisser you’re a bad leader anyway. Its the thing people forget about leadership - its not your job to do it. Its your job to provide the vision, inspire it, and facilitate smarter and skilled people to achieve it.
In the case of nations - let’s take my New Zealand. Jacinta Adern was an average politician but a great crisis leader. She couldn’t stop covid from happening, but she made choices that kept us safe, kept our economy and skills intact, and kept us calm. She didn’t do it herself- she gave us the vision, had the right people in the right place, and brought the policies and plan forward. I wouldn’t vote for her again as a “peacetime” leader, but strongly wish we could keep her on retainer for the next crisis.
