Meta-Thread On Fascism, The Essence Of Injustice Options

[Jonny Cache]

Resource Thread

I will use this thread to collect previous posts and relevant resources on Fascism and its kindred species of Polis State Kraft.

Jon Awbrey

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache:

[Saltimbanco]

Jonny, how about a bare-bones definition of "fascism?"

Merriam Webster online gives "a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."

I don't really like this definition, mostly because it points toward dictatorship. Ancient Sparta is the model for all fascism (and Plato's "Republic"), and its leaders were relatively weak. Sparta had a dual king-ship and a senate, and its highest authority was in fact the laws of Lycurgus.

The essential aspect of fascism, I think, is that it holds the rights of the state to be primary and superior to the rights of individuals. In this sense, it would be reasonable for a project like Wikipedia to be fascistic: it should judge actions based on whether or not they serve the purpose of the project, rather than whether or not they are fair to the individuals involved. If Wikipedia has a problem with fascistic tendencies, it can only be because the legitimate concerns of the project are not accurately reflected in the enforcement of order, and never because the enforcement of order is excessive.

[AB]

The essential aspect of fascism, I think, is that it holds the rights of the state to be primary and superior to the rights of individuals. In this sense, it would be reasonable for a project like Wikipedia to be fascistic: it should judge actions based on whether or not they serve the purpose of the project, rather than whether or not they are fair to the individuals involved. If Wikipedia has a problem with fascistic tendencies, it can only be because the legitimate concerns of the project are not accurately reflected in the enforcement of order, and never because the enforcement of order is excessive.

So if WP defames someone for the good of the project,
that's okay? If a WP member threatens a WR member
with physical violence for the good of the project, that's
okay?

Charities should be about helping people. Putting some
random website claiming to be a charity ahead of ethics
displays a complete and utter lack of morality. Attitudes
like that seriously make me feel nauseas, and sometimes
throw up.

This post has been edited by AB:

[Nathan]

So if WP defames someone for the good of the project,
that's okay? If a WP member threatens a WR member
with physical violence for the good of the project, that's
okay?

There is never any justification to threaten someone with violence (except in the case of self-defense, I wouldn't threaten, I'd just do it) but I see where you're going with this and I agree with you.