[clumsysmurf]

> corruption is actually considered a benefit! This is because the loyalists interpret this as "we" are winning and "they" are losing.

I think the end goal is domination. From https://mastodon.social/@JuliusGoat/109551955251655267 :

It’s best to understand that fascists see hypocrisy as a virtue. It’s how they signal that the things they are doing to people were never meant to be equally applied.

It’s not an inconsistency. It’s very consistent to the only true fascist value, which is domination.

It’s very important to understand, fascists don’t just see hypocrisy as a necessary evil or an unintended side-effect.

It’s the purpose. The ability to enjoy yourself the thing you’re able to deny others, because you dominate, is the whole point.

For fascists, hypocrisy is a great virtue — the greatest.

https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/hypocrisy-and-fascism-2018-0...

[dralley]

>It’s best to understand that fascists see hypocrisy as a virtue. It’s how they signal that the things they are doing to people were never meant to be equally applied.

For my friends - everything, for my enemies - the law.

[AlexandrB]

I used to love this pithy quote but reflecting on it more recently this doesn't seem like something limited to fascists or fascism. Indeed, this kind of thinking is used by those of any political leaning when ideology becomes more important than principles. An obvious example is the USSR.

[danielheath]

Authoritarianism is the umbrella term describing the behaviour of both fascist states and various others. AFAIK all fascist states have been authoritarian - but it’s a common outcome anytime the people running the government are replaced en masse.

[palmfacehn]

The tyranny of the majority is another, often overlooked form of authoritarianism.

[WhyIsItAlwaysHN]

Good point, and much harder to challenge. If the majority is against an authoritarian there's protests and sabotage of social structures. If the majority oppresses a fringe group, it's often socially encouraged

[palmfacehn]

For these reasons, I personally believe authoritarianism cannot be opposed without a solid foundation of individualism. The problem becomes that explaining ideological nuance is rarely politically expedient or even rhetorically effective. Appeals to collectivism are more easily digested by the masses.

[EasyMark]

that's kind of what the USA is going through right now but it's more aptly described as "tyranny of the plurality" because Trump didn't win either majority of of registered voters or majority of the actual vote.

[palmfacehn]

Regardless of tiresome partisan hyperbole, I don't regard the substance of this administration's actions as any more authoritarian the previous or the status quo. In the specific instances where state power has been expanded, I regard it as part of the general trend of expansion. The trend is more indicative of the overall incentives and structure of governance, rather than specific political actors. Similarly, partisan recriminations fit with the same pattern.

[account42]

As is the tyranny of the minority.

[consumer451]

This is a great example of the horseshoe theory of politics [0], which I believe in very strongly. I made a separate post if anyone cares to discuss it. [1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44214040

[thephyber]

Horseshoe Theory is stupid.

It’s based on the flawed assumption that politics can or should be understood on a single axis. It can’t and shouldn’t be. That heuristic is wrong.

If viewed on a 2d axis, the “cohorts that appear similar” on the ends of the horseshoe are still on opposing ends of one of the axes, despite being near each other on another axis.

[consumer451]

I see it as the gateway to people realizing that the left/right 1D line, and even the political compass, are ridiculous.

IMHO, political positioning should be described as a tensor, where each data point is the person's position on a specific policy.

[rendall]

Horseshoe theory has always read like a Pythagorean epicycle to me, an attempt to redeem a broken model. For a reductive political model, I prefer the 2 dimensional Collectivist-Individualist, Authoritarian-Libertarian axes. No need to literally contort the outdated Left-Right spectrum.

An added benefit is you get to avoid annoying semantic battles such as whether Nazis or Fascists are Right wing or Left wing.

Plus you get to add other axes as needed. My favorite, perhaps relevant today, is principled vs. expedient: do we apply principles like this "Rights" stuff impartially, even to people with whom we disagree, or do we just git 'r done?

[consumer451]

To me, the horshoe theory is just a step in the right direction. It shows the limits of a straight 1D line to describe politics, and is a stepping-off point for deeper exploration.

Ideally, maybe we would describe a person's politics with something like a tensor, where each value is the person's support of a specific policy.

[rendall]

Hmm. I guess I feel that "The Horseshoe Theory" is worse than useless. It implies that as someone gets "too much" Right or Left, they inevitably become authoritarian, as if centrists cannot be authoritarian. It equates "weirdness" with "bad". I'd argue that we should skip straight to identifying "authoritarianism" as the problem, and the not having weird or even extreme leftist or rightist ideas.

[popalchemist]

Agreed, the matrix expresses this idea more exactly.

[ahf8Aithaex7Nai]

It should be a trident theory.

[consumer451]

If you don't mind, could you expand on this a bit?

[ahf8Aithaex7Nai]

> I see it as the gateway to people realizing that the left/right 1D line, and even the political compass, are ridiculous.

When this theory is used in discourse, it is always a matter of suggesting that the left fringe and the right fringe are equally to be rejected. Stalin and Hitler, communism and fascism, class struggle and racial theory, Das Kapital and Hitler's Mein Kampf, dictatorship of the proletariat and Nazi dictatorship: the righteous liberal democrat must keep his distance from both extremes in equal measure. The golden path lies in the balanced middle. I am tired of criticizing this nonsense. It is an ideological lie.

The trident means that there is just as much ideology, corruption, political dysfunctionality and all kinds of drivers of suffering, misery and resentment in the supposed political center. But it is very well hidden because it wears a kind of ideological cloak: the horseshoe theory.

So to respond to your sentence I quoted above: the horseshoe theory IS the political compass that should be ridiculed.

[FireBeyond]

Absolutely. See "the only moral abortion is my abortion".

Republicans can play all sorts of games because their mistresses will always be able to get an abortion on the DL without consequence, while "single black mom? 25 to life for murder!"

[wyre]

Red fascism is a term that has been used to equate Stalinism with fascism, so maybe the quote still has merit?

[pinkmuffinere]

For my true friends, champagne! For my sham friends, true pain.

[kennyadam]

Close, but the correct version has better wordplay: "Champagne for my real friends, real pain for my sham friends."

[KennyBlanken]

[flagged]

[andyjohnson0]

> I think the end goal is domination. From https://mastodon.social/@JuliusGoat/109551955251655267

I don't know whether Trump can accurately be described as a fascist, but its been clear to me since his first term that domination is the only thing that matters to him. The obscene wealth and the swaggering deceitfulness and the gold-plated bathrooms are just the secondary outcomes of his need to dominate.

Domineering father-figure; raised as a sociopath; given a lot of money. Kind of inevitable.

[wefinh]

Yeah, only the issue here is that @realFascists are in opposition to Trump. And reading this text in that light - it check out and not really a news.

Also, frankly, you folks need to stop monopolizing these topics, based on highly polarized ideological filter, because even before Trump there was dissatisfaction about how Musk monopolized NASA contracts on the promise, that he would deliver more efficient and cheaper solution, while in reality the result is that NASA is currently paying more for Musks private solutions, than when it had to do it by itself. There are sure many other options to what Musk offers and if Trump is there to break up that monopoly and open up the market, then it is a win situation.

[Cipater]

>there was dissatisfaction about how Musk monopolized NASA contracts on the promise, that he would deliver more efficient and cheaper solution, while in reality the result is that NASA is currently paying more for Musks private solutions, than when it had to do it by itself

SLS, NASA's rocket, costs $2.5 billion, PER LAUNCH.

[avmich]

Can you clarify what reality you're talking about? How NASA would do it cheaper?

[wqaatwt]

That’s all very nice but according to Trump this only suddenly became a problem only a few weeks ago due to some reason. So whatever you are saying has absolutely no relevance to this decision making. If Musk continued licking his boots he’d be doing fine..

[shigawire]

Doublethink

[tempodox]

I think double standards would be a better term than hypocricy. Hypocricy would imply the pretense to be bound by certain rules, but the whole point of fascism is that those in power are not bound by any rules. They only make rules to bind others. I don't see any hypocricy in the openly advertised corruption of the current administration, it's just plain evil of the “we do it because we can” sort.