|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 4, 2018 20:29:09 GMT
There is a lot in between communism and fascism. I would rather some form of democratic socialism. You have to choose one or the other for this. |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 4, 2018 20:38:34 GMT
Communism because in a fascist state, I'd have to still put up with SJWs. No surprise there, you work-shy northerners will always take the lazy approach. Anything that allows you to sit at home all day with a bag of scag. |
|
|
|
Post by drtokyo on Jan 4, 2018 20:44:05 GMT
Italy lasted 21 years and left its people starving. Spain lasted, but only from the charity of western Europe or their p;eople would.ve starved, too. I see nothing about starvation: Italy fared better than most western nations during the Depression: its welfare services did reduce the impact of the Depression.[63] Its industrial growth from 1913 to 1938 was even greater than that of Germany for the same time period. Only the United Kingdom and the Scandinavian nations had a higher industrial growth during that period.[63] During the 1960s, Spain experienced further increases in wealth. International firms established their factories in Spain: salaries were low, taxes nearly nonexistent, strikes were forbidden, labour health or real state regulations were unheard of and Spain was virtually a virgin market. Spain became the second fastest-growing economy in the world, just behind Japan. The rapid development of this period became known as the Spanish Miracle. How'd they do after they got rid of Mussolini and post war? Starvation. Maybe Spain should have kept fascism after Franco died. Without Marshall in Europe, and the revival of w Europe, Spain wouldn't have had any miracles. Because he was so anti=Russia, he reaped the benefits of NATO and all the rest. And Spain was war torn like the other countries either. |
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Jan 4, 2018 20:47:00 GMT
Facism lasted five minutes and left its people starving, too.. It would have been indistinguishable from the USSR had it lasted, and both systems were totalitarian. It lasted quite a while in Italy and Spain and both did quite well during those periods. No starvation, general economic prosperity, very different to the USSR. Those are the examples I would put forward of fascism, not Germany. It still exist in North Korea. |
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Jan 4, 2018 20:48:26 GMT
Italy lasted 21 years and left its people starving. Spain lasted, but only from the charity of western Europe or their p;eople would.ve starved, too. 21 years is a lot longer than five minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by drtokyo on Jan 4, 2018 21:03:28 GMT
Italy lasted 21 years and left its people starving. Spain lasted, but only from the charity of western Europe or their p;eople would.ve starved, too. 21 years is a lot longer than five minutes. Yeah, it's 10 minutes, Benito. It's a failed system that's a blip in the radar of the governance of Italy, but it is 21 times longer than the arab spring! LOLOLOL |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 4, 2018 23:12:17 GMT
How'd they do after they got rid of Mussolini and post war? Starvation. Maybe Spain should have kept fascism after Franco died. Without Marshall in Europe, and the revival of w Europe, Spain wouldn't have had any miracles. Because he was so anti=Russia, he reaped the benefits of NATO and all the rest. And Spain was war torn like the other countries either. Oh come on. WW2 threw everyone in Europe off the scale. How did the USSR do? How did Poland do? How did the UK do? Irrelevant to throw that in as if it's a measure of the system pre-1939. |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 4, 2018 23:16:54 GMT
And yet it saw growth in many ways. Only beaten by the UK and Scandinavia, as above, and better than Germany. |
|
|
|
Post by Deplorable Fascist Garbage on Jan 4, 2018 23:19:48 GMT
If you had to choose between having a communist or fascist government, which would you choose and why? Both very undesirable, but if I had to, I would have to go with fascism for one simple reason: under fascism, economies can do well and people can eat. Under communism, economies stagnate and people starve. Hedonism? |
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on Jan 5, 2018 0:36:36 GMT
I think I'm kind of a "National Libertarian". I'm not sure exactly what "fascism" even is, the word is so overused.
|
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 5, 2018 2:16:20 GMT
I'm not sure exactly what "fascism" even is, the word is so overused. Lookee uppee. |
|
|
|
Post by drtokyo on Jan 5, 2018 3:31:08 GMT
And yet it saw growth in many ways. Only beaten by the UK and Scandinavia, as above, and better than Germany. Monkey, I looked twice and and couldn't find where I said that. On a side note, I have a finger in a splint, so it's typo city on most of my posts for a while. |
|
|
|
Post by drtokyo on Jan 5, 2018 3:33:29 GMT
How'd they do after they got rid of Mussolini and post war? Starvation. Maybe Spain should have kept fascism after Franco died. Without Marshall in Europe, and the revival of w Europe, Spain wouldn't have had any miracles. Because he was so anti=Russia, he reaped the benefits of NATO and all the rest. And Spain was war torn like the other countries either. Oh come on. WW2 threw everyone in Europe off the scale. How did the USSR do? How did Poland do? How did the UK do? Irrelevant to throw that in as if it's a measure of the system pre-1939. The UK gave the boot to Winnie, that's what they did. |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 5, 2018 12:49:55 GMT
On a side note, I have a finger in a splint Oh yeah, poking it somewhere you shouldn't have...? |
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 5, 2018 13:03:13 GMT
The UK gave the boot to Winnie, that's what they did. I know, "Thanks for your help, now piss off." The Labour Party ran on promises to create full employment, a tax-funded universal National Health Service, the embracing of Keynesian economic policies and a cradle-to-grave welfare state, with the campaign message 'Let us face the future'.Same old, same old - free shit for everyone! |
|
