The club I support recently appointed a self confessed fascist as its manager.

That is not an issue for me, but it did spark a debate on another forum which got quite heated at times. I'm not particularly interested in politics but I did do some more reading on the subject.

What I found confused me. Fascism is a far-right political leaning, which I was well aware of. I then went onto read that fascism movements are very anti-communism which surprised me because I thought they where quite similar. Then I read that communism is considered a far-left political leaning which surprised me even more because I thought the left was about liberty whereas communism is not.

So. Why is it the fascists are so opposed to communism despite their similarities, and how is it that communism with it's policies that limit liberty is considered a far-left ideology?

Interesting question, Rakers, and one I'll have to give some study to before really trying to come up with a logical answer. I DO know that humans like to "bend the rules" a bit to justify their own personal interests. It stands true with all religions and politics. That is why in the second World War between Germany and the Allies, both sides were praying to the same God for protection and success in battle. In their purest form, most ideologies make sense. Unfortunately, humans own interests and perversions tend to cloud the issue, and those in power make "changes" to fit their own needs.

Well, to me both Fascism and Communism in the forms they presented themselves in during the last century are two sides of the same coin.

Both dictatorships, both just names given to a bunch of ego maniacs controlling a population devastated by war and looking for a leadership who offered scapegoats and excuses for why they " the chosen ones " were not to blame for their own situation.

The reason I said in the forms they presented themselves in, is the fascists to my mind, were actually less hypocritical than the communists. Fascist ideology, was almost " Roman" in concept with the dictator bedecked in laurels but without a Senate to keep said " Caesar's " feet grounded in some form of reality. Thus Hitler, Mussolini etal.......Presented themselves to the people as what they were, despots devoid of morals, and totally ruthless in their demands for power and blind loyalty, promising to conquer, not teach.

Communists on the other hand total hypocrites. Why?................ Well, for me "true" communism ( as promised ) if it could ever work, with a harmonious, caring society where the fat of the land is shared by all with a common goal to make the world a better place, really should be utopia ( albeit a tad dull ).

What did the Russians and the Chinese get ? Same despotic rule as the other lot , but with pretensions that the mass killings and deprivations were really there to make the workers equal, not dead.

Both presentations inherently evil......................

But what about the black dwarfs I here you ask .............?

There you go hereing again.

A CHRISTIAN DEMOCRAT: You have two cows. You keep one and give one to your neighbor.

A SOCIALIST: You have two cows. The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor.

AN AMERICAN REPUBLICAN: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. So what?

AN AMERICAN DEMOCRAT: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You feel guilty for being successful. You vote people into office who tax your cows, forcing you to sell one to raise money to pay the tax. The people you voted for then take the tax money and buy a cow and give it to your neighbor. You feel righteous.

A COMMUNIST: You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk.

A FASCIST: You have two cows. The government seizes both and sells you the milk. You join the underground and start a campaign of sabotage.

DEMOCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government taxes you to the point you have to sell both to support a man in a foreign country who has only one cow, which was a gift from your government.

CAPITALISM, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.

BUREAUCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government takes them both, shoots one, milks the other, pays you for the milk, then pours the milk down the drain.

AN AMERICAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when the cow drops dead.

A FRENCH CORPORATION: You have two cows. You go on strike because you want three cows.

A JAPANESE CORPORATION: You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. You then create clever cow cartoon images called Cowkimon and market them World-Wide.

A GERMAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You reengineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves.

A BRITISH CORPORATION: You have two cows. They are mad. They die. Pass the shepherd's pie, please.

AN ITALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows, but you don't know where they are. You break for lunch.

A RUSSIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You count them and learn you have five cows. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 12 cows. You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.

A SWISS CORPORATION: You have 5000 cows, none of which belong to you. You charge others for storing them.

A BRAZILIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You enter into a partnership with an American corporation. Soon you have 1000 cows and the American corporation declares bankruptcy.

AN INDIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You worship both of them.

A CHINESE CORPORATION: You have two cows. You have 300 people milking them. You claim full employment, high bovine productivity, and arrest the newsman who reported on them.

AN ISRAELI CORPORATION: There are these two Jewish cows, right? They open a milk factory, an ice cream store, and then sell the movie rights. They send their calves to Harvard to become doctors. So, who needs people?

There you go hereing again.

Believe it or not Harky, my little under name things says it all..................

Edited to add one of my best pals is called Neil......or it could be Niel.....I simply can't tell by looking at it. Sad eh.....!!!

Sorry. And I just pointed out another in another thread...sorry again.

It was all because of your "mamal" crusade. I'm not normally a spelling nazi.

Sorry. And I just pointed out another in another thread...sorry again.

It was all because of your "mamal" crusade. I'm not normally a spelling nazi.

Have no fear I'm thick and thick skinned............

( edited to add, even I knew mamal was wrong..........)

But...I don't fear that you're thick and thick-skinned. Why should I fear that?

I fear......no, I won't divulge that....you'd use it against me

But...I don't fear that you're thick and thick-skinned. Why should I fear that?

I fear......no, I won't divulge that....you'd use it against me

Tsk tsk....Peeking in the showers again ?

But...I don't fear that you're thick and thick-skinned. Why should I fear that?

I fear......no, I won't divulge that....you'd use it against me

Tsk tsk....Peeking in the showers again ?

Don't tell ND.

Who'd you think passed the soap ?

I do enjoy a one liner, two make the spell checking so much more difficult.........

Well, to me both Fascism and Communism in the forms they presented themselves in during the last century are two sides of the same coin.

Both dictatorships, both just names given to a bunch of ego maniacs controlling a population devastated by war and looking for a leadership who offered scapegoats and excuses for why they " the chosen ones " were not to blame for their own situation.

The reason I said in the forms they presented themselves in, is the fascists to my mind, were actually less hypocritical than the communists. Fascist ideology, was almost " Roman" in concept with the dictator bedecked in laurels but without a Senate to keep said " Caesar's " feet grounded in some form of reality. Thus Hitler, Mussolini etal.......Presented themselves to the people as what they were, despots devoid of morals, and totally ruthless in their demands for power and blind loyalty, promising to conquer, not teach.

Communists on the other hand total hypocrites. Why?................ Well, for me "true" communism ( as promised ) if it could ever work, with a harmonious, caring society where the fat of the land is shared by all with a common goal to make the world a better place, really should be utopia ( albeit a tad dull ).

What did the Russians and the Chinese get ? Same despotic rule as the other lot , but with pretensions that the mass killings and deprivations were really there to make the workers equal, not dead.

Both presentations inherently evil......................

But what about the black dwarfs I here you ask .............?

What really led me to do more reading on something that I had no interest in was the sheer hypocrisy being shown by the lefties in the debate.

The vast majority of people didn't give a monkeys. Some voiced their displeasure but otherwise left it at that. The lefties, those supposed champions of free speech, were by far the most intolerant of the lot. Anybody who pointed out their hypocrisy was shouted down as being immoral and stupid.

It was a real eye opener. The lefties were the first to claim that everybody should have the right to their own opinion, except for when it's politics that they don't agree with.

That forum sounds like the diametric opposite to OTB (and bedlam sometimes) where it is the left that are illogically shouted down.

Just goes to show.....opinions are varied all over the world.

Well, to me both Fascism and Communism in the forms they presented themselves in during the last century are two sides of the same coin.

Both dictatorships, both just names given to a bunch of ego maniacs controlling a population devastated by war and looking for a leadership who offered scapegoats and excuses for why they " the chosen ones " were not to blame for their own situation.

The reason I said in the forms they presented themselves in, is the fascists to my mind, were actually less hypocritical than the communists. Fascist ideology, was almost " Roman" in concept with the dictator bedecked in laurels but without a Senate to keep said " Caesar's " feet grounded in some form of reality. Thus Hitler, Mussolini etal.......Presented themselves to the people as what they were, despots devoid of morals, and totally ruthless in their demands for power and blind loyalty, promising to conquer, not teach.

Communists on the other hand total hypocrites. Why?................ Well, for me "true" communism ( as promised ) if it could ever work, with a harmonious, caring society where the fat of the land is shared by all with a common goal to make the world a better place, really should be utopia ( albeit a tad dull ).

What did the Russians and the Chinese get ? Same despotic rule as the other lot , but with pretensions that the mass killings and deprivations were really there to make the workers equal, not dead.

Both presentations inherently evil......................

But what about the black dwarfs I here you ask .............?

What really led me to do more reading on something that I had no interest in was the sheer hypocrisy being shown by the lefties in the debate.

The vast majority of people didn't give a monkeys. Some voiced their displeasure but otherwise left it at that. The lefties, those supposed champions of free speech, were by far the most intolerant of the lot. Anybody who pointed out their hypocrisy was shouted down as being immoral and stupid.

It was a real eye opener. The lefties were the first to claim that everybody should have the right to their own opinion, except for when it's politics that they don't agree with.

Have you no experience of life? Both of the furthest reaches of the pendulum, left and right, are absolutely convinced that their ideology is the only way that mankind should live, and therefore they feel obliged to shut out any other form of belief.

You also have that with extremeist Islamists who want to impose Sharia law everywhere. That would not necessarily be a bad thing (Sharia law is - in it's original form - a basis for communal decisions), except that these fundamentalists want to impose THEIR INTERPRETATION of what Sharia Law is. And that is not Sharia Law.

There are bigots in most political and religious doctrines who have closed minds to any other interpretation. This sometimes shows in the most unusual places - for instance in the climate change argument it is almost impossible to be heard if you disagree with the view that this is a man-made phenomenon that will destroy the earth.

And nuclear power - to me the simple solution to the above mentioned (and wholly disputed) global warming. Yet the 'greenies' don't want it - nor coal-fired generation, nor oil/gas-fired generation. But if you close those down and go back to kerosene lanterns they will complain even more.

There's nowt so queer as folk.