[Big Rob]

OK... enjoy your ironic labeling...

[jguazu]

Yes they do, to a great extent, but communism in Russia and China both identified internal 'enemies' kulaks, royalists, bourgeoisie, intellectuals and so on and the Russians also scapegoated national minorities and Jews. Does this one work as a fascist identifier? I'm not convinced myself. I think that may be another one where totalitarian regimes look for fictitious enemies to get the support of frightened people.

True, I maybe didn't totally think that through - I was mostly basing it on Latin American régimes, which never seemed to talk about external threats. I'd still say that, in general, communist régimes appear to worry more about outsiders: the USSR's obsession with the US, China and Yugoslavia for example. And the communist oppression of internal "enemies" is perhaps a lot quieter: see Cuba's fairly subtle oppresion of gays, whilst fascist Paraguay was very vocal about how they were a threat to society.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Perhaps there's a distinction that communist states really worry about external enemies and fascist states internal ones - but both oppress minorities, nonconformists etc.?

[mojojojo]

Stalin was obsessed with internal enemies though. Rightly or wrongly, I always associate the phrase 'enemy of the people' with communist states.

[jguazu]

Didn't Stalin also have a real hatred towards Tito's Yugoslavia and China though? In fact, communist nations seem to have more conflicts between themselves than fascist states do: USSR with Yugoslavia/China, Vietnam with China/Cambodia, Albania with Yugoslavia - whereas fascists seem to get along with other fascists: Germany-Italy-Japan, Argentina-Paraguay-Chile. Is fascism more globally unifying than communism?

[mojojojo]

Presumably the fact that there is no text to interpretate and argue over in the way that there is with Marxism makes a difference. The Soviet Union's problem with Tito was that he wanted to be independent of them wasn't it?

[Malcolm Armsteen]

That's a good point. Mussolini's 'My Life' and Adolph's 'Mein Kampf' aren't exactly close-reasoned political theses, more collections of lies, fantasies and wishful thinking.

[Althea]

That's a good point. Mussolini's 'My Life' and Adolph's 'Mein Kampf' aren't exactly close-reasoned political theses, more collections of lies, fantasies and wishful thinking.

Like the Lib Dem manifesto?

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Lib Dems are bad, but they haven't started concentration camps - yet.

[Althea]

Perhaps, but their manifesto was perhaps too good to be true.

[Abernathy]

Lib Dems are bad, but they haven't started concentration camps - yet.

But if they do, the Lib Dems will point out that the camps would have killed a lot more innocent people without their influence.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

But they aren't, by any definition, fascists.

[Abernathy]

But they aren't, by any definition, fascists.

Yeah, I know.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

The Tories flirt, stigmatising 'useless mouths', immigrants, small foreign countries, big foreign countries etc. Also the use of language, the hyperbole of munters like Gove calling concerned parents 'Trots'. But not yet with the castor oil and frogs. AFAIK.

[Big Rob]

But they aren't, by any definition, fascists.

So what is the 'definition' of a fascist?