FASCISM DEFINED | The Difference between Fascism and National Socialism

History has been forgotten. Nobody seems to know what 'Fascism' actually is, or was, or means. And the word has degenerated into little more than a slur. Today though I'm going to use historical sources to accurately define what Fascism was, place it within the context of history, and explain why there was a difference between Fascism and National Socialism, and what that difference was. I'll be giving the technical definitions of both Fascism and Nazism, backed by references so you can double-check my work. Sources are listed in the links below.
I'm NOT a Fascist, I'm NOT a Nazi, I'm NOT a Marxist, and I'm NOT racist or anything else. I do not support said evil ideologies and I'm not promoting them either. My goal here is to give as accurate an account of history as possible so that we may learn from our mistakes and prevent history from repeating.
List of sources for this specific video
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
Full list of all my history sources docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
- - - - -
🔔 Subscribe for more History content: / @theimperatorknight
⏲️ Videos EVERY Monday at 5pm GMT (depending on season, check for British Summer Time).
The thumbnail for this video was created by Terri Young, and the video was edited by her too. Check out her website www.terriyoungdesigns.co.uk/
- - - - -
⭐ SUPPORT TIK ⭐
This video isn't sponsored. My income comes purely from my Patreons and SubscribeStars, and from KZbin ad revenue. So, if you'd like to support this channel and make these videos possible, please consider becoming a Patreon or SubscribeStar. All supporters who pledge $1 or more will have their names listed in the videos. For $5 or more you can ask questions which I will answer in future Q&A videos (note: I'm behind with the Q&A's right now, and have a lot of research to do to catch up, so there will be a delay in answering questions). There are higher tiers too with additional perks, so check out the links below for more details.
/ tikhistory
www.subscribestar.com/tikhistory
Thank you to my current supporters! You're AWESOME!
- - - - -
📽️ RELATED VIDEO LINKS 📽️
George Orwell's "What is Fascism?" • George Orwell's "What ...
Public vs Private | The Historic Definitions of Socialism & Capitalism • Public vs Private | Th...
Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism • Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism
National Socialism | Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments • Hitler's Socialism | D...
A Short History of Mussolini and Fascism • A Short History of Mus...
Himmler's INSANE Reason for Recruiting non-Germans in the Waffen-SS • Himmler's INSANE Reaso...
My “Why I'm Passionate about HISTORY and What Got Me Into it” video
• Why I'm Passionate abo...
History Theory 101 • [Out of Date, see desc...
- - - - -
ABOUT TIK 📝
History isn’t as boring as some people think, and my goal is to get people talking about it. I also want to dispel the myths and distortions that ruin our perception of the past by asking a simple question - “But is this really the case?”. I have a 2:1 Degree in History and a passion for early 20th Century conflicts (mainly WW2). I’m therefore approaching this like I would an academic essay. Lots of sources, quotes, references and so on. Only the truth will do.
This video is discussing events or concepts that are academic, educational and historical in nature. This video is for informational purposes and was created so we may better understand the past and learn from the mistakes others have made.

[@kingamadoow2055]

My history teacher threatened to give me a detention when I pointed out they are not the same thing, people these days jeez

[@TheImperatorKnight]

Ignorance is their strength. My advice is not to channel the establishment. Nod your head, get the grades, think for yourself. Once you're out of -prison- school, then you can try to educate others.

[@jamescawl6904]

@@TheImperatorKnight what event made you understand that facism and socialism are one and the same?

[@helpiamstuckonthismanshead3385]

Read the rules of power and use them

[@jamescawl6904]

@@helpiamstuckonthismanshead3385 The what?

[@helpiamstuckonthismanshead3385]

@@jamescawl6904 the???

[@AFGuidesHD]

because "fascist" these days is used as a synonym for "baddie", "authoritarian" or "person i don't like"

[@BalrogUdun]

Not just these days it’s been going on for decades

[@buddyables9797]

So ANTIFA...is fascist in it very actions...what a waste of grey matter and oxygen

[@coachhannah2403]

@@buddyables9797 - Excellent example of what AF said! Great job.

[@coachhannah2403]

AF - Well, when used by Republicons, you are correct. Few other people misuse it much, though it does happen.

[@albertarthurparsnips5141]

No it isn’t . Absolutely wrong. It’s used by people who are well - read, reasonably conversant with languages ( that cancels out the vast majority of TIKs gamer - trained commentators ‘) to describe devotees of Mussolini, Oswald Mosley, the Action Francaise and it’s myriad of offspring splinter grouplets ( wiki- time, TIK devotees ! ) or those who might fancy the Italian MSI or its later-day offspring along the lines of Casa Pound ( sorry, TIK devotees, I’m afraid you’ll be in need of a google click, somewhat shamefacedly, in my reckoning, but not all at all stunning TIKs appallingly ignorant following, for both Pound and the Casa )..

[@mbrsart]

"Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - People who haven't learned from history and are presently repeating it

[@SerErryk]

I swear I hear that quote from many liberals who know nothing about history.

[@Neko_Mario]

@@SerErryk It's also sad that they stole the title of Liberal from us and now Liberal is basically just a synonym for communist in the west rather than people who stand up for individual freedom like it used to mean.

[@SerErryk]

@@Neko_Mario Yes I fully agree. I wish we could have that word back. But words change over time and we have to accept. What is liberal today will not be liberal tomorrow, just like how counter-culture used to mean moving away from God but now being Christian is counter-culture. I imagine once socialism gains a stranglehold on the US then being a free market individualist will go back to being called liberal (although prolly not in our lifetime).

[@Neko_Mario]

@@SerErryk Hilariously the most extreme communists still use Liberal under its original definition when they describe anyone they hate aka non communists.

[@lupatogiovanni7848]

Quoting is real easy when you don't know a lot about the subject aight? 2 mins into the video and you can already spot some big bs, the "Leggi razziali" weren't any less loose than than their German counterparts. People weren't being killed, but neither were the German Jews in the lapse between 38' to 39'. Just for some context, Italian Jews were expelled from schools, and that stands both for Teachers/principals and pupils/students, whilst in Germany they were allowed still to attend classes (not to teach tho). Just to clarify, i wasn't attacking anyone, at least it wasn't in my intentions and sorry for I have just now realised how much of a dick that first statement made me look like. I wanted to point out at an error and at our tendency to simplify things

[@snakey934Snakeybakey]

I'm a historian (and I am also Jewish BTW) and I have been saying this for years. Nazism emerged independently from Italian fascism, and there is no reason other than gross oversimplification and dumbing down of History to assume that they were automatically the same.

[@Toporzel.]

Yeah bro, just unjew yourself.

[@snakey934Snakeybakey]

@@Toporzel. no

[@bengraham5699]

As an "alternative Historian" i can say that each Century, each year, each month, up to the present is drenched in Lies, Cover-ups and rewritten History by whoever was/is currently in Power-Positions. Everything is a Lie. Just one example: Right now they even pretend that there are no NAZIs in Ukraine 😏

[@VinnyUnion]

Howdy! Jew! What you think of the name, Judith?

[@snakey934Snakeybakey]

@@VinnyUnion you mean Jewdith?

[@AFGuidesHD]

what a hot take that wikipedia page is "fascists mobilize the nation to prepare it for war" because Italy was famous for spending its 20+ years preparing and trying its best to start a war.

[@TheImperatorKnight]

Of course! Italy did a good job with the whole war thing... Thanks Wikipedia!

[@deg6788]

@@TheImperatorKnight we tried not to fight.. We aren't that order following like the Germans

[@TheAngelobarker]

They ignore Mussolini's support of the stressa front and his repeated attempts to stop a war such as starting the munich conference.

[@commissarkordoshky219]

@@TheAngelobarker Uhh, didn't he... Invade Ethiopia?

[@PutasZG]

And Albania. Greek women will also welcome Italian soldiers as heroes, Benito said so. But let's not bring facts into fantasy lands.

[@liammccoy2208]

"Fascism is when you do based things. The more based things you do the more Fascisty it is" - Benito Mussolini

[@transatlanticwhirlwind7589]

Lol

[@undefinedhuman7404]

this but unironically

[@DavidB1124]

Based

[@DavidB1124]

@James East why people keep using the world "fascism" as synonymous of authoritarian governments? Fascism is authoritarian? Yes. But is not the only one. Using that world for everything you disagree is just a tool to avoid and ignore the dangers of other political, economic and social movements.

[@ackchyualidealism2528]

Imperialism and war was cringe though

[@harmstrongg]

The hard left's skill in re-writing history and gaslighting reality is both impressive and terrifying.

[@dendradwar9464]

Yip

[@chins9217]

Then you have this guy just not mentioning Italian Libya and hand-waving away the invasion of Ethiopia as somehow “not racist”.

[@dendradwar9464]

@@chins9217 Arab slavers took more Black slaves into Arabia via the East African slave route than went west into Brazil, West Indies & America Are the Arabs racist?

[@mikemetanoia9942]

I just found your channel. I have been interested in WW2 politics for thirty years. I owned a bookstore and have a huge library on the subject. I received a ba in history mostly focused on ww2. You sir have filled in gaps and verbalized many points I have focused on for sometime without being verbalize as throughly and plainly as you do. Thank you! I’ve probably watched 10 videos tonight!

[@avacadomangobanana2588]

Anyone who says sir in a KZbin comment is not a serious person

[@TheElPescador]

Me too.

[@THARG67]

Same

[@82dorrin]

Definition of Fascism in 2021: Anyone I disagree with.

[@TheImperatorKnight]

That's why it's important to actually define it 👍

[@mike.mentzer_enjoyer]

Extreme Leftist logic lol. Ive seen those morons on Reddit, i've been called a Fascist 7 times and a Nazi 2 times just because i counter-argued those Communists.

[@ericanderson7346]

@@mike.mentzer_enjoyer The corollary is to call anyone you disagree with a communist

[@jakemocci3953]

Boomers who try to claim that the “no, left are the REAL fascists” are the most annoying thing in the world, just playing the leftist’s word games.

[@akgxd]

In my country, I have heart and read people calling fascists to people that support free market. However, here things are more balanced, as you can use the word "terrorist or terrorist supporter" (we had a marxist maoist guerilla that killed thousands of poor people and peasants) just to discredit or make fun of them. You can see these leftiest crying and posting articles that condemn such demeaning actions, but they do not hesitate to call you fascist for whatever reason. lol

[@xander9564]

Though Hitler genuinely admired Mussolini, Mussolini's initial impression of Hitler was poor. He considered him a "madman." He also denounced Nazi racism, saying, "There are no pure races anymore." Sometimes it's good to trust your first impressions.

[@timcahill4676]

Reference for calling him a madman please?

[@bookedroomer]

Then he shacked up with him anyway because Mussolini is just an authoritarian worm

[@filipziljak9942]

Hi I just wanted to pointed out, that many people today think, that Mussolini was kinda like " ideological" father for the Hitler and the Nazi movement, but that isn't the true as TIK already said. Hitler may have tried to copy coup like Mussolini achieved, but also many people think that things like nazi salute "Heil" was copied from fasist movement in Italy, which is not entirely true. You see during Hitler's young age in Vienna he was inspired by man called Georg von Schönerer, whom I would also consider as spiritual father of Hitler believes. Schönerer was pangermanistic, during the Austin- Hungarian era and incredibly anti-semitic and also anti-slavic. During his rally it's assumed that he was first to use salute "Heil", that should supposedly be old pagan germanic salute. During his rally he also like to refer himself as the "führer" ( in Italy it was Duce, but Hitler himself didn't copy it from Mussolini) . So you see the salute "Heil" and the name for the leader "führer" aren't necessarily related to the fasicm. If you look at it, that "these" things were in Hitler's mind long time before Mussolini even was thinking about fasicm.

[@xander9564]

@Oliver Thompson Except that Germans were not monoracial. Being in central Europe, Germans had mixed with Slavs, Latins, and Jews over the centuries. Going by the Nazis' own racial standards, it's clear that the Scandinavian people were more purely Nordic than the German people.

[@richlisola1]

@@bookedroomer He ‘shacked’ up with him (Hitler), because France and Great Britain turned on Italy, foolishly-Even though Mussolini had been reigning in Hitler diplomatically, in regards to an independent Austria free from Germany. France and Great Britain put forth economic embargoes on Italy that crippled its economy. Forcing Italy to turn to Germany for trade, and forcing an unhappy wedding of Germany and Italy. So yeah, yay for Western dumbness. The West literally forged the Axis themselves.

[@scuddyleblanc8637]

Mussolini was from the left and the editor of the leading socialist newspaper in Italy. His differences with the communists were minor. He was impatient with the communists. After gaining control of Italy, Mussolini nationalized many businesses like socialist/communist do.

[@mrlunatic4816]

Yes, but you may forget that he eventually left the “left” (or was at least kicked out of it) And though he was no longer a leftist or a marxist he was still a socialist and that’s how we got fascism

[@loke5713]

​@@mrlunatic4816 socialism is left

[@vgmaster9]

So who's right wing then?

[@mrsentencename7334]

@@vgmaster9anti collectivists

[@pavelm.gonzalez8608]

​​@@mrsentencename7334 All nations or great empires had needed a certain level of collectivism / socialism to survive (which doesn't necessarily means they'll become totalitarian or autarchy states). Or do you think Donald Trump (a truly conservative / right wing leader) and his fandom is truly anti-collectivist only because of their anti-communist / anti-socialist rhetoric??

[@johngalt5072]

I don't know of other countries but in mine, Romania, the word Fascism was used instead of Nazism because the Communist Party was afraid to use the latter for having "Socialism" in it, it would have created confusion among people. The Communists didn't wanted for us to know that the Nazis were in fact socialists.

[@stefanpatrickco]

The Nazis wanted workers owning the means of production? I doubt that.

[@yekaterinasmirnova214]

They can call themselves zeebras, if it does as good as job at collecting votes, you know.

[@zuckergolf4442]

Because they weren’t.

[@johngalt5072]

@@zuckergolf4442 Well, Hitler would have disagreed with you

[@zuckergolf4442]

@@johngalt5072 what do you think socialism is?

[@ahmetben8812]

"12,310 political opponents were arrested in Italy between 1922 and 1940." In Turkey this is the roughly number of political opponents that are arrested weekly in these days...

[@brettmcclain9289]

Is Erduon really that bad?

[@Malinb0ratt]

Probably there are less execution that those on Mussolini Italy

[@MrBassmann15]

@@brettmcclain9289 Yes

[@brettmcclain9289]

@@MrBassmann15 he really is running that place into the ground as fast as he can.

[@MrBassmann15]

@@brettmcclain9289 Pretty much. He's trying to turn Turkey into a Islamic Caliphate in a way.

[@Agent-Blaze]

"Ape alone weak, Apes together strong" - Caesar, while holding sticks and using the bundle of sticks argument

[@JacquesduPlessis11]

Isn't that meme based off something Genghis Khan actually said?

[@692ALBANNACH]

@@JacquesduPlessis11 The Iroquios Confederacy had a similar idea but with 5 arrows!

[@januarysson5633]

So Caesar was a fascist. Color me shocked. 😏

[@MrX-tm8fy]

Ape alone weak, but ape can still hurl feces at grandma 😆

[@calogerohuygens4430]

@@692ALBANNACH interesting point, but fascism has even a economic policy.

[@MrAnonymous1515]

Thank you for these videos on socialism, fascism, communism, marxism. It bothers me how ignorant people are. 😒

[@pimentaze2886]

😒

[@emanuelegiordano962]

Finally a great video that honestly explains what fascism was. I am a political science student doing a master's degree in the history of political parties and movements. I find it absurd that in Italian universities the political experience of fascism is not explained as you did in this video, but as the monster of history, in a simplistic way, only telling lies, without any desire to research the historical truth. BRAVO!

[@bockmaker]

“Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State."

[@hermitoldguy6312]

That's as far left as you can get!

[@freedomordeath89]

@@hermitoldguy6312 U gotta stop thinking left vs right. There's no left,, there's no right. There's authoritarians and there's libertarians. There's people who support state-controlled economies and there's people who support private controlled economies.

[@hermitoldguy6312]

@@freedomordeath89 You just reworded what I said, while denying the meaning of what you wrote!

[@TheImperatorKnight]

"U gotta stop thinking left vs right. There's no left,, there's no right. There's authoritarians and there's libertarians. There's people who support state-controlled economies and there's people who support private controlled economies." Exactly. The Left and the Right beyondthecusp.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/political-spectrum-taught-versus-actual.jpg

[@freedomordeath89]

@@hermitoldguy6312 No man, if you keep that argument you'll end up having 2 "fanboys" bitching about who's better, the "right or the left". I've been seeing that debate going on in my country for 100 years. It doesn't lead anywhere. Only (at worse) to civil war and radicalization of the 2 opposing "factions". We need tot alk about problems and how to fix them, not choose one side to "belive in" and demonize the other.

[@2drx4]

"This guy even makes Himmler look sane." Well, that's impressive.

[@thorshammer7883]

@Blesava Konjina Yeah right. I'm not believing in that crap all the way.

[@ptfodity]

Julius Evola is a good man!

[@bobthebomb1596]

That one made me chuckle.

[@nashbobrigade372]

yeah he was totally insane. that's why wojcicki = youtube 40 percent of biden's cabinet are tiny hats. his kids married them, and kamala married one. per forbes, out of the top 10 donors to the last election, 8 are tiny hats. CNN, Zucker. CBS, Redstone, ABC. Goldston, BBC, Sharp. NBC, Roberts. Totally unfounded am I right

[@nashbobrigade372]

@jan osovsky lol you saw that on telegram too? very true. j contributions is a good one to follow

[@david7458]

Gregor was my professor in college. He was, in the eyes of many, the foremost living authority on fascism.

[@Weregus1]

Evola was of the perennial traditionalist school, started by René Guenón. He was mostly dealing in metaphysical terms, thus, his ideas cannot indeed make any sense if taken literally. As for Evola's connection to fascism, he has seen it as a potential vector to make his ideas come into practice, not the end point. There were even periods he wasn't allowed to publish in the fascist Italy.

[@andrewshaw1571]

It has amazed me the last couple of years, where fascism as an accusation gets thrown around so often, that criticism of communist systems gets excuses and demands to read the communist manifesto or das kapital yet those same people seem to have never considered that fascism has an equivalent book before throwing the word around.

[@grimreaper492]

Yes leftists are quite hypocritical that way, they believe they are somehow 'exceptional' and 'superior'. They believe fascists are idiotic beasts that should be shamed and that communists are peaceful freedom fighters, not being aware that the differences between them are not that big.

[@jimmyseaver3647]

Capitalism has had a hell of a body count (colonialist/imperialist antics, ho!), but an awful lot of these communists seem to fail to realize that their movement, which is supposed to emphasize things such as democracy and equality for all, tends to end up taken over by power-hungry jackasses who are dictators and make everyone below them suffer equally (but depending on character, some more than others).

[@ctrlaltdebug]

Jimmy Seaver imperialism is anti-capitalism, since the property rights of the conquered are not respected. Capitalism requires peace and the absence of force.

[@Elementalism]

If those people demanding others to read Das Kapital actually read it themselves. They should be shocked by its anti-semitism.

[@TheClassicWorld]

​@@jimmyseaver3647 Capitalism is not the same thing as colonialism or Imperialism; in fact, some times they don't even have much in common at all, and the core values and purposes are completely different most of the time. Not to mention the fact that not all capitalist states/nations are colonialist or Imperialist, which really crushes that idea other than a few examples since if it was a 1:1 mapping, that would mean every single capitalist country would manifest that; further, many non-capitalist nations throughout history also had things like colonialism. I don't see any proof at all in your argument. On the other hand, every single Communist nation has killed millions, failed, refused to generate wealth/money, and has zero freedom if you look at the Freedom Index, and little creative impact, either: a pathetic wasteland, in other words. So, to really punish capitalism here, let us include some parts of Imperialism and colonialism against all of Communism (over the last 100 years). My guess is that capitalism has 30 million dead bodies at most since 1900 (mostly under the Americans, French, and British) and like 7+ trillion dollars generated and directly saved/aided over 6 billion people so far. On the other hand, Communism has killed around 100 million people, generated a few billion only, and didn't save/aid anybody, really. Oh, also, the free, capitalist systems have all the inventions, and Communist nations haven't invented much. There are many more factors than just the death toll, though even the death toll isn't close at all. In short: Since the year 1900, capitalism (and its attached evils and issues) have killed 30+ million people, saved everybody, and created all the money in the world, along with most of the inventions, and has great personal and otherwise freedoms, whereas, Communism has killed 100 million people since the year 1900, didn't really save or help anybody, doesn't have freedom, and didn't create any money or inventions, etc.

[@aramismanzie462]

As an Italian and student of political sciences, I can safely say you are the first non-Italian to actually have a fucking clue about what fascism is. Thank you so much for your video and finally spreading some correct information out there. No, really, I gave up trying to explain to Americans and Brits why fascism is different from Nazism/racism/antisemitism/capitalism. Impressive job on your part!

[@germaniatv1870]

Excuse me "Mazism" doesnt exist. The Term NAZI is a Allied slur fir Germans, a sort of "propaganda" tool. I ask you this, if Germany was "racists" why did it ally with Jerusalem-Palestine,Japan,Italy,Libya,Egypt,Free Hind Cor,Free Asian Cor,Free Arab Cor ad Free Africa Cor, making the Wehrmacht the most MultiNational Army in history? It was a world war, right? The question is: Was Germany against the World? Because the opponents of Germany are obviously: Britain,France,Neo-Poland(Bolschewiks),Soviet-Russia and the USA, which would be the Allied. Britain-White Colonial,France-White Colonial,Neo-Poland White Slavic Bolschewiks,Soviet Russia mostly White Communists and the USA. Germany and Capitalism? That doesnt work, because clearly the CAPITAL also declared a war on Germany, a FINACIAL war. Please, provide me with evidence that the Germans who allied with the World who suffered from Colonialism and Communism was a Racist Nation & Peoples, while the Brits,French,Americans wiped out numerous Tribes,Folks,Nations ,slaved the Blacks,the Hindus and the Arabs, took over Jerusalem, destroyed Japan, starved out various Arab regions in World War 1&2. So, the Allied fight against Germany,Japan,Jerusalem,Italy,Libya,Egypt and the Germans are the racist defending them from White-Colonial Britain & France? Oh no, this makes no sense at all being the most Multi National Army in world history and at the same time being racist. Nope. Fighting a ALL WHITE ARMY is racist? Germany didnt wage war against Africa,India,Asia,Arabia, it waged war against COLONIALISM,CAPITALISM and COMMUNISM. Change my Mind if you like :-D The Cat is out the Bag. :-D Ciao Bella, Bella Ciao ;-)

[@rorrim0]

Hey odd question but can you explain to me what actualism is and how it defined fascism, compared to other socialist movements. I tried looking it up but it kinda goes over my head.

[@Cloud9vegas1]

@@rorrim0 from my understanding, i believe actualism is the idea that you act or should act only on whats actually present or existing right in front of you. I think the difference between Italian fascism and nsdap and other socialisms is that theres an idea of utopia, making something exist that before was nothing more than an imaginative idea.

[@benitolazio8193]

me ne frego!

[@aramismanzie462]

@@rorrim0 I'm not sure I've ever heard the term. Perhaps in Italian is referred to as something different from a direct translation. Anyway if you allow me to guess, it's probably referring to Mussolini's pragmatic approach on politics. He was known to be a "tactician" of politics, in the sense that often sacrificed ideological gains for practical ones. Overall he was a very flexible character, for example when he passed from an anti racist stance ("Racism is barbarian and belongs to the people over the Alps" refering to the Germans) to a supportive one in order to better seal an alliance with Germany. Also when D'Annunzio took the city of Fiume, he vowed his support to that adventure but never provided any real support as doing so was a very risky move that could have compromised his relation with the Italian state. What I am trying to say, and I beg pardon if I'm being repetitive, is that Mussolini truly wasn't an ideologue, he only cared for practical matters.

[@Scottish_Unionist]

I love when people who think Fascism is inherently racist call me racist and anti-semetic. And then after I tell them I'm jewish by blood and about how the majority of my friends aren't the same race as me they have a breakdown because their "argument" is gone.

[@AidenRKrone]

The intersection between communism, socialism (including the nationalistic variety), fascism, syndicalism, and anarchism is very, very interesting. As someone who enjoys splitting hairs and focusing attention on hypotheticals and theoretics rather than practicality, I truly love videos like this. I've had a handful of, shall we say, "lively", debates with leftists about the historical connections between communism, fascism, and national socialism. My favorite aspect of fascism and national socialism - and something the Left, especially socialists, staunchly denies - is how they are both outgrowths of revolutionary socialism. Fascism is closer to Marxism than Marxists like to admit. Fascist thinkers took the Marxist concept of class struggle (proletariat versus bourgeoisie) and applied it to countries (poor countries versus rich countries). Also, regarding the lack of ideological antisemitism in Italian fascism, that makes complete sense, seeing as how Italian fascism in its classical form sees all citizens of Italy as being members of the state. An attack on one social group of citizens, e.g. ethnic Jews, is considered an attack on the entire nation. In fact, the prime philosopher of Italian fascism, Giovanni Gentile, was not personally or doctrinally antisemitic. He happily worked with ethnic Jews to achieve fascist goals. Many Italian fascists did the same thing . What mattered to the Italian fascists was nationality ("Are you an Italian?") and ideology ("Are you a fascist?").

[@Thischanneldead]

Just admit your a fascist.

[@deechonada]

please correct me if I'm wrong I'm only someone whos fascinated by history but doesn't read it enough; can the idea of the in-group being italian citizens and the out group being those who aren't and oppose Italian interests be seen as a crude form of racism? Not in the modern sense of biological race but race as a classification of a people. I heard that the Roman race was similar in classification too. Which makes me wonder why neo marxists are so hell bent on biological race as a structure, when it's inherently unimportant to their ideology. I feel like the post-modernist underpinnings may have something to do with it?

[@madmonkeys88]

​@@deechonadatribalism my friend.

[@achair7265]

@@deechonada Marxists to me focus more on the religion and identity. Marx did quote that there cannot be a Jew in a cashless society. Himself being of Jewish descent. It's why Hitler thought Marxism was a Jewish lie. Nazism focuses more on race, that even if someone were to drop the faith and or identity. They'd still be Jewish.

[@deechonada]

@@achair7265 what did marx mean that there cannot be a Jew in a cashless society? Is he referring to Jew being an 'ethnicity'? And i get what you mean in terms of nazis, like rich or poor you're still x race. But thats why I'm wondering why neo marxists are so hell bent on demonising white people then? Even if you're a poor white, you're still white for example. Shouldn't they really be more concerned with the class divide than anything?

[@calvin7981]

I love how you never downplay the atrocities in these videos. you're simply accurately depicting where the issue stems from.

[@jaimes350]

Fascism was not realy the problem, Hittler and his nutcase mob where the problem.

[@andrewhooper7603]

@@jaimes350 It's funny how the "True _______ism has never been tried" trope transcends all ideologies.

[@jaimes350]

@@andrewhooper7603 yes, especialy with communism though they have always ended up the same way. my point is that by what i have understood it was never Mussolini's intention to exterminate large groups of people like Hitler did. he just wanted power and he got it, for a while at least. if he had not koined the war on either side he probably would have died an old man while stillin charge of itally and fascism would not have such a bad reputation as it does.

[@jaimes350]

@@dansmith1661 oh so the holocaust did not realy happen? Hitler did not murder over 66 million Jews in concentration camps?

[@je-freenorman7787]

lol, not really. Etymology helps more

[@niallmurray8654]

I truly stand corrected, educated and more informed. I have being using the term fascist incorrectly for years without realising. Thanks, much appreciated.

[@TheRed812]

This video is entirely disinformation and designed to be misleading. Fascism comprises a broad range of ideologies including national socialism. Do not trust this video.

[@soraparent1256]

@@TheRed812 fascism doesn’t include National Socialism, as long as we are using proper definitions of Fascism used by people such as Gentile and Mussolini rather than definitions by Eco and Brett which were made 50 years after the fall of Italian Fascism and treat fascism as if it’s some kind of checklist.

[@Rippel0000]

Hey man, conservatives (not everyone) calls anybody that they dont like a communist. Words get trown out all the time. It’s good that we learn from sources such as these videos.

[@monsieurdorgat6864]

Eh... I'd still take this video with a grain of salt. He started off with the notion that Marxism is inherently anti-semitic, which is kinda bogus because Karl Marx was Jewish. Also, the meanings of words are not stagnant - they're socially constructed. Neo-nazi's, capitalists, neo-fascists, various nationalists, and the KKK all form an incredibly unified right-wing political block with very similar core goals. When people call them fascists, they despise the label for its historical connotations, and arguing about the label is more a distraction for their horrific political agenda.

[@je-freenorman7787]

USA is a Fascist country. It was built on Fascism

[@jacobsandoval4789]

Remember Fascist Italy had to rule over Ethiopia and other African colonies. If Fascism held the same grossly emphasized racial policies as Nazism it would have never worked in their favor of their governance in Africa. You know what i mean ? Its hard to explain. But yeah. Not the same thing.

[@winstonsmith7652]

So glad I found this channel. I used to be on the left, but there's only so much cognitive dissonance my brain could take. Thanks for clarifying much of what concerned me. Subscribed.

[@Neko_Mario]

I think the main reason many of us may have considered ourselves on the left at one point may have also been due to their made up definitions of what makes someone left or right, then we realized we were always on the right going by history. That or some may have just been leftist out of ignorance then woke up after seeing reality.

[@TheMacabrees]

As a Marxist and a leftist I would like to comment on how this guy said that Marxists believe in a “Jude-bourgeoisie” when in reality V.I. Lenin the most prominent Marxist of the 20 century said that working Jews were the Allie’s of working Russians.

[@superburrito9797]

​​​@@TheMacabrees As a former communist, I realized that the ideology is simply dead. Its too destructive, and attempts to apply a German point of view to the rest of the world. The Chinese knew this, and realized their whole "Socialism with Chinese Characterisitics". Capitalism too is dead. What ever we have today is some limited form of Corporate Internationalism. In a way, Communism is a form of liberalism. Claiming that the "international working class" has more common with each other than each other's respective ruling class. Which is fundamentally not true.

[@Web720]

​@@TheMacabrees Okay, but what about the rest?

[@JohnSmith-ox3gy]

@@TheMacabrees I am not a racist, my best friend is a good 🐒.

[@angiefraley387]

I am a 73 year old woman; why did I have to wait 50 years before someone could explain this to me despite reading lots of history books?

[@Lachausis]

The answer was there in front of you the whole time. Russians called baltic people fascists all the time. And for one reason only - the baltics didn't want to live under soviet occupation. 'Fascist' is a curse word used to subdue any national feelings. I've read a serious book written by an allegedly serious historian, who couldn't see a difference between nazism and fascism.

[@angiefraley387]

@@Lachausis Too true!! I was too mesmerized by unfolding events to pay attention. It was only after coming to the USA that I saw Fascism and Nazism bandied about and worse held to be non-socialist. Well that was too much for me because I at least knew that they are socialism and the difference between the ideologies really became pivotal. That's when I discovered TIK. Thank goodness.

[@worldoftancraft]

@@Lachausis that is very indicating how you omit all the facts, all the sympathy of Baltic governments to Right Boyz and just state "well, it's been because they disliked the idea of being a part of soc block"

[@Lachausis]

@@worldoftancraft what facts am I omitting? Genocide, ethnic cleansing, forced assymilation? Communism is a horrible disease. And communists used apparently lesser evil fascism to describe those who disagree with that socialist madness. In reality both had the same roots. Ironic.

[@worldoftancraft]

@@Lachausis I mentioned one fact as an example. Your unbased words can be easily turned against you. ... ehh, what to expect from a branch of the endless war of throwing shit to enemy's trench and throwing back the incoming scat. "Socialist madness"? Excuse me? Getting paid accordingly to objective circumstances, not the will of a hirer is madness? What is the thing you used to get stoned and high that hard? And what about getting to do some kind of real labour, mister long tongue? What about getting to a plantation to make commodity-money relations great again?

[@herrschmidt412]

You gotta love Evola though. After the war he was put on trial for being a Fascist. His defense was "I'm not a Fascist, I'm a Super Fascist." He was acquitted 😂

[@jaimes350]

they did not realise they where being trolled 😂

[@emperorkane317]

I mean he did say consider Hitler to be Too liberal. So Super Fascist would be correct

[@businessproyects2615]

@@emperorkane317 imagine considering Hitler as liberal, that's daring or crazy indeed.

[@emperorkane317]

@@businessproyects2615 Evola took it to a Spiritual/Mystic level. Hitler still allowed some Catholic influences into National Socialism. Evola wanted to relove Christian influence entirely and return back to Pre-Christian Germanic paganism. Also think it was because of Hitler's Honorary Aryan titles to other races, but I could be wrong

[@josephevans5785]

. . . Evola on many occasions rejected almost every feature of Fascism: its nationalism, unitary party, its social and economic policies, its corporativism, its appeal to the Italy of the Risorgimento, the Italy of Mazzini, and so on. Almost every major Fascist intellectual rejected Evola’s traditionalism. In fact, neither Fascist thinkers or National Socialists accepted Evola. Evola was never a member of the Fascist Party because he never met the minimum criteria for membership. During the first period he chose not to petition for membership, and during the last period of Fascist rule, because his application was rejected for political reasons. During the final six hundred days of republican Fascism, Julius Evola remained in Rome until the city was threatened by imminent occupation by Allied forces. There, as he later affirmed, he worked not for Fascism or National Socialism, but sought to create a movement that would labor for neither Fascism or National Socialism. That was the political movement that survived the war that many try to refer to as “fascism.” In fact, Evola had absolutely nothing in common with the basic fundamentals of Fascism. All the intellectuals in which Evola associated explicitly opposed Giovanni Gentile, both as a political figure and a philosopher of Fascism. Evola and those who followed him rejected the humanism of Gentile’s Actualism, as well as its moral opposition to anti-Semitism and biological racism. Roberto Farinacci, Carlo Costamagna, and Preziosi were all anti-Actualists and anti-Semites. All exercised some influence over developments during Fascism’s end days in the Republic of Salò. One of the consequences was to ultimately render Fascism complicit in the murder of Jews. In 1951, after Evola had been indicted by the post-Fascist government of Italy for attempting to form a “new” government, Evola held that he never was either a Fascist or a National Socialist. He admitted that all major Fascist thinkers objected to his ideas. When he proposed that Mussolini underwrite a journal to be published in both Italy and Germany that would expand on the ideas found in Sistesi di dottrina della razza, Fascists from every part of the party and government raised objections. (See Evola, Il cammino del cinabro, pp. 170-172).

[@gglehteswhtemnAdChrstns]

Hey TIK, excellent review. Thanks for taking the time out to make a fundamentally accurate yet controversial topic. Mussolini was known to pay AH a lot of lip service. This was due to rivalry between the two where building up to WW2, Italy had a lot of excellent new ideas (e.g. paratroopers, frogmen) but lacked any industrial strength to pull any of it off with real impact. AH wanted to be the up and coming man to overtaking Mussolini, and, Mussolini quietly knew that he needed Germany’s industrial strength which led to their rivalry that’s often mistaken for friendship.

[@Nyg5618]

The fact that you’re honest and use logic basically guarantees that you are bad at politics. No room for truth or logic in the political arena.

[@BlackPhoenix313]

This gives a new perspective. That word "Fascism" gets thrown around a lot, even I was throwing it out a lot. As I look into history, I'm starting to see how bad things are starting to become. Since when the word "Fascists" become just "the person I don't like"? That's a true problem. I'm glad that this video was made to bring more info to the word's true meaning. The more people actually read about fascism, they can understand its true meaning. In the meantime. I hope that my generation can come to a better understanding of what it truly means.

[@dergutehut3961]

People throw words around they know little about...may it be fascist or socialist...and mostly that isn't fitting description. But nevertheless fascism has earned its reputation...(not just because of Hitler who is labeled as a fascist for good reasons) and regurgitating things that have been a part of those ideologies should be met with skepticism. Not everyone who calls for privatization is a socialist...but he gets people closer to it. And people who use racist rethoric might not be fascists...but they get people closer to it.

[@dergutehut3961]

@UTubeFekUrself Hitler was the ultimate fascist and National Socialism is a prime example for fascism. And I did watch the video which is why I left plenty of comments were I try to explain why I disagree with its content...and why almost every historian who has to deal with peer review and not viewers on youtube disagrees with it as well. But if you find any problems with my argumentation...feel free to point them out.

[@dergutehut3961]

@UTubeFekUrself Fascism is not inherently racist...that is true...but fascism is inherently nationalist and nationalists are often the more racist people. Lets say you are a racist who travels a lot and you want to hang out among your kind, ...where would you go to be welcomed? A) find the next socialist party B) find the next nationalist party I bet with you that whenver our traveling Racist hangs out in a party that has "nationalist" in the name he has WAY less problems if he says or does racist stuff...as long as he stays among people of his own race of course. The point is...a lot of nationalists also define nation as something biological...not like you as people with same values or the same place they grew up in and grew together. I think you can 't understand Hitler unless you realize what "völkisch" means...and I'am not sure if I can give a proper english translation. Volk means People...but the way Hitler used it is more a biological than a cultural unit. He wanted the "völkischer Staat"...and that term pops up nearly everywhere. But the understanding of that unity is deeply rooted in fascism...and of course there is a reason why Hitler and Mussoline got along while Hitler did NOT get along with any socialist leader (unless he had to pretend to, to later backstab him) And fasicsm unlike soclialism has nothing AGAINST racism. And to be clear Mussolini and most his folks were total racists. The Italian fascist party had plenty of hard core open Antisemites (which was why most of them had no problem bonding with HItler)...it is much harder to find those in socialist movements. Also they were against black people, slavs. gypsies etc. Mussolini definitely saw italians as biologically superior...but it is true that he wasn't an Antisemite. So what? There are other races to be racist to. He did not went over to Yugoslavia or Abessina to turn those people into good Pizza eaters...but to oppress them and exploit them and he felt entitled to do that because HE was Italian and they weren't. Also..even in your version Mussolini would be horrible...why should it matter what football team I support or what I eat....that shouldn't affect my standing or chances in a country. - To be clear..both Hitler and Mussolini were major fascists...so you can't just be like. If Mussolini was X and Hitler wasn't X than Hitler can't be a fascist. Hitler defined fascism AS much as Mussolini and I think nobody (especially not Hitler himself) would deny that he was the top dog of his movement (at least during his reign). So before you claim Hitler wasn't a real fascist because he did something that Mussolini didn't do...could as well use the opposite logic. - I think a great way to tell how Hitler was a fascist is how he treated the other fascist parties if he conquered a country....not good...because he was a dick...and didn't like competition...but also he didn't treated them like all the other parties and definitely not like the socialist parties.

[@milkwalkerjones633]

@@dergutehut3961 Your mental gymnastics are impressive. It’s much simpler though. Fascism viewed the State as paramount. NS viewed the nation as paramount. So no, you wrote all that text and it didn’t make you any less wrong.

[@TIRFemcel]

@UTubeFekUrself This video is a huge clusterf*ck actually, NSDAP (National Socialist German Workers Party) was only the name of the Party he was in, not his ideology, he was a Nazi and Nazism falls under Fascism.

[@samuelmaia8501]

This channel, with the use of primary and secondary fonts, and a very clear approach, made me realize that I was very ignorant on so many political and ideological topics. And I am very grateful of it.

[@brettmcclain9289]

At least you admit that you have much to learn, unlike what all of the socialists do.

[@deg6788]

We are learning every day brother

[@brettmcclain9289]

@Political animal Truly am academic elitist, that likes to disparage people for their appearances.

[@samuelmaia8501]

@@brettmcclain9289 seems that looking like you steal money from your mom's purse to buy drugs (besides having a degree on Pharmacology, and a post-degree on Neuropsychopharmacology), also commenting with a language that is far from my mother tongue, discredit me in some way.

[@samuelmaia8501]

@Political animal I really appreciate your politeness

[@DrakusRecords]

I can't tell you how many times I've had to link this video who say Nazism is fascism and not socialism. Thank you.

[@richardphillips8696]

This is brilliant, for so long (40 yrs - I'm 55) I've wondered what fascism was & never had it clarified, I honestly believe most people love using the word without the slightest clue of what they are stabbing at. I've even looked at it recently & had no descent explanation of the term. Thanks V much

[@Zenovarse]

When wartime propaganda lingers for longer than necessary, it censors from a people anything it could learn from its enemies.

[@boulderbash19700209]

For years, I sniffed the connection between fascism and socialism. But TIK really describes it in a definitive way, and makes it clear.

[@Paris-xv9sj]

Heart Of Iron IV : Hitler is a Fascist TIK : _are you sure about that?_

[@warrenlehmkuhleii8472]

I think there is a sub mod that makes the NSDAP a separate faction from the fascist. Might need to try it out. But I mainly play Kaiserreich, so I will probably never get around to doing that.

[@spectre2635]

Install BlackIce, fixes that BS

[@BigBroTejano]

Didn’t HoI3 have a much more “detailed” political compass? I seem to recall when I would play as the US there would be about three or so different “parties” each representing the Democratic, Fascist, and Communist branches. I think the Fascists one where the German Bund?, The American Silver Legion(old Pelley and his “Commonwealth”), and the American Nazi Party.

[@warrenlehmkuhleii8472]

@@BigBroTejano HOI4 does the same thing, expect they have added non aligned.

[@BigBroTejano]

@@warrenlehmkuhleii8472 HoI4 only shows one party for each branch(though in the case of the US you can switch who represents the Democratic branch via election events). HoI3 did it in a way similar to how the Kaiserreich mod dose.

[@luispt77]

We now need to create an ideology called villageidiotism.

[@TheImperatorKnight]

Village socialism was a thing. Look up Robert Owen's "New Harmony" or read the book "Heaven on Earth" by Muravchik

[@jussim.konttinen4981]

Although I have nothing against Mennonites, that’s probably the ideology you’re looking for. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hqXCiYhqjJl3eKM

[@thurin84]

well hillary did say "it takes a village"

[@jussim.konttinen4981]

@@thurin84 Crazy thing, Custer died in Montana. I thought the battle took place somewhere in the Midwest. Montana is less populated than Canada, so even in the US a person can live an independent lifestyle of their own.

[@thurin84]

@@jussim.konttinen4981 what are you babbling about?

[@rodrigodepierola]

The fascists even had "facceta nera" (little black face), the song about the conquest of Abyssinia. The lyrics are quasi-romantic, almost a love story. There's nothing like that in Nazis. Of course, it's justifying the invasion and hiding the atrocities. If you look at the sea from the hills Young brunette, a slave among slaves Like in a dream you will see many ships And a tricolour waving for you Pretty black face, beautiful Abyssinian Wait and see, for the hour is coming! When we are with you We shall give you another law and another king Our law is slavery of love Our motto is FREEDOM and DUTY We, the Blackshirts, will avenge the heroes that died to free you! Pretty black face, beautiful Abyssinian Wait and see, for the hour is coming! When we are with you We shall give you another law and another king Pretty black face, little Abyssinian We will take you to Rome, as a freedwoman You will be kissed by our sun and a black shirt you too will wear Pretty black face, you will be Roman Your only flag will be the Italian one! We will march together with you and parade in front of the Duce and the king!

[@MercedesW169_]

The fascists and expecially mussolini despised this song

[@corymcdowell7295]

You're going to be the historian that changed the world man. The unwavering way you follow the facts to their conclusion is terrifyingly rare.

[@teethgrinder83]

Is that why he got a 2:1 in history and not a 1st class degree? I'm not saying he's stupid but you are kinda up his ass here

[@avacadomangobanana2588]

Gawkgawkgawkgawk bro is just feeding into your preconceived biases and you’re glazing him for it

[@mrsentencename7334]

@@avacadomangobanana2588 what do you think about this then I'm curious?

[@urgadurga]

@@avacadomangobanana2588 Someone's projecting. Like the other commenter asked, what did TIK say that you think is incorrect? It looks like you have a preconceived bias that Fascism and National Socialism are as far from Socialism as is possible, the narrative pushed by the left, and therefore pointing out the extreme similarities upsets you. So please, by all means, debunk the sources and debunk TIK's claims if you're correct.

[@josemiguelcaballerorestrep2101]

Imagine making a “first” comment This post was made by the everyone else gang

[@pottierkurt1702]

i'd rather just watch the video before commenting lol, call me old fashioned.

[@TheImperatorKnight]

I do prefer comments that are made after watching the full video, but "FIRST" is a nice exception :)

[@Mitch93]

Prepare your pickaxes, there's salt to be mined.

[@robert48044]

you bundle of sticks, lol

[@loteanloris9407]

Salt mining's become SO profitable in recent times...

[@Mitch93]

@@robert48044 How dare you!

[@robert48044]

@@Mitch93 im joking, That part of the video had me laughing and a little annoyed. please take no offense to it.

[@Mitch93]

@@robert48044 It's a Greta Thunberg reference.

[@shoo682]

Wow, I’ve always thought of this but did not get any proper explanation. You make complex matters easy to understand, you sir are a genius!

[@bryanstrom812]

Great video. The meanings of these labels have shifted and evolved A LOT, starting almost right from when those labels were first created. Today, these labels, as commonly used, are not just meaningless. It's far worse than that! The intended meanings have been highly distorted, and misappropriated over and over. And when one points that out, one gets assigned one of those labels - by people who don't even know what the original meanings were. I

[@meesteranonymous8177]

Modern fascists definition by modern fascists like antifa: "every ideology or opinions i disagree with are made by fascists that needs to die"

[@BigTArmada]

I love that this argument has taken on such a life on this channel. So many people need to hear it

[@TheImperatorKnight]

The more people complain that I'm not good at history, the more I'll give it to them.

[@BigTArmada]

@@TheImperatorKnight you are awesome man. Please don't ever be deterred

[@anthonyclark6388]

Been making this argument for years and God knows how many accounts on twitter.

[@pottierkurt1702]

We can all agree to disagree, but if anyone says i'm not welcome at his bbq cause of an intellectual debate.. no further.. i draw the line tere !! and prob F his wife just cause i'm evil, not a nazi .. just evil .. there is a difference people.

[@TheNorman1169]

@@TheImperatorKnight O baby

[@michaelmartin4552]

Something major was missed that the Italians would have picked up on. The Fasces is more than just a bundle of sticks. During the Roman Republic and Empire, it was also a specific symbol of Roman Might. Most commonly seen in a bundle of sticks, either around the handle of an ax, or with the head of an ax embedded into the bundle. This not only symbolized the power of the people, but the military might of the nation. A symbol that was normally given to the leader of a Legion when sending them out on a mission, or awarded to a returning leader after a conquest. This would have been known to the Italians, and was yet another way that Il Douche was trying to link his new government to the Roman Empire of old. And this symbol was known to others as well. If anybody looks at the armrests of the chair that the statue of President Lincoln is sitting on in his Memorial in Washington DC (built 1914-1922), it is obvious that they are composed of fasces. Specifically showing that he was acting on the authority of the people of the United States. And it appears a great many times in iconography in the US. In the official shield of the National Guard. On the back of the Mercury Dime. Above the door that leads into the Oval Office. On the podium in the House of Representatives. On the Seal of the US Senate. Even in the painting in the Dome of the US Capitol "The Apotheosis of Washington" shows an angel sitting next to the President holding a fasces with an ax. I will admit, I was a bit surprised that this symbol was not gone over in more detail, in how it also called back to ancient Roman traditions.

[@jonathanknauf1926]

Yes, this guy just wanted to hate on trade unions, which apperently is a thing the american right loves to do. Nasty mix of a lack of knowledge and applying own politics

[@michaelmartin4552]

@@jonathanknauf1926 Do not confuse the "American Right" with those that simply do sloppy research. I have seen equally sloppy research from those on "The Left". Who only concentrate on key points that support their belief, and avoid all others. The video is actually rather accurate, but should have also gone into more detail as to the origin of the name, and why it specifically was picked. And that the US among other nations are literally full of "Fascist" symbols, but that does not mean they are "Fascist". But do not forget, all "Socialist" organizations ultimately look down on trade unions. All want complete control, and once such a government is formed those unions are one of the first to go. Only seen as a tool to be used to gain power, then discarded.

[@palemale2501]

He was called Il Duce (the leader and pronounced "Doochay") - but not Il Douche (as you write in para 3) which describes an American that gets things badly wrong lol.

[@michaelmartin4552]

@@palemale2501 I am aware of that, I use that as his name on purpose. I have actually referred to him as either "Il Douche" or "Il Lamp Ornament" for decades now. He was a despicable person, who I hold in nearly as much contempt as I do "Der Wallpaper Hanger". I am not an "American that gets things badly wrong", I am purposefully using satire and sarcasm, learn the difference.

[@palemale2501]

@@michaelmartin4552 Thanks for your explanation. You were using satire not sarcasm, but quite funny anyway.

[@claudiomonteverdi7126]

I'm a new fan, I absolutely love your videos. This in particular made me realize how even the most respected "scholars" on fascism have no idea what it was actually about. One thing I'd like to point out though is that calling Evola a village idiot is not unlike calling Hitler a "madman" or leftists "stupid" (two other very interesting videos of yours). Evola was, despite all, an extremely knowledgeable man. He was an occultist, which makes his writings cryptic and apparently nonsensical, but they are not all that different from many texts that form the bibliographical corpus at the foundation of masonry, an organization that has had and still has great influence as well as many members worldwide.

[@JayPot-bf9dm]

There is a reason, the socialist lost after World War II. During the 60s and 70s they had to escape themselves from both Hitler and Stalin.. one good thing socialist are very good at is propaganda, they created a propaganda campaign distance from Hitler and Stalin …

[@markdatheist9179]

@TIKHistory I'm an old fan and supporter of your work but have a quick favor to ask. I've been having an argument with a close family member about the socialist roots of fascism, the difference between NAZIs and socialists and the undeniable roots of Socialism in NAZIsm. I know these topics are all connected and you have several hours worth of videos with content overlapping these issues. However, since I'm about to burn years worth of good faith in my familial relationship by asking them to watch several hours worth of your content, I was hoping you could recommend which videos (and in which order) I should recommend them watching - to maximize understanding and effectiveness while minimizing mental burnout?

[@AFGuidesHD]

"socialism becomes fascism" except the majority of "socialists" these days are of the internationalist type and therefore would never be fascists, no ?

[@brettmcclain9289]

When you are on the streets protesting it is easy to be internationalist, but once you achieve political power and are in control of a state most movements will then become nationalistic due to practical concerns, The difference between the two changes depending on which strategic situation the group is in.

[@brettmcclain9289]

@Martin P So you are saying state control is the same as no state , so then what is the alternative in your eyes.

[@victimofchungus2039]

@@brettmcclain9289 bud your brain isn’t working well because communism doesn’t have a government either

[@victimofchungus2039]

@@brettmcclain9289 no the difference between the two is literally every philosophical doctrine they stand for

[@brettmcclain9289]

@@victimofchungus2039 The communism that marx talked about has never been achieve and should be regarded as realistic as the utopian socialists like fourier.

[@TheTableTable]

in 40 or so minutes you taught me more about facism vs national socialism, and both on there own, than i'd learned in any class at any time.

[@doyouwanttoplayagame4503]

I forget who said this but I saw it once they said " just because those people are bad dose not mean you are good " and I feel this applies to these ideologies

[@juanduenas1943]

The best history Channel. You do all the leg work I don't have the time to do thank you. 🙏 You should sell your talks as audio books.

[@babbisp1]

Video basically: not everyone you disagree with us a fascist Vaush watching this video: **nervous sweating**

[@weareeverywhere8851]

The guy has called anyone right of center, a fascist already.

[@shumono3254]

@@weareeverywhere8851 heck he probably has called someone a fascist for being politically centered leftist

[@weareeverywhere8851]

@@shumono3254 He even calls jew shapiro a fascist.

[@janon5815]

@@shumono3254 "you cut a liberal, a fascist bleeds"

[@mrmoofle]

Vaush is a third-rate psuedo-intellectual. Even high school dropout Tim Pool can paint him into a corner.

[@gumdeo]

Stalin's "Socialism in one country" sounds too close to "National Socialism", thus the Soviets used the term "German fascists".

[@Parallex001]

When P.N.F. (Partito Nazionale Fascista, Eng: National Fascist Party) was established, they were not racist nor they had nothing to do with racism. Mussolini passed the "Leggi Razziali" English: The Racial Laws in 1938, it was just act of friendship and to show Hi*ler that he supported him when the Nuremberg Laws passed.

[@freiinmajor2511]

I was taught in school that fascism and communism and nazism were all sides of the same coin. I know this is an oversimplification but it is something which you have elaborated in full.

[@nadrewod999]

"If you've ever worked in a corporation, welcome to fascism." No wonder I've always D E S P I S E D bureaucracies in all forms...

[@iantaakalla8180]

Also makes sense as to why Democrats can even describe themselves as socialists: because they serve corporations, which do employ socialist ideals. Explains why they always kowtow to corporations; they were never against corporations in the first place, even by definition.

[@benitolazio8193]

Thanks for the insight comrade , best you work on a medieval farm then ! Yet you support the left , the biggest large state/corporation movement in history!

[@elaishh3533]

I love asking ( Champaign ) socialist supporters “what’s your definition of a fascism?” Most don’t even understand what NAZI stands for or that fascism originated in Italy. Thanks for the content 👍🏼

[@Lachausis]

Bbbb...bbbut it was not real socialism. LoOk aT sWeDeN!!!

[@thatlemonguy1107]

Your argument is that Nazism is socialist because of what it's short for. Tell me, friend, do you know what DPRK or PRC stand for?

[@thatlemonguy1107]

@@Lachausis It objectively wasn't. There has not been one actual socialist country in existence if we're gonna go by the actual definition of it, and that counts Scandinavian countries which are all Social Democracies which is a capitalist system. The only difference between Social Democracy and other forms of capitalism is that it cares at least a tiny bit for the average person, and even then the pricks at the top who get their money by owning things are still favored over average working class people.

[@Lachausis]

@@thatlemonguy1107 nazism was socialism, but not international socialism. You commies and socialists of any form should be publically executed.

[@thatlemonguy1107]

@@Lachausis No. It objectively just wasn't socialism. The Nazi party literally coined the term privatization to describe their policies, privatization being antithetical to socialism, nothing was owned by the workers, worker ownership being the definition of socialism, and the very first people they went after were unionists and socialists 'cause they were the most militant enemy to their party. Learn a bit of history my guy. Also that's a very healthy way to conduct a discussion, by saying your opponent in a debate should be publicly executed, really lets your opponent know you're an open minded person, which is a very respectable virtue.

[@ioandragulescu6063]

the corporation part just scared the hell out of me. Also made clear a loooot of things coming from the corporate world these days.

[@tomhalla426]

Weirdly, a “Soviet” has nearly the same definition as a “fasci”, both being roughly a workers council.

[@tomhalla426]

@Wulf In British usage, a “council” is used to refer to what the US calls a “local”. As I wrote, the words meanings overlap. Translations are never exact.

[@LightxHeaven]

I appreciate this video very much because people seems to throw around the terms "nazi" and "fascist" very recklessly these days without even knowing what those terms actually means. It dilutes the meaning of these terms to the point that nobody seems to remember the actual consequences that derive from these ideologies. It's also a disservice towards those living in or have lived under these totalitarian political systems.

[@OO-nn3ny]

@Political animal So what is Fascism then?

[@allaround360]

@Political animal Wrong. Fascism a political and economic system, with a clearly defined route to being actualized. You cannot simply repurpose it to mean what you'd like. You clearly don't understand that these videos aren't comprised of made up information either. The other interesting tidbit is we can track exactly where misinformation was spewed. Where italian socialists attempted to not acknowledge Mussolinis clearly Socialist roots. These roots even clearly affected the way he realized Fascism. You would have to use a completely different term to identify the similarities across authoritarian countries. Hopefully it isn't just pathetically reduced to a checklist, but if that's the best we can do..... How anyone can call these conspiracy theories, only goes to show how desperate they are to cling to their own realities. The truth being it shouldn't really matter what happened in history. What should matter is whether or not we're repeating it.

[@allaround360]

@Political animal What part do they disagree with? If it's anything in this video, unfortunately you just haven't been keeping up with academia. One could argue most of academia are biased leftists. Does that mean they also shouldn't be taken seriously? Overall I care more what historians say on this subject more than academia as a whole. You seem to have just made a blanket statement, hoping that it lands. It doesn't. Not even sure how you gained the perspective that academia disagrees with him. They actually agree with him. Second, you're comparison of democracy doesn't actually make a point. For something to be fascism is must hold the majore tenets of fascisms economic, social, governmental philosophy. We can't just willy nilly call everything the government does socialism, right? The same must be afforded to fascism. Fail. (x2)

[@allaround360]

@Political animal Yeah. They seem to be. You have some kind of proof they aren't? I don't really care, but you brought up this youtubers politics to strengthen your argument. That's actually not true either, but even if all ww2 historians did agree with you, obviously history expands and evolves. It has expanded and evolved. You silly guy.

[@mitch_the_-itch]

They sit directly next to each other on the real political spectrum. Six of one half a dozen for the other.

[@endcensorship874]

Find a thousand ANTIFA protestors in the streets, and I bet not a single one could define Fascism if asked.

[@InfiniteDeckhand]

You would lose that bet, lol.

[@endcensorship874]

@@InfiniteDeckhand OK. Define "fascism" for me then. You have the whole internet at your hands, go for it.

[@soraparent1256]

@@endcensorship874 Fascism = Collective Nationalism with Totalitarianism, “Fasces” means the Roman Bundle of sticks and used by Roman collectivist nationalists. “Fascio” doesn’t actually refer to a syndicalist group, it was also used by nationalists, monarchists, and conservatives. You can’t say that the “syndicates” in Fascist Italy where even real syndicates, it wasn’t a workers Union, it was a state forced union, capitalist business owners were also collectivized, but that isn’t syndicalism. The only argument here that would be in favor of TIK’s would be that fascists started off as socialists then switched to capitalists when they got to power in 1922

[@TheNamelessScholarOfficial]

They'd just punch you in the face.

[@monroesmith9183]

but this guy has it wrong though , he assumes its about jews which is misinformation .

[@fahrenheit8084]

Orwell was still a socialist when he wrote Nineteen Eighty-Four. It's true that "Ingsoc" means "English Socialism", but he wasn't being anti-socialist or equating socialism with fascism. In the book, he writes: "Socialism, a theory which appeared in the early nineteenth century and was the last link in a chain of thought stretching back to the slave rebellions of antiquity, was still deeply infected by the Utopianism of past ages. But in each variant of Socialism that appeared from about 1900 onwards the aim of establishing liberty and equality was more and more openly abandoned. The new movements which appeared in the middle years of the century, Ingsoc in Oceania, Neo-Bolshevism in Eurasia, Death-Worship, as it is commonly called, in Eastasia, had the conscious aim of perpetuating UNfreedom and INequality." Later, he clarifies once more: "The official ideology abounds with contradictions even when there is no practical reason for them. Thus, the Party rejects and vilifies every principle for which the Socialist movement originally stood, and it chooses to do this in the name of Socialism."

[@mr.warlight9086]

Amazing channel that accurately states the truth. This is the first history content creator I've seen accurately describe Fascism and Nazism.

[@YitzharVered]

Roses are red and it'll cause a great schism to imagine that possibly fascism isn't national socialism

[@TheImperatorKnight]

Roses are red This poem sucks If you read it all You owe me 100 bucks

[@overrated88]

@@TheImperatorKnight you got a PayPal 😑?

[@calumdeighton]

@@TheImperatorKnight I have read it, I have read yours, not a chance.

[@nukclear2741]

@@TheImperatorKnight sorry, PETA would kill me if I gave you 100 bucks.

[@dariuszrutkowski420]

@@nukclear2741 They call it animal cruelty. Wonder what they think of a murrder of crows? too bloody????

[@strontiumdog3344]

Very balanced. Thank you. Neither Left nor Right, but a third position. You’ll still get called a Fascist apologist.

[@beanieman7138]

Ever wondered if you try to understand everything, there is not really a bad vs good side but just the "confident vs the wise". Things goes badly very easily when confidence outweighs the mind.

[@peter-andrepliassov4489]

Nah, fascism is far-right because of its hierarchical and authoritarian nature.

[@sashan4722]

​@@peter-andrepliassov4489 in practice communism is both authoritarian and hierarchical, so communism is far right too?

[@peter-andrepliassov4489]

@@sashan4722 Well, if that's your definition of communism, sure. But the traditional definition of communism is about as far-left as anarchism. Originally, communism was just about having a classless, stateless, moneyless society, which is pretty far-left. But of course in practice, most attempts at achieving communism so far have been corrupted by dictators who not only slow down any kind of progress towards communism, but actively suppress communism altogether. Now, if you want to use that as your definition of communism, then I agree it's far-right, but this is all just becoming a discussion about semantics. What really matters in my opinion, is to challenge unjust authority in society and aim for a better world. Let's not let labels get in the way of that.

[@sashan4722]

​@@peter-andrepliassov4489 I agree wholeheartedly. The problem with these labels is that none of them are accurate, but this is the state of political debate, and I'm not quite sure how to get down to first principles when talking about politics with strangers. The theoretical "free market" capitalism is a childish pipe dream much in the same way communism is. We currently have neither, and we have never, in history, had either. And imo theoretical communism in the ML sense is impossible because the revolution requires authoritarianism, authoritarianism requires hierarchy, and no one is going to give up that power once its been gained. If they do, someone (counter-revolutionaries or reactionaries) will come along to fill the power vacuum and your revolution is a failure. The only way I can possibly see a success is through simultaneous global/continental revolution, but even then, it takes some mental gymnastics. And the problem with "challenging unjust authority" is that most of the groups doing so do not do so in good faith. they simply seek to replace one unjust authority with their own. What is the solution there? thanks for the kind response, was not expecting it.

[@Tripthethird]

Dang, the algorithm fucked up letting this gem through! Solid work, dude. Every socialist seems to love Eco's essay, but never turn to Mussolini's own definition. Copius Maximus

[@bludfyre]

I do notice he never discussed Eco's characteristics of fascism... maybe because instead of cherrypicking quotes to suit his point, he would see the similarities between the two groups.

[@NathanAurelianus]

as a fascsit myself I'd like to thank you for giving a reasonable and fair explanation of fascsim and how it differs from Nazism, and for helping me write a paper on it for my English class.

[@edgaraf9411]

Fascism is garbage.

[@NathanAurelianus]

@@edgaraf9411 and which ideology do you follow?

[@edgaraf9411]

@@NathanAurelianus for what? Spreading gayness? I meant you can't make others gay. If you want to fix hookup culture in general (i agree its bad) then we need to go back to VOLUNTARY traditional values or closer to them. I'm socially left(?) H I can tell you that lots of young people don't want to be forced into those roles. You need to show them hookup culture is bad and explain why. Not to mention many people want to but simply canf afford it.. lso Republicans don't wanna fix the wages and corporations as both a party and voter base. Dems don't do it as a party but their voter base does. But no they are dumb with their gun laws and other shit which turn eople away. Not to mention people like you don't like brown people like me which th4 dem party has a lot of.. you don't have to, but atleast treat people with respect. What's good for those at the bottom is good for everyone.(minus the uber rich). Race is a fickle thing. I find people who value me for my personality a much more rewarding experience. Hate just burns you out. I tell you this as someone who was almost radicalized by Muslims in europe.

[@NathanAurelianus]

@@edgaraf9411 mate what the fuck are you talking about? and guess again cause I'm brown too, Mexican and Portugese. I hate both the political parties as they're the same and neither do anything good for the nation and people. I never said anything about the gays, I've no problem with them so long as they're fine with me ignoring them. Nor did I say anything about hookup culture. Afford what? The democratic voter base doesn't do shit and neither does the republican voter base. Race is a fickle thing and it is no longer fit to be the sole identity of a person but it should not be erased(see what I did there?). I find people who value me for my personality to be selfish and only around me for their own gain. I don't hate because hate is lazy and cowardly. And what are you trying to say about Muslims?

[@NathanAurelianus]

@@edgaraf9411 ALso I never said anything about forcing people to do anything. I'm a goddamned American, my country exists because people were forced to do something you think I'd want to turn around and do that to someone else?

[@pf1038]

"It is not Germany that will turn Bolshevist, but Bolshevism that will become a sort of National Socialism. Besides, there is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separate us from it… The petit bourgeois Social-Democrat and the trade-union boss will never make a National Socialist, but the Communist always will." -Adolf Hitler

[@dergutehut3961]

"Lets put all the socialist in jail" also Hitler.

[@rustyshackelford3590]

@@dergutehut3961 National socialism is socialism

[@dergutehut3961]

@@rustyshackelford3590 Uhm...no it isn't. Socialism is about nationalizing, its non racist, its about equality, about class war-fare, and globalism, and it has relatively progressive gender roles....national socialism is none of that. It nationalist, traditionalist, it has free markets and pampers big companies, it rather privatizes, it has very traditional views on family, and is deeply rooted in racism, its not interested in creating income equality or abandon private property, its straight nationalist. They only thing they have the name in common...and that was from the very early days of the NSDAP. To be fair...both do have in common what fascism and socialism have in common...like strong government control, militarism or the one party system...but they share that features with most dictatorships.

[@dergutehut3961]

@Jeremiah Crow No...its not required to be racist...and yes...sometimes it is...just ask everyone in the Soviet Union. But the point is...racism is not a core value of socialism but of national socialism...and fascists are MUCH MUCH more likely to be racist because their ideology is about nationality. You COULD interpret that as: "everybody from that nation"...sure...but you could also see it as "everybody from a specific kind from that nation." and thats what fascism mostly boiled down to. So if we wonder wether or not national socialism is fascism or not we can't ignore its core component. And also a lot of other ones that also clearly show the right-wing character of national socialism.

[@LordSyphilis]

@@rustyshackelford3590 Well actually it basically lacks any criteria of socialism except for the name and yeah... Thats not how definitions work... If I called myself a 1m-Penisman it still wouldnt make my dong 1m long... Economically speaking there was an increase in privatization of the market and capital as well as the dissolving of the workers unions and loosening of the market-regulations. Thats basically the opposite of socialism.

[@mustardjar3216]

Finally, i found the ideology i was meant to believe in: Anarcho-Primorial Creative Race of Hyperboreaism With Chinese Characteristics. This was satire for those who couldnt tell

[@brettmcclain9289]

I think he achieve peak racism by believing the master race is mythic, that might also be considered going full circle on racism, since he really can not judge people on race due to the perfect race not existing.

[@nicholasconder4703]

Wasn't Hyperborea where Conan the Barbarian lived?

[@keithberger8998]

An ideology second only to the doomsday cult Falun Gong. Hahaha.

[@brettmcclain9289]

@@keithberger8998 Go back to china 50 cent army

[@nogoaway4969]

meh. i prefer Anarcho national Titoist syndicalist fascist marxist lenninist judeo catholic caliphate Bolshevik menshivik regency council with chinese characteristics

[@ericc9321]

For the record, Umberto was talking about post-war fascist movements when he said that Evola was respected. I think a lot of people get confused when talking about modern fascism and neonazi ideologies and historical fascist and national socialist thought in the same breath, but Evola is unironically very influential post-war.

[@davidmackie8552]

Thanks. I've tried explaining this to many younger people . Good to know I'm not alone.

[@cleanerben9636]

You're really going all out to farm salt this month.

[@SebsterMS99]

I'm only about 10 mins in, but this is a really interesting argument. So often Fascism is hailed as the greatest evil of the 20th century because it is simply disingenuously lumped in with Nazism. Understanding National Socialism as a distinct (more vile) off-shoot of Fascism clarifies a lot and highlights how Mussolini's Italian regime was so much less blood thirsty as a totalitarian state compared to Nazi Germany. Edit: This is ofc not to infer that Mussolini's fascist ideology or his regime were in any way benevolent. I'm no apologist and hate that this clarification might be needed in today's age.

[@Elementalism]

Makes one wonder if Italy never joined the Axis if Fascism would be linked to Nazi Germany. Hard to spin it if Italy stayed out of the war.

[@michealhoffstater9810]

I find it so funny that people would mistake stating the truth for outright advocacy for Fascism, an ideology that has a founding principle of doublethink and is still a totalitarian state. It's dumb, yes, but it's not any more evil than garden-variety totalitarianism is.

[@herrrobert5340]

It is for sure. Personally I learned that Socialism has more in common with Fascism and National Socialism than I thought by playing the Kaiserreich mod, lol. Just shows how messy the traditional view of what's left-and right is.

[@todisbg5864]

@@Elementalism Honestly it could have happened. Italy, Hungary and Austria signed the Rome Protocols which ensured trade and peace amongst the three nations. After hitler wanted to Anschluss Austria, Benito Mussolini got very angry and immediately wanted to step in and defend Austria. Tho I think afterwards Hitler managed to brainwash or appease mussolini so the country was still Anschlussed. Tho If Italy announced war on Germany then WW2 would have probably never happend and this one big major war in Europe could have drastically changed the world view and it would have been less bloodier.

[@Terencetembre1001.]

I don't thinl any serious historian or academic would claim there is no difference between Nazism & Italian fascism. So this there is nothing new really in this discourse.

[@notrealy180217]

This is my favorite KZbin channel by far. Just started watching. Your video about antisemitism and Marx was like the most informative and interesting lesson I've ever been a part of. I felt like I read a book afterwords.

[@pavelm.gonzalez8608]

I don't think Karl Marx was actually antisemitic or racist (at least no more than Georg Hegel, Immanuel Kant and most of germanic european thinkers of his time). What's true is that Marx was a radical enemy not only of bourgeoisie (the social class from which him, Lenin and few others socialist thinkers came from) but also from the clergy and any form of religious ideology / philosophy that wasn't based on dialectic materialism (= the religious cult / philosophy of URSS).

[@stephanc197]

There was a part in 1984 that made a grown man like me breakdown into tears, very powerful book , but my favorite orwell book was down &out , I also read animal farm , he's probably my favorite writer even though I've never seen him as such until now as I am reflecting. Great videos man! Thank you for your service

[@consistentbug]

I think Orwell put it best in his 'What is fascism' essay. He points out that the word is kinda meaningless because of how various groups have used it. It being a synonym for 'bully' seems to be the most apt description

[@bengale9977]

I thought the conclusion of that essay was more "fascism is whatever my opponent is". Kind of like in 1984 how the eternal enemy is just whoever they are fighting at the time.

[@spellman007]

orwell was stupid.

[@raaaaaaaaaam496]

@@spellman007 socialist hate Orwell cause he isn’t cringe

[@spellman007]

@@raaaaaaaaaam496 Brave New World is just a better book bro!

[@raaaaaaaaaam496]

@@spellman007 I mean it’s more accurate but 1984 wasn’t necessarily trying to be an accurate prediction

[@jazzninja]

A few years back, given the increasing frequency of the term “Fascism” being employed as a pejorative by ideologues who themselves could not define the term when pressed to do so, I began reading on the subject. I read many of the sources that you’ve cited here, including many books by A. James Gregor (I cannot recommend his work highly enough), Sorel, Bauer, Gentile, Mussolini, Marx, Luxemburg, Woltmann, and a number of biographies on Benito Mussolini. My discoveries mirror yours. The truth is readily available for anyone willing to do a little reading. Fascism grew out of Marxist Socialism and French Revolutionary Syndicalism. Unfortunately, most people appear to be too lazy to put in the effort. I have been preaching this same truth to anyone willing to listen, for years now. I greatly appreciate your producing this piece, as well as the five-hour documentary on National Socialism. Your attention to detail is admirable to put it mildly. I wish that I could sit down and discuss the topic with you at length. Thank you. Please keep up the fantastic work. “…while in the great stream of Fascism are to be found ideas which began with [Georges] Sorel, [Charles] Peguy, with [Hubert] Lagerdelle in the ‘Mouvement Socialiste’ [Socialist Movement], and with the Italian trades-union movement which throughout the period of 1904 - 14 was sounding a new note in Italian Socialist circles…” ~ La Dottrina Del Fascismo

[@smilesface3741]

I'm willing to do the research but my English is sh*tty af.

[@Neko_Mario]

@@smilesface3741 Are there translations for your native language? I'd always check for that first.

[@smilesface3741]

@@Neko_Mario nah, we don’t talk about this in our country.

[@Neko_Mario]

@@smilesface3741 Sadly that's too many countries anymore. Even America which gets accused as "spewing anti communist propaganda" has been very much pro socialist, pro state, and insisting the nazis were right wing. Even then though there may be unofficial translations for your language online. That's usually the only way to find them anymore since no major people that handle translations of history in these countries want the woke mobs after them for bringing over literature that destroys their narratives.

[@smilesface3741]

@@Neko_Mario in fact, i live in vietnam and i have seen people rather be a commie or live under an authoritarian gov than seeking. Propaganda is everywhere

[@hozettes]

The book by Gregor "Mussolini's Intellectuals"...is that one of your recommendations for getting aquainted with the history behind Facism? You think Gregor is "on the mark"? I would like your feedback on this. Thanks

[@blacknight1406]

Always enjoy your videos and have a learnt a great deal from them. Thank you Tik.

[@endcensorship874]

Excellent video. I was recently on my son's college campus, and I saw a house that had a sign saying "jews for marxism" next to the obligatory "black lives matter" and others. I just shook my head, and I wondered if they ever read a history book.

[@ninjasonicteenagewarhead4284]

Yeah the "x group for y idea/person" annoys me when people who are apart of x say it for/infavor an anti-x y. Examples: "Latinos for Trump" and "Blacks for Biden". I think they shoukd say: I of x and here's why I think y is good for us.

[@raaaaaaaaaam496]

@@ninjasonicteenagewarhead4284 English?

[@acaydia2982]

Freaking hilarious.

[@internetzenmaster8952]

@@ninjasonicteenagewarhead4284 Yes, but then those campaign signs would be impossibly long and no one would pay them any attention.

[@zyanego3170]

Well, Marx was a jew though

[@robert48044]

in 2020 everything's Fascist, lol. 1984 wasn't wrong, it was just something people didn't want to admit being correct. The two examples I'll use it "doublespeak" and Africa and the middle East being the battleground of the major players.

[@zxbzxbzxb1]

As Tik noted in another video, pretty much everybody has been called a fascist at some point lol. I think the modern assumption is that it's a right-wing racist authoritarian movement/government but it's far from well defined

[@robert48044]

@@zxbzxbzxb1 It's a bullet word used to change your opponents conversation from offense to defensive

[@grahamturner2640]

What doublespeak happens today?

[@Perkelenaattori]

One reason why everyone is suddenly fascist is because Umberto Eco's essay Ur-Fascism lists easily identifiable bullet points and anyone using those is called a fascist. If you look at the list you'll notice that in most countries those tactics are employed in one way or another. I personally would say that people misidentify fascism in the same way as US citizens misidentify what's actually socialist.

[@robert48044]

@@grahamturner2640 antifascist tend to be pretty fascist we could start there. We can move on to a little broader scenario that I believe encompasses "doublespeak". Americans in the 90's and early 2000's were told Iraqis went to work and straight home because you never know when a neighbor it gonna snitch on you for something you said or did. In America were told to "see something say something" same idea but one is presented as a negative and one as a positive. just depends who the one is giving the order. Dictators are called leaders depending on the relationship with the home country. Collateral damage instead of multiple fatalities. Mujahideen or terrorist.

[@arefsadr7338]

The most accurate explanation of the matter I've ever seen in a video. Also disclosing that socialism is also the same thing. Thank you.

[@JosephDobosz]

17:41 nationalism and inter-nationalism, thanks so much that really clears it up for me. I've been trying to find a simple explainable and understandable description of the difference for so long.

[@JosephDobosz]

18:53 "anything but a right wing movement", very interesting, man I am loving this video!

[@JosephDobosz]

socialism by another name(I'm kind of using the comments as a notes section lol)

[@mateuszg9866]

I can feel demonetization coming ;)

[@TheImperatorKnight]

I didn't bother monetizing this one for obvious reasons

[@mateuszg9866]

@@TheImperatorKnight That's out of disquisson ;) Can I troll local socialist party fanpage with your vid? :)

[@SonofTiamat]

@@mateuszg9866 Dew it!

[@freedomordeath89]

Fun fact: Italy enlisted HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Ethiopian, Abyssinian, Eritrean and Libyan soldiers in their armies. Such a thing would be inconceivable in a system dominated by a racist ideology. In fact, Hitler didn't allow the use of foreign "racially inferior" troops in the German Army until the last years of the war, when he was desperate (and even if he did, most were used as slave labor, not as soldiers). And even then he only admitted SOME nationalities to the Waffen SS and ONLY if they could make up some silly story about some ancestral link with the "aryans". Italian attitude was more like the old "white men's burden", just with 100 years of tardiness, as usual lol

[@pete8420]

That fact was really fun. I want to shoot myself now.

[@raptorxxl1904]

Today we know that the real European "Aryans" are R1a/Slavic people, and Hitler himself was African/E1b1b1...

[@insanehippiehippieinsane3828]

@@raptorxxl1904 Actually Hitler's mother was an Austrian Jew.

[@jeegunugger1871]

There were many arab and Indian fighting units they fought with weaponary and we're given the standard training a german soldier recieved they weren't just "slaves"

[@endlesssolitaire731]

Hitler used non-German soldiers in waffen-ss and auxiliary . There were some Estonian and even Arab SS regiments formed even when everyone seemed good for Axis as well as organisations like Russian liberation army (which consisted from both Russian emigration, volunteers from occupied Soviet territories and captured Soviet soldiers who decided to switch sides). And Mussolini organised yekatit-12, which was basically extermination of Ethiopian culture because it targeted predominantly most educated people. This is not a total genocide, but still it matches the definition.

[@jonathanwilliams1065]

democracy is not necessary to voting but voting is needed for a democracy

[@MARK-gp9hb]

Julius Evola did have some influence on the Scuola di Mistica Fascista (School of Fascist Mysticism) in the final years of Fascism and he also taught in Germany to SS schools. He was one of the main "traditionalist" philosophers, like René Guenon. He wrote extensively on philosophy and the history of religions and he knew a lot of stuff, he shows a great intelligence and reason. Other occultists like Arturo Reghini initially closer to Fascism hoped for a pagan imperialism, then they were excluded by Evola and the fascists from their groups for being freemasons. Maybe he sought to influence fascists and neofascists for this reason, to make fascism better according to his view and not make it fall in the hands of other occultists. He wasn't a lunatic, not even H---er was a lunatic. Julius Evola was an artist and a philosopher with a worldview that not many people like and agree with, but it doesn't make him a lunatic.

[@pressedrat7]

TIK, I have listened and watched this video 3 times becaue it is so dense with information. Thank you for actually defining Fascism and its differences from Nazism. I just subscribed to The Great Courses and have been listing to WW2 lectures, and I now know that when Italy and Germany are lumped together as Fascist countries by PhD historians, they are incorrect. You rock TIK! Keep it up! Cheers!

[@TheImperatorKnight]

Thank you! I'm glad to hear you found this so useful that you watched it three times - that's awesome :)

[@pg4binx198]

my history teacher claimed fascism was a purely right wing ideology because of its "racial theory"

[@businessproyects2615]

don't know why have history teachers when they don't teach history but propaganda; for propaganda.

[@TheManofthecross]

Ik that person should not be a teacher in the first place hell one can undermine there carrear then.

[@meesteranonymous8177]

​@@businessproyects2615 teaching and educating proffesions have been hijacked to leftist ideologies for decades

[@loutsont2985]

Thought that 'fascio' means 'bundle of wheat' and that it was related to the German 'Boden'. Didn't succeed to connect it further. So glad that all those terms now make sense and that I finally can grasp this part of history!

[@horeageorgian7766]

What is that (The emotional childs guide to opposing fascism) at 20:31? Is that a book or a meme?

[@reginaldbauer5243]

Plato’s “tyrannical man”, who is at once a product of democracy and its deadliest enemy (Republic 565d). One can observe Plato’s strong dislike of “democracy” and also a strong dislike of “tyranny” as a result. Plato points out that in the conditions of Greek democracy, a skillful orator could certainly exert a disproportionate and dangerous influence. This observation was not new and it was already used in the 5th century BCE as an argument against democracy: Herodotus’ contention (Histories 5.97.2) that it is easier to deceive many than one. The facts of crowd psychology were unknown to the Greeks, but Socrates and Plato seem to prefigure it. Plato had seen how democracies inculcate in their citizens the character of a hot-blooded and short-sighted adolescent, which is why they are ripe to be taken over and dominated by strong-willed and resolute tyrants (Republic 563e-569c). Because the demos is the ultimate source of democratic authority, democracy is doomed to promote pandering leaders who must parrot back to the demos its own wishes (Gorgias 503c-d, 517b-c, 518e-519a, 521a-b). The legitimacy of democratic rule resides in the fact that all men are equally ignorant. Democracy is but another form of collective morality (just a different set of ‘rules’). The shared aims and shared perceptions of solidarity and altruism is another idol, another phantasm, another sham. Democracy - the benign herd mentality, the rule of calm and tranquil sheep by shepherds. The cult of numbers (sanity reduced to numbers) with their numerologists (so-called political ‘leaders’) define this ‘real world’. ‘Reality’ defined as how many people belong to the cult. The belief that the greater the power of the masses, the greater the degree of ‘reality’. The relative ignorance in which the individual person is kept within the masses is among the conditions under which rule can be exercised best, and lends itself to a finer ‘reality’. Democracy: a ‘sovereign’ ignorance over oneself. Democracy: a great, firm dome of ignorance must encompass one because one cannot escape the pens, the fenced in pasture, because ‘you cannot escape reality’. Result: the masses have the ultimate say as to what is best (because the masses clearly know excellence through sheer numbers alone). Democracy: how loud can they scream for their ‘rights’; the louder they scream, the closer to ‘reality’ the herd lives. The larger the ‘herd’, the more they demand. Modern democratic morality means the following to me: a speedy education so that one may quickly become a money-earning being. A man is allowed only as much culture as it is in the interest of general money-making and world commerce he should possess. Greed naturally arises to the fore as the supreme value in all democratic states. Money-making, as the highest value, is disseminated and universalized as culture and this becomes the instrument for satisfying peoples' desires. Supposedly democracies unchain the individual's energies, but at the right time also yokes him to this money-making value. The dissemination of education among its citizens can only be to its advantage in its competition with other states. The individual, in this 'cultural' and political state is only relevant to the extent that he will serve the interests of existing institutions. The “sensibility” of the majority of men is pathological and unnatural. Democracy is the ideal state of the herd animal. “Democracy represents the disbelief in great human beings and an elite society: Everyone is equal to everyone else. At bottom we are one and all self-seeking cattle and mob” (Will to Power, 752). The growth of moral ills among mankind is the consequence of a pathological and unnatural morality. Why is it that mankind is corrupt morally? Because a healthy society cannot be derived from the notion of “equality” - this term conceals behind it the tendency to make men more and more alike, e.g. virtue as an ideal for everyone, as something average, common, mediocre, superficial, replicated, imitated, accomplished by casual thinking, by compromise, by conciliation, by consistency, by calculation, and thus a squandering and poverty of feeling through a shared sickness that infects all - but this is assuming virtue is even taught at all! “Liberalism: in other words, herd-animalization” (Twilight of the Idols, Skirmishes of an Untimely Man, 38). The true hero is an infectious force that makes a people stronger, more resilient, even as he destroys its foundations. The feat of founding a state, culture, or folk is subsequent to warfare, conquest, and destruction. The great man remains essentially a creative force, but before his genius (i.e. spiritual essence or soul) may manifest itself in an enduring work, the existing structures - be they constitutive of an aesthetic, ethical, or political regime - must be demolished and the rubble cleared: “If a temple is to be erected a temple must be destroyed: that is the law - let anyone who can show me a case in which it is not fulfilled!” (Genealogy of Morals, II:24). “How is freedom measured in individuals and peoples? According to the resistance which must be overcome, according to the exertion required, to remain on top. The highest type of free men should be sought where the highest resistance is constantly overcome: five steps from tyranny, close to the threshold of the danger of servitude. This is true psychologically if by ‘tyrants’ are meant inexorable and fearful instincts that provoke the maximum of authority and discipline against themselves; most beautiful type: Julius Caesar. This is true politically too; one need only go through history. The peoples who had some value, attained some value, never attained it under liberal institutions: it was great danger that made something of them that merits respect. Danger alone acquaints us with our own resources, our virtues, our armor and weapons, our spirit, and forces us to be strong” (Twilight of the Idols, Skirmishes of an Untimely Man, 38). Democracy - typical of lowering everything to craving, desire. The former celebrating it, the latter negating it. The high point that there is no meaning in anything + THE MASSES (the cult of numbers, with their political leaders/"numerologists") define the "real world". "Reality" defined as how many people belong to your cult. The belief in the masses in democracy: the greater the power of the masses, the greater the degree of "reality", life more or less "real" based on more or less people in the masses, the gradation of "reality", the degree to which one believes in this democracy derived from being convinced that it is the only way through life. The greater one is compelled to believe in this type of government, the greater the degree of "reality" must be. The relative ignorance in which the individual person is kept within the masses is among the conditions under which rule can be exercised best, and lends itself to a finer "reality". Democracy: a 'sovereign' ignorance. Democracy: a great, firm dome of ignorance must encompass one because "you can't escape reality"; there is no such thing apart from it; otherwise, it would not be "reality". Result: any striving by the individual is meaningless because the result is the same, the masses rule and one cannot, "obviously", deny this "reality", so what's the point of even opposing the masses? Perspective: no meaning to life; conclusion: resign oneself and deny everything. Withdraw and let the beasts turn on you instead when the time comes. The democratic way/the "real" way: the masses have the ultimate say as to what is best (because the masses "obviously" know this through sheer numbers, how can it be otherwise? Their collective "power": Power of what means? Answer: nothing but how loud they can shout with their mouths; the louder they scream, the closer to "reality" it must seem. The larger the "herd", the closer to "reality" one must be. If any individual disagrees with this "herd": deviation from "reality", no longer conforms to "reality". The grand style of "reality" discovered - sanity by numbers, the larger the number the greater the degree of "reality" must be.

[@reginaldbauer5243]

And "if humans are individualist by nature, because every single one of us is a greedy swindler who will take the opportunities we can to get ahead" then one should not be surprised at the ossification of the West. This view is a form of lust for power or a greed for power, an aggrandizement, trying to get more than your share, (in Greek: pleonexia), which is an intellectual error. This despotic exercise of power can only stimulate the irrational desires of a person and his “striving for having more” (pleonexia), which can only result in self-indulgence and injustice. The term means precisely “wanting more than one’s share” or “self-seeking”. In Classical Greece, this individualist form of greed for power, or money, was invariably regarded as a particularly destructive vice. Thucydides, for example, thought that Athenian overreaching was one of the main reasons that they were defeated in the Peloponnesian War. As mentioned, all moral judgments are expressions of the psychology of the person who makes the judgment. There are no moral facts. "Morality is subjective" you say. Morality is merely an interpretation of certain phenomena - more precisely, a misinterpretation. One’s spiritual health requires a personal diet: “The popular medical formulation of morality that goes back to Ariston of Chios, ‘virtue is the health of the soul,’ would have to be changed to become useful, at least to read: ‘your virtue is the health of your soul.’ For there is no health as such” (Gay Science, 120). Virtue, then, must be a personal or individual invention. Society holds the individual to be its greatest threat; morality serves as its weapon. It is important to distinguish two senses in which it might be left to the individual to determine value for himself. Enlightenment thinkers such as Kant make it the right of an individual to judge questions of value for himself. Yet they remain committed to the assumption that these judgments are answerable to objective standards of correctness: standards independent of the particular will of the individual. But an autonomous individual is not simply someone capable of deciding questions of value for himself. He is someone who recognizes that he himself, and not reason, community, or God, is the ultimate arbiter of the value of persons, actions and things. The freedom of the “higher human being” is rooted in his ability to regiment in himself a principle of action expressive of his power. The starting point for this account of autonomy is his description of the noble mode of evaluation: “The noble type of man experiences itself as determining values; it does not need approval; it judges, ‘what is harmful to me is harmful in itself’; it knows itself to be that which first accords honor to things; it is value-creating” (Beyond Good and Evil, 260). This is entirely at odds with liberalism/democracy, i.e. a kind of "herd morality".

[@reginaldbauer5243]

If one is going to say that “morality is subjective”, that it's "just an opinion", meaning that "no morality is any better than another; they are just different", then, at the base of it, each morality is equally acceptable/good. Taking the stand that no morality is any better than another, that they are just different and subject to the individual's decision, is saying that each person's morality is valid, good and true (to him/her). Now, each person's morality is justified in some way. Reason/logic does operate as one factor for a person to decide one way or another. What is decided upon as good for you is a psychological act of showing something to be right and valid (good and true) for you . It is an act of “self”-justification. More on this later. For you it is right and valid, good and true. By stating that morality A is good for person A, morality B is good for person B, morality C is good for person C, ad infinitum (or in a nutshell that "morality is subjective"), is indeed to state that there is no ultimate moral world order for everyone (much to the dismay of Plato and Kant). Each person lives in their own moral world, in a sense: that world A is just as good as world B or just as good as world C, ad infinitum. There is no ultimate moral standard by which to judge one better than another, so they are each valid. By agreeing that morality, so construed (that the person has shown to himself something right by reason), is valid, good and true for him is to acknowledge that each person has a valid, good and true morality (on the basis that each individual uses his reason to argue to himself a morality). The statement “morality is subjective” is solipsistic. Stating that "morality is subjective" is stating what is good is good for me This decision is made on the basis of the individual’s moral reasoning, by his mind. If something is good for me because I (my mind) have decided it to be so, then inevitably the statement “morality is subjective” upholds that my moral mental state is the only moral mental state that can be known to exist to me (i.e. the only good I know is the good for me). Then, no other person can be morally knowable to another; the only thing that can be morally knowable to a person is his own morality and not another person’s morality. In effect, another person’s morality is ultimately unknowable. What is the root problem of the statement “morality is subjective”? The underlying assumption behind all moral philosophy is intellect/mind (a person's objective use of logic/reason as a diagnostic tool to evaluate a morality to himself). Something is true is true for you on the basis of your intellect, your reasoning. But logic and consciousness is only a small part of what takes place. The mistake is in extrapolating logic and consciousness "as the standard and the condition of life that is of supreme value": “The fundamental mistake is simply that, instead of understanding consciousness as a tool and particular aspect of the total life, we posit it as the standard and the condition of life that is of supreme value: it is the erroneous perspective of a parte ad tatum [from a part to the whole] - which is why all philosophers are instinctively trying to imagine a total consciousness, a consciousness involved in all life and will, in all that occurs, a ‘spirit,’ ‘God.’ But one has to tell them that precisely this turns life into a monstrosity; that a ‘God’ and total sensorium would altogether be something on account of which life would have to be condemned - Precisely that we have eliminated the total consciousness that posited ends and means, is our great relief - with that we are no longer compelled to be pessimists - Our greatest reproach against existence was the existence of God” (Will to Power, 707). It is the “subject” that is added to an interpretation of morality: “‘There are only facts’ - I would say: No, facts is precisely what there is not, only interpretations. We cannot establish any fact ‘in itself’: perhaps it is folly to want to do such a thing. ‘Everything is subjective,’ you say; but even this is interpretation. The ‘subject’ is not something given, it is something added and invented and projected behind what there is. Finally, is it necessary to posit an interpreter behind the interpretation? Even this is invention, hypothesis…It is our needs that interpret the world; our drives and their For and Against. Every drive is a kind of lust to rule; each one has its perspective that it would like to compel all the other drives to accept as a norm” (Will to Power, 481). One comes to believe in this intellect/mind that applies itself to the moral problem of which morality to adopt for oneself. One comes to believe that moral philosophy is THE application of scientific, logical reasoning to moral problems. But, as stated, logic and consciousness is only a small part of what takes place. It is only one type of tool, not THE tool, that we use to justify or explain to ourselves an adoption of a morality. In a world where “morality is subjective” you have many different moral world views, each applying to a particular person. The consequences of which is each person says that their own moral view is right for him/her In such a “subjective” world, many different moral worlds then exist. Meaning, world A is just as good as world B or just as good as world C…and so on (for that particular person). In the end, it doesn't matter what type of morality is decided upon so long as it can be logically reasoned for by the person. There is no one to say under such conditions that there is an ultimate morality or moral goal. (Take Note: I am not stating that there should or should not be an objective moral goal for everyone). But whence comes Apollo, whence comes this intellect, as Nietzsche asked and “How should a tool (the mind) be able to criticize itself when it can use only itself for the critique? It cannot even define itself!” (Will to Power, 486). Intellect evolved as a “tool” of your will, as a means to justify or explain your existence, of which your morals are but one part of that existence. This intellect is therefore secondary to your will of self-affirmation. Your moral truth becomes your trustworthy guide in life, your daemon or inner voice as Socrates put it, and it is valid for you because of (1) positing a self, (2) positing a consciousness for this self so that it can be reflective (a “thinking” subject), (3) seeing value in a moral “fact” or interpretation for said self/subject. So, by adopting a moral interpretation for your“self”, the decision was made that it is also good for your“self”. Adopting a particular moral view is a reflection of your psychology. Which moral view is adopted or decided upon is in part based on reason/logic/consciousness, but not entirely. All moral judgments are expressions of the psychology of the person who makes the judgment. Reason, logic, and consciousness are only a part of that psychology. By stating "morality is subjective", as only different, that this morality is good for that person or another morality is good for another person and ad infinitum, means that each individual decides his/her own good, which is itself a moral judgment. That one morality is not any better than another, that they are just "different", means that all moralities have equal standing because there is no reference point by which to judge. The implication is that there can be no claim to a superior morality; no one person can claim that their own morality is better than any other person's morality. But this is just another biased moral judgment because it is still a moral judgment. By claiming that "morality is subjective" is your moral interpretation. So the question becomes: If “morality is subjective”, then on what levels can there be moral understanding with others? With what is considered “good” or “bad”? If each person subjectively holds their own morality as good for himself, then what is to be made of the term "good"? Everyone has their own morality, their own good, is tantamount to saying that person A is just as good as person B or just as good as person C. In sum, people are morally equal. Then explain to me the existence of laws? Explain to me the need for laws? If “morality is subjective”, then why the sham of having everyone obey standard moral laws (insert your society here)? Having laws must be an attempt to posit an objective moral standard that everyone should follow and an objective form of knowledge that can be understood by all. In such a case, then, society is a form of moral Platonism and the dialectic is simply a tool for the "herd" to use. [Platonism, understood as a faith in “the pure mind and the good as such”, the equivalence of the true and the good (Beyond Good and Evil, Preface).] Under such a framework, knowledge/science (episteme in Greek) becomes a form of law-giving (i.e. morality). Episteme, as it operates for society, is as a method of truth telling (i.e. society is only possible on the basis of the belief that moral problems can be approached objectively, hence the existence of “laws”).

[@sarveshkatuwal4002]

Ok

[@deathmetaldrummer9368]

I met a lady who survived an Italian concentration camp. She said the treatment while not good was definitely better than the Germans. I remember her telling us she was allowed to shower once or twice a week and was given acceptable food.

[@whyter11]

She survived a German concentration camp also? To make the comparison? Friend of my grandfather was pow in Germany. Said guards were mainly decent people, treated with respect and obeyed Geneva convention. Of course there were exceptions, but overall the Germans did not hate us. We should never have declared war on them. They certainly didn't want to fight us, and sued for peace with Britain a half dozen times.

[@captainsponge7825]

@@whyter11 yeah, sign a peace with the nazis, betray all your allies at once, make the europe germany-dominated and lose your authority once for all, lol. what a bullshit. the best they could do is to stop the war at first, but after the war started the only way to survive was to fight till the end. only neo-nazis or retards would really enjoy "peace" with Nazi Germany.

[@whyter11]

@@captainsponge7825 "betray all your allies" You mean like Poland, the country we went to war over? The country we just handed on a plate to the Soviet Bolsheviks. That the kind of betrayal you mean? "Lose your authority once for all" You mean even worse than losing the fkn Empire? Worse than being financially bankrupt?? Listen Spongebob, you don't know what tf you are talking about, you or I weren't there, I think our history is very distorted from the truth. Suggest that you watch "Europa the last battle" on Bitchute, it's banned here. Watch it all, start with part 1 then we'll talk.

[@Nightdare]

@@whyter11 "and sued for peace with Britain a half dozen times." After invading allies of GB and neutral countries as well, you can't really blame GB for not wanting peace Especially since DE had no intention of leaving the occupied territories and not after Chamberlain did all he could to "feed the crocodile"

[@revere0311]

Difference between Tik and the Ryan Chapman video is that Tik actually references contemporary sources and explains the the historic background. Chapman meanwhile just cherry picks and created a small f definition. ‘What Marxism, Leninism and Stalinism failed to accomplish, we shall be in a position to achieve.’ - Adolf Hitler It’s an interesting subject, and one that Tik is obviously well versed on.

[@stuffbymax]

hi can i use your work and documents vids for my videos?

[@SwfanredLotr]

"Fascism arose from the nationalization of certain sectors of the revolutionary left, and those who played the central role in its conceptual orientation were revolutionary trade unionists who embraced extremist nationalism." -Stanley G. Payne Fascism had origins in the left, true, but that did not prevent them from allying with some sectors of the conservative or authoritarian right, since in the social sphere they were largely opposed to the same things. It must be borne in mind that although Mussolini was a socialist in his youth, he rejected the communism established in Russia, which was one of the reasons why he stopped being a socialist in the middle of the First World War and formed the Fascio di Combatimento as armed response to communism that wanted to manifest itself in Italian cities. Another detail that must be taken into account is that not all fascisms are the same, since it is an ideology that is modified and adapted to the laws and traditions of the country in which it is implanted. In Germany, some of the more radical Nazis rejected the Italian fascists as being too conservative and supposedly capitalist, and Mussolini was not anti-Semitic. The Falangists were traditionally Catholic and the Romanian legionaries advocated an orthodox clerical regime to give a few more examples. I recommend you read "El fascismo" by the historian Stanley Payne. Very good book.

[@alwayswas8155]

I don't usually like """"""scholars"""""" of fascism, as primary sources are a better way to understand it imo. That being said, Stanley Payne, Emilio Gentile and Roger Griffin give some good insights

[@dhereaktienner3552]

Traditional fascism was based more in nationalism and traditionalism, they believed in a race but, they did not the thijgs nazis made

[@jonb3150]

Well who is to say that Mussolini stopped being a socialist just because he was against Communism? All nationalists hate communists because communism is globalist and anti nationalist. So if he was against Communists, does that change the way he wants to structure the economy or his views on labor unions, what societal traits a a country should adopt or opposition to capitalism to take an example. For me Fascists just seem to be socialists who are nationalists. They hated Communists for the same reason Capitalists did and they hated Capitalists for the same reason Communists did. The country today that is run similar to fascists and Nazis is actually China. There is plenty of private enterprise but everyone is to work for the good of the state and individuals rights or freedom really don't matter.

[@jonb3150]

@Rick Vis Hitler wrote that the only difference between USSR and Nazi Regime was that the Nazi's were nationalists. Other fascists said exactly the same thing, for example the ideological founders of the Bath party. They clearly wrote that there is no disagreement between them and Communists except Communists had no nationalist agenda. They were pan Arab nationalist socialists and they hated the communists because the communist party in Syria wanted to extend the French control in Syria. Fascists like Saddam Hussein and Nasser of Egypt were both ardent socialists, rejected religious extremism, were quite liberal on many issues like women's rights. They were fervently pan Arab nationalists and hated both Capitalists and Communists. Just like Communists, the nationalist Socialist like the Nazi's and Bath party believed in one party states. 1 political party(their own obviously) was the only party needed, Marxist socialism(communism) = National Socialism minus Nationalism.

[@zyanego3170]

@@jonb3150 where did Hitler write that?

[@willmarmol6533]

I could not be the only one to think that “bundle of sticks” point was going somewhere else

[@mitch_the_-itch]

Collectivism. Its like people are afraid to use this word because it exposes ALL LEFT WING IDEOLOGIES equally. Progressives most upset.

[@Agent-Blaze]

Ape alone weak, apes together strong

[@mitch_the_-itch]

@@Agent-Blaze If you really believe that then move to China. In America we are individuals and our Govt was setup that way for a reason.

[@Agent-Blaze]

@@mitch_the_-itch You realize im not being serious and im just referencing Caesar's quote from 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes'

[@mitch_the_-itch]

@@Agent-Blaze That does make more sense, lol.

[@christopherjefferson3561]

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding on supper. A republic is an armed lamb.

[@ostrava8809]

I have been watching your videos on socialism/fascism/nazism and it has been truly eye opening for me. For years I've been very interested in world war 2, yet whenever I tried to piece together what the core of fascist/nazi ideology was, I always felt as if something was being left out of the conversation, especially on the subject of their economics. Your videos have given me so much context that has been sorely lacking; not only in public education, but in general discussion as well. Not to mention a lot of reading material. My only issue with your videos, for lack of a better term, is how butthurt you seem to get at hate comments. Don't get me wrong, they are quite idiotic and you're pretty damn funny at times, but being so combative towards "The Haters" doesn't help the situation, it just attracts more of them

[@jbellflower83]

Tbf, it does get annoying trying to explain things to ppl who just refuse to see the truth of it no matter what you put in front of them. And Tik has probably been dealing with ppl like that for years. I hear what you're saying but sometimes no matter what you say, some ppl are just here to argue and demean and undermine.