Re: Defintion of Facism (was: Re: Evolution in action)

Mark Grant (
Fri, 12 Sep 1997 23:35:00 +0000

On Fri, 12 Sep 1997, Arjen Kamphuis wrote:

> Or maybe there are a lot of working definitions of 'Facism' around.
> Facism does not mean Nazism, it's about putting the interests of the group
> (fasci - Italian word) ahead of the individual. Also in such an arangement
> stronger individuals often have more rights than weaker ones.

Yet another good reason for eliminating the state which gives them those
extra rights.

> Thing are further complicated by the fact that there's no 'manual' on
> facism as there is on communism (you know, the one by Marx)

What about Reich's books? I've never had the chance to read them, but I'd
presume he did a pretty good job.

> Example: euthanasia is illegal in most country's, but is becoming accepted
> in some and has been practised by the Eskimo's for thousands of years.

I was under the impression that Eskimo 'euthanasia' was much closer to
what we'd call 'murder'; people didn't commit suicide because they were in
horrible pain, but committed suicide or were killed because they were a
drain on the community.

> With a Darwinian Economy I meant an economy without any ethical rules or
> law-enforcing organisation (like a state).

Which is a far cry from the kind of anarcho-capitalist or libertarian free
market societies we've talked about here. The *only* difference between
anarcho-capitalism and modern society is that we privatise everything,
including the government and legal system.

> I'm not saying it won't work, I
> think it would work very well (that was what the post was all about). But I
> find the side-effect of such a system much too high.

So by your own definition you're a fascist (you put the interests of the
group above the interests of the individual)?


|Mark Grant M.A., U.L.C. EMAIL: |