The “Fascist” Ad Hominem As an Act of Projection


A definition of “projection” is when one baselessly accuses others of doing something unsavory, immoral, or illegal that he is actually doing. For example, a thief who, without proof, accuses others of being thieves. This is what socialists do when they call their intellectual and political opponents “fascists” or compare them to Hitler. Fascism is socialism, as Lew Rockwell recently reminded us in an essay entitled “National Socialism Was Socialist.” Socialists calling opponents of socialism fascists and Hitler-like is a classic example of projection.

Socialists started out claiming that their goal was forced egalitarianism with the means being government ownership of the means of production. Then, according to Ludwig von Mises, it also came to be defined as government control of the private means of production through pervasive government regulation, controls, and regimentation. The ostensible goal was still egalitarianism but the means were different. In the 1976 edition of The Road to Serfdom F. A. Hayek wrote that by that time socialism also meant the pursuit of egalitarianism by yet another means – income redistribution through the institutions of the welfare state and the progressive income tax.

Today socialism is defined by its self-described “woke” practitioners as “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI), a synonym for egalitarianism, along with comprehensive central planning through regulation in the name of “fighting climate change” (i.e., the “Green New Deal”). What these definitions of socialism have in common is that they would all require totalitarian governmental power and the further abolition of property rights, the rule of law, civil liberties, constitutionalism, and economic freedom in general, all in the name of “equity,” the new buzz word for socialist egalitarianism.

Today’s socialists see Donald Trump and his political followes as their main obstacle, so naturally they relentlessly label them as fascists and Hitler-like. A typical Washington Post headline was “How Trump’s Rhetoric Compares with Hitler’s.” Another one was “Yes, It’s OK to Compare Trump to Hitler.” National Public Radio’s web site had a headline announcing that “Donald Trump Used Language in a Speech that Echoed Hitler.” Joe Biden once publicly announced that “Trump echoes language you heard in Nazi Germany.” “Calling Trump Hitler has become part of the routine” of the Biden campaign, wrote POLITICO in early 2024, before it became “part of the routine” of the Harris campaign.

In reality it is today’s “woke” cultural Marxists in government, universities, the so-called “media,” the entertainment industry, and much of corporate America – including the people and institutions quoted above – who are the real fascists. They are the political children of the early twentieth century Italian communist Antionio Gramsci, who taught them that the road to socialism should proceed with a “long march through the institutions.” Their socialist long march as been concluded with the capture of all of the above-mentioned institutions. They are now busy rigging elections, “cancelling” anyone who disagrees with them, using “lawfare” to imprison their political opponents, and using the powers of government to try to destroy the First Amendment. Hillary Clinton, the widely acknowledged instigator of the “Russia Hoax,” the biggest political lie in memory, recently proposed prison sentences for anyone spreading “misinformation” ( i.e., criticizing her political agendas) on the internet. Talk about projection on steroids.

Fascism IS Socialism

Benito Mussolini, who ruled over fascist Italy, called himself an “international socialist” before he relabeled himself as a “national socialist,” which is what a fascist was defined as in the nineteenth century. Private enterprise was permitted in fascist Italy but was regulated and controlled with an iron fist by fascist politicians. As such, it was socialism as Mises explained.

The 2007 edition of The Road to Serfdom, published by the University of Chicago Press, included an appendix that was an essay by F.A. Hayek entitled “Nazi Socialism.” “The socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized,” wrote Hayek. This is remarkable on its face: Why would something called “national socialism” not be considered socialism?! (Hint: Because socialists understand that Hayek was right when he wrote in The Road to Serfdom that under socialism “the worst rise to the top” in politics. Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Ceausescu, and the rest were not just aberrations).

“Pervasive anti-capitalism was at the heart of national socialism,” Hayek said. The Nazi Party Platform “was full ideas resembling those of the early socialists” including “a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic – individual profit seeking, large-scale enterprises, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, international finance and loan capital, the system of ‘interest slavery.’”

Hayek described German national socialism as “a violent anti-capitalist attack” with “The End of Capitalism” being its slogan. “All of the leading men” of German and Italian fascism “began as socialists and ended as Fascists or Nazis,” he wrote.

Mussolini wrote in his book Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions that “The fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with the State. It is opposed to classical liberalism.” “If classical liberalism spells individualism,” said the fascist dictator, “Fascism spells government.” Mussolini announced with great bombast that the twentieth century was “the collective century, and therefore the century of the State.” What socialist would not approve of that?

The Italian and German fascists adopted both kinds of socialism that Mises described: They nationalized many industries, more than half in Germany, and the rest were de facto nationalized with pervasive government regulatory control and regimentation.

Nazi apologist Paul Lensch was a self-professed Marxist, a member of the Reichstag who praised the “war socialism” of World War I, and the author of Three Years of World Revolution. In it he followed Mussolini in denouncing “English liberalism” and especially individualism (i.e., respect for all individuals) and called for replacing these “inherited political ideas” with “Socialism,” which “must present a conscious and determined opposition to individualism.” Accordingly, the fundamental philosophical plank of the “25-Point Program of the Nazi Party” was “The Common Good Comes Before the Private Good,” with of course the state defining what “the common good” is. A classic definition of collectivism.

As good socialists the Nazis in their platform demanded that capitalist “usurers and profiteers [bankers and entrepreneurs] . . . must be punished with death.” The media were to be under strict government control to eliminate “known lies” about fascism, essentially identical to Hillary Clinton’s recent proposal to imprison spreaders of “misinformation” about her political preferences.

As with all twentieth-century socialist regimes the Nazis demanded monopolistic, centralized governmental power and the abolition of federalism, states’ rights, and decentralization. “We demand the formation of a strong central power in the Reich” and “unlimited authority of the central parliament over the whole Reich.” That of course is exactly what today’s “woke” cultural Marxists want with their election rigging, censorship, lawfare, and calls to abolish the Constitution, the Supreme Court, the electoral college, and anything else that would stand in the way of “unlimited authority” in the central government. They know exactly what they are doing because they are, after all, fascists.

 


Originally Posted at https://mises.org/


Stay Updated with news.freeptomaineradio.com’s Daily Newsletter

Stay informed! Subscribe to our daily newsletter to receive updates on our latest blog posts directly in your inbox. Don’t let important information get buried by big tech.



Current subscribers:

  • Related Posts

    Tropical Storm Sara Public Advisory Number 9A

    …SARA CRAWLING WESTWARD NEAR THE HONDURAS COAST…
    …CATASTROPHIC FLOODING AND MUDSLIDES ONGOING FOR PORTIONS OF
    CENTRAL AMERICA…
    Location: 16.2°N 86.3°W
    Max sustained: 50 mph
    Moving: W at 2 mph
    Min pressure: 997 mb

    Issued at 600 PM CST Fri Nov 15 2024

    Jake Paul Or Mike Tyson?

    Jake Paul Or Mike Tyson?

    Netflix is reportedly paying at least $60 million in purses to make history in its first-ever, live, non-pay-per-view sports broadcast tonight.

    The streaming giant’s venture into live programming pits 27-year-old YouTuber-turned-boxer Jake Paul against 58 year-old ‘Iron’ Mike Tyson.

    The big fight between “Iron Mike” and “The Problem Child” is scheduled to take place at AT&T Stadium, the Arlington, Texas home of the Dallas Cowboys.

    The venue, which holds 80,000, has hosted some major boxing matches over the years, including multiple fights featuring former champion Manny Pacquiao current pound-for-pound No. 1 Canelo Álvarez.

    Tyson will be fighting out of the red corner on Friday night, and weighs in at 228.4 pounds.

    “This fight is not going to change my lifestyle financially,” Tyson said.

    “I feel I can beat this guy.”

    Paul will fight from the blue corner of the ring and enters the fight at 227.2 pounds.

    “I’m here to make $40m and knock out a legend,” Jake Paul told interviewers.

    The fight has garnered a great deal of attention as nobody knows how a 58-year-old Mike Tyson is going to look in his first sanctioned competitive fight since 2005.

    Things got a littel heated at the weigh-in…

    For now, the betting markets favor Paul over Iron Mike, with Tyson’s odds fading today…

    Jake Paul’s Advantages:

    • Age and Stamina: Paul is significantly younger, at 27 years old, which gives him an edge in terms of stamina, recovery, and physical condition. Boxing is indeed a sport where youth can be a substantial advantage.

    • Recent Activity: Paul has been active in the ring, fighting several times in recent years. This regular competition keeps him in fighting shape and provides him with recent experience against diverse opponents.

    • Size and Reach: Paul has a height advantage and possibly a reach advantage, which could help him keep Tyson at bay if he chooses to fight more defensively.

    • Boxing Skill Development: Over his fights, Paul has shown improvement in his boxing technique, particularly in his footwork, jab usage, and defensive maneuvers.

    Mike Tyson’s Advantages:

    • Experience: Tyson’s vast experience as a former undisputed heavyweight champion cannot be overstated. He knows how to fight at the highest levels, how to read opponents, and how to end fights quickly.

    • Power: Even at an advanced age, Tyson’s punching power is legendary. If he can land a clean shot, his power could still be devastating.

    • Motivation: This fight could serve as a significant motivator for Tyson to prove he still has what it takes, which might lead to an exceptional performance.

    Fight Predictions:

    Betting odds generally favor Paul due to his youth and recent activity, but there’s a significant portion of the public and some experts betting on Tyson, driven by nostalgia and his raw power.

    • Scenario 1 – Early Knockout: If Tyson can replicate his old explosive starts and land a significant punch early, he could potentially knock out Paul.

    • Scenario 2 – Endurance and Strategy: If the fight goes beyond the initial rounds, Paul’s superior conditioning and strategy might wear Tyson down, leading to a win either by knockout or decision.

    • Scenario 3 – Fight Integrity: There’s always the possibility in such high-profile, exhibition-like bouts that the fight might not be as competitive as it could be due to various external factors, but given the statements from both fighters and the sanctioning of the bout, this seems less likely.

    Conclusion:

    While many factors could play into the outcome, if one were to go by the majority of expert opinions and odds:

    Jake Paul is likely to win due to his youth, recent fighting experience, and physical advantages. However, Mike Tyson’s power and experience make him a dangerous opponent, and if he can catch Paul with a solid punch, nothing can be ruled out.

    The fight’s result might also depend on how Tyson has prepared, considering his age and health conditions.

    Remember, in boxing, one punch can change everything, especially when it comes from someone with Tyson’s history.

    *  *  *

    Netflix will start coverage of the full fight card at 2000ET.

    Who are the Jake Paul-Mike Tyson Ring Girls?

    • Lexi Williams – Instagram superstar; 1.4M followers; “I’m so excited to be a part of this moment,” she wrote on Instagram. One of the true titans of the Instagram modeling world

    • Sydney Thomas – Making her second career ring girl appearance

    • Raphaela Milagres – Brazilian model who worked the Jake Paul vs. Andre August fight in 2023

    • Virginia Sanhouse – Venezuelan model with 5.5M TikTok followers

    • Delia Sylvain – Veteran ring girl who worked the Jake Paul vs. Mike Perry fight in July.

    Full Card:

    • Heavyweight: Mike Tyson vs. Jake Paul

    • Super Lightweight: Katie Taylor vs. Amanda Serrano for Taylor’s IBF, WBA, WBC and WBO women’s super-lightweight titles

    • Welterweight: Mario Barrios vs. Abel Ramos for Barrios’ WBC welterweight title

    • Super Middleweight: Neeraj Goyat vs. Whindersson Nunes

    • Super Middleweight: Shadasia Green vs Melinda Watpool for vacant women’s WBO super middleweight title

    • Super Lightweight: Lucas Bahdi vs. Armando Casamonica

    • Featherweight: Bruce Carrington vs Dana Coolwell

    As PJMedia’s Scott Pinsker warns, make no mistake, Mike Tyson is still a master artist. He’s still an all-time great. 

    Jake Paul is scribbling with crayons. 

    On their merits, if Tyson has ANYTHING left, he will flatten Paul. It shouldn’t go more than a couple of rounds, two minutes or not. Mike Tyson on Testosterone Replacement Therapy is probably less like a guy pushing 60 and more like an athlete in his 40s.

    If the fix is in, it’s almost certainly for Tyson to take the dive. That’s how it’s always been in boxing: The old lion makes way for the younger (and more marketable) lion. 

    Some boxing insiders suspect as much.

    After all, Paul has exponentially more to lose: If Tyson loses, he’s still Mike Tyson, but if Paul loses, he’s done.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 11/15/2024 – 18:00

    You Missed

    Tropical Storm Sara Public Advisory Number 9A

    • By NHC
    • November 15, 2024
    • 1 views

    Jake Paul Or Mike Tyson?

    Jake Paul Or Mike Tyson?

    The Computer Forcast The Demise of the Democratic Party

    The Computer Forcast The Demise of the Democratic Party

    German Chancellor Olaf Scholz tells Putin to end war with Ukraine during phone call: report

    German Chancellor Olaf Scholz tells Putin to end war with Ukraine during phone call: report

    BREAKING: Joe Rogan BEAT Disney ABC News in Election Coverage — Now Disney GIVES UP on Politics?!

    • By WDWPro
    • November 15, 2024
    • 2 views
    BREAKING: Joe Rogan BEAT Disney ABC News in Election Coverage — Now Disney GIVES UP on Politics?!

    Tropical Storm Sara Public Advisory

    • By NHC
    • November 15, 2024
    • 3 views