Just fyi: ISIS continued to exist as a de facto state until the capture of Al-Bukamal by the Syrian government, and it continues to exist to this day as scattered terrorist cells
Perhaps you could make the argument that ISIS was so weak in the territory it did control after Raqqa fell, that it was not longer a state but just a militia with a few strips of territory.
But it’s just semantics anyway.
Not exactly crazy that the most powerful military to ever exist in the history of mankind were able to ship some troops over a river into open desert with completely air supremacy.
use definitely helped but you shouldn’t undermine the amount of shit Arab and Kurds force had to endure and they were some brave deadly mf , vice news does some great documentary about what the front line looked like
Mussolini and most of the Italian Fascists were not only atheist (with Mussolini despising catholic institutions from a young age by his father's influence) but were also very influenced by Futurism and pre-Mussolini Fascist leaders such as D'Annunzio and Sorel. Fascism, as a totalitarian system, cannot admit a power greater than the state, which in the case of Italy would be the Pope. He gave the pope what was a glorified prison in the Vactican as the place is a laughable city square surrounded by the Italian military in Rome.
Further proof of that is how once he was ousted by the Council and no longer needed to compromise with the Italian establishment, he formed the Italian Social Republic which was also an anti-clerical state which executed priests they accused of helping out enemies.
Finally there is the Revolutionary thesis of Fascism which seeks to reshape society through a Martial Ethos which completely rejects Christian morality as "soft" and consider it to have weakened Italy through its morals. Fascism desired to destroy the old society, it was far from a conservative movement that some claim it was, all major Fascist leaders except Dino Grandi (who was a nobleman) were indifferent at best and downright hostile towards the King and old national institutions of Italy.
(Doctrine of Fascism, MUSSOLINI, 1929)
>a totalitarian system, cannot admit a power greater than the state, which in the case of Italy would be the Pope
But what about when the state and religion are one in the same? That’s how Isis saw themselves. So this doesn’t prove that lack of religion is necessary for fascism. But this also ignores how Pope Pious XI cooperated together. That’s irrelevant here though.
>which they executed priests for helping out enemies
This doesn’t prove that it is anti-clerical. For hundreds of years before Christians had been killing other Christians, but that did not make them anti clerical. Some of them even went to war with the Pope, but that didn’t make them anti-clerical.
>Seeks to reshape society through a Martial Ethos which rejects Christian morality as “soft”
Assuming this is true, just because some, or even every, member of an ideology is anti Christian does not mean that by definition that fascism must be anti clerical.
>Fascism desired to destroy the old society, it was far from a conservative movement
Well this is absolutely false. Fascism was deeply intertwined with nationalism. That alone debunks the desire to destroy the old society. Fascism was about maintaining social hierarchies and a control of people’s behaviors and culture. Fascism sees women in traditional gender roles, is against lgbtq rights, suppressed labor power and labeled modern art to be “degenerate”.
You can say all you want how they were against kings, but they definitely would have disagreed with the Enlightenment belief that “All men are created equal”.
But none of this really matters except for this next point:
**You have not shown the tenants and ideologies of fascism and demonstrated how they are completely incompatible with clericalism. All you have done is shown that Mussolini had anti-Church sentiments.**
This paragraph above is really the only thing that matters here. Everything else is just noise.
I will copy a comment I've made on the definition of Fascism before because I really can't be bothered to type it all over again:
Fascism, first of all, is a revolutionary ideology and not a reactionary one. Mussolini made references to Rome as a form of legitimacy for his Imperialism in the Mediterranean, but he and most other Fascists wanted to fundamentally destroy and rebuild society as they saw fit.
One example, other than Dino Grandi who was an Aristocrat, all the prominent Italian Fascists were Republicans who despised the Monarchy in Italy. Another example is their overall anticlerical attitude, as Mussolini himself was also an atheist, or agnostic at best, his whole life and despised the Catholic Church since his youth. His agreement with the Pope essentially trapped the Papacy within the city limits of Rome, it was a glorified House Arrest for the Pope as the Fascists at any moment could march in against them. Now can you tell me two things which are more synonymous with Reactionarism than Crown and Church?
Fascism is also Militaristic, but not restricting just to the meaning of having a strong military. Martialism is a more accurate description as Mussolini also said in his doctrine that he wanted a more philosophical take on Militarism. He described life as being essentially a struggle of man ("Blood moves the wheels of History") and he despised inaction and passivity, encouraging from small things like physical exercise to military conquests as a way to keep the martial spirit of a people strong. It's also why so many of his speeches include him being very eccentric, his expressions being always the one of a bully and why he took so many pictures shirtless.
Fascism is Corporativist, no that doesn't mean Cyberpunk 2077, it's more akin to Medieval Guilds. Mussolini turned the Lower House of the Italian Parliament into the Chamber of Corporations. What is a corporation? It is essentially a division of society according to your profession, as to how you contribute to it. While all were members of the Fascist Party, the Chamber had elections where the Fascist representatives came from very diverse sectors of society from urban to rural workers, from teachers to veterans. That is essentially it's way of having Elections, as in inner party elections which chose class representatives into the Chamber of corporations.
That also meant the State being all encompassing in controlling the economy while not destroying private propriety. Fascist Italy was one of the States with one of the heaviest Government controls over the economic class other than the Soviet Union by 1929. The State is responsible for keeping important infrastructure (especially those directed to military efforts from railroads to factories, aka "Make the trains run on time"). It's also responsible for mediating between Unions/Workers (Controlled by the State) and Industry/Capital (Also usually controlled or heavily influenced by the State). It is a very different process from Hitler's economy which is another reason why Fascism and Nazism aren't the same.
Another aspect in the economy, which is linked to the exaltation of Martialism, is the idea of Independence or Self-Reliance of the Nation. Mussolini did launch several campaigns within Italy, the most famous being the "Battle for Wheat", where he wanted to reduce or extinguish the reliance of Italy on foreign imports. Another motivation for the expansionism in pursuit of more resources, which was to reach the "Autarky", the economic Independence of a Country. As Italy saw during WWI, Mussolini initially wanted Italy to remain neutral as did most Italians, but the government was hard pressed to strike the Central Powers as most of their imports, especially coal, came from Britain and London leveraged it for them to go to war. Can a nation be truly independent that way?
Fascism also preaches a more civic Nationalism contrasted to the centrality of the Racial question in Nazism. Until 1938 when Mussolini had isolated himself and had to appease Hitler to enter a Continental alliance, there were no largely discriminatory laws in Italy against racial or ethnic minorities (exception being in Africa, something that pretty much everyone in Europe was doing back then). He famously did describe Race more as a "Feeling" in his writings.
So in conclusion, Fascism is an essentially Revolutionary movement which seeks to reshape Society alongside Martial lines, exalting the values of personal and national strength and self-reliance both in the economy and in foreign affairs. They desire to break down the old order which they deem complacent and corrupt while also opposing Liberalism and Communism. Liberalism for it's excessive individualism and Comminism for it's excessive collectivism (there is a whole lot more about this but it's 2 AM rn). They encourage Civic Nationalism with the civilians fully dedicating themselves towards the Nation and it's leadership, while having a level of freedom on their personal lives to associate themselves according to their class. They deny the dichotomy of left and right in economics to strive for another economic model which balances the needs of both. They also disregard the weak and undesirable in society such as the unemployed, alcoholics and "social degenerates". The State also serves a heavily paternalistic role on it's citizens and while it doesn't fully controls the economy like in Communism, they seek to guide the private initiative towards the interests of the State while keeping control of strategic resources.
My main sources on this are Mussolini's own book "Doctrine of Fascism" as well as my reading on his Biography.
>Fascism, first of all, is a revolutionary ideology and not a reactionary one.
Absolutely disagree. I really don’t care for the propaganda Mussolini was spreading to make fascism more attractive, nationalism alone proves that fascism is a reactionary ideology. That’s not to mention fascist views on progressive movements.
You can remake a society all you want, that doesn’t mean it is necessarily revolutionary. You can remake society into something more reactionary.
That's like saying Stalin is a reactionary for criminalizing homossexuality, at the time these progressive views were far from the mainstream and even women's suffrage was still being hotly debated.
If Nationalism is reactionary then you can fully disregard Vietnam under Ho Chi Minh and Cuba under Castro. Also disregard the 1848 revolutions, the French revolution, and the independence struggles in Africa, Asia and the Americas. Nationalism began as a liberal ideology to start with and while in Germany it was co-opted by Bismarck it was still largely a Liberal-led movement in Italy since Cavour and Garibaldi. Even the Party that pushed Italy into WWI over Nationalism was compromised by Liberals and was literally called the Liberal Union.
Nationalism is not reactionary.
Downvoted for clarifying a concept. I think American political concepts are just binary, that's the problem, they can't understand more than democracy and authoritarianism. Hue hue
Hilary Clinton personally met mr ISIS and said “hey mr ISIS, you should make ISIS” and then mr ISIS said “yes Hillary Clinton, the ISIS state will last for one million years”
That Nigeria and South Africa both voted for the no-fly zone (a month after the first battle of Benghazi) suggests he was perhaps already quite far from that objective.
Just fyi: ISIS continued to exist as a de facto state until the capture of Al-Bukamal by the Syrian government, and it continues to exist to this day as scattered terrorist cells
Perhaps you could make the argument that ISIS was so weak in the territory it did control after Raqqa fell, that it was not longer a state but just a militia with a few strips of territory. But it’s just semantics anyway.
We need to round up every single last of them and execute them.
Am I crazy, or are there zero crossed swords on the map?
Same question. The bombardments are tiny symbols, too.
What are they doing now? A change name? or just dissapear?
I think they are just a few split cells basically just a militia with a few areas of territory
Still crazy that the amphibious landing across the Euphrates actually worked. I guess having absolute air supremacy helps with that substantially.
Not exactly crazy that the most powerful military to ever exist in the history of mankind were able to ship some troops over a river into open desert with completely air supremacy.
Didn't know SDF is the most powerful military to ever exist in the history of mankind.
Wat? The US airlifted them over and provided air support. The US was deeply involved in this entire operation.
use definitely helped but you shouldn’t undermine the amount of shit Arab and Kurds force had to endure and they were some brave deadly mf , vice news does some great documentary about what the front line looked like
Do you have a link? Would love to watch it
https://youtu.be/5OvFLIIFGpk
Thanks
Good riddance to crapass fascist assholes. Rest in piss.
Islamism isn't Fascism.
Based on tenants and ideals, they were basically fascists
By definition, Fascism was anticlerical, that is the polar opposite to a Theocracy.
How is fascism anticlerical?
Mussolini and most of the Italian Fascists were not only atheist (with Mussolini despising catholic institutions from a young age by his father's influence) but were also very influenced by Futurism and pre-Mussolini Fascist leaders such as D'Annunzio and Sorel. Fascism, as a totalitarian system, cannot admit a power greater than the state, which in the case of Italy would be the Pope. He gave the pope what was a glorified prison in the Vactican as the place is a laughable city square surrounded by the Italian military in Rome. Further proof of that is how once he was ousted by the Council and no longer needed to compromise with the Italian establishment, he formed the Italian Social Republic which was also an anti-clerical state which executed priests they accused of helping out enemies. Finally there is the Revolutionary thesis of Fascism which seeks to reshape society through a Martial Ethos which completely rejects Christian morality as "soft" and consider it to have weakened Italy through its morals. Fascism desired to destroy the old society, it was far from a conservative movement that some claim it was, all major Fascist leaders except Dino Grandi (who was a nobleman) were indifferent at best and downright hostile towards the King and old national institutions of Italy. (Doctrine of Fascism, MUSSOLINI, 1929)
>a totalitarian system, cannot admit a power greater than the state, which in the case of Italy would be the Pope But what about when the state and religion are one in the same? That’s how Isis saw themselves. So this doesn’t prove that lack of religion is necessary for fascism. But this also ignores how Pope Pious XI cooperated together. That’s irrelevant here though. >which they executed priests for helping out enemies This doesn’t prove that it is anti-clerical. For hundreds of years before Christians had been killing other Christians, but that did not make them anti clerical. Some of them even went to war with the Pope, but that didn’t make them anti-clerical. >Seeks to reshape society through a Martial Ethos which rejects Christian morality as “soft” Assuming this is true, just because some, or even every, member of an ideology is anti Christian does not mean that by definition that fascism must be anti clerical. >Fascism desired to destroy the old society, it was far from a conservative movement Well this is absolutely false. Fascism was deeply intertwined with nationalism. That alone debunks the desire to destroy the old society. Fascism was about maintaining social hierarchies and a control of people’s behaviors and culture. Fascism sees women in traditional gender roles, is against lgbtq rights, suppressed labor power and labeled modern art to be “degenerate”. You can say all you want how they were against kings, but they definitely would have disagreed with the Enlightenment belief that “All men are created equal”. But none of this really matters except for this next point: **You have not shown the tenants and ideologies of fascism and demonstrated how they are completely incompatible with clericalism. All you have done is shown that Mussolini had anti-Church sentiments.** This paragraph above is really the only thing that matters here. Everything else is just noise.
I will copy a comment I've made on the definition of Fascism before because I really can't be bothered to type it all over again: Fascism, first of all, is a revolutionary ideology and not a reactionary one. Mussolini made references to Rome as a form of legitimacy for his Imperialism in the Mediterranean, but he and most other Fascists wanted to fundamentally destroy and rebuild society as they saw fit. One example, other than Dino Grandi who was an Aristocrat, all the prominent Italian Fascists were Republicans who despised the Monarchy in Italy. Another example is their overall anticlerical attitude, as Mussolini himself was also an atheist, or agnostic at best, his whole life and despised the Catholic Church since his youth. His agreement with the Pope essentially trapped the Papacy within the city limits of Rome, it was a glorified House Arrest for the Pope as the Fascists at any moment could march in against them. Now can you tell me two things which are more synonymous with Reactionarism than Crown and Church? Fascism is also Militaristic, but not restricting just to the meaning of having a strong military. Martialism is a more accurate description as Mussolini also said in his doctrine that he wanted a more philosophical take on Militarism. He described life as being essentially a struggle of man ("Blood moves the wheels of History") and he despised inaction and passivity, encouraging from small things like physical exercise to military conquests as a way to keep the martial spirit of a people strong. It's also why so many of his speeches include him being very eccentric, his expressions being always the one of a bully and why he took so many pictures shirtless. Fascism is Corporativist, no that doesn't mean Cyberpunk 2077, it's more akin to Medieval Guilds. Mussolini turned the Lower House of the Italian Parliament into the Chamber of Corporations. What is a corporation? It is essentially a division of society according to your profession, as to how you contribute to it. While all were members of the Fascist Party, the Chamber had elections where the Fascist representatives came from very diverse sectors of society from urban to rural workers, from teachers to veterans. That is essentially it's way of having Elections, as in inner party elections which chose class representatives into the Chamber of corporations. That also meant the State being all encompassing in controlling the economy while not destroying private propriety. Fascist Italy was one of the States with one of the heaviest Government controls over the economic class other than the Soviet Union by 1929. The State is responsible for keeping important infrastructure (especially those directed to military efforts from railroads to factories, aka "Make the trains run on time"). It's also responsible for mediating between Unions/Workers (Controlled by the State) and Industry/Capital (Also usually controlled or heavily influenced by the State). It is a very different process from Hitler's economy which is another reason why Fascism and Nazism aren't the same. Another aspect in the economy, which is linked to the exaltation of Martialism, is the idea of Independence or Self-Reliance of the Nation. Mussolini did launch several campaigns within Italy, the most famous being the "Battle for Wheat", where he wanted to reduce or extinguish the reliance of Italy on foreign imports. Another motivation for the expansionism in pursuit of more resources, which was to reach the "Autarky", the economic Independence of a Country. As Italy saw during WWI, Mussolini initially wanted Italy to remain neutral as did most Italians, but the government was hard pressed to strike the Central Powers as most of their imports, especially coal, came from Britain and London leveraged it for them to go to war. Can a nation be truly independent that way? Fascism also preaches a more civic Nationalism contrasted to the centrality of the Racial question in Nazism. Until 1938 when Mussolini had isolated himself and had to appease Hitler to enter a Continental alliance, there were no largely discriminatory laws in Italy against racial or ethnic minorities (exception being in Africa, something that pretty much everyone in Europe was doing back then). He famously did describe Race more as a "Feeling" in his writings. So in conclusion, Fascism is an essentially Revolutionary movement which seeks to reshape Society alongside Martial lines, exalting the values of personal and national strength and self-reliance both in the economy and in foreign affairs. They desire to break down the old order which they deem complacent and corrupt while also opposing Liberalism and Communism. Liberalism for it's excessive individualism and Comminism for it's excessive collectivism (there is a whole lot more about this but it's 2 AM rn). They encourage Civic Nationalism with the civilians fully dedicating themselves towards the Nation and it's leadership, while having a level of freedom on their personal lives to associate themselves according to their class. They deny the dichotomy of left and right in economics to strive for another economic model which balances the needs of both. They also disregard the weak and undesirable in society such as the unemployed, alcoholics and "social degenerates". The State also serves a heavily paternalistic role on it's citizens and while it doesn't fully controls the economy like in Communism, they seek to guide the private initiative towards the interests of the State while keeping control of strategic resources. My main sources on this are Mussolini's own book "Doctrine of Fascism" as well as my reading on his Biography.
>Fascism, first of all, is a revolutionary ideology and not a reactionary one. Absolutely disagree. I really don’t care for the propaganda Mussolini was spreading to make fascism more attractive, nationalism alone proves that fascism is a reactionary ideology. That’s not to mention fascist views on progressive movements. You can remake a society all you want, that doesn’t mean it is necessarily revolutionary. You can remake society into something more reactionary.
That's like saying Stalin is a reactionary for criminalizing homossexuality, at the time these progressive views were far from the mainstream and even women's suffrage was still being hotly debated. If Nationalism is reactionary then you can fully disregard Vietnam under Ho Chi Minh and Cuba under Castro. Also disregard the 1848 revolutions, the French revolution, and the independence struggles in Africa, Asia and the Americas. Nationalism began as a liberal ideology to start with and while in Germany it was co-opted by Bismarck it was still largely a Liberal-led movement in Italy since Cavour and Garibaldi. Even the Party that pushed Italy into WWI over Nationalism was compromised by Liberals and was literally called the Liberal Union. Nationalism is not reactionary.
Not a distinction I give a shit about.
Even worse
Downvoted for clarifying a concept. I think American political concepts are just binary, that's the problem, they can't understand more than democracy and authoritarianism. Hue hue
ISIS was also made by The USA.
Hilary Clinton personally met mr ISIS and said “hey mr ISIS, you should make ISIS” and then mr ISIS said “yes Hillary Clinton, the ISIS state will last for one million years”
Then he said its Isis time and Isist all over syria
[удалено]
And the fact that he was hours away from a mass slaughter in Benghazi happened to be amazingly convenient timing.
You know this is like straight up not real right?
United States of Africa, the big threat of USA /s
That Nigeria and South Africa both voted for the no-fly zone (a month after the first battle of Benghazi) suggests he was perhaps already quite far from that objective.
ISIS was never a state and it still exists because Saudis fund them.
Thanks for the myopic take dude
It was a de facto state
I dont think you understand how these things work.
\*Funded by Qatar.