I'm having a hard time understanding what exactly the difference between fascism and socialism is

I'm having a hard time understanding what exactly the difference between fascism and socialism is.

I mean they both seem to stand for the same things. An authoritarian government, nationalization of most of the nation's industries, militarism, isolationism, and protectionist economic policies.

It seems like the only real difference is that communism/socialism is, in theory, not headed by one person, and fascism still allows for personal enterprise and is more socially conservative.

So is that the only real difference?

They are collectivist, yes, but so is the human civilisation. Individualism is a meme, humans evolved and progressed when subspecialisation and larger scope of socialisation happened.

>Socialism = support the worst, the most. Cancer.
>Fascism = create a resilient and nationalistic society, hierarchy

Westerners should ideally adopt a reverse form of socialism where the best of the society are given money based on their qualities and achievements, while there is no welfare for scum and the worst.

A functioning fascist society will strengthen its people and all forms of socialism weaken the target population.

So......the hunger games?

Fascism is nationalist, socialism is internationalist.

The size and power of government is not the primary philosophical issue for most of the world outside the west. One ideology or another being more or less pro individualism and small government is often a non issue.

I couldn't tell you the difference but I do know that Mussolini was a communist before he became a fascist.

*outside of America, i meant

Socialism is when the workers control the means of production and democratically control what the factories produce, mostly for need instead of profit.

Fascism is capitalism in decline.

That's all you really know.

YOU CAN PAINT A POTATO BUT IT'LL STILL BE A POTATO.

No, economic measures. Taxes would be lower than they are now, and only the above-average and better would get opportunities and resources.

The bottom of the society would literally accept their position, or be purged, since they will turn to crime and illegal actions due to their inferiority, only to be neutralised by the very effective, very motivated law enforcement.

No, he was a socialist

You think that police officers, who are people, would literally go out and cull the population of not inferior, but poor people?

How is this going to be sold to the public as a good idea

shhh don't try reasoning with Balkan niggers they're the only group of posters stupider than the Polish on Cred Forums

I can make this incredibly simplified:
> Socialism: overt inclusion
>Fascism: overt exclusion

Sometimes they can overlap (eg. Nazi "National Socialists")
*There doesn't exist a solid definition of fascism because of the unique cultural interpretation from each group... Merely a typology.

...

No.
Socialism and Democracy aren't synonymous.

...

The police force wouldn't be made of various rejects, underpayed and complex-infested tards, but of highly trained talented individuals on a very high pay. Also, no women.

A country with low taxes and meritocracy needs a strong defence, and absolute rule of law. So when niggz, spics and other criminal lifeforms think they can get away with it, they don't. Not one single time.

I agree. People with outstanding academic scores should be given full scholarships. Perhaps with some clause like they can't go work for a foreign company or something. Makes zero sense not invest in the future.

Also welfare should be ended or at least there should only be a time limit. Just because you crank out kids doesn't mean society should be paying for them. That really pisses me off desu.

I remember back in (community) college we had to do a group project and come to a consensus. My suggestion was that people should need a license to have kids. The nigress single mom of multiple kids on govt bux wasn't too happy about that one.

He was a socialist, and fascism was partly a reaction to the internationalization of Socialism after the Third International. Nationalism had no place in the new socialism, and so a counter movement formed. Fascism was also heavily influenced by WWII and the idea of total war meaning every citizen had to be engaged in the battle between cultures.

Fascism:
>Corporatist organization of economics (unions, business leaders, etc. forged into an "organic body" to work together)
>Palingenetic ultra-nationalism
>Authoritarian traditionalism
>Belief in inherent difference between nations, and of inherent differences between members of those nations

Socialism:
>Socialist organization of economics (workers control, directly or indirectly, of the means of production)
>Internationalist
>Marxist historiography
>Authoritarian progressivism
>Belief in extreme existentialism and the inherent equality of all men

There are other differences but those are the first ones that really come to mind as important. Fascism = revolutionary nationalism, socialism = revolutionary redistributivist philosophy.

Socialism has always been international.

That was always true in theory, but the Second International dissolved because socialist parties in WWI all gave up on that (with a few exceptions) in favor of national ties.

It's difficult to explain the entire history of the French and Italian quasi-right wing organizations but there were a lot of weird political ideas floating around by 1920~. The French anarchists, Italian national syndicalists, all of the French far-right monarchist, Catholic and other groups influenced by anarchism and national syndicalism, etc. tl;dr Out of this giant clusterfuck, some guys invented fascism. Other "fascist" movements arose organically without a direct connection to the Italian example, as well.