Does it cover the history of what the concept was before World War II, and in Rome, cause it’s real confusing how so much of our old iconography prominently features fasces - Lincoln, Washington, buildings, money, etc.
The Mercury Dime, issued by the United States Mint from 1916 to 1945, has been the subject of many conspiracy theories, including the mistaken belief that it supports Fascism.
It’s as if they changed the meaning to be bad so we’d never look at what was actually done before. Kinda like how a lot of places spoke German exclusively before WWI, then stopped and switched to English afterward. We only discuss Mussolini’s “fascism”, and Hitler’s “fascism”, but what were all the pre-WWII American fasces about?
Like the lamp and the scales, they represented a particular attribute of the classical view of justice: physical power or the ability to impose order.
The architects working on the federal buildings of the 1930s were also extremely conscious of the political symbolism they employed. They often looked to the socialist realism of Europe for inspiration. The Federal Trade Commission building, for instance, completed in 1938, is adorned with socialist-realist reliefs of brawny workers engaged in various industries.
Mussolini was widely admired by Americans for getting Italy back on its feet. “I’m pretty high on that bird,” humorist Will Rogers said of Il Duce after visiting Italy and interviewing Mussolini. “Dictator form of government is the greatest form of government—that is, if you have the right dictator.” The rise of fascism appeared to pose no direct threat to U.S. interests, and many saw it as a counterweight to scarier European movements. It was Bolshevism without the collectivization; Nazism without the racism.
There is something goofy going on here, but I don’t know what. Too many -isms and history rewrites, not enough critical thinking.
…
Andrew Mellon, who served as Treasury secretary until 1932, personally oversaw much of the planning and design for it. He was an early and durable Mussolini fan, who, among other things, helped the Italian regime secure favorable terms for its World War I debt. Mellon urged that Italian economic policies be imported into the New Deal.
Hoover recalled that when he took office, Mussolini did not “worry anybody much.” He also expressed the view that fascist Italy would have remained relatively innocuous had it not been “transformed” by its alliance with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
How the fasces survived is a mystery: Americans are sensitive, if not hypersensitive, to any potential endorsement of an enemy’s culture, language, or creed in times of war. In World War I, growers went so far as to rename the humble sauerkraut, innocent of any political connotation, as “liberty cabbage.”
This also assumes that all the architectural fasces were built in the 1920’s, which just happens to be completely outside living memory right now, and just after a lot of historical rewrites had already been begun.
Two years earlier [in 1997], New Jersey spent tens of thousands of dollars repainting the fasces inside the rotunda of Trenton’s late-nineteenth-century capitol dome [~1890].
From another of that guy’s articles…
Did Silver really think New Yorkers would buy it? In Kiev, the city where I was born, ancient and pervasive anti-Semitism made residents specialists in the art of recognizing who is a Jew. Here, most people aren't aware that one can sometimes distinguish Jews through facial features. It's a good thing, and Silver should stop trying to mess it up.
No, there was no mention of the Mercury Dime. I'd never heard of that one before. The birth of Nazism was the Eugenics movement in the USA, and D'Souza goes into great detail about that and how it morphed into the Progressive movement. Unfortunately, he did not take the opportunity to mention the whole Cold Spring Harbor thing in great detail, and only mentions it on one page.
I got pissed that they EXPLICITLY wrote FASCIST ECONOMIC IDEALS into the core operations of the New Deal, then have the gall to call us “fascists”.
These people are nothing but bundles of sticks.
It seems to me, and I could be wrong on this, but the modern definition of “fascism” seems wrong. What it seems to have been historically is “many rods together are not easily broken”. A populist, therefore, would by definition be a “fascist” by virtue of uniting many individuals, and the whole “state ownership of blah blah blah” is irrelevant nonsense.
It’s also hilarious that DEMOCRATS (literally, “rule by the people”) accuse POPULISTS (“drawing authority of/from the people”) of being “fascist”, when those two words (democrat and populist) should effectively mean the same thing, by their grammatical construction.
Really shows that the democrats, in truth, have NOTHING to do with the common man other than drawing on them for exploitation.
If we unite, they call us “fascists”, because they want us divided.
The forces of Ha’Satanwoulddo that, wouldn’t they?
Matthew 12:25-26
Knowing their thoughts, Yeshua said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand. If Ha’Satan casts out Ha’Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand?
One thing that the communists, and then the neo-communists of the Frankfurt School, for example, came to realize was the power of propaganda (early psyops) through the re-defining of language.
Rainbow > relative humanism, 'diversity', 'equality', etc.
But it is gross manipulation, grounded in a foundation of lies and evil (selfish) intent.
Do the fasces of Rome sort of have a philosophical and spiritual lineage connection to the modern 'fascism'?
Roman law became the foundation (I think) of the civil law that is used, for example, by France. Contrast this with the common law foundation that is the root of British and American law. That common law foundation is Christian civilization and ethics, the civil law of Rome, then France, is rooted in the power of the state.
In that civil system, if someone commits a crime, they commit a crime against the state, and so the State prosecutes them, whether it is murder, theft, etc, etc.
In common law, it is party vs party. So if you damage or somehow inflict problems by violating my rights, I am the one who prosecutes you and it is to me that the redress is given.
But don't confuse this sort of common law approach with the (now twisted) criminal law vs 'civil law' in systems based on the British way, such as in the US or Australia, etc.
Despite any similarities between our now 'civil law' and common law approaches, I think that they are probably different.
In any case, from Rome Fasces to Mussolini's fascism to then the modern, post WW2 concept of 'Fascism', the spirit is the same: supremacy of the State over the individual.
It is a testament to the effectiveness of the Communist / Political Satanist clique that somehow patriotic nationalism has been tainted with the concept of fascism.
But I think a clearer, more accurate nomenclature would be that fascism is very close to Communism, or any form of State-ism where the collective or state is held as superseding the inalienable rights of the individual (which after all, are based on the concept that each human being is a unique child of the Creator, God.)
Does it cover the history of what the concept was before World War II, and in Rome, cause it’s real confusing how so much of our old iconography prominently features fasces - Lincoln, Washington, buildings, money, etc.
https://www.govmint.com/media/magefan_blog/Fasces_Symbol_on_the_Mercury_Dime_Header_Image_1_.jpg
It’s as if they changed the meaning to be bad so we’d never look at what was actually done before. Kinda like how a lot of places spoke German exclusively before WWI, then stopped and switched to English afterward. We only discuss Mussolini’s “fascism”, and Hitler’s “fascism”, but what were all the pre-WWII American fasces about?
https://www.city-journal.org/article/when-fasces-arent-fascist
There is something goofy going on here, but I don’t know what. Too many -isms and history rewrites, not enough critical thinking.
…
🤬
u/TaQo
This also assumes that all the architectural fasces were built in the 1920’s, which just happens to be completely outside living memory right now, and just after a lot of historical rewrites had already been begun.
From another of that guy’s articles…
…
Back to that Mercury dime from govmint…
https://www.govmint.com/learn/post/a-fascist-u-s-dime
🤬
u/Strelnieks how’s that for noticing? (Edit: he might actually just be German) Maybe I’ll go into the CDC sometime soon.
Uh, the Jefferson Memorial is that new? I had no idea.
No, there was no mention of the Mercury Dime. I'd never heard of that one before. The birth of Nazism was the Eugenics movement in the USA, and D'Souza goes into great detail about that and how it morphed into the Progressive movement. Unfortunately, he did not take the opportunity to mention the whole Cold Spring Harbor thing in great detail, and only mentions it on one page.
I got pissed that they EXPLICITLY wrote FASCIST ECONOMIC IDEALS into the core operations of the New Deal, then have the gall to call us “fascists”.
These people are nothing but bundles of sticks.
It seems to me, and I could be wrong on this, but the modern definition of “fascism” seems wrong. What it seems to have been historically is “many rods together are not easily broken”. A populist, therefore, would by definition be a “fascist” by virtue of uniting many individuals, and the whole “state ownership of blah blah blah” is irrelevant nonsense.
It’s also hilarious that DEMOCRATS (literally, “rule by the people”) accuse POPULISTS (“drawing authority of/from the people”) of being “fascist”, when those two words (democrat and populist) should effectively mean the same thing, by their grammatical construction.
Really shows that the democrats, in truth, have NOTHING to do with the common man other than drawing on them for exploitation.
Projection, projection, and more projection.
u/#q4943
If we unite, they call us “fascists”, because they want us divided.
The forces of Ha’Satan would do that, wouldn’t they?
Matthew 12:25-26
Peace through strength.
u/FractalizingIron
One thing that the communists, and then the neo-communists of the Frankfurt School, for example, came to realize was the power of propaganda (early psyops) through the re-defining of language.
Rainbow > relative humanism, 'diversity', 'equality', etc.
But it is gross manipulation, grounded in a foundation of lies and evil (selfish) intent.
Do the fasces of Rome sort of have a philosophical and spiritual lineage connection to the modern 'fascism'?
Roman law became the foundation (I think) of the civil law that is used, for example, by France. Contrast this with the common law foundation that is the root of British and American law. That common law foundation is Christian civilization and ethics, the civil law of Rome, then France, is rooted in the power of the state.
In that civil system, if someone commits a crime, they commit a crime against the state, and so the State prosecutes them, whether it is murder, theft, etc, etc.
In common law, it is party vs party. So if you damage or somehow inflict problems by violating my rights, I am the one who prosecutes you and it is to me that the redress is given.
But don't confuse this sort of common law approach with the (now twisted) criminal law vs 'civil law' in systems based on the British way, such as in the US or Australia, etc.
Despite any similarities between our now 'civil law' and common law approaches, I think that they are probably different.
In any case, from Rome Fasces to Mussolini's fascism to then the modern, post WW2 concept of 'Fascism', the spirit is the same: supremacy of the State over the individual.
It is a testament to the effectiveness of the Communist / Political Satanist clique that somehow patriotic nationalism has been tainted with the concept of fascism.
But I think a clearer, more accurate nomenclature would be that fascism is very close to Communism, or any form of State-ism where the collective or state is held as superseding the inalienable rights of the individual (which after all, are based on the concept that each human being is a unique child of the Creator, God.)
Yes, Mussolini praised FDR as "America's Fascist," particularly in the way he strong-armed people into accepting the New Deal.