Why are they so obsessed with fighting "communists"...

Which is entirely on purpose too

Well off kids always become fascists though. You couldn't make these dudes commies. It's just not in their class interest.

Exactly. Propaganda doesn't need to be obvious. Just tell the plebs that fascism is too evil to be believable and say communism has good intentions but always fails leading to 100 million deaths. Actual fascism isn't actually that radical and doesn't need to be racial.

You've never met a millennial, then.

Especially antifa, who are mostly (proclaimed) ancoms, and are basically a flesh and blood stereotype of what we think ancoms are like.

Funny thing is I'm totally on board with the idea that leveraging property rights to extract wealth from a process without actually putting anything else back in is a universal wrong, but so many of you are so rabidly opposed to any form of corporatism or nationalism on the grounds that one day centuries in the future it might get in the way of your global anarchoutopia that it makes zero sense for me to even begin to sympathize with you

American antifa are just liberals trying to be edgy, my goy

The left has a lot less power than you think they have.

Fascism definitely is radical. It doesn't need to incorporate racism to be.

Nah. Castro I think was pretty well off. Seemed like he was pretty bougie. More than myself, at least.

I would wager that Che was, too. Luigi Galleani was college educated, which says a lot more in the early 20th century than it does now.

So, idk, I think it just comes from not being a fucking idiot. Class isn't always the central point. I think it depends on how your parents raised you – e.g., are you able to look at the world, and adjust your view, even if it harms your social standing? I think the former folks could see that the system was fucked and it was worthwhile to change it, their own wealth and future be damned.

most ancoms have little answers for how to do things without government though i have found. maybe there's more to it but i've never been impressed by their 'theory' or lack there of. a lot of it is based on informal hierarchies and a lot of trust is put into an idea that natural leaders and hiearchies won't develop anyways due to things like the division of labor.

they will usually deflect answers to "that's for hte people to decide" and generally have a lot more "proving" to do than someone who just wants to seize state power.

i'm in favor of heirarchies with competent leadership with strong accountability, but only so far as they are necessary for transitioning to full communism. there's some things i just can't imagine being 'decentralized' ; e.g., shit like a nuclear shutdown being ran by anarchists i just can't imagine. it requires meticulous planning and involves many people with widely varying skillsets and levels of education.

i have no expectations that such a project happens overnight and is successful, so this is where i think i'm different than the anarchists.

i'm in favor of seizing state power and keeping infrastructure for as peaceful of a transition to socialism as possible. however, none of this requires me to support 'corporatism' as you put it, or worse, 'corporatism' would be a swift departure from any such program.

I would expect there to be no concept of "profit" or private property in such a scenario. If there was private property, it is based on use and occupancy like the mutualists would have it.

All corporations would be abolished or replaced with far more democratic institutions. I think, to a degree, this abolition would be required – shit like Goldman Sachs or Taser International is only there to keep people down, if not accumulate more capital for the bourgeoisie. post-revolution, a lot of companies just would be pointless to keep around so I don't see why they'd be worth keeping.

I just don't know why nazi's claim to be for "the people" in their prop, but then praise shit like corporatism. never made sense to me, even with the claims of 'efficiency' it doesn't make sense. Capitalism just doesn't seem all that efficient when i look at the world around me, and fascists seem all too similar to liberals that think they can put a "happy face" on it.

They may not have power directly, but they are the facade that those with power hide behind.

As far as nationalism goes, I think too often nationalism and patriotism are conflated with one another, so that way fascists can claim you are "anti American" or anti (fill in your country) so long as you don't cater to blatantly nationalist and imperialist dogma.

I would consider myself a patriot.

I love where I live, but i have no desire to project power across the ocean and enslave people in the third world through absentee ownership like you guys do. i think it always comes back to bite us in the ass and simply isn't worth the trouble. imperialism sucks and for some reason you guys don't realize it. I want to improve the living conditions of the people here and make sure everyone is fed, housed, and healthy. The only influence or things I want to "export" from my country are things like mutual aid – e.g., building other countries up than tearing them down. This is the true way to solving the immigration problem.

Wars are stupid unless they're literally for defending the people in your homeland. i want a permanent end to mass immigration, but free movement of people. so, we need more even distribution of wealth and property rights (e.g., communism) to correct this. Show me an area with significant immigration and i'll show you an area with great wealth. Show me an area with lots of people leaving, and i'll show you an area where crime, poverty, and war are destroying everything in sight. These are symptoms of capitalism in more cases than not.

I'm not saying culture isn't important, it is. Marx knew this too, in spite of what fascists always try to claim. But fascists, do not love their country like they say. They do not want to protect their culture like they say. They want to turn white people into willing dupes for a nation state founded on a war economy with no end to imperialism in sight.

All I can say is "NO THANKS!"

I've never understood how fascism looks good to people. Why not just be a liberal, at the very least? Seems to achieve mostly the same end goals and is much easier for people to swallow tbh.

It's absolutely necessary for a reactionary to see an "actionary" somewhere, real or not. Feeling persecuted is a fundamental part of their existence, and provides righteousness to what actually is maintenance of muh privileges.

Che and Castro were huge outliers. Fascism is the norm for the bourgeoisie in times of crisis.

If you count illusion based power built upon the uninformed, it is pretty high. Considering all the help from the msm for the narrative, it hasn't really done much though.

if power "doesn't do much" then it's not power, power is the capacity to do things.