this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
124 points (100.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13823 readers
710 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's hilarious to me that the people who most hate communism have no clue what it even is. Have they ever heard of the concept of "know your enemy"?
Nah, it's one of the contradictions built in to fascist ideology. They need the enemy to be both everywhere and all powerful but also snivelling and weak at the same time. if they actually knew anything about their enemies they'd have a harder time maintaining the overpowering enemy half that justifies their paranoia and demands for conformity and military postuer while also maintaining the weak enemy that justi
This is one of fascism's largest weakpoints, is it not? Constantly underestimating your enemy is a terrible war strategy. Thinking of the Hitler quote where he was shocked that the USSR had built so much in so little time.
Let's be honest here, MOST people do this about their political rivals. We do it all the time here, American fascists are all lard ass cucked dorks, but also the most terrifying force in human history.
I feel like that's a bit different though, because american fascists are usually insufferable losers as people, and that's not incompatible with them being dangerous and pushing harmful ideology
Not exactly the same as what fascists do, which often materialises as claiming their enemies to be completely weak and ineffectual, lesser humans, but somehow able to control the world from the shadows, or similar
Some of the people in the military seem to know. I remember Mike Milley testifying in court that critical race theory is nothing like “Mao Tse Tung” (not Zedong) because he’s read his books in the military academies
Supposedly Mao's book on guerilla warfare has been intensely studied in the millitary academies of the US since at least the Afghanistan invasions. The fact that the officer corps doesn't seem to internalize litterally any part of it is another problem.
Well, it's because it says that there is no actual way (for an invader) with a small military presence to win. You can't make them internalize facts that they are physically unable to cope with strategically, because then the logical conclusion is that they shouldn't do it, and that is an unacceptable answer.