Fascism and capitalism are one and the same. For some reason (probably a heavy propaganda campaign) everyone thinks fascist when they mean authoritarian or dictator. Fascism is things like Citizens United allowing corporations to flood politicians with donations, essentially marrying corporation and government.
Yes. All states are authoritarian, as they are all representatives of a given ruling class by which the rest are oppressed. You can’t get rid of authoritarianisn without abolishing class, so socialist states are better in the interim.
Let’s flip that around: Is Sweden libertarian? No.
Our definitions of authoritarianism clearly differ. Traditional definitions are limited in scope - political democracy does not inherently eliminate or override economically authoritarian mechanisms.
So to answer your question: Is Sweden authoritarian?
Sweden is a capitalist state that operates with soft authoritarian features, or at the very least, leans authoritarian - all embedded within a democratic political framework (including socialist elements).
Authoritarianism isn’t black or white; it’s a spectrum. Capitalism does not exist in a vacuum - it requires authoritarian structures to enforce itself, either through state power protecting capital, or private violence used to assert and maintain ownership.
Ultimately, capitalism is economic authoritarianism, even under the best-case, most-idealized form of political democracy regulating it.
You can’t have two definitions of authoritarianism, here’s the actual definition from a dictionary “favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom.”.
You can’t have two definitions of authoritarianism
Right-libertarians or anarcho-capitalists would say the same thing about libertarianism, a word historically coined to mean mostly the opposite of their ideology - a word they later co-opted to dress their preferred ideology (capitalism) up with language that implies freedom.
I’ll remain steadfast in my position: capitalism is economic authoritarianism by nature. Many thinkers agree that authoritarianism is a continuum or spectrum.
The good thing about dictionaries is that we don’t have to follow them strictly regarding political theory, which is fluid and evolving by nature. But regardless, “favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority […] at the expense of personal freedom” seems to be a core principle of capitalist institutions. Regulation cannot meaningfully address core internal authoritarian structures and hierarchy present in capitalism.
The only examples of capitalism being compatible with libertarian or democratic governance would be in a direct democracy, with stronger regulation than anywhere on the planet, or in examples like worker-owned cooperatives (if that concept was enforced or widespread) - however, it would be closer to market socialism at that point.
Even in Sweden, contesting the violence (inherent in the enforcement of private property) of capitalist institutions would be met with violence.
Even in Sweden, contesting the violence (private property [not personal property] is inherently violent in my eyes) of capitalist institutions would be met with violence.
How the fuck is an inanimate object supposed to be violent?
The british and US empires were and are far more effective than their fascist successors at killing innocent people.
And fascism is just a specific form of capitalist imperialism that burned out by the 1940s and regressed to the far more stable form of government for (neo)colonialism - bourgeois parliamentarism.
The us and British imperialist nations didn’t cause an estimated 70,000,000 deaths in a mere 6 year time frame, fascism did.
And fascism is just a specific form of capitalist imperialism that burned out by the 1940s and regressed to the far more stable form of government for (neo)colonialism - bourgeois parliamentarism.
ww1 had more deaths than ww2, and it was inter-capitalist rivalry fighting over who would get control over the colonies. Took place before fascism as a term was even coined.
British imperialism killed millions in India, africa, asia. US imperialists genocided an entire continent, and the nazis explicitly took it as their model: trying and failing to acheive in eastern europe, what the US’s capitalist democracy already carried out in North america.
First two are from fascism not capitalism smfh.
Fascism and capitalism are one and the same. For some reason (probably a heavy propaganda campaign) everyone thinks fascist when they mean authoritarian or dictator. Fascism is things like Citizens United allowing corporations to flood politicians with donations, essentially marrying corporation and government.
Fascism and capitalism are two separate things one is an economic system the other is a political ideology and fascism is authoritarian by nature.
How is capitalism not authoritarian by nature? Explain.
Is Sweden authoritarian?
Yes. All states are authoritarian, as they are all representatives of a given ruling class by which the rest are oppressed. You can’t get rid of authoritarianisn without abolishing class, so socialist states are better in the interim.
Let’s flip that around: Is Sweden libertarian? No.
Our definitions of authoritarianism clearly differ. Traditional definitions are limited in scope - political democracy does not inherently eliminate or override economically authoritarian mechanisms.
So to answer your question: Is Sweden authoritarian?
Sweden is a capitalist state that operates with soft authoritarian features, or at the very least, leans authoritarian - all embedded within a democratic political framework (including socialist elements).
Authoritarianism isn’t black or white; it’s a spectrum. Capitalism does not exist in a vacuum - it requires authoritarian structures to enforce itself, either through state power protecting capital, or private violence used to assert and maintain ownership.
Ultimately, capitalism is economic authoritarianism, even under the best-case, most-idealized form of political democracy regulating it.
You can’t have two definitions of authoritarianism, here’s the actual definition from a dictionary “favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom.”.
More knowledge for the hungry below.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism#%3A~%3Atext=11+External+links-%2CCharacteristics%2Cthe+goals+of+the+regime.
Right-libertarians or anarcho-capitalists would say the same thing about libertarianism, a word historically coined to mean mostly the opposite of their ideology - a word they later co-opted to dress their preferred ideology (capitalism) up with language that implies freedom.
I’ll remain steadfast in my position: capitalism is economic authoritarianism by nature. Many thinkers agree that authoritarianism is a continuum or spectrum.
The good thing about dictionaries is that we don’t have to follow them strictly regarding political theory, which is fluid and evolving by nature. But regardless, “favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority […] at the expense of personal freedom” seems to be a core principle of capitalist institutions. Regulation cannot meaningfully address core internal authoritarian structures and hierarchy present in capitalism.
The only examples of capitalism being compatible with libertarian or democratic governance would be in a direct democracy, with stronger regulation than anywhere on the planet, or in examples like worker-owned cooperatives (if that concept was enforced or widespread) - however, it would be closer to market socialism at that point.
Even in Sweden, contesting the violence (inherent in the enforcement of private property) of capitalist institutions would be met with violence.
How the fuck is an inanimate object supposed to be violent?
fascism and capitalism are 2 sides of the same coin where history has proven that capitalism always devolves into fascism eventually.
The british and US empires were and are far more effective than their fascist successors at killing innocent people.
And fascism is just a specific form of capitalist imperialism that burned out by the 1940s and regressed to the far more stable form of government for (neo)colonialism - bourgeois parliamentarism.
The us and British imperialist nations didn’t cause an estimated 70,000,000 deaths in a mere 6 year time frame, fascism did.
Mind specifying?
ww1 had more deaths than ww2, and it was inter-capitalist rivalry fighting over who would get control over the colonies. Took place before fascism as a term was even coined.
British imperialism killed millions in India, africa, asia. US imperialists genocided an entire continent, and the nazis explicitly took it as their model: trying and failing to acheive in eastern europe, what the US’s capitalist democracy already carried out in North america.
https://dessalines.github.io/essays/us_atrocities.html
You should really do an online search before you post, WW1 had a death count of roughly 20,000,000 vs WW2’s 70,000,000
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties
Fascism is capitalism in decay, when it needs to violently assert itself to maintain existing property rights. It isn’t a button you press.