Third Position and Nationalist subforums?

[Saint Frankenstein]

Maybe we should have a Third Position subforum for those who do not fit into the Socialist or Capitalist DIRs. Third Positionism is any economic theory that is viewed as an alternative to capitalism and Marxism. So it would include things like distributionism, (national) syndicalism and corporatism.

I mean, I'm not the only one opposed to both capitalism and Marxism, right?

Maybe have a Nationalist subforum, too.

 

[Laika]

Voted, "Yes, should have a Nationalist subforum but don't want/need/care about a Third Position subforum."

I think the idea of nationalism is something which can and should be debated and recognized on RF. not so sure about third-position (but that's more a reflection of my views that there isn't a middle ground between capitalism and socialism than anything else).

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Voted, "Yes, should have a Nationalist subforum but don't want/need/care about a Third Position subforum."

I think the idea of nationalism is something which can and should be debated and recognized on RF. not so sure about third-position (but that's more a reflection of my views that there isn't a middle ground between capitalism and socialism than anything else).

I see. I just want a Third Position Only forum because socialism on here tends to be of the leftist/Marxist sort. I think it would also open it up more for non-Western posters, such as Hindu nationalists, who tend to oppose both capitalism and leftism.

(I would ask for a Fascist Only subform but I'd be the only one posting there, lmao. This board isn't inclined to something like that, anyway. Lol.)

 

[Laika]

honestly, I think a Fascist sub-forum would be better or something similar. There is scope for the far-left to get representation in the Socialist Sub-forum, but there is no equivalent one for Fascists. Given that both far-left and far-right are positions which are traditionally intolerant of other-views, I can understand why Forum admins would be skeptical about having either. it probably hasn't come up before.

 

[Valjean]

How about an "alternative" subforum? Frankly, though, dissecting these categories into myriad subforums just gets confusing.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

honestly, I think a Fascist sub-forum would be better or something similar. There is scope for the far-left to get representation in the Socialist Sub-forum, but there is no equivalent one for Fascists. Given that both far-left and far-right are positions which are traditionally intolerant of other-views, I can understand why Forum admins would be skeptical about having either. it probably hasn't come up before.

You make a good point. Yes, let's be fair!

At least if there's a Fascist Only subforum, we'd (i.e. I'd) be able to have our own space without getting into blow-out fights, which is a privilege that the Far Left has on here.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

How about an "alternative" subforum? Frankly, though, dissecting these categories into myriad subforums just gets confusing.

Lol. That would be very chaotic. Probably fun too, I'll admit.

 

[Laika]

SF I wouldn't request a Communist Sub-forum because it would only take 3-5 die hard communists to turn this place into an absolute Stalinist sh*thole. It's not the numbers the count, but how vocal and active they are. I'm only one and I know that I've already had some impact and a lot of people are respective to these ideas without really recognizing their dangers. Both Communism and Fascism represent dictatorial systems of government whose ambitions extend to getting everyone else to agree with their point of view because we don't respect individual rights and free thought. it's not really compatible with this forum, which has given us 'safe haven' where as others would just ban us for even mentioning sympathies of our sort.

Given that behind the mask of wanting our "freedom" we are really saying, we want to compell everyone to accept our view as the "truth" because we both have semi-conscious totalitarian leaning, there is a strong argument against giving either of us representation in a specific sub-forum. Online, I deal with it with humor but offline it is difficult as the mixture of passion and conviction can be very persuasive on a human level irrespective of reason and evidence. RF is a really nice place and it wouldn't take more than a handful of ignorant, fanatical grotesque fanatics to turn this place upside down and polarize it along political lines (the same could be said for giving any group of Religious Fundamentalists a sub-forum).

I think we have a responsibility to recognize the worst aspects of our ideas. we've grown up with these ideas and have learned to respect them probably though our own mistakes. most of our contemporaries online haven't and are bad news for any forum irrespective of whether they have a point. I can't name a single communist online who has ever admitted as much fault with their own system as I have and you feel the same about Fascism/National Socialism. We're both very civilised and get on, but that's exceptional. We know the demons of our respective ideologies whereas everyone else on here doesn't. Do we really want to inflict that on other people by giving permission for any of our online counter-parts from abusing RF's openness and trust?

A Nationalist Sub-forum might even things up a bit and it wouldn't be exclusively far-right, but could easily appeal to a broader group of people, but explicit permission to allow either communists or fascists on RF in any sizable numbers and potentially to organize people to adopt their views could really upset this place. I think that would be a loss honestly as it is so rare to find a place on the internet where so many different views and meet up to try to understand each other. we both think in terms of the benefit of the whole rather than as individuals, so the best thing for RF would probably be to let this go. it sucks, but it's for the best honestly.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You make a good point. Yes, let's be fair!

SF I wouldn't request a Communist Sub-forum because it would only take 3-5 die hard communists to turn this place into an absolute Stalinist sh*thole. It's not the numbers the count, but how vocal and active they are. I'm only one and I know that I've already had some impact and a lot of people are respective to these ideas without really recognizing their dangers. Both Communism and Fascism represent dictatorial systems of government whose ambitions extend to getting everyone else to agree with their point of view because we don't respect individual rights and free thought. it's not really compatible with this forum, which has given us 'safe haven' where as others would just ban us for even mentioning sympathies of our sort.

Given that behind the mask of wanting our "freedom" we are really saying, we want to compell everyone to accept our view as the "truth" because we both have semi-conscious totalitarian leaning, there is a strong argument against giving either of us representation in a specific sub-forum. Online, I deal with it with humor but offline it is difficult as the mixture of passion and conviction can be very persuasive on a human level irrespective of reason and evidence. RF is a really nice place and it wouldn't take more than a handful of ignorant, fanatical grotesque fanatics to turn this place upside down and polarize it along political lines (the same could be said for giving any group of Religious Fundamentalists a sub-forum).

I think we have a responsibility to recognize the worst aspects of our ideas. we've grown up with these ideas and have learned to respect them probably though our own mistakes. most of our contemporaries online haven't and are bad news for any forum irrespective of whether they have a point. I can't name a single communist online who has ever admitted as much fault with their own system as I have and you feel the same about Fascism/National Socialism. We're both very civilised and get on, but that's exceptional. We know the demons of our respective ideologies whereas everyone else on here doesn't. Do we really want to inflict that on other people by giving permission for any of our online counter-parts from abusing RF's openness and trust?

A Nationalist Sub-forum might even things up a bit and it wouldn't be exclusively far-right, but could easily appeal to a broader group of people, but explicit permission to allow either communists or fascists on RF in any sizable numbers and potentially to organize people to adopt their views could really upset this place. I think that would be a loss honestly as it is so rare to find a place on the internet where so many different views and meet up to try to understand each other. we both think in terms of the benefit of the whole rather than as individuals, so the best thing for RF would probably be to let this go. it sucks, but it's for the best honestly.

Very good points. Fascist forums tend to be just as petty and factionalist as Far Left forums. I think it's a common issue in totalitarian ideologies in general. Both leftist and rightist totalitarian ideologies have the same issues, really. But I don't really want Communist or Fascist Only subforums. A Nationalist one would do me fine for the social and cultural discussions and a Third Position one would be fine for economic discussions. I suppose it's best to have more moderate ideologies allowed to express themselves lest we horrible authoritarians strangle everything with our fanaticism. I often keep my ideological views under wraps on this site as it is. I'm just pragmatic like that.

 

[Laika]

Very good points. Fascist forums tend to be just as petty and factionalist as Far Left forums. I think it's a common issue in totalitarian ideologies in general. Both leftist and rightist totalitarian ideologies have the same issues, really. But I don't really want Communist or Fascist Only subforums. A Nationalist one would do me fine for the social and cultural discussions and a Third Position one would be fine for economic discussions. I suppose it's best to have more moderate ideologies allowed to express themselves lest we horrible authoritarians strangle everything with our fanaticism. I often keep my ideological views under wraps on this site as it is. I'm just pragmatic like that.

I'm the same, I self-censor a great deal as communism is really based on logic and can therefore take it to the absurd extremes. How would you feel about an economic centrist one? that could work for any group that supports mixed economies. (most people would call that socialism, but those dam commies wouldn't. ) it could really come down to how you define 'socialism' and 'capitalism' as both Communists and libertarians agree on polarizing definitions of them. social democrats, social liberals and fascists agree on a mixed economy.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm the same, I self-censor a great deal as communism is really based on logic and can therefore take it to the absurd extremes. How would you feel about an economic centrist one? that could work for any group that supports mixed economies. (most people would call that socialism, but those dam commies wouldn't. ) it could really come down to how you define 'socialism' and 'capitalism' as both Communists and libertarians agree on polarizing definitions of them. social democrats, social liberals and fascists agree on a mixed economy.

In other words, let's downplay the Fascist aspect of it so that moderates don't get scared.

 

[Laika]

In other words, let's downplay the Fascist aspect of it so that moderates don't get scared.

We wouldn't want to have too much fun now would we?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

We wouldn't want to have too much fun now would we?

Oh, of course not. Let's give it to 'em in small portions, like the proverbial frog in the boiling water.

 

[Laika]

Oh, of course not. Let's give it to 'em in small portions, like the proverbial frog in the boiling water.

you have to repeat the message constantly for people to believe it. if you tell the same lie often enough people accept it as fact. it takes time for people to realize we were right all along.

we share shamefully a lot in common.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

you have to repeat the message constantly for people to believe it. if you tell the same lie often enough people accept it as fact. it takes time for people to realize we were right all along.

we share shamefully a lot in common.

LOL. I've realized a while back that Communists and Fascists are more alike than we are different. The movements even tend to draw from the same ranks and there's a lot of flip-flopping back and forth. Mussolini himself was originally a socialist. The Nazis had a strong contingent of radical Leftists but they suppressed it.

 

[Laika]

LOL. I've realized a while back that Communists and Fascists are more alike than we are different. The movements even tend to draw from the same ranks and there's a lot of flip-flopping back and forth. Mussolini himself was originally a socialist. The Nazis had a strong contingent of radical Leftists but they suppressed it.

Yeah That is true. There were the "Left-wing" Nazi's (I think it was Strasserism). The National Bolsheviks were Nationalists who thought Communism was a good way to unite and strengthen the country and therefore liked Stalin's "Socialism in One Country". Nazi's and Communists did work together on a limited scale in Wiemar Germany; I think in some places they shared the same offices. The Chinese Nationalists and the Communist also had a pact. Communists often sided with National-Liberation struggles (when it suited them), but took the side of 'oppressed' nations in colonial struggles rather than of 'imperialist' nationalisms.

it tends to end badly though.

 

[Ultimatum]

Voted, "Yes, should have a Nationalist subforum but don't want/need/care about a Third Position subforum."

I think the idea of nationalism is something which can and should be debated and recognized on RF. not so sure about third-position (but that's more a reflection of my views that there isn't a middle ground between capitalism and socialism than anything else).

Why does it have to be a middle ground for it to be a third position? Because, in my opinion, socialism is disgusting and capitalism does not go far enough!

As for nationalism, I'm not too bothered.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yeah That is true. There were the "Left-wing" Nazi's (I think it was Strasserism). The National Bolsheviks were Nationalists who thought Communism was a good way to unite and strengthen the country and therefore liked Stalin's "Socialism in One Country". Nazi's and Communists did work together on a limited scale in Wiemar Germany; I think in some places they shared the same offices. The Chinese Nationalists and the Communist also had a pact. Communists often sided with National-Liberation struggles (when it suited them), but took the side of 'oppressed' nations in colonial struggles rather than of 'imperialist' nationalisms.

it tends to end badly though.

Yeah, they were called Strasserists. Some neo-Nazis follow it today. Totalitarianism has fallen out of favor with the racist right for whatever reason and they tend to promote voluntary separatism and tribalism instead, such as with National Anarchism and the Nouvelle Droite. What a bunch of wimps. My future empire will just roar through and smash them all.

Red, just imagine how powerful we would be if we could somewhow reconcile our differences and unite. It would be earth-shattering!

 

[Laika]

Why does it have to be a middle ground for it to be a third position? Because, in my opinion, socialism is disgusting and capitalism does not go far enough!

As for nationalism, I'm not too bothered.

Because the battle between capitalism and socialism represents the struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. third position, like centrist ones, attempt to reconcile class conflict.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Why does it have to be a middle ground for it to be a third position? Because, in my opinion, socialism is disgusting and capitalism does not go far enough!

As for nationalism, I'm not too bothered.

So what do you want, some sort of ultra-capitalism?