Viewers may find this context helpful:

I’m an anarchist - if you haven’t heard much about anarchism before, you probably have some misconceptions about it, so I encourage you to watch the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime or have a look through an Anarchist FAQ, because it’s almost definitely nothing like what you think.

Anarchists are vehemently opposed to states such as the USSR and China. We consider them to be as great a danger as fascism.

I personally believe that anarchism is the most coherent philosophy which adequately explains and addresses all of the problems which plague our society, and which holds the most promise for a path out of the inevitable cycle of the continuous rise and fall of fascism that capitalism makes inevitable.

Liberalism is a right-wing ideology which adopts the language of progressiveness, but actually prioritizes the freedom of movement of wealth, e.g. free markets, over the freedom of individuals. Some individual liberties are espoused under liberalism, insofar as those liberties do not interfere with the freedom of capitalists to exploit the working class. I believe fully in the freedom of individuals, as long as those freedoms do not allow for the exploitation or oppression of others.

How does capitalism inevitably lead to fascism?

Basically, the issue with capitalism is that the more wealth you have, the easier it is for you to make more money. And since money can be used to buy goods, services and influence, there is always a way to use money to gain more political and social power. With that political and social power, you can push society and the legal system in the direction you want to go. So you can use your wealth to gain power, and then you can use your power to change laws and society so that you can make even more wealth and power. It’s a positive feedback loop.

Obviously, though, if the billionaires and ruling class are accumulating more and more of our society’s wealth, that inevitably means that there’s less for everyone else to go around - therefore, working class people feel poorer and poorer. Meanwhile, the economy is going absolutely great for rich people, so inflation continues to go up - everything gets more expensive, but wages don’t increase. The wealthy just keep more and more of the wealth for themselves. To accumulate more and more wealth, they change the laws so that they can avoid paying taxes, so public services collapse. Politicians are lobbied to ensure that public funds are diverted away from where it is most needed - housing, healthcare, transportation, infrastructure - and instead into industries where their class interests most benefit from it, such as weapons manufacturing and extractive industries such as fossil fuels and mining.

The working class are bound to notice that their lives are getting shittier and shittier, and if that situation is left unchecked, the working class would realize that the ruling class are fucking them over, rise up, and overthrow their rulers. Obviously, the ruling class need to do something about this, but there’s no solution that the ruling class can offer. They’re causing all of the problems, to fix them they’d have to give up some of their wealth and power - and that’s not something they’re going to do. So they need to find someone else to blame the problems we have in society on. Unfortunately, though, no matter who they blame the problems on, and no matter what they do to “fix” it, the issue will continue to persist, because the material conditions underlying the issues are, very intentionally, never addressed.

So, the conundrum returns: The ruling class said that minority A caused all of the problems, minority A is persecuted and oppressed, but society doesn’t actually get any better. Either the problem wasn’t minority A, or minority A just hasn’t been oppressed enough yet. So the ruling class can either escalate the oppression, or they can shift the focus to another minority group. The division continues to escalate in terms of how vitriolic and extreme it is, and it also continues to divide the working class into smaller and smaller groups.

To get the working class to buy into this hateful message, they need to take advantage of our worst instincts, and one of those instincts is the in-group bias. The majority are manipulated into being suspicious, then intolerant, then hateful, then violent, then genocidal, towards whatever the targeted minority of the day is. Anything that can be used to divide the working class - sexuality, nationality, immigration status, ethnicity, religion, sex, gender identity, age, all of these will be used as wedges to keep the working class split apart and not working together, because they know that if the working class actually unite against them, they are completely and truly fucked.

That’s exactly how fascism manifests. It’s because it’s possible for people to accumulate power through wealth. This is why capitalism must be abolished. If we do not abolish capitalism, fascism will always return. It’s just a matter of time.

But can't capitalism can be reformed?

While, of course, some laws to reform capitalism can be passed, and would definitely alleviate the worst harm caused, over the long term, capitalism cannot be reformed.

Any attempts to reform, democratize or socialize capitalism may yield short term improvements to quality of life of the working class, but if capitalism is not abolished, it will always reassert itself, and capitalism inevitably leads towards fascism.

The New Deal prevented the US from sliding into fascism in the 20th century, so that’s ultimately a good thing, but it did not go far enough, and that’s why we have the resurgence of fascism in the 21st century America.

But the Soviet Union was really oppressive!

Yeah, the soviet union had a lot of problems, Stalin was a psycho. Let’s not do that, but we can do socialism using a bottom-up, direct democratic, consensus based decision making approach, rather than a top-down, centralized state. We can learn from the mistakes of the past.

I’d encourage you to check out an anarchist FAQ to learn more - If you haven’t heard much about anarchism before, you probably have some misconceptions about it, so I encourage you to watch the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime or have a look through an Anarchist FAQ, because it’s almost definitely nothing like what you think.

I personally believe that it’s the most coherent philosophy which adequately explains and addresses all of the problems which plague our society, and which holds the most promise for a path out of the inevitable cycle of the continuous rise and fall of fascism that capitalism makes inevitable.

  • bearboiblake@pawb.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    Let me explain it in simple terms.

    Imagine there is a nice park which is used by the community. The park is owned by a kind, old man, who allows everyone to use it freely.

    When the man passes away, the park is inherited by his son. His son exercises his freedom to build an oil rig on the park, and putting fences around it.

    His freedom to do what he wants with private property deprives others of their freedom to use the park.

    This is how liberalism works in practice. Freedom to own land means the freedom to deprive others from the use of the land.

    Freedom of the wealthy to own land and the means of production means that they accumulate wealth and thus power, and they use that power freely to exert influence on politics.

      • bearboiblake@pawb.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        You know what else exists in the west? Starvation, homelessness and medical debt. The freedom to profit from food, shelter and healthcare means that you are forced into laboring, usually for the benefit and profit of wealthy private individuals, who pay you for less than your work is actually worth, because otherwise you die. Is that freedom?

        • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          Feel free to try to improve the problems you see, but the track record for either autocracies or anarchists doing better is so far Zilch.

          The USA, which is actually a pretty horrible country on many issues, has one of the best records for making sure everyone is food of human history. The closest thing they’ve ever had to a famine was the dustbowl.

          I think healthcare should be socialized as it is in many European Nations.

          Clearly there are many examples of governments in general and very much so Capitalism addressing all your worries.

          • bearboiblake@pawb.socialOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            Feel free to try to improve the problems you see, but the track record for either autocracies or anarchists doing better is so far Zilch.

            Actually, there are current and historical examples of very successful anarchist societies. For a couple of examples, at present, the Zapatistas exist, an anarchist region with at least 300,000 people living under it, and also that Revolutionary Spain existed, an extremely successful example of anarchism in practice which resisted Nazi Germany better than any democratic nation in mainland Europe.

            The USA, which is actually a pretty horrible country on many issues, has one of the best records for making sure everyone is food

            “Making sure everyone is food” is quite the freudian slip. Seriously, though: someone hasn’t heard of food deserts!

            In 2025, the United States Department of Agriculture reported that an estimated 12.8% of the US population were living in low-income and low-access census tracts. Of this number, 19 million people live in “food deserts”, which they define as low-income census tracts that are more than 1 mile (1.6 kilometers) from a supermarket in urban or suburban areas and more than 10 miles (16 kilometers) from a supermarket in rural areas.

            I think healthcare should be socialized as it is in many European Nations.

            So do a majority of Americans, and yet it has not happened. Why not? Because the wealthy rule, because of capitalism.