The online version of Merriam-Webster does not mention Nazism in its definition.

If you’re making a semantic point about definitions, you shouldn’t say it “specifically refer[s]” to the Nazi regime, when in fact it doesn’t.

The specific tenets of fascism have often been debated by historians and that definition is not unreasonable.

How could it when Benito Mussolini never once said any such thing?

Also;

I remember a fascist ideology simply referred to any authoritarian government that used force against opposing ideologies

I’ve definitely used the old definition to point out how the ANTIFA movement is ironically fascist.

What government is antifa?

No, they don’t.

You’re mistaking AntiFa for an organisation, with a central tenet system and singular belief in how governments can/should be run...

Instead of what it actually is, which is a meet-and-greet, worldwide collaboration of all ideologies that aren’t facist coming together.

You’re also tenuously linking violence and fascism, but not all violence is fascism.

However, even if none of that was true, fascism is 100% a Nationalist ideology with racial bias, so your op isn’t correct anyways.

Uhhuh... look... I’ve no reason to believe or disbelieve your claim...

But if the Philly branch are communists, as you say, then how on god’s green earth can they be fascists?

We don’t agree, because fascism is an inherently nationalistic ideology, often based on racial bias, where corporate power merges with the State to become one monolithic overseer...

Fascism was concocted by Benito Mussolini, you can look at his quotes on the subject to see why you are wrong.

We don't agree because facism is extreme nationalism. What you're defining is an authoritarian gov't in general. Ffs.

There are a surprising number of users who attempt to harp on how disorganized they are, except they show up in buses to schools in droves of 50+.

Someone is paying. Maybe it's daddy's money that they feel bad for having that 'privilege', maybe they are funded through radical professors at Universities, but they are definitely receiving funding or donations from political disrupters.

Lol ive had bigger birthday parties. What you're talking about is a nationally centralized organization that has clear motives. Antifa doesn't, it's like BLM, a common issue attracts people who then rallie to demonstrate their position, it isn't nationally centralized at all.

It isn't national, but to believe it is a disorganized movement without heavy funding is asinine if you've seen them roll in on your campus.

Like I said, there is a movement to minimize their presence online. It's like a faux-defense for them.

It's nothing like BLM.

Right. A good counter-example would be Unite the Right style rallies.

They bussed in a bunch of different groups.... But that doesn't mean all those groups were centrally organized under one banner. It was a meet up

I mean ANTIFA believes in an authoritarian government

That was not my impression of ANTIFA, so how did you come to this conclusion?

I thought they wanted communism which is the people owning the means of production

I ask all the time for redditors to give me a good reason why China SHOULDN'T be considered a fascist state and nine times out of ten they can't do it without mentioning nazis and hitler.

It's absolutely pathetic.

There's also that whole state-corporate synthesis/symbiosis, which USA, Inc. has had since early on in its beginnings, especially if you ascribe to the theory of the US being the continuation of The Virginia Company.

The 14 Defining Characteristics Of Fascism

But we've been in a period of hybrid ideologies since early-mid 20th C. We're in a weird socio-fascist corporatocracy that's morphing into a further, more narrow and stringent/iron-fist, global version of the same. Their idea is eventual soviet-style totalitarian socialism for the masses, with a controlling, capitalistic, self-enriching ruling elite.

You're right. Fascism as it was created by Mussolini had nothing about races. It was just about state's and personal interest. Where interests of the country were higher than personal liberties. That's it.

Yeah, so OP is not “right.” Your definition his right. His, the “oppwessive govewnment wegime” is wrong.

99% approval rating? That's fucking bullshit and being beaten up by brownshirts for voicing support for another party is not high approval. Hitler couldn't even win the election legitimately and used violence to suppress oppression.

Yes, Germans overwhelmingly supported Hitler because they were doing well. Violence was only used initially to silence political opponents, don't need to force anyone to do things through violence when you can give them national pride and a full belly, those people will die for you.

To “suppress oppression?” Ok guy. I think you mean opposition, but you’d still be wrong.

How does the State's relationship with Corporations factor into that definition? I was always under the impression that the state-corporate relationship was a key aspect of Fascism.

Yes, your correction is right. Thank you. I just forget to mention corporations in my post. BTW in most fascist country of nowadays, which is Russia, all fundamental industries like oil and gas production, all they are named as "state owned corporations" which are in fact, under the full control of super rich and influential JEWS. So-called "state owned corporations", "global corporation" all them are parts of Fascist philosophy. That's why I agree with the statement "Globalism is a corporate Fascism"

Why not try to see if some archive sites have it?

Waybackmachine should.

The correct definition is indeed “socialism that is nationalistic” (opposed to Marxism, i.e. socialism that is international).

But you are right, national socialism is not limited to Germany. People often forget that both Hitler and Mussolini were prominent socialist statesmen.

Mussolini published Il Trentino veduto da un Socialista. He was later editor of the Italian socialist Party newspaper Avanti! Under his leadership, its circulation soon rose from 20,000 to 100,000. During this period, Mussolini considered himself a Marxist and he described Marx as "the greatest of all theorists of socialism."

From 1912, Mussolini was a leading member of the National Directorate of the Italian Socialist Party (PSI). He was later expelled from the PSI for advocating military intervention in World War I, in opposition to the party's stance on neutrality.

And someone asks, no, he didn't change his underlying ideology or worldview before being expelled and founding the fascist party - he merely altered his socialism to make it nationalist instead of internationalist.

Wow. Who would have thought he was a Marxist.

Actually, it makes a lot of sense once you look into the philosophical tenets of collectivism.

In a nutshell: the individual does not have any natural, inherent and inalienable rights; the very idea is preposterous; the rights to life and liberty are abhorrent, as they are "selfish"; whatever little rights man has was granted by the State, and may thus be revoked at anytime. This is often necessary, as the sacred collective supersedes the filthy individual. The "greater good", as defined by the State, is all that matters; an individual life means nothing, and may be expediently sacrificed at any time on any day.

Collectivism is a philosophy founded on tyranny, debt, war, and death. Fascism and Marxism, two sides of the same coin, illustrate this well.

One last thing: modern neoliberalism is the "perfect" syncretism between the two.

And before someone asks, no, he didn't change his underlying ideology or worldview before being expelled and founding the fascist party

he merely altered his socialism to make it nationalist instead of internationalist

So he did chang his underlying ideology.

Well, you can't have "Fascism" apply to both the Nazis AND the Jews...

Incorrect. Fascism has always been taught as extreme nationalism. I learned that in 8th grade.

Fascism has nothing to do with Nazism or national socialism directly.

It is a 'perfect merger of government and corporation', as Mussolini stated.

The military industry is by definition fascism.

it sure seems as if the definition hasn't changed much between now and 2007: Here

No, they don’t.

You’re mistaking AntiFa for an organisation, with a central tenet system and singular belief in how governments can/should be run...

Instead of what it actually is, which is a meet-and-greet, worldwide collaboration of all ideologies that aren’t facist coming together.

You’re also tenuously linking violence and fascism, but not all violence is fascism.

However, even if none of that was true, fascism is 100% a Nationalist ideology with racial bias, so your op isn’t correct anyways.

I mean ANTIFA believes in an authoritarian government

That was not my impression of ANTIFA, so how did you come to this conclusion?