Socialism vs Fascism, Part II

From what I've said previously, it makes total sense for liberals in America to assign the greatest slur they can think of (fascists/Nazis) to conservatives, while conservatives assign the greatest slur they can think of to liberals (Communists/socialists).  The problem is, at least with the liberals' use of fascism and Nazism, they fail to look deeper at both fascism (which they abhor) and socialism (which they wish to emulate).


Socialism, it is widely thought, was the brain-child of the theories of Robert Owen.  Owen (1771-1858) used his extraordinary skill in managing and overseeing to create a successful textile mill at New Lanarck. He was able to put several of his progressive ideas into practice at New Lanarck, and these successes gave him the opportunity to put his more radical, socialist theories into practice, most notably at New Harmony in Indiana.  Owen's socialism reduced the population into small "societies" of about 500-3000 people, and removed private property and private ownership: all that mattered was the success of the "society".  All people shared everything, and each would receive according to their need.  Everyone would exist in relative equality in these self-contained societies, which would be overseen by a capable, qualified and adept overseer.  Groups of societies would be linked together, and those groups would be linked together, until every society was part of a globally integrated, non-competitive socialist utopia.  In classical socialism, the goal is the economic survival/success of each individual, not competitive "collective".  Due to the non-competitive nature, the idea of nationalism, or pride in one's collective, or heritage, or individuality is supposed to be non-existent.  Any sort of differentiation between individuals would create a competitive atmosphere, which would undermine the socialist utopia.  Thus, true socialists are afraid of nationalism, or "American exceptionalism", so much so that the would label anyone who demonstrates any sort of pride in their country as "fascists" thought to invoke the totalitarian regime of Hitler.


Fascism is first seen in Mussolini's Italy.  Mussolini's fascism was centered around his authority as a dictator, and the uber-nationalism that accompanied Italy's militarism.  For Mussolini's Italy, everything revolved around the good of the State.  So important was the State's influence on everyday life, that a common joke was that while everything was going to hell-in-a-handbasket, at least the (state-run) trains ran on time.  Over time, he dramatically increased state control over the private sector, eventually settling on a system called corporatism, which melded a centralized economic plan with privately run businesses.  Mussolini was the first, but not the last.  Adolf Hitler adopted the fascist idea with his National Socialists is Germany.  For the Nazi party, the good of the state was the goal, and while Mussolini never really went full socialist, Hitler did.  However, we don't really hear about Hitler's love-affair with socialism.  Instead we are faced with his great nationalism, his Thousand Year Reich, and the "Fatherland". 

The fact is, that all fascists used socialism as their economic policy to some extent.  The goal of the fascist is the success of the state...thus, socialism, with its goal of economic "success" of the society is a good match. Fascists will, because of their insistence on the importance of the state over the importance of the individual, adopt socialist policies. For this reason, it is rather ironic that American liberals (who want state control of the economy, and who believe in the importance of the state over the importance of the individual) call American conservatives (who are proud of the United States and believe in the importance of the individual over the importance of the state) "fascists".