News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Umberto Eco: Ur-Fascism (1995) [pdf] by Brendinooo on Tuesday February 16, 2021 @07:27PM (#26160926)
This is a thoughtful reply; thanks for it. I know that my framing is a sorites paradox, and won't have a tidy answer.

But maybe that's my point: Fascism is but one particular flavor of malicious totalitarianism, and totalitarianism can coagulate around a vast variety of beliefs across the political/religious/cultural spectra.

Studying the commonalities of particular flavors can be helpful, but it's tremendously unhelpful to whip out the list, check some boxes, and decide that someone is A Bad Person as a result.

Re:Umberto Eco: Ur-Fascism (1995) [pdf] by AnimalMuppet on Tuesday February 16, 2021 @07:35PM (#26160995)
I think it's at least as often used to decide that I am not A Bad Person...
Re:Umberto Eco: Ur-Fascism (1995) [pdf] by Brendinooo on Tuesday February 16, 2021 @07:41PM (#26161036)
What do you mean?
Re:Umberto Eco: Ur-Fascism (1995) [pdf] by AnimalMuppet on Tuesday February 16, 2021 @07:47PM (#26161100)
You said:

> Fascism is but one particular flavor of malicious totalitarianism, and totalitarianism can coagulate around a vast variety of beliefs across the political/religious/cultural spectra.

I can go through a list like that, make sure that I check none of the boxes, and decide that I am verifiably not A Bad Person. (As if the only kinds of badness are fitting Eco's fascism checklist.) Or that the movement I'm attracted to is verifiably not A Bad Movement.

(All that said, it's not a totally bad list, and it does cross over some between different flavors of politics. Even Antifa checks more boxes than they would be comfortable with, if they seriously considered it.)

Re:Umberto Eco: Ur-Fascism (1995) [pdf] by Brendinooo on Tuesday February 16, 2021 @08:05PM (#26161257)
Thanks for clarifying!