• disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I don’t think they’re either. Fascists fall under the bottom left quadrant of the Nolan Chart for supporting liberal economic and conservative social systems. Libertarians are placed opposite them on the top right. Left wing on the top left for liberal social and liberal economic, and right wing on the bottom right for conservative social and conservative economic.

    My point is if you place them on the right of a straight line, you’re defining your line to weigh on social policy over economic policy. Therefore you must place Libertarians on the far left, despite their staunch objection to tax generated social systems. A line simply doesn’t work.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      So first things first. Nolan was a liberal, despite calling himself libertarian. Liberal == economic freedom, libertarian == social freedom. Always has been. Always will be. Second I was not aware that the Nazis were liberal and supported economic freedom. Honestly everything I’ve seen historically screamed the opposite. You know, the whole if you aren’t with us we kill you. Not a socially or economically “liberal” vibe. But I’d be interested to see what your justification for the claim is.

      Why would you not weight social Freedom over economic freedom? Society is the basis of the economy. Who in their right mind would prioritize economic freedom over social freedom? Who would want prioritize being the wealthiest inmate in a concentration camp for instance. over being free but having wealth similar to everyone else?

      Let’s put this in better perspective. The transition from mercantilism to capitalism. Capitalism provided zero new economic freedom. There were immensely wealthy non royals that owned trading companies. But they were socially segregated from the royals and could never become them outside of marriage which was also segregated. Capitalism offered new social freedom, now us low born could become the equivalent of the royals based largely on dumb luck and chance. The change was strictly about social freedom. As surpurfluous and damaging as that particular freedom was.

      Finally there is no meaningful economic freedom without social freedom. Without social Freedom you will be permanently segregated from economic success. Black people and minorities for example in the United States technically have access to economic freedom. And yet it is always such a noteworthy thing anytime one of them actually becomes economically successful. Because they generally do not have the social freedom.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Liberal economic policy means they support high tax socialization. Hitler socialized much of Germany’s industry, and is responsible for the creation of Volkswagen. Conservative economics support low tax socialization.

        As far as weight of social freedom vs. economic support goes, that’s entirely up to the individual. Plenty of people cast their votes with economic priorities- the elderly, Conservatives (not MAGA or far-right), and people on social programs such as Section 8, Medicaid, or SNAP to name a few.

        Capitalism is a form of economy that in no way dictates social legislation. We base social legislation (liberty or restrictions on acceptable behavior) on The Constitution and its Amendments. The policies are independent of one another.

        Read up on the Political Compass if you don’t like the Nolan chart. They accomplish the same goal of identifying independence of social and economic systems in relation to political ideology.

        Economic policy is on a spectrum from liberal (high tax socialization) to conservative (low tax socialization). High taxation with low socialization falls under conservative.

        Social policy is on a spectrum from libertarian (freedom from socially restrictive legislation) to authoritarian (oppressive socially restrictive legislation).

        The use of the term libertarian here is not to be confused with the Libertarian ideology or party, as it’s being used to exclusively define social liberty, and does not include economic policy definition. The same is true of the use of liberal vs Liberal in regards to economic policy.