Brian Molko criticised Giorgia Meloni during a concert at the Sonic Park festival

Meloni heads Italy’s most rightwing government since the second world war. Italy’s criminal code punishes with a fine ranging from €1,000 to €5,000 anyone who “publicly defames the republic”, which includes the government, parliament, the courts and the army.

  • Fisting for Freedom@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    810·
    1 year ago

    The USSR would also persecute people for criticizing the Soviet state or its leaders, but they weren’t fascist. Authoritarianism is something people on the left and right both get up to.

    • socsa@lemmy.mlEnglish
      12·
      1 year ago

      I mean we are kind of splitting hairs a bit then. The worst thing about fascism is mostly the autocracy and the “ends justify lots of murder” attitude. When people talk about the evils of fascism that’s what they’re talking about.

      Likewise, when people criticize Stalinism, they aren’t talking about the high minded ideals or even the questionable fashion choices. They are talking about the autocracy, and the “ends justify lots of murder” attitude.

    • SuperApples@lemmy.worldEnglish
      8·
      1 year ago

      If left-wing authoritarianism isn’t an oxymoron, then what the heck does left-wing mean?

      I agree that authoritarianism does not equal fascism, but the only meaningful definition of left-right politics (in my opinion) is a measure of belief in and adherence to social hierarchies. And the USSR was definitely heavily into hierarchy.

      • nadir@lemmy.worldEnglish
        31·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, that’s where the left-right concept kinda breaks down.

        It feels wrong to say the USSR wasn’t left when you consider the many left policies they had and of course their origin.

        I also agree with your idea of what left-wing should mean. I guess there’s no way to avoid complexity with topics like this.

      • Fisting for Freedom@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        36·
        1 year ago

        Oh, Mellonhead is definitely a fascist, I’m just pointing out that you get the same kinda of oppression at the other end of the lef-right spectrum, too.

        • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          1 year ago

          There’s plenty of oppression and violence smack dab in the center of the left right spectrum too. I’m not sure why horseshoe theory is so keen to equate Stalin, Mao, etc. with the violence of Hitler, Pinochet, etc. while ignoring the genocides of the Dutch East India Co. (and competitors), imperialism, the slave trade, settler colonialism, etc.

          • Fisting for Freedom@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            1·
            1 year ago

            Absolutely! This is why, even though the political compass is a memey oversimplification at this point, it does get a the inadequacy of a single dimension view of political ideology. The authoritarian mindset is a human trait, and while some ideologies seem more prone to attracting people with that particular trait, by no means does it only occur in those cases.

            Some people just want to rule over others.

    • MonsieurHedge@kbin.social
      106·
      1 year ago

      I’d argue the USSR was fascist the same way the DPRK is fascist. You aren’t necessarily left-wing just because you say you are.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        64·
        1 year ago

        I can see the parallels but this really conflicts with the historical definition of fascist. Then again, practically everyone is a fascist these days at least according to someone, so maybe the historical definition doesn’t matter anymore. Guess that’s the downside of it being the universally despised bogeyman term in politics.

        • trafguy@midwest.social
          6·
          1 year ago

          Thought it might be helpful to compare the USSR to Wikipedia’s definitions of fascism and communism. These definitions can be wrong or could be different than what they were at the height of the USSR, but perhaps it’ll help with finding common definitions. I’ll admit that my knowledge of USSR culture/governance is limited, so feel free to critique/refute any of my interpretations.

          Fascism:

          Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement,characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

          Checklist (hidden for brevity)
          1. +Dictatorial leader: Stalin wasn’t exactly a democratic ruler. Check.
          2. ?Centralized autocracy: AKA: One person has final say over any government decision. Probably, but maybe not depending on your definition?
          3. +Militarism: Definitely had a significant military focus. Check.
          4. +Forcible suppression of opposition: Yeah, that sounds par for the course for modern Russian government.
          5. ?Belief in natural social hierarchy: Does semi-deliberate wealth disparity and nationalistic superiority complex count?
          6. ?Subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race: Sounds likely, but not 100% sure.
          7. +Strong regimentation of society and the economy: Pretty sure the USSR had a planned centralized economy.

          It hits 4/7 pretty firmly and the remaining 3 are plausible.

          Communism:

          is a left-wing to far-left sociopolitical, philosophical, and economic ideology… whose goal is the creation of a communist society, a socioeconomic order centered around common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange that allocates products to everyone in the society based on need. A communist society would entail the absence of private property and social classes, and ultimately money and the state.

          Checklist (hidden for brevity)
          1. XCommon ownership of the means of production of goods/services: Weren’t these state-owned?
          2. XCommon ownership of the means of distribution of goods/services: ^
          3. XCommon ownership of the means of exchange of goods/services: ^^
          4. ?Allocates products to everyone in the society based on need: Wasn’t there significant poverty while others’ were well-fed? If distribution wasn’t tied to labor, then it could be argued this fits, if somewhat imperfectly.
          5. XAbsence of private property: Oligarchs don’t exactly scream “lack of private property”
          6. XAbsence of social classes: Again, oligarchs and poverty
          7. ?Absence of money: Can’t comment on this one
          8. XAbsence of the state: There was 100% an overarching state

          Hits 2/8 at best, but I would be surprised to learn there wasn’t money in the USSR.