The best explanation of Fascism you will ever read.

[JTL]

Hey guys, I came over this picture from Reddit it is small section of a U.S. government issued WWII era "Army Talk" pamphlet describing how to identify American fascists. The pamphlet was only meant for Army officers and not for normal infantry. What I love about the pamphlet is of how meticulous it is written, no bullshit here, probably shout be expected, but it is so rare today. It explains the MAGA movement to a T. You should read the whole pamphlet it is only 8 pages.
Here is the link: https://archive.org/details/ArmyTalkOrientationFactSheet64-Fascism/mode/1up

[eliasvelez]

I am still reading but good text! It goes straight to the point. Texts like this should be tacklet in school. Even in the swiss school system, countless hours are wasted on BS while there is no hour invested ro really understand important stuff like this 

Edited January 17 by eliasvelez

[Infinity16]

You can notice point 2 in spades. The US was already doing well beforehand but Trump seems to be under the impression that the ideal foreign policy is to disregard the will of other nations. Trump's supporters say that it makes America look strong. I say that it makes America look like a bully. Also brings me to the quote by Stephen Miller. A day ago, he said that it would be alright if the US took Greenland under the justification that Denmark is too weak to defend it.

https://thehill.com/policy/international/5694105-stephen-miller-greenland-acquisition-defense/

Stephen Miller embodies a fascistic foreign policy. I don't use that adjective lightly. Trump's foreign policy seems to be a populist one without much thought put into it. Stephen Miller seems like he's trying to justify naked imperialism.

[Cred]

The foundational text from Mussolini is pretty short and readable. It's called "the doctrine of fascism"

https://sjsu.edu/faculty/wooda/2B-HUM/Readings/The-Doctrine-of-Fascism.pdf

Fascism is the direct answer to communism. There is no such thing as fascism that is independent of communism. If you want to understand what fascism is you need to understand communism and learn why communism is objectively the best system.

Fascism rises to power when liberals become afraid of a communist revolution. That's it. As soon as the rich realize that communism is a better option for the people, they start funding fascism out of fear. And they should be fearful. Communism shows no mercy to the corrupt. If you are corrupt and a revolution is on its way you need to start taping your head to your neck because else it will be separated from your body soon

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

You're right that fascism is a reaction to the threat of genuine redistribution. You're right that the corrupt should be held accountable. But the method matters.

'Taping heads back on' isn't justice, it's just revenge. And revenge, when institutionalized, creates its own corruption. The revolution always eats its children.

What if we built systems that prevented corruption in the first place, instead of just promising to punish it after the fact? Systems with distributed power, so no one can capture it all. Systems with transparency, so everyone can see what's happening. Systems with feedback, so the people most affected can shape decisions. Systems with restorative justice, so harm can be repaired without creating new victims.

That's I would like to build. Not revenge, but resilience. Not certainty, but wisdom. Not victory over enemies, but flourishing for all.

I don't know if it will work. But I know the old way, your way, the fascist way, the way of heads on pikes, has already failed, catastrophically, many times.

[Cred]

Marxists are not violent because they are vengeful. They are violent because they do what's necessary. This image of the vengeful marxist is fabricated. This image of the irresponsible marxist is fabricated. This image of the paranoid marxist is real. You will realize that the paranoia of marxist leaders is extremely justified when you learn about the brutality of the west against it's enemies. Look at the Ayatollah. A little bit more paranoia and he might have lived a little longer.

When analyzing failures of past communist states it always has to be looked at from the context which is that the west was doing everything in their power to make sure they fail. Also their material conditions were shit at the beginning but they pretty much always managed to rapidly improve regardless; even under the pressure from the west.

When you do a real analysis you will realize that these states were and are managed reasonably well.

Quote

Systems with distributed power, so no one can capture it all.

If you distribute power you will just have liberalism.

The ideal realistic government needs to be one disciplined, centralized marxist-leninist party with absolute power as long as capitalism still has this much power in this world.

The notion that absolute ideologial power corrupts necessarily is a lie invented to defame communist states. The reason why marxists tend not to get corrupted by ideology is because they care way more about analysis then about identity. How do I know this? Because I'm like this.

Edited March 7 by Cred

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

Cred, you say you're not corruptible because you're an analyst, not an ideologue. But you've just defended a system that concentrated absolute power, eliminated dissent, and killed millions, and explained it all away with context. That's not analysis. That's ideology so deep you can't see it.

Absolute power corrupts. Not because of class, but because of human nature. That's what the evidence shows, across every regime, every ideology.

You say you're like this, careful, analytical, uncorruptible. I believe you. But will you be the one making decisions? Or will it be someone less careful, more ambitious, with no structures to stop them?

That's what I'm trying to build. Not liberalism. Structures that protect us from our own worst selves.

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

Here's a non-ideological problem with your one-party system: Governing a complex society requires accurate, timely information flowing from every part of it to wherever decisions are made. Centralized systems structurally degrade that signal, every layer of hierarchy introduces delay and distortion. By the time a problem is visible to the center, it's already compounded. By the time a response arrives, reality has moved on.

This isn't a critique of communist intentions. It's an engineering constraint. Stafford Beer tried to solve it for Allende's Chile in 1972, a genuine attempt to use cybernetics to make socialist planning work in real time. It was promising. The CIA-backed coup ended it before anyone found out.

Distributed systems aren't liberalism. They're the architecture that matches the complexity of what you're trying to govern.

[Cred]

@Bjorn K Holmstrom fyi, I'm still very much invested in the conversation but I realized you have a SUPER AWESOME WEBSITE that I find extremely inspiring. I think this introduction thingy

Quote

From engineering physics to mysticism, from psychosis to systems design – my journey has taught me that the deepest problems require the integration of the personal, the political and the existential

goes hard man this resonates with me a ton, this is exactly my current special interest.

I'd love for you to read

and give me your thoughts. The most relevant part is:

Quote

Life is symbiosis which is the space that is created by the dance (the couple dance symbolizes the harmony between the hug and the handshake) between love (unity, symbolized by the hug) and partnership (creating space, symbolized by the handshake)

This is an extremely compressed version of my theory of life and I'm planning to go into more detail in future posts. 

--------

I noticed you WROTE A BLOG POST ON YOUR WEBSITE ABOUT MY TAKE "MARXISM-LENINISM IS STAGE YELLOW" WITHOUT TELLING ME??? HOW DARE YOU! I WOULD HAVE LOVED READING THIS WHEN IT CAME OUT!!!

--------

Damn it seems that the "that's what I'm trying to build" was not an empty statement at all. You really seem to know what you are talking about.

I really want to answer but I also kinda want to keep digging theough your website more first. I don't want to make the mistake of critiquing your system from below too much. 

You will hear from me soon. *smooch*

Edited March 7 by Cred

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

Haha, guilty! Your Marxism-Leninism as stage yellow take was too interesting not to explore. Consider it a compliment.

Your symbiosis framework resonates. The elephant metaphor in particular: the idea that what suffocates us can be invisible precisely because we've lived with it so long. I'm genuinely uncertain what my own elephant consists of, if there is one. I've arrived at something like acceptance of my depression as a valid mode of being rather than purely a problem to solve. Maybe that's option 2 done slowly, over years, without quite knowing it.

I'd be curious whether your framework has room for that ... a depression that isn't necessarily pointing at a hidden exploitative relationship, but is more like a particular coloring of consciousness. Not everything to be eliminated, but something to be understood and perhaps inhabited differently.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the frameworks. And yes, the "that's what I'm trying to build" was not empty. It's my way of finding meaning in my depression.

The "Life is a symbiosis ..." is beautiful btw, looking forward to hear your expand on it!

[enchanted]

On 16/01/2026 at 1:15 PM, JTL said:

Hey guys, I came over this picture from Reddit it is small section of a U.S. government issued WWII era "Army Talk" pamphlet describing how to identify American fascists. The pamphlet was only meant for Army officers and not for normal infantry. What I love about the pamphlet is of how meticulous it is written, no bullshit here, probably shout be expected, but it is so rare today. It explains the MAGA movement to a T. You should read the whole pamphlet it is only 8 pages.
Here is the link: https://archive.org/details/ArmyTalkOrientationFactSheet64-Fascism/mode/1up

This is awesome