All societal systems that have existed since humans became sedentary roughly 10,000 years ago are fascist. Before that, for nearly 95 percent of our species’ 300,000-year history, humanity lived in hunter-gatherer or forager societies. These communities had no permanent hierarchies, no inherited positions of power, no state institutions and no ruling class at all: decisions were made through collective consensus, and people with particular experience or skill held only temporary authority rooted in mutual respect, never the power to coerce others. They were entirely classless and egalitarian, with land, tools and hunting grounds held as common property, food distributed according to need, and no exploitation of one group’s labour by another. There was no organised state violence, no standing armies and no large-scale warfare between communities; internal conflicts were resolved through mediation rather than repression. Gender relations were broadly equitable too, as women’s foraging work supplied 60 to 80 percent of most groups’ food supply, earning them equal social standing. Groups were small and flexible, usually made up of 20 to 50 related people. This form of organisation is known as primitive communism: the default way humans lived for almost all of our history, before sedentism gave rise to the fascist systems that have defined every society ever since.
Except we have zero actual proof of how they lived, outside of observing modern day tribes and making assumptions from that, also funerary traditions, that's all we have
Fascism is when shit i don't personally like
The Sentinel island guys? These are fascist piece of shit and we should denazify them
>>2883868Okay but it's incredibly unlikely that there were hunter gatherer landlords isn't it?
I'm sure some groups were primitive communist and democratic, and others were tyrannical, and this probably changed over the generations back and forth, but we can say pretty much for certain that there was not an organised system of class control as we have today. Perhaps some chiefs would have some strongmen by which he could enforce order but it seems very unlikely that he could impose total tyranny when everyone was armed to basically the same level, and it was easy for a group of people to just decide "fuck this" and take all their shit and leave.
>>2883872How? They were willing to make peaceful contact with outsiders until things went wrong. They made their position abundantly clear that they didn't want those missionaries on their island, they didn't just shoot them with spears right away. They were defending themselves. Maybe they consciously knew that the outside world would inevitably destroy their way of life or maybe they didn't, but either way they have a right to self determination.
They're not totally ignorant of the outside world either by any means, there was a couple of anthropologists who met with them for decades and probably taught them a whole lot about the outside world - plus it would be impossible for them not to notice some parts of modernity like planes, big ships on the horizon, etc.
>>2883873Day 1621 of the 3 day evangelisation. Islands still closed btw.
Fascism is liberalism
Liberalism belongs to the capitalist mode of production
>>2884016>Fascism is liberalismwhy don't we use just 1 word then instead of confusing people with a bunch of synonyms
Fascism does not, has never, and will never exist.
Stone aged people also killed competing tribes with a rock and ate them while freely raping the women. Don’t see you ever mention this in your cringe pre civilizational communistic utopias.
while your descriptions of the material conditions of nomadic hunter-gatherer societies are more or less accurate, taking a 19th-century ideology like communism and retroactively applying it to stone age people who lived over ten thousand years ago doesn't really make any sense. people from that time did not have the means to form complex organized societies or abstract socioeconomic models to describe them, their societies were the way they were because of technological limitations and not because of any conscious will or cosmic purpose. and as soon as those limitations were gone, as soon as humans developed things like complex language and agriculture, large centralized permanent settlements began to emerge with government and hierarchy and rulers and slaves and militaries and imperialism and all that kind of good stuff. and of course, all of the small nomadic tribal societies would be conquered or wiped out by the empire, so humanity never really had a say in any of this; the empire was an inevitability that was written into our dna from the very beginning and there's nothing we could have done to prevent it.
>Class society is fascism
trvke
>fascism is a universal transhistorical concept that has always existed it just didnt get a name until WWII lol!
midwits should read marx before spouting retarded shit that sounds straight out of ancient greece
>>2885145Ancient greeks are wiser than you’re giving them credit for, without Aristotle there is no Hegel or Marx
Fascism is merely a manifstation of a thing. The thing is not fascism. The thing represents many things
>>2885145Modern states are just more elaborate versions of the bronze age slaver canal building states. They would've been "progressive" too for advancing the productive forces and slaughtering people not using the land right (Locke and Marx agree on native genocide).
>>2883864>These communities had no permanent hierarchies, no inherited positions of power, no state institutions and no ruling class at all: decisions were made through collective consensus, and people with particular experience or skill held only temporary authority rooted in mutual respect, never the power to coerce others.This isn't true. We can't know for certain how those communities lived because they are all long gone. The myth that forager societies don't have hierarchies and are literally egalitarian is clearly false when we look at the ethnographic and historical record of these societies today. There are plenty of forager societies that defy the stereotypes political theorists paste onto them. The idea of the primitive, not to mention primitive communism, is a modern assumption that is retroactively back projected onto the human past. This romanticism began with Rousseau and found its way to Marx and Engels through Lewis Henry Morgan. It fulfilled an ideological function, if human societies are naturally communist then you had to explain why they don't live that way now and one easy way to do this was create a degeneration narrative.
You also seem to assume that certain values (hierarchy) inherently contradict such things as mutual respect e.g. throughout much of human history, hierarchy has been key to fostering mutual respect (e.g. the Confucian idea of filial piety). Even societies that are seemingly stateless today, such as various Bedouin groups, have strict internal hierarchies, or at least asymmetrical roles between persons based on their age, gender, knowledge, wealth or whatever position they have within their kin group. Is hierarchy always a bad thing? Why do moderns see hierarchy as bad, while other societies did not? A particular leftist set of virtues (equality, gender equality, no property) is being read into societies where these very ideas (created by a bunch of Western intellectual elites) might not be relevant to those people anyway.
I suppose there are interesting things non-modern non-Western societies can teach us about how to organize life, but primitive communism isn't one of them and the general tendency of leftist intellectuals of the Marxist stripe is to paint such people's uncivilized enemies anyway. We see this clearly in how leftist intellectuals reacted after 9/11, depicting Afghans and Somalis as underdeveloped and less evolved, how the Marxist government in Afghanistan tried to force state socialism and private land ownership onto a tribal population etc.
>>2883875Nobody knows the language of the North Sentinelese apart from the Islanders themselves. Quite frankly, we don't know what they are trying to communicate, if something outsiders is doing is being interpreted by them as hostile, if people are just miscommunicating with them etc. They aren't ignorant of the outside world, yes, but we can't really know much without talking to them and there have been no attempts to do that in decades.
>>2885343damn everything Marx says about exploitation is wrong because of his hot takes on US natives. I will now be a primitivist or whatever you're pushing. Consider me converted
>>2883874there were like hunger gatherer hunting ground owners and you'd have to pay a fee in clam shalls or whatever to be allowed to access them for like until sun goes down or shit.
also you weren't allowed to bring your own spears, you had to rent them from the hunting ground lord for like even more clam shells.
also you had like to give them the best parts of the animals you brought down.
also foraging for anything but the stuff you payed clam sheels for, you'd be arrested by the stone age police and the stone age court would sentence you depending on how much stuff you stole from the hunting ground lords hunting ground land.
basically, just watch the flintstones, that is a prettay accurate depiction of what stone age hunter gatherer fascism was like.
also have a look at dinosaurs, that shit is the best documentary on dinosaur fascism. fuckers were blown into extinctions alright, deservedly, for being dino fascists
>>2883864This is probably the most stupid post I have ever seen
>watering down the meaning of a word until it practically means nothing
>>2884448Hence the usage of liberalism
>>2884400>genshin impact react image There is no meaningful distinction between fascism and liberalism + ur cringe
>>2883864I don't know about that. But one thing we can all agree on is that right now today the USA is a fascist white supremacist state. And that is NOT up for debate.
Completely ignorant ragebait as usual
>>2885157Aristotle was the dumbest one. Of all the greeks he could have never been born and we'd maybe be better off for it.
>>2900077It's interesting how many Marxists disagree with Marx:
<Aristotle, the greatest thinker of antiquityhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch15.htm >>2900077Aristotle discovered formal logic, without which we would not have computers and you wouldn’t be able to post this.
>>2899969No, he’s right. Thread is dumb and you should actually read.
>>2900198>No, he’s rightHe’s completely wrong, and you have no evidence to the contrary. Fascism is indistinguishable from liberalism, and your only counter to this is angry comments.
>Thread is dumbUr dumb
>you should actually readSaid the one trying to argue against primitive communism. Hit the road revisionist.
tell me the difference between fascism and liberalism.
Show me a genuine difference
Unique IPs: 30