Could someone in plain and clear English define Socialism and Fascism and briefly describe their differences. Sarcasm need not apply, this is an honest question. I often feel fascism gets used incorrectly here and there and want to make sure I understand it correctly.
Thanks!
[ Communist ] Socialism - State ownership of the means of production, internationalism [ in theory ], class consciousness, interchangiblity of the concept of the workers with the concept of the state, anti-intellectual [ in theory ], no division of labor, communalized property rights
Fascism or Nationalist Socialism - Corporatism, Overzealous state regulation of the means of production, nationalist, xenophobic, jingoist, government ruled by elites or intellectuals [ technocrats ], anti-intellectual, fabricated populism, love of martial values, organized caste system of labor, regulation of populace.
Both are essentially Socialist, it is either Communist or Fascist in nature.
This video then confuses me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1EotfbBPjA
Mr. Block puts the two on different spectrum’s. As if being different.
Well they are different to some degree, I mean Fascists don’t like Communists and vice versa. In essence they are left and right of the same ideology. Think of it like Left Socialism [ Communism ] and Right Socialism [ Fascism ]
Socialism is where the state, a criminal organization within a territory using a monopoly on violence against its subjects, exercises ownership rights over all property (Incorrectly called the means of production by people wanting to lighten the definition) giving it complete control over society even into the most personal decisions people make like making ownership decisions over the bodies of people. Outside of the Communists very few societies have this level of state control. Most “Socialist” societies are a mixture of state ownership and private ownership with varying degrees of state control over privately owned property. So these societies are a mixture of socialism and fascism.
Fascism, really brought to fruition by Mussolini not Hitler, is where the state does not exercise complete ownership rights over property, but uses its monopoly of force to strictly control the use of property through bureaucracy. The intent here is to use the one requirement for capitalism to work properly, private property rights, to grow society and run the economy efficiently.
So in the continuum between free/voluntary society based upon private property rights and complete socialism has fascism nearer to the socialist end. Most economies like the USA, Japan and most of Europe are somewhat fascist with socialist components.
You know after watching that video again I may just be mis-interpreting a few things. So Fascism and Socialism ultimately have the same ends. It’s the means to that end thats different?
Alright so…
Fascism = Private owned governmental backed monopolies
Socialism = (supposed) Publicly owned governmental backed monopolies
That would then fit in the left to right 1D spectrum. How does that sound?
Ehh, in theory socialism is suppose to be about the decentralization of power to the worker class while fascism is really about the retention of power to the ruling class. Though socialism usually results in a ruling class also.
Ahh, I like this. Theory is important as pro-socialists will use this argument. Thanks Laughing man.
No problem. For a good history of Socialism I would read Sir Alexander Gray’s The Socialist Tradition. A very good book though old. I think there are still some copies on amazon.
Hmm my book list gets longer and longer the more I hang out at mises.org. Thats not a bad thing, as I love to read! 
Just to confirm I have this understanding correctly,
Our current healthcare system is fascist. While our proposed healthcare reform is more socialist?
Socialism is simple: the fusion of all economic and social activities into the state and the suppression of the division of labor.
Fascism is not so simple, as fascism is not an ideology in the same sense that liberalism, socialism, nationalism and conservatism are ideologies. Fascism is more like a political art. It has logos, characters, directors, stage sets for thousands of extras (the Nazis built enormous stage sets) and of course propaganda (the real moving stuff, not just the lies we commonly hear in the media, think Leni Riefenstal). In the service of this political art absolutely any ideology can serve, and so at times the fascists will be socialists, at other times they will be conservatives, at other times nationalists and some times even liberals. Because it is a totalitarian system, fascism will of course be authoritarian and compel you to play the role that has been staged for you.
I would say that the American medical system is a combination of corporatism and socialism. On the one hand there are the different monopolies granted to medical associations whose intent is to raise prices, and on the other hand there are direct price and value controls on the medical insurance business, hospitals and other key institutions.
The solution, as Dr. Paul and Dr. Paul repeat ad nauseam, is more freedom.
If this is true it will be extremely hard to use the word fascism with any credibility. As any and all of the criteria you mentioned are applicable in any type of state run society. This more co-aligns with Laughing Man’s definition that the two are necessarily different but that Fascism is the way of getting to a totalitarian state is different then that of socialism. They just both have the same end.
I don’t think the part about division of labor is right. Central planning doesn’t rule out division of labor, although it does impair it.
Central planning is the very contradiction of a division of labor. In a division of labor, every planning task is assigned to a specialist.
I always thought socialism attempted to monopolize the division of labor, not suppress it.
Yes, tasks are not assigned by letting people voluntary choose what they want to do, but by some other mechanism, mainly politics. And the results are suboptimal.
No it is not. For starters it assumes that there’s at least a division of between planners and people who take orders.
Not necessarily true. Lots of jobs are done by people who are not specialists.
The point of the false left / right paradigm is that it boxes everyone in.
Those who have a natural inclination to be independent, or neutral, those who think - well, socialism has failed, but then unfettered capitalism is also bad, I choose the middle. These individuals however don’t realise that the spectrum is fallacious.
And as we all know, the middle of the road leads to socialism.
Think of there being only 5 letters of difference…
Marxism / Communism - international socialism
Nazism / Fascism - national socialism