• Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    4 months ago

    Nah, it’s not that liberals WANT any kind of fascism. It’s just that they don’t really MIND much since they and their owner donors tend to be wealthy and/or powerful enough to weather most of the effects.

    Also, if you look at liberals throughout history, particularly Italy a century ago, you’ll see that they tend to not resist fascist uprisings that hard and then join them once they come to power.

    With the exception of Franco’s Spain, every fascist government in the 1920s and -30s and then throughout the cold war had either no resistance or outright support from the Western liberals.

    WW2 wasn’t the rule for how the West tends to deal with fascists, it was the exception.

    • Juice@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Well, the US stayed out of the conflict until after the Battle of Stalingrad. The US was hoping the Nazis would destroy the USSR, which it looked like they might, but once the Russians started pushing back west the US realized they couldn’t allow Russia to win the war. So they teamed up with the UK, invaded France and cleaned up the western front and told their people that it was actually the US/UK that won the war when the most sacrifices were made, and the actual turning point was achieved by the USSR.

      Consequently fascism wasn’t completely eradicated, it was absorbed into the western consensus as the virulent anticommunism of the Nazis was quite valuable. Several high ranking Nazi generals were recruited to form NATO, and rocket scientists were also brought into the fold. The vast majority of companies, and their executives who cooperated with and were fervent enablers of the Nazis, received no punishment at all; as punishing business dealings with the Nazis would implicate american businesses such as IBM whose second largest customer was Nazi Germany (the first being the USA). The few executives tried at Nuremburg received diminished sentences.

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

        So are you just totally ignoring that The Battle of Stalingrad didn’t start for 6 months after we entered? July of 1942 is later than Dec. 7, 1941.

        We were landing troops in Belfast, Ireland as early as January 26, 1942, so how were we waiting for a battle that hadn’t even started yet?

        • Juice@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          D-day is June 6th 1944, its true the Americans were giving defense to the British, shooting at subs, protecting British ships etc., but that’s not really “entering the war” with the intention of defeating the Nazis so much as protecting an ally.

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            So yeah, you’re just ignoring everything we did before D-Day. We had been in the war for over two years by that point, in both theaters, but focusing on Europe. We had been protecting our allies up until Dec. 7 1941. We were in the European theater, with troops on the ground, as of early February 1942.