The Italians were Fascists (Italian National Trade Unionists). So yes, Left wing.
The Germans were National Socialists. So yes, Left wing
The Japanese were something outside of Leftist doctrine because they are not descendent from Rouseau or Marx. Their ideological roots of Japanese Militarism resemble Leftism, as they made Leftist arguments, they governed along political rationalist lines, while embracing the Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism of Left-wing governments, and used a completely invented history like the National Socialists and Fascists did to excuse their behavior.
For their Fascist arguments, it was very common that the militarists would excuse the expansion of their empire as "liberation from western colonialism" and that their empire wasn't really an empire because it wasn't capitalist.
The militarists didn't always lead from the top, but from the middle as effectively the flag officers were seen as the better and more informed people to be leading military operations. In some cases, whole military operation were launched without the knowledge of the government.
The totalitarianism should be obvious enough that I don't need to explain it.
As a result, what Japan had done was adapt Leftism (as Progressivism) to itself despite not embracing Liberalism.
Yes, Imperial Japan was effectively Leftist, just not in any traditional sense.
It doesn't make sense to call Japan right wing, because the Left-Right dichotomy doesn't fit for all the same reasons I just mentioned. Rightism is just "reaction against Leftism". Militarist Japan was also not Conservative, particularly by their own terms. Japan had explicitly abandoned it's old ways since The Great White Fleet and before. It understood that it needed to progress in order to challenge Britain and America. See: The Battle of Shiroyama. The militarists merely wore a skin-suit of Japanese tradition and Samurai code, but most of that was bunk, and the actual Samurai aristocracy and class structure had been dead for a generation.
The Japanese Militarists were effectively, a very unique form of Progressivism that evolved without Marxist doctrine.
Japan has been authoritarian for 99% of its history. Authoritarianism doesn't automatically mean "left wing" . And Japan was run by the military class for most of its history so its been "militarist" for most of its history. Most of the militararists of imperial Japan were descendents of the samurai class anyway.
Also your idea that they used an inverted history is just your opinion, just like its my opinion that you are the one inverting history.
Stop putting words in my mouth you Qatari faggot. I never said authoritarianism was inherently left wing. I said they adopted those traits which are also present in Leftist structures.
You're ignorant to what "militarist" means. An armed aristocracy is not the same as a military junta.
If you can make lies about me saying that i downplayed the grooming gangs and falsely claim that im Qatari than i can put words in your mouth. And i didnt even do that, you were the one who said "while embracing the Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism of Left-wing governments" as a reason for why you consider them leftists.
Also the samurai class was the military class of Japan that just happened to have noble status, its basically the same thing as a military junta except that they had nobility status. the samurai class was started by rogue militias in the first place.
Absolutely not, you're completely backwards. The Samurai Class was the aristocracy, sometimes practicing martial efforts in the same way the Europeans did in the middle ages. The aristocracy used the military as a mechanism for their own social achievement, regardless of whether they ever fought in a single battle or led a single soldier in combat. Militarism requires that society be structured out from the military, and all institutions are governed exclusively by the military, for military purposes.
Calling someone a faggot is explicitly allowed, this is not an attack on an identity group. It doesn't seem to be an attack on Qataris as a nationality, just an attack on Telia.
The Italians were Fascists (Italian National Trade Unionists). So yes, Left wing.
The Germans were National Socialists. So yes, Left wing
The Japanese were something outside of Leftist doctrine because they are not descendent from Rouseau or Marx. Their ideological roots of Japanese Militarism resemble Leftism, as they made Leftist arguments, they governed along political rationalist lines, while embracing the Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism of Left-wing governments, and used a completely invented history like the National Socialists and Fascists did to excuse their behavior.
For their Fascist arguments, it was very common that the militarists would excuse the expansion of their empire as "liberation from western colonialism" and that their empire wasn't really an empire because it wasn't capitalist.
The militarists didn't always lead from the top, but from the middle as effectively the flag officers were seen as the better and more informed people to be leading military operations. In some cases, whole military operation were launched without the knowledge of the government.
The totalitarianism should be obvious enough that I don't need to explain it.
As a result, what Japan had done was adapt Leftism (as Progressivism) to itself despite not embracing Liberalism.
Yes, Imperial Japan was effectively Leftist, just not in any traditional sense.
It doesn't make sense to call Japan right wing, because the Left-Right dichotomy doesn't fit for all the same reasons I just mentioned. Rightism is just "reaction against Leftism". Militarist Japan was also not Conservative, particularly by their own terms. Japan had explicitly abandoned it's old ways since The Great White Fleet and before. It understood that it needed to progress in order to challenge Britain and America. See: The Battle of Shiroyama. The militarists merely wore a skin-suit of Japanese tradition and Samurai code, but most of that was bunk, and the actual Samurai aristocracy and class structure had been dead for a generation.
The Japanese Militarists were effectively, a very unique form of Progressivism that evolved without Marxist doctrine.
Japan has been authoritarian for 99% of its history. Authoritarianism doesn't automatically mean "left wing" . And Japan was run by the military class for most of its history so its been "militarist" for most of its history. Most of the militararists of imperial Japan were descendents of the samurai class anyway.
Also your idea that they used an inverted history is just your opinion, just like its my opinion that you are the one inverting history.
Stop putting words in my mouth you Qatari faggot. I never said authoritarianism was inherently left wing. I said they adopted those traits which are also present in Leftist structures.
You're ignorant to what "militarist" means. An armed aristocracy is not the same as a military junta.
If you can make lies about me saying that i downplayed the grooming gangs and falsely claim that im Qatari than i can put words in your mouth. And i didnt even do that, you were the one who said "while embracing the Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism of Left-wing governments" as a reason for why you consider them leftists.
Also the samurai class was the military class of Japan that just happened to have noble status, its basically the same thing as a military junta except that they had nobility status. the samurai class was started by rogue militias in the first place.
Absolutely not, you're completely backwards. The Samurai Class was the aristocracy, sometimes practicing martial efforts in the same way the Europeans did in the middle ages. The aristocracy used the military as a mechanism for their own social achievement, regardless of whether they ever fought in a single battle or led a single soldier in combat. Militarism requires that society be structured out from the military, and all institutions are governed exclusively by the military, for military purposes.
This, is not a militarist society, it is an aristocracy exploiting the military.
Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
Calling someone a faggot is explicitly allowed, this is not an attack on an identity group. It doesn't seem to be an attack on Qataris as a nationality, just an attack on Telia.