The argument is that as more people are harmed by capitalism and realize it's flaws, the more likely the ruling class is to embrace fascism rather than let their ill-gotten gains slip away from them.

Definitely clumsy here, but I can make sense of it.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, yes, but you should understand that when the creator of this meme wrote "capitalism" they really meant "liberalism" but didn't want to scare the normies.

It's not just about the ruling class, it's about uncertainty leading people to look for "strongmen" to provide direction and certainty, no matter how false it is, creating the popular support needed to overthrow democratic institutions.

[–] FaeDrifter@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Strongmen like Lenin and Stalin who provided direction and certainty in uncertain times?

Or a strongman like George Washington?

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

1: Anarchists and democratic socialists literally coined the term red fascism to describe Leninism.

2: Your examples all overthrew the rule of absolute monarchies, neither of which was quite exactly capitalist thanks to the owner class often being nobility.

3: Leaving aside for the moment that post-colonial America would absolutely be considered fascist by modern standards, even as its existence began to solidify the ideology of liberalism, I don't think the meme is literally stating liberalism becomes fascism the moment it stubs its toe.

If anything, based on the characters used, it implies the fight over institutional power as the fascists try to seize control.

And, ironically to authoral intent I assume, Superlib there would absolutely body Homelander lol

[–] FaeDrifter@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Still doesn't make much sense, fascism is a populist movement.

It would make way more sense if it said Feudalism instead. Keep the peasants in line with your armed militia class, eventually murder-robots. The peasants might be miserable, but they're going to work the land because that's they're only choice to survive.

[–] ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Re robots

We won’t need them to work the land. And we will starve them as they’ll no longer be needed. There will be two classes. The ruling class, and the maintenance class. And it’s timing is perfect considering that in about 100 years every population model says humans will go from 10 billion to less than 1 billion as quickly as our population grew. And it will coincide with extreme scarcity due to climate change. Unless we start nuclear war first, of course.

[–] restingcarcass@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Can you link a model supporting your statement? I wasn't able to turn anything up showing a predicted population decline from 10 billion go 1 billion.