Fascism is a superior form of rule than theocracy

Response to the Opponent's Arguments The Bible and Theocracy: I do not dispute the fact that the Bible condemns corruption, and those who follow it are incorruptible; however, I dispute the fact that humans can and will follow the Bible. Entire Churches have been found upon for personal greed and lust; the Church of England founded by Henry VII was founded after the Papacy refused to divorce him with one of his eight spouses. The Hobbesian view that “humans are salvages and evil by nature” is adopted to understand this; the creation of class inequality, as observed by Rousseau further supports this view. “The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said "This is mine," and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society” This quote starts his view with a point that he has for so long followed and praised; he argues that men possess the want to propel their living standards (survival) and will do anything to stop this. All theocracies, or many to say the least, fell into this state of post-revolutionary trauma; as the revolutionary spirit died down, the leaders of the nation started forgetting their true doctrines. This then leads to outright corruption, especially when the state was created and sustained in a name of a divine person. When men aren’t regulated, then the society falls; when leaders aren’t regulated, then the state falls. A book, a document or a powerless parliament does not interfere with the unregulated powers of leaders; people do. People will speak out against needless injustice; people will speak out against limitless power. Theocratic states are burdened with solving this phenomenon, especially when theocracies already have a weak justification for ruling. But my opponent may argue, “what about fascism?” It has been agreed; fascism isn’t stable either. But what fascism has is the ability to sustain the “revolutionary spirit” A quote by Mark Twain says it all. “Loyalty to country, always. Loyalty to government, only when deserves it.” Many citizens, certainly the majority (especially in fascist countries, due to the nationalistic education received), will always stay loyal to their government. Where there is demand, there is supply; the fascist government is the supply to a highly nationalistic and revanchist-minded population. Theocracies and Dissent: The opponent states that there is no room for dissent in a theocratic state. That might be true in the case of a previously ignorant and law-abiding generation; perhaps that of the Dark Ages before the re-enlightenment of society. BUT we now live in possibly one of the most well informed generation ever; recently, a coup was carried out in Thailand. All of you would have remained ignorant of this until today; however, with such advances as the internet, the news was posted within minutes of the coup. This flow of information has created a liberal atheistic generation, whose skills are limited to presenting facts to an audience. Facts; not philosophy! Theocracy is therefore rendered obsolete; with the majority of the generation turning to the a-word ­alternative, how can a theocracy sustain itself? Is it supposed to praise god and tell everyone to follow his rule? Is it? Many say yes. That, in itself, is done by the following of many religious texts, or eventually, departing it (but still justifying that with the reign of god). As explained before, many religious texts have obsolete ideas on gender roles; with such a highly informed generation, it would be impossible to deny news from outside countries. With this knowledge, many people oppress under a theocracy will need to rebel; this is also a problem in fascism, but perhaps more pressing in theocracies. Since genders are discriminated, about ½ of the entire nation is discriminated. That, in itself, is unsustainable. Then fascism? Under fascism, all citizens are equal and have the same rights. Although dissent is suppressed by totalitarian means, the majority of the population is certainly not discriminated (and therefore, not dissenting). Fascists ought to imprison threats to the state; communist, anarchists, and other radical leftists. We can all agree radical leftists are the minority, the very small tiny (but loud) minority that ought to speak whenever unsatisfied. It takes a stick, a huge on, to sufficiently poke a fascist state into submission; World War II poked two fascist states into submission. But alone, an internal revolution under fascism seems really unlikely. With this, I would like to conclude my arguments: Argument One: P1. All Theocracies support an extreme branch of religion P2. All Religious Fundamentalist group support an extreme branch of religion C1. All theocracies support religious fundamentalist group From this conclusion, we must also see that: P1. Many religions have an obsolete view of gender roles P2. All theocracies support this view P3. Many citizens in one state are of one gender that is discriminated C1. All theocracies have a large minority (perhaps majority in some cases) of the population in dissent Therefore: P1. All theocracies support religious fundamentalist groups, which are hated externally P2. All theocracies support an obsolete view, which creates dissent C1. Theocracies face both internal and external dissent Concluding at: P1. Theocracies support religious fundamentalist groups P2. Theocracies face both internal and external dissent C1. Theocracy is inferior to fascism Argument Two: P1. All theocratic economics are obsolete P2. Some economics of fascist countries are modern P3. All aspects of fascist economics are adaptable C1. Fascism has a better economic system than theocracy Another conclusion that I presented was that: P1. All fascist countries suppress anti-government groups P2. Many fascist states have therefore suppressed a slight minority of the nation P3. Many people remaining however, are more or less satisfied with the fascist government C1. Fascism faces slight internal dissent Therefore: P1. Fascism has better economics than theocracies P2. Fascism faces less internal dissent P3. Fascism is superior to theocracy