Fascism is the best system of governance

However, not to debate semantics,but your view of Fascism is corrupted and incorrect. Fascism =/= National Socialism. Nazism = National Socialism. Fascism =/= Nazism. They are all three separate things that can survive without the other and still hold its own identity. Fascism at the core is brought into existence by three basic elements: national unity, the merging of state and corporate power, and an idea of a new beginning or a unique social importance. The national unity comes from the symbol of the state in which the citizens resign in. Some Liberal Fascist argue that unrestricted Fascism holds humanity in its entirety as a common unity, but since there is conflict with at least one state towards another, then unity under the state and other residing cultures is the next best thing. The merging of state and corporate power comes from the belief that a. ) corporations should be managed heavily to prevent corruption and to insure a stable economy and b. ) no other state or person should take direct benefits from the national land. Take Africa for example. After colonialism, the colonist (whoever occupied a territory) entered the land into the Free Market which allows for investors to solely dig and sell African resources to no other foreign buyers. Which is why Africans are so poor yet live on resource rich land. The third idea of a "new beginning" or "unique social importance" is vital. During a Fascism movement, Fascist are always direct toward a system of total change (social and federal) that is different from the norm. But I think it's best if I give you a quote directly from Benito Mussolini. "In order to understand the Fascist movement one must first apprehend the underlying phenomena in all its vastness and depth. In point of fact, Italian Fascism has not only been a political revolt against weak and incapable governments. .. but also a spiritual revolt against old ideas which had corrupted the sacred principles of religion, of faith, of country. Fascism, therefore, has been a revolt of the people. " --Benito Mussolini [This quote is on the back of my book, "The Doctrine of Fascism". ] Now for the actual debate and rebuttals. "In Germany, the National Socialists provided excellent transport, the most advanced thinkers of the day and mandated public health. They looked after their own citizens. " Fascism or National Socialism had nothing to do with transport and advanced thinkers. At least not to the extent that you believe. Although Germany rebuilt--and therefore modernized--many of its railroads and other transportation after WW1, under Fascist rule, the rule itself did not direct to such actions. For example, if the previous government believed that building new roads and means of transportation were bad (which the didn't), THEN one could say that Fascism is the cause of a better system of transportation. The point is that the development of transportation was natural and would have occurred without Fascism. As for the thinkers--although there were national philosophers inspired by Hitler, you must understand that Germany itself has always had a great history with intellectuals. It isn't as if Fascism spurred this new intellectual renaissance. As for, "they looked after their own citizens". Not quite. Not only did Hitler inprison or kill anyone who defied his rule, but it wasn"t citizenship that Nazi's cared about, it was obedience. For if citizenship was the common unity, then mass murder and hateful propaganda would not have occured different inner-nationally. "I assert that a publicly mandated physical fitness program is something that all western societies should have. I assert that the sense of common purpose, unity and kinship fostered under such a system is something that all responsible and forward thinking countries should strive to attain. " Let me go so far as to say that an individuailistic, consumerist society like the West (United States of America and Canada) will NEVER welcome fascism or any forms of, as they call it, "Big Government", into their personal lives. No matter how well they benefit from it. The mere thought of it angers them. [Years of mental training to hate the state? Who knows. ] Such an implication will definately cause riots. With that being said, Fascism, although good, is not for everybody. May I also point out that Fascism during this time of age, with the Free Market being involved and corporations holding the most wealth, will never be accepted. The transition of wealth from banking elite to the state will anger them greatly, causing an economic panic which could lead to an economic collapse for all countries. To refute the claim that "Fascism is the best form of government", I can simply say as I said before: it isn't for everyone. If a society does not like its government, the people will revolt. With that being said, the "best" form of government is of that where the people are generally happy. And since most of modern society lives by individualistic standards, then a government and economy that supports that is what is best.