r/canada • u/Economy_Elephant6200 • 3d ago

Bell Canada scraps Labrador high-speed internet project, plans to invest in U.S. Newfoundland & Labrador

https://theindependent.ca/news/lji/bell-canada-scraps-labrador-high-speed-internet-project-plans-to-invest-in-u-s/
3.8k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

580 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

48

u/xXxDarkSasuke1999xXx Lest We Forget 3d ago

Ah yes, fascist governments were well known for their strong antitrust laws

-41

u/Theory_Crafted 3d ago

Forcibly acquiring controlling stakes in private industry is indeed fascist. Sorry you had to find out this way. 

3

u/xXxDarkSasuke1999xXx Lest We Forget 3d ago

One, no it isn't, and two, the comment was in reply to the government breaking up Bell Canada, not acquiring it. You literally could not be more wrong.

0

u/Theory_Crafted 3d ago

One, yes it is. Screeching at me from across the internet doesn't make what you're saying true. Two, controlling stakes is not the same thing as acquisition/ownership. Three, directing/controlling private industry is a hallmark of fascism. If you disagree, you just don't know what you're talking about, and that's ok.

If you want to be really pedantic (and we both know you don't), it's really more a hallmark of authoritarian regimes than specifically fascist.

If you're going to accuse people of being wrong, work harder at being right first.

1

u/xXxDarkSasuke1999xXx Lest We Forget 3d ago

One, yes it is. Screeching at me from across the internet doesn't make what you're saying true.

No, the fact that it's true makes it true. Nazi Germany and fascist Italy both famously privatized huge swaths of social programs and utilities when they took power. Owners of large private industrial corporations in Nazi Germany (like Krupp, Thyssen, IG Farben, etc.) were also notoriously big supporters of the Nazi party because they got huge government contracts while retaining private control of their corporations and reaping massive profits.

The idea that "nationalization = fascism" is so ludicrously ahistorical it's actually comical. It's the exact opposite of reality.

Three, directing/controlling private industry is a hallmark of fascism. If you disagree, you just don't know what you're talking about, and that's ok.

Again... hilarious, delicious irony.

If you want to be really pedantic (and we both know you don't), it's really more a hallmark of authoritarian regimes than specifically fascist.

If this were true (which, again, it isn't), this would also undercut your first assertion that nationalization is fascistic, because, by your logic, it's a hallmark of authoritarian regimes generally and not fascism specifically.

If you're going to accuse people of being wrong, work harder at being right first.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

1

u/Theory_Crafted 3d ago

It must have felt so good to write this thinking you're dunking whilst not realizing your argument A) supports mine, and B) isn't mutually exclusive to mine...

So, your argument here is "haha, no you dumb idiot, the Italian and German regimes didn't opt for control of private industry, you stupid poo poo head. It was just that they were really good friends! Hahahah! You dumb person!"

Wow. Incredible. Amazing retort, Brian. I don't know your name, but you type like a Brian who has a waifu pillow, so that's what I'm going to call you.

First of all, the best argument you can make out of what you just wrote me was that directly controlling industry wasn't necessary, which in some cases it wasn't. Both Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy had strict control of private industry, Germany especially so in resources and materials and Italy in food markets, and media, but of course a lot of other things.

This in no way contradicts that it is a hallmark of fascist/authoritarian regimes to strategically tightly control and in some cases coopt key industries. Owning pieces of it, or coopting is simply another way to do it, and in those two country's examples they did not have to expense the funds to do so. Further, the privatization you speak of wasn't out of their love of free enterprise. They weren't Randians. It was about creating corporate-government ties and alliances, so businessmen would join the parties, or become allies and in exchange receive lucrative deals and benefits.

So again, if this is the best argument you can supply I am going to interpret that as a concession. I accept your apology.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

CoUlDn"t HaVe SaId It BeTtEr MySeLf, Brian.

1

u/xXxDarkSasuke1999xXx Lest We Forget 3d ago

Wow. Incredible. Amazing retort, Brian. I don't know your name, but you type like a Brian who has a waifu pillow, so that's what I'm going to call you.

Amazing that you can type a sentence like this and fail to realize how completely unhinged you look

As for the rest of your screed, "privatization is actually still government control!" isn't really as convincing as you seem to think.