chapotraphouse

They weren't seeking profit so much as they were seeking leisure and security from barbarians.

Its important to note how these things build on eachother too. Originally the world was largely empty. There was more than enough resources for the few people in it, and little reason to try to take something someone else had already laid claim to. Why risk conflict when you could walk 10 miles over and find empty land ripe for the taking? Then eventually the world began to fill up, and you had the rise of imperialism. The Akkadians. They took from other cities to enrich their own.

Over time there were many methods for doing this. Rome sort of perfected the process. Growing to dominate the entire region. This happened all over. In India, China, Africa, The Americas, etc.

The issue with these systems for those in power though was they arent easy to maintain. Lording over entire populations that you have to live among is hard. And dangerous. They had their methods for preventing revolt, but they didnt always work.

Fuedalism perfected the safety aspect. The Kings and Lord live in great fortresses, and give their peasants a meagre amount of freedom while taxing them heavily. They get the benefits of the wealth extraction but can minimize the risks.

Once technology had developed enough though the next step was Colonialism. Once they could do so it was much safer to extract the wealth from far flung colonies rather than from domestic people. Especially now that castles were not as safe as they used to be. Cannons existing and all.

But to maintain this colonial empire rulers needed more and more sub-rulers. Private interests began to develop. This is how capitalism was birthed. A new class figured out that they do not need monarchs to benefit from colonialism. So they largely got rid of them.

This colonial system was not sustainable though, and as more colonies broke free from their control capitalists realized they must start extracting wealth once again from the domestic population. This was the rise of fascism. Colonial extraction once again turned inward. With all the new types of violence learned through their colonial conquests now used against their own citizens.

There is an order to it. You can't simply arrive at capitalism without all that came before. So when we see the similarities to fascism in older systems its because it has built upon those systems.

Communism is no different. We build upon what came before. Communism could not exist had capitalism not created a united class of worker. Who had a shared interest. When we speak of the dictatorship of the proletariet it is in opposition to the dictatorship of the bourgeoise we live in now. This is also why communism must be emphatically anti-imperialist. Since we are undermining the millenia old system of exploitation started in Akkadia.

We are forging a new path for the species. One where instead of taking from eachother we willingly share, and collaborate. A system where the very limited resources afforded to us are not allocated based on who has the power to claim them, but based on who needs them most.

The fasces existed as a symbol of magisterial power for nearly 3000 years before Mussolini came along and named his ideology after it.

good question. i'm no historian either but my understanding is that italian fascists in the 20th century used the fasces (among other roman symbols) to harken back to an imagined glorious past for the italian people and associate themselves with a golden age. i.e., fascism is inspired by rome and by the fasces in particular, but the roman empire itself was not fascist because fascism didn't exist and could not exist in the ancient world