![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think that in external politics, third position may also refer to the situation of the neutral countries during the Second World War. └ Nitro4ce┘┌ t┐ 05:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Isn't this somewhat similar to the idea of Third Way, and could be mentioned within such an article. - Animagentile ( talk) 06:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there any sort of information available on the political economics of the Third Position movement, either past or present? This Wiki page is strongly linked with the discussion of fascism, but the present write-up here is distanced from the various fascist movements of the previous Century, and there is little or nothing here that speaks to the political aspirations of Third Position advocates.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.156.49 ( talk • contribs) (04:42, 12 November 2008)
Currently, third way seems to be rather leftist, third position rightist, and we could possibly use syncretic politics as a neutral point of view citing each of the above-mentioned two articles 193.224.72.132 ( talk) 09:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Although i have almost no experience in editing wikipedia, I do have a lot of knowledge about the "third positionist" movement and would be willing to help, as i read on the article page that references and etc are needed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.209.138.167 ( talk) 18:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone have any current third position groups, or know of any. I have looked a few up on google etc, but when I attempt to post, apparently the one link I found, which still exists, is worthy of deletion? Please, friends, this article needs some updating —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lumpenproliteriate ( talk • contribs) 02:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Hardy Lloyd runs the "New Dawn" out of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA... He's given talks in the US, Mexico and Canada... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.117.56 ( talk) 07:42, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
According to his website, the ADL, the SPLC, a Pittsburgh Times interview...! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.117.238 ( talk) 14:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
I've been following this guy for a while now... I've gone to his speeches, interviewed him, read interviews in the local paper... I live in his city. Should I bring a blood sample or something??? I mean, WTF? lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.117.77 ( talk) 02:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
You were a hall watcher in school, weren't you.
I can bring the bloody newspaper articles!! Or the FBI report, or the Pittsburgh police file on him, or you can meet him or many other things.........! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.117.57 ( talk) 19:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
I've added the jargon tag. I don't think the opening is clear enough - it is full of technical political jargon which I don't believe many would understand. Politics is something I understand, but I had to look up pretty much every word!
If someone could simplify it, that would be great Dvmedis ( talk) 03:43, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't think distributism quite belongs on the list, even though it shares some features with third position ideas. Mainly because distributism is not per se a nationalist ideology, let alone tribalist, but a Christian one. -- Rallette ( talk) 06:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
In the article's subsection on the U.S., it claims (or implies) that the paleoconservative organization The Rockford Institute subscribes to Third Positionism. I am not entirely sure if this is an accurate characterization. Third Positionism, in as much as it is anti-capitalist (as acknowledged by this very article's intoductory section), does not speak for the Rockford Institute. On that organization's website, the "About Us" section says [1]:
"For 30 years, The Rockford Institute has carried out its mission of defending and advancing the principles of a free society. Founded in the year of the nation's bicentennial celebration, the Institute has worked to preserve the institutions of the Christian West: the family, the Church, and the rule of law; private property, free enterprise, and moral discipline; high standards of learning, art, and literature."
An organization that promotes "private property" and especially "free enterprise" cannot, in my estimation, fairly be labeled a "Third Position" group. 24.189.139.132 ( talk) 17:07, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
"what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source" The only source I see attached to the list of groups delineated in the United States subsection of this article as being Third Positionist is a link to an index of articles published by an organization called Political Research Associates/PublicEye.org. That's a reliable source? One of the articles found on that page about black nationalism surmised something to the effect that "American Jews have more to worry about from David Duke and Pat Buchanan than Louis Farrakhan." In other words, Pat Buchanan is genocidally anti-Semitic. In my opinion, to describe Political Research Associates as having a far-leftist agenda and outlook would be to make a gross understatement. Furthermore, I saw no mention at all of the Rockford Institute in any of the articles indexed on the link attached to the footnote (perhaps I missed a reference?). 24.189.139.132 ( talk) 22:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
I propose that Syncretic politics be merged into Third position. Syncretic politics refers to ideologies that combine elements from existing ideologies, for example fascism and libertarianism. It is a subject appropriate for a dictionary not an encyclopedia. TFD ( talk) 04:40, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
As asked in the headline, where in the sources does it say that?-- R-41 ( talk) 23:19, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
The cites could use sharpening up with page number info. See {{ sfn}}, {{ rp}}, and other footnote templates for some tools which can help with doing this with re-used cites. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
In my opinion, this article does not bring an accurate definition of "third position" in both domestic and international politics. Third Positionism is an historically situated idea: an alternative to the Cold War bipolarity. The Non-Aligned Movement is its well-known product. Latin American populism (Perón and many others), Panarabic Nationalism (Nasser and many others), and other national liberation movements worldwide in Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe participated in this trend. And many political theorists and commentators from third-world countries (I can give a list of Latin American authors) used "third position" to label their political views.
But this article almost says that "ẗhird position" is a by-product of European fascism, ignoring the well-known international history of third-positionism. It is important not to confuse third-world national liberation movements from European and Western fascism: they are completely different phenomena. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Observatorio ( talk • contribs) 23:39, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
There is a movement in Greece which is generally labelled as being third-positionist, aiming to crack down on what they view as corrupt foreign financial institutions and instead promote racial and environmental restoration. I believe they should be added to the list -- especially since most of the other groups on the list are historical and GD is current. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.242.57.132 ( talk) 20:07, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Advocates of Third Position typically present themselves as "beyond left and right" and "against communism and capitalism" etc. On the contrary, national-bolsheviks present themselves as left-wing nationalists who combine elements of nationalism (especially Russian nationalism) and Communism. GrenadeF1 ( talk) 14:13, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
"During the 1930s and 1940s, a number of splinter groups from the radical left became associated with radical nationalism; Jacques Doriot's French Popular Party (from the French Communist Party) and Marcel Déat's National Popular Rally (from the French Section of the Workers' International). " doesn't work as a sentence.
Is "During the 1930s and 1940s, a number of splinter groups from the radical left became associated with radical nationalism, INCLUDING Jacques Doriot's French Popular Party (from the French Communist Party) and Marcel Déat's National Popular Rally (from the French Section of the Workers' International). " what is meant?
Or "During the 1930s and 1940s, TWO splinter groups from the radical left became associated with radical nationalism: Jacques Doriot's French Popular Party (from the French Communist Party) and Marcel Déat's National Popular Rally (from the French Section of the Workers' International). " ?
[Feel free to delete this comment after fixing.] Fp cassini ( talk) 13:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Shouldn't Third International Theory be mentioned? ShimonChai ( talk) 17:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Querfront. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hildeoc ( talk) 16:00, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Because people keep coming in here and trying to revert it: Third Position is a neo-fascist ideology. In addition to making the same appeal of being both anti-communist & anti-capitalist as fascism classic, the article repeatedly refers to it as being rooted in fascist ideology and practiced by neo-fascist groups. The only exception to this is the Justicialist Party in Argentina, and even then it doesn't mean much given Peron's documented sympathies for fascism and protection of Nazis after World War II. Docktuh ( talk) 14:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Should the lead of this article have "neo-fascist" in it? Is "nationalist" more appropriate? What is the best way to respect WP:NPOV here? See the previous discussion on the talk page above. CelebrateMotivation ( talk) 00:54, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
So, this just kind of something that I've surmised, looking at kind of a lot of articles, here, on various far-Right groups, and, so, I'm not requesting to edit the article to include information in this regard, unless someone happens to have it, but, just looking at the various organizations and figures and all, it seems kind of like the so-called "third position" has some sort of influence on far-right accelerationism. I don't have any real evidence to support this, but, after clicking through my many tabs for kind of an extensive period of time, it has become something that I do generally glean. It seems to me that the third position is kind of the de facto ideology of certain neo-fascist intelligentsias and that far-right accelerationism is their praxis. I'm not about to sift through the scores of neo-fascist ideology to find out for absolute certain, but, if anyone has done so already, I would call it a good hunch, y'know. Daydreamdays2 ( talk) 20:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
My article was reverted based on the grounds that 'Third Position does not originally describe Peron, it predates him by some time, and specifically refers to neo-fascist ideas'
Firstly, I did not claim that the term 'Third Position' solely “described Peron”. My assertion was that the term was 'Initially introduced by the Peronist regime.' This is a factual statement. During the period of 1946-1949, under the foreign minister Juan Atilio Bramuglia, the Justicialist/Peronist government pursued a geopolitical policy termed 'Tercera posición' or ‘Third Position’/’third way/’third conception’ [2] This policy aimed to forge relations distinct from both the Soviet Union and the United States, aspiring instead to create an anti-imperialist bloc comprising 'Third World' or less developed Latin American governments. Juan Peron, in a speech at Teatro Colón in 1946, even articulated this concept, stating,
'Capitalism, gentlemen, in the world is very reluctant ... The others begin to evolve into new forms. The absolute state system marches under the banner of communism in all latitudes and it would seem that a third conception could form an acceptable solution, in which it would not reach state absolutism nor could it return to the absolute individualism of the previous regime. It would be a balanced solution of the forces that represent the modern state to avoid the annihilation of one of these forces, to unite them and set them in parallel motion, and that the forces of capital and labor, harmoniously combined, set out to build the common destiny, with benefit for the three forces and without prejudice to any of them.' [3] [4]
Secondly, it is erroneous to exclusively equate that all of Third Positionism is sets of ‘ Neo-Fascism’, as the umbrella term encompasses a broad and diverse range of ideologies, some of which exhibit anti-imperialist, national liberationist, and anti-statist characteristics. [5] [6] For instance, ideologies like Social-Nationalism and National-Anarchism fall under the Third Position umbrella. It's important to recognize that Fascism is characterized by expansionism, pro-imperialism, and pro-statism, whereas the aforementioned non-fascist Third Position ideologies exhibit different characteristics that are diametrically opposed to expansionism and statism. Hence, categorizing all these ideologies as 'Neo-Fascist' oversimplifies their distinctions. It would be akin labeling all of Leftism as exclusively a set of Marxist-Leninist ideas.
Lastly, I would also like to dispute the 'neo' in 'neo-fascism' as well, as I believe the umbrella term 'Third Position' can also be used to describe ideologies that existed before and during the fascist era such as National Syndicalism, Yellow Socialism, National Communism/ National Bolshevism and even some odd ones like monarchist syndicalism. [7]
Thus, I propose a slightly revised description: The Third Position is an umbrella term that pertains to a collection of nationalist syncretic political ideologies. These ideologies encompass elements from the social far-right and economic center and far-left spectrums. Distinguishing themselves from the conventional left-right political spectrum, these ideologies adopt the mantle of a 'Third Position', positioning themselves in contrast to Capitalism and Communism. Notable ideologies falling under the umbrella of the 'Third Position' include but are not limited to: National Syndicalism, Fascism, National Socialism, National Bolshevism, National anarchism, and Social-Nationalism.'
I hope the points mentioned above are able to win you over and we can conclude at the definition/description above.
Mr.Feinstein ( talk) 22:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
within the realm of far-right politics, largely due to its prevalent ultranationalist and discriminatory characteristicsis the best way forward. While there's nothing fundamentally incorrect in what you've written, as far as I can see, it's not clear to me how it improves upon the existing text, which is –– I think you would agree –– far more approachable for the reader. Generalrelative ( talk) 23:37, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Ba'athism#Controversy says that Baathism has fascist and racist inspirations. 186.32.216.85 ( talk) 22:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think that in external politics, third position may also refer to the situation of the neutral countries during the Second World War. └ Nitro4ce┘┌ t┐ 05:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Isn't this somewhat similar to the idea of Third Way, and could be mentioned within such an article. - Animagentile ( talk) 06:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there any sort of information available on the political economics of the Third Position movement, either past or present? This Wiki page is strongly linked with the discussion of fascism, but the present write-up here is distanced from the various fascist movements of the previous Century, and there is little or nothing here that speaks to the political aspirations of Third Position advocates.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.156.49 ( talk • contribs) (04:42, 12 November 2008)
Currently, third way seems to be rather leftist, third position rightist, and we could possibly use syncretic politics as a neutral point of view citing each of the above-mentioned two articles 193.224.72.132 ( talk) 09:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Although i have almost no experience in editing wikipedia, I do have a lot of knowledge about the "third positionist" movement and would be willing to help, as i read on the article page that references and etc are needed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.209.138.167 ( talk) 18:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone have any current third position groups, or know of any. I have looked a few up on google etc, but when I attempt to post, apparently the one link I found, which still exists, is worthy of deletion? Please, friends, this article needs some updating —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lumpenproliteriate ( talk • contribs) 02:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Hardy Lloyd runs the "New Dawn" out of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA... He's given talks in the US, Mexico and Canada... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.117.56 ( talk) 07:42, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
According to his website, the ADL, the SPLC, a Pittsburgh Times interview...! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.117.238 ( talk) 14:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
I've been following this guy for a while now... I've gone to his speeches, interviewed him, read interviews in the local paper... I live in his city. Should I bring a blood sample or something??? I mean, WTF? lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.117.77 ( talk) 02:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
You were a hall watcher in school, weren't you.
I can bring the bloody newspaper articles!! Or the FBI report, or the Pittsburgh police file on him, or you can meet him or many other things.........! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.117.57 ( talk) 19:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
I've added the jargon tag. I don't think the opening is clear enough - it is full of technical political jargon which I don't believe many would understand. Politics is something I understand, but I had to look up pretty much every word!
If someone could simplify it, that would be great Dvmedis ( talk) 03:43, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't think distributism quite belongs on the list, even though it shares some features with third position ideas. Mainly because distributism is not per se a nationalist ideology, let alone tribalist, but a Christian one. -- Rallette ( talk) 06:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
In the article's subsection on the U.S., it claims (or implies) that the paleoconservative organization The Rockford Institute subscribes to Third Positionism. I am not entirely sure if this is an accurate characterization. Third Positionism, in as much as it is anti-capitalist (as acknowledged by this very article's intoductory section), does not speak for the Rockford Institute. On that organization's website, the "About Us" section says [1]:
"For 30 years, The Rockford Institute has carried out its mission of defending and advancing the principles of a free society. Founded in the year of the nation's bicentennial celebration, the Institute has worked to preserve the institutions of the Christian West: the family, the Church, and the rule of law; private property, free enterprise, and moral discipline; high standards of learning, art, and literature."
An organization that promotes "private property" and especially "free enterprise" cannot, in my estimation, fairly be labeled a "Third Position" group. 24.189.139.132 ( talk) 17:07, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
"what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source" The only source I see attached to the list of groups delineated in the United States subsection of this article as being Third Positionist is a link to an index of articles published by an organization called Political Research Associates/PublicEye.org. That's a reliable source? One of the articles found on that page about black nationalism surmised something to the effect that "American Jews have more to worry about from David Duke and Pat Buchanan than Louis Farrakhan." In other words, Pat Buchanan is genocidally anti-Semitic. In my opinion, to describe Political Research Associates as having a far-leftist agenda and outlook would be to make a gross understatement. Furthermore, I saw no mention at all of the Rockford Institute in any of the articles indexed on the link attached to the footnote (perhaps I missed a reference?). 24.189.139.132 ( talk) 22:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
I propose that Syncretic politics be merged into Third position. Syncretic politics refers to ideologies that combine elements from existing ideologies, for example fascism and libertarianism. It is a subject appropriate for a dictionary not an encyclopedia. TFD ( talk) 04:40, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
As asked in the headline, where in the sources does it say that?-- R-41 ( talk) 23:19, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
The cites could use sharpening up with page number info. See {{ sfn}}, {{ rp}}, and other footnote templates for some tools which can help with doing this with re-used cites. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
In my opinion, this article does not bring an accurate definition of "third position" in both domestic and international politics. Third Positionism is an historically situated idea: an alternative to the Cold War bipolarity. The Non-Aligned Movement is its well-known product. Latin American populism (Perón and many others), Panarabic Nationalism (Nasser and many others), and other national liberation movements worldwide in Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe participated in this trend. And many political theorists and commentators from third-world countries (I can give a list of Latin American authors) used "third position" to label their political views.
But this article almost says that "ẗhird position" is a by-product of European fascism, ignoring the well-known international history of third-positionism. It is important not to confuse third-world national liberation movements from European and Western fascism: they are completely different phenomena. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Observatorio ( talk • contribs) 23:39, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
There is a movement in Greece which is generally labelled as being third-positionist, aiming to crack down on what they view as corrupt foreign financial institutions and instead promote racial and environmental restoration. I believe they should be added to the list -- especially since most of the other groups on the list are historical and GD is current. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.242.57.132 ( talk) 20:07, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Advocates of Third Position typically present themselves as "beyond left and right" and "against communism and capitalism" etc. On the contrary, national-bolsheviks present themselves as left-wing nationalists who combine elements of nationalism (especially Russian nationalism) and Communism. GrenadeF1 ( talk) 14:13, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
"During the 1930s and 1940s, a number of splinter groups from the radical left became associated with radical nationalism; Jacques Doriot's French Popular Party (from the French Communist Party) and Marcel Déat's National Popular Rally (from the French Section of the Workers' International). " doesn't work as a sentence.
Is "During the 1930s and 1940s, a number of splinter groups from the radical left became associated with radical nationalism, INCLUDING Jacques Doriot's French Popular Party (from the French Communist Party) and Marcel Déat's National Popular Rally (from the French Section of the Workers' International). " what is meant?
Or "During the 1930s and 1940s, TWO splinter groups from the radical left became associated with radical nationalism: Jacques Doriot's French Popular Party (from the French Communist Party) and Marcel Déat's National Popular Rally (from the French Section of the Workers' International). " ?
[Feel free to delete this comment after fixing.] Fp cassini ( talk) 13:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Shouldn't Third International Theory be mentioned? ShimonChai ( talk) 17:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Querfront. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hildeoc ( talk) 16:00, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Because people keep coming in here and trying to revert it: Third Position is a neo-fascist ideology. In addition to making the same appeal of being both anti-communist & anti-capitalist as fascism classic, the article repeatedly refers to it as being rooted in fascist ideology and practiced by neo-fascist groups. The only exception to this is the Justicialist Party in Argentina, and even then it doesn't mean much given Peron's documented sympathies for fascism and protection of Nazis after World War II. Docktuh ( talk) 14:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Should the lead of this article have "neo-fascist" in it? Is "nationalist" more appropriate? What is the best way to respect WP:NPOV here? See the previous discussion on the talk page above. CelebrateMotivation ( talk) 00:54, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
So, this just kind of something that I've surmised, looking at kind of a lot of articles, here, on various far-Right groups, and, so, I'm not requesting to edit the article to include information in this regard, unless someone happens to have it, but, just looking at the various organizations and figures and all, it seems kind of like the so-called "third position" has some sort of influence on far-right accelerationism. I don't have any real evidence to support this, but, after clicking through my many tabs for kind of an extensive period of time, it has become something that I do generally glean. It seems to me that the third position is kind of the de facto ideology of certain neo-fascist intelligentsias and that far-right accelerationism is their praxis. I'm not about to sift through the scores of neo-fascist ideology to find out for absolute certain, but, if anyone has done so already, I would call it a good hunch, y'know. Daydreamdays2 ( talk) 20:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
My article was reverted based on the grounds that 'Third Position does not originally describe Peron, it predates him by some time, and specifically refers to neo-fascist ideas'
Firstly, I did not claim that the term 'Third Position' solely “described Peron”. My assertion was that the term was 'Initially introduced by the Peronist regime.' This is a factual statement. During the period of 1946-1949, under the foreign minister Juan Atilio Bramuglia, the Justicialist/Peronist government pursued a geopolitical policy termed 'Tercera posición' or ‘Third Position’/’third way/’third conception’ [2] This policy aimed to forge relations distinct from both the Soviet Union and the United States, aspiring instead to create an anti-imperialist bloc comprising 'Third World' or less developed Latin American governments. Juan Peron, in a speech at Teatro Colón in 1946, even articulated this concept, stating,
'Capitalism, gentlemen, in the world is very reluctant ... The others begin to evolve into new forms. The absolute state system marches under the banner of communism in all latitudes and it would seem that a third conception could form an acceptable solution, in which it would not reach state absolutism nor could it return to the absolute individualism of the previous regime. It would be a balanced solution of the forces that represent the modern state to avoid the annihilation of one of these forces, to unite them and set them in parallel motion, and that the forces of capital and labor, harmoniously combined, set out to build the common destiny, with benefit for the three forces and without prejudice to any of them.' [3] [4]
Secondly, it is erroneous to exclusively equate that all of Third Positionism is sets of ‘ Neo-Fascism’, as the umbrella term encompasses a broad and diverse range of ideologies, some of which exhibit anti-imperialist, national liberationist, and anti-statist characteristics. [5] [6] For instance, ideologies like Social-Nationalism and National-Anarchism fall under the Third Position umbrella. It's important to recognize that Fascism is characterized by expansionism, pro-imperialism, and pro-statism, whereas the aforementioned non-fascist Third Position ideologies exhibit different characteristics that are diametrically opposed to expansionism and statism. Hence, categorizing all these ideologies as 'Neo-Fascist' oversimplifies their distinctions. It would be akin labeling all of Leftism as exclusively a set of Marxist-Leninist ideas.
Lastly, I would also like to dispute the 'neo' in 'neo-fascism' as well, as I believe the umbrella term 'Third Position' can also be used to describe ideologies that existed before and during the fascist era such as National Syndicalism, Yellow Socialism, National Communism/ National Bolshevism and even some odd ones like monarchist syndicalism. [7]
Thus, I propose a slightly revised description: The Third Position is an umbrella term that pertains to a collection of nationalist syncretic political ideologies. These ideologies encompass elements from the social far-right and economic center and far-left spectrums. Distinguishing themselves from the conventional left-right political spectrum, these ideologies adopt the mantle of a 'Third Position', positioning themselves in contrast to Capitalism and Communism. Notable ideologies falling under the umbrella of the 'Third Position' include but are not limited to: National Syndicalism, Fascism, National Socialism, National Bolshevism, National anarchism, and Social-Nationalism.'
I hope the points mentioned above are able to win you over and we can conclude at the definition/description above.
Mr.Feinstein ( talk) 22:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
within the realm of far-right politics, largely due to its prevalent ultranationalist and discriminatory characteristicsis the best way forward. While there's nothing fundamentally incorrect in what you've written, as far as I can see, it's not clear to me how it improves upon the existing text, which is –– I think you would agree –– far more approachable for the reader. Generalrelative ( talk) 23:37, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Ba'athism#Controversy says that Baathism has fascist and racist inspirations. 186.32.216.85 ( talk) 22:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)