Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 dadx6 wrote:

Personally, I think all the "WH40K is satire" stuff is nonsense created by the younger generations who can't handle the fact that a fictional universe doesn't have people behaving in an ideal fashion (to them).

Hahahahahah.

 dadx6 wrote:

Personally, I think all the "WH40K is satire" stuff is nonsense created by the younger generations who can't handle the fact that a fictional universe doesn't have people behaving in an ideal fashion (to them).

Many of the people who were key creators of the franchise have stated, since at least the 90s, that 40k is supposed to be satirical.

As for the general thread question, is 40K satire? To answer that question, all you have to do is look at 40k content. Can anyone point me to a Black Library novel (or hell even a codex fluff blurb) written in the last 15 years, that actually depicts the Imperial heroes of the story genociding an enemy that is explictly more ethical and functional than the Imperial heroes? Eldar and Tau certainly are not- both being factions that are equally prone to committing attrocities when it is strategically convenient for them. Closest I can think of is the Interex, but even that situation was basically engineered by Evil Chaos Man for Evil Chaos goals.

Judge Dredd is obviously satire, because when Dredd gives someone a 10 year prison sentence for loitering it is obvious that the punishment does not fit the crime. But whenever we see the Guard or Space Marines stomp citizens into the dirt we always find out that, actually, those citizens were a baby-sacrificing cult! Or they were genestealers! Or they were Tau loyalists secretly plotting to blow up all the factories so that the Imperial war machine would be effected! We don't ever get to see Calgar or Eisenhorn or Gaunt slaughter an entire planet down to the last child just because they converted to atheism, but were otherwise a completely normal and functional civilization (by real world modern moral standards). 'cause 40K is not satire. Maybe it once was, but it is no longer.

And that makes perfect sense because financially it is simply not in GWs interest for the Imperium to be satirical. They want people to form strong emotional connections to Imperial characters, they want people get invested in the black library books, they want TV shows and cartoons and comic books. It's a lot easier to get customers invested in that when your posterboy faction isn't going around kicking puppies (or rather, it is okay to kick the puppies if it is at least established that the puppies are actually demons that want to wear your skin).

A franchise that is the size, popularity and age of 40k cannot exist with the underlying theme of every storyline being "but actually look at how stupid and pointlessly evil everyone involved is haha". Consider how white-washed and non subversive Game of Thrones became by the end, then appreciate that GoT was only popular for eight years compared to Warhammer being around since the late 80s.

GW has gone on record, several times, that it is satire.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Laughing Man wrote:
I mean, historically fascism sucks quite badly at running a fascist state as well, which might have something to do why their leader did a pretty good impression of a piñata.

Historical fascism didn't have the plot shields to keep running after everything fell apart and people started worshipping the rotten corpse of space Hitler.

Gert wrote:
But we're not talking about local military like the PDF or system defense craft, we're talking about the Guard and the Navy. The Guard is not controlled by the local political structure of the planet they fight on, nor is the Navy beholden to whoever commands a local defense fleet.
Likewise, while the Administratum and Arbites exist to support the rule of local powers, if those powers step out of line then both institutions can and will remove them from power.
I also think that you may be taking "centralised" to mean "all controlling" and that's just not what that is. Power in the Imperium is derived from Terra (more accurately the Emperor) and regardless of how efficient the bureaucracy may be, the ultimate claim to power still resides with Terra (and the Emperor). If Terra says "Jump", the rest of the Imperium says "Off of which cliff?".

If Terra says "Jump", half of the IoM doesn't receive the message because it got lost in the Warp, half of the half that did receive the message come up with interesting interpretations of why they aren't going to jump and clearly Terra meant something different from "jump" and the last quarter declare the concept of gravity heretical and thus it is impossible to jump.

And while at it ten percent fall to either Chaos or Genestealer Cults.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 dadx6 wrote:

Personally, I think all the "WH40K is satire" stuff is nonsense created by the younger generations who can't handle the fact that a fictional universe doesn't have people behaving in an ideal fashion (to them).

Hahahahahah.

Oh yeah it is definitely meant to be a satire of fascism that is clear both by what the company says and a surface level glance at the fluff. The question is are they successful in their attempt to which I would argue again, only at service level. Once you get into the weeds it all becomes a lot more questionable in a few ways but I'd raise an eyebrow towards anyone who questions the intent.

 Tyran wrote:
If Terra says "Jump", half of the IoM doesn't receive the message because it got lost in the Warp, half of the half that did receive the message come up with interesting interpretations of why they aren't going to jump and clearly Terra meant something different from "jump" and the last quarter declare the concept of gravity heretical and thus it is impossible to jump.

And while at it ten percent fall to either Chaos or Genestealer Cults.

That still doesn't make it not fascist. Your entire point relies on the unreliable nature of warp travel and astropathic communication somehow negating the fact that the Imperium is still a modern system of government that has a central power structure.
It's not feudal because feudalism can't be applied to an industrial society and it certainly isn't socialist or democratic.
Why is it so wrong to apply the term to the Imperium when the term fits almost perfectly?

It’s feudal fascism if you ask me.

Starting at the top and working down through the social stratas, you see fewer rights and rewards.

Planetary Governors are however largely left be, provided their non-negotiable “deliver or die” tithe is paid on time, every time? That’s good enough.

Even a major world like Necromunda doesn’t have a massive presence of Arbites. Certainly not enough to fight an uprising on their own. Their job instead is to ensure that Imperial Law is broadly followed, and that Local Law Enforcement isn’t completely useless.

The Mechanicus and Ecclesiarchy will of course assist in oversight of their respective areas. But even then, there’s a perverse tolerance for some deviation. Essentially, provided you’re sticking to the underlying message, exactly how you preach that is open to some interpretation.

Outside of that, a Planetary Governor need only worry about clandestine Inquisition Agents. Who also aren’t terribly fussed how you’re fulfilling your tithe provided it’s not Too Naughty. Horrific human rights abuses, up to and including grinding up your dead to feed to the living? Nobody cares. At all.

Eh, the Imperium can be both fascist and feudal, these do not seem to be mutually exclusive at the scale of the Imperium. The way it is set up is also completely different to any modern society despite being (mostly) industrialised, with the vast majority of worlds run as vassals that are largely left alone so long as they pay their tribute on time.

It seems to me to be fascist by intent, but forced to be feudal in implementation. So all the organs of the Imperial state are fascist, but the relationship between them and a given world is feudal. A given world can be all over the place. Most seem to be either hereditary monarchies or some kind of oligarchy, but theoretically a democratic Imperial world could exist if it still followed Imperial law (pay tithes etc) and recognised the Emperor as overlord (sort of a constitutional monarchy vassal when I think about it).

Karol wrote:
I have question regarding the "fasism in w40k" thing. How is generaly understood, because it can be actual fasism. That thing with its separation of church and state nationalisation of production and focus on citizentship rather then nationality is nothing how W40k Human Imperium is run. So is it like used as a stand in for "things I don't like to happen" or is there is a set of things that define the w40k state in a peculiar way. I am almost confused by the wording used regarding settings like w40k.
Xenophobia for example, a specific definition for a very odd to wrong point of view on the world. But only in the "setting" we have right now. There is absolutly nothing xenphobic about wanting to kill eldar, ork, tyranids etc on sight, because the threat from all those races is not imaginary. Eldar for example wiped out the population of a hive planet, just to get a few soult stones the governour used as jewlery. Tyranids kill and eat humans. Orks kill humans and enslave some, and sometimes they eat them too. Tau technicaly take humans in, but they have sterilisation programs, and then there is also Farsight who is very anti everything no tau, not just humans.

So a phobia of a xeno, isn't a phobia, it is a regular warented fear.
Same with the with witch/mutant thing. In our world, as long as it ain't illegal, peresecution of someone for just being different is abhorable. I personaly am a mutant. But in the w40k setting being a unsactioned psyker or a mutant means one can become a gate to the warp and cause the destruction of the entire planet or even a sector. The expiriance of the long night clearly taught humanity to act fast and decise, when it comes to unsantcioned people.
And it is not even something some odd. I come from a rural region that was plagued in the last decade or so, by swine and bird flu. If a source of any of those gets found near a farm, all the birds/pigs are killed. And it is done swift, because not doing it risks further spreading.

First, to your point with Xenos, that's not entirely accurate.
- Eldar. While some Eldar have done what you say, sure, there are just as many who have helped humanity (usually to further benefit their own ends, but now always) and many who are just straight up ambivalent. Would you condemn the entire human race based on the worst of our kind?
- Orks: While incredibly warlike as a society, there are individual or small groups of Orks that can be somewhat... if not peaceful, at least willing to live without constant violence. There are some that live within backwater human colonies, work with Rouge Traders, or my personal favourite, the Ork "Philosopher" that gave an interview to an Inquisitor about Ork society and culture. His profound and genuine question of "why is Dakka?" still cracks me up. So long as they build up to WAAAGH! levels, Orks can live amongst others and we do know they have changed a lot since their creation, perhaps a galaxy without constant war would long term change them more?
- Tau: Baseline Tau lore on how they treat humans has changed a lot, so I'm not exactly sure where we are at with that at the moment, but I can say that your read on Farsight is just straight up wrong, though that could have been old lore. Currently, he greatly values the humans that are part of his tiny realm, and IIRC has honoured them greatly after the sacrifice of some human scientists to bring down a Hive Fleet tendril with some super poision.
- Okay, Tyrnaids are a fair point, but that's still only 1.5/4.

As for the Psykers, your realize that your argument is comparing human beings to cattle right? It shouldn't have to be explained that prematurely killing livestock and persecuting a subset of humanity because of a genetic abnormality are to wildly different things. While they can be warp conduits, we also know that with proper training, their abilities can be used mostly safely, (something the Eldar could help with if both sides could stop fighting long enough to work something out). Also if the warp was less tumultuous due to the constant feeding of the dark gods, it would be a lot easier for psykers to control their powers.

With all that said, circling back to your initial questions about fascism, you start to see the point. It's a system that is always pointing the faults at others, always scapegoating. "The problems of the galaxy aren't the Imperium's fault, oh no, they are the fault of all these "others" the xenos, the mutnat, the heretic. We're great, but they are stopping us from achieving our greatness, so they can be given no quarter, no mercy." That is the MO of fascism, and as usual it ignores the fact that the Imperium is just as much a problem as all these other races, if not more in some cases, but it doesn't want to improve, learn, or grow, it just wants to keep blaming all the "others" for it's problems so it can justify all the terrible things it does to keep the people in power where they are and doing whatever they want to do.

Worth noting that fascism is not a system of government, it’s more of an ideology. Basically fascism is the idea that we (whomever ‘we’ constitutes can vary) are strong and we do not just deserve to rule, but we are a combination of genetically disposed and divinely selected. And while we are so chosen, they (again, they can vary and continues to once each ‘they’ are dealt with) have subversively toppled us from our chosen position been intentionally undermining us to keep us down.

It’s key hallmarks are militarism (so we can regain our rightful place), intolerance (finding your ‘they’), and an obsession with a near mythical and perfect past when we were strong and ontop before they conspired to drag us down (we will be great again).

To this end fascism can apply to any form of government in the same way that capitalism can. While it’s most suited to forms of dictatorship, it’s theoretically possible to see stuff like fascist democracies or even fascist communisms.

So the imperium is undeniably fascist, and quibbling over what form or structure the government takes is beside the point.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 Tawnis wrote:

1) This entire situation in the first place was caused by their own regime being so messed up that Chaos didn't look that bad to some involved, especially when they started out only having a cursory understanding of it. It was Big E's totalitarianism that pushed many of the Primarchs to that point.

Without a single exception every Chaos-aligned Primarch is depicted as betraying the Imperium due to grievous personality flaws that the loyalist Primarchs are depicted as completely lacking by comparison. People will with a straight face say that it's okay for the Chaos Primarchs to be portrayed as ineffectual losers compared to their loyalist brothers because it's meant to show how Chaos has degraded what they once were and made them less than their peers who kept to the straight and narrow path of supporting a totalitarian genocidal regime.

Every Chaos Primarch is portrayed like this. Mortarion? Admits to Jaghatai Khan that he's essentially envious of the Emperor and aspires to be a tyrant and can't stand being one's lackey. Magnus? Can't admit fault for anything and fell because he refused to admit he might be wrong. Curze or Fulgrim? Lol, the former is fething insane and the latter is a cartoon villain. Perturabo? A petty and vindictive scumbag with a martyr complex. Even Angron, who you'd think is the only Primarch who lacks moral agency due to his situation is presented as someone unable to take responsibility for his own circumstances. Like uh, having needles put in his brain and being forced to lead a Legion he didn't want to. Although of course to make sure you know he's bad he has to do something cartoonishly evil like force his sons to put the Nails in their heads.

None of the loyalist Primarchs have any of these fun personality flaws and are all the more sterile for it, and ones who were originally being portrayed as less than ideal were whitewashed later, most notably Lion El'Jonson. Because being loyal to Space Hitler Jesus is good, betraying him is le bad.

This is what I mean when I say that 40k is just fascist capeshit. The heroic Imperium are there to make the hard choices and look badass while they mow down either the traitorous and cowardly Chaos forces or the perfidious and subversive Je- I mean Xenos.

And as pointed out in this thread it doesn't help that the setting is written in such a way now that the Imperium's actions are often portrayed as justified. It's not satire if an Inquisitor wipes out a city's population because some kid found a red rock that oh is actually possessed by a Daemon and could possess the kid and cause him to be possessed by a Daemon Prince which would open a rift in the Warp and cause the legions of Hell to pour through and corrupt the entire planet. It's just fascist apologia as mentioned.

The is the point though, and the tragedy of the setting. These characters were flawed yes, but it's made clear in the setting that their fall isn't inherit to their character flaws, it's inherit to how they were shoved into the Imperial machine with no thought or care as to who they were or what they wanted.

- Mortarion: Spent his entire life trying to overthrow a tyrant just to be shackled to an even greater one. He was always sullen and morose, and the Imperium did nothing to dissuade him that this is just the nature of everything. There's always a bigger tyrant, always someone else pulling the strings. So he sees the only path to personal freedom to be the one on top, they very thing he vehemently despises.

- Magnus: That was only his first step. Once he realized the gravity of his mistake he fully understood his own folly and still would have been a staunch ally in the fight against Chaos, until Russ showed up. It was the lapdog of his father's regime grounding Magnus' people beneath his boot because he believed them lesser than he, Magnus and his psykers are treated like the "others" that Russ always believed them to be, and now no one is holding his leash. That is what caused Magnus' fall, a last ditch attempt to save his remaining sons that ultimately caused his doom.

- Cruze: "Raised" on a world of crime and excess while constantly tormented by visions of a terrible future, Curze never had anyone to help shoulder his burden. While incredibly wrong in his actions, Curze did at his very core, want to do right. He believes himself the lesser of two terrible evils, but still abhors what he believes he has to do, and by extension himself, which does nothing to bolster his already fragile psyche. No one has ever been there for him, and the one time he finally reached out to someone who he thought just MAYBE, might be a kindred spirit in Sanguinius, that idiot had to go and blab to Dorn who of course treated Curze like any other problem and attempted to hammer it into submission because that's the person he had to be for his father's regime. After this "betrayal", Curze gave up on everything and just more-less accepted his fate in being the monster that everyone saw, cleaning up what he considered to be his own mess in Nostromo, before being almost happy to accept his demise in the end. Had anyone actually given him the time of day, and been a true understanding friend and confidant, this could have been avoided, but there is no tolerance for those outside the norm in the Imperium.

- Fulgrim: (I can't really speak to this one because I've read so little of his pre-Lyrean blade lore, I don't know enough about him to make this argument.)

- Perturabo: He never wanted to be what he was. Perturabo only every wanted to create, to build, but his talent for building was surpassed only by his talent for destruction, so despite any of his own wishes, that's what he was constantly called upon by the Imperium to do, the exact opposite of what he really wanted and cared about. Combine that with his already grim and harsh outlook on everything and you get someone who easily becomes petty and vindictive. He's the child that thinks if he can't have his sandcastle, then no one else is going to have one either. In a society of progress and creation, Perturabo wouldn't have fallen, he may have even found true happiness.

- Angron: He's presented as someone not in control of his own actions, but (especially at the start) that is far from the truth. There is a reasonably argument to be made that the nails control him far less than everyone seems to think (or at least they did). While Angron didn't conquer his world, he did still lead a full on slave rebellion that especially given their complete lack of supplies and minimal manpower, needed to be led by someone with a level head. Had they just blindly fought, they never would have gotten as far as they had. But then Big E shows up and just kidnaps Angron and lets all his friends die, because he only has use for his Son and doesn't deign to consider any lives that don't serve his ultimate goal. He cares more about his own personal goals then anything he Son could want. The War Hounds were in orbit, they could have re-enforced their gene-sire and saved both him and his army, but no, instead Angron was ripped away from everything and everyone he every cared about, as if the Great Crusade could fill that void in him now, because in a fascist state, nothing can be greater or should provide more purpose than serving the cause. This is the moment he surrendered to the nails and set upon his path to damnation, and it was the most preventable of all.

- Horus: As a leader, Horus was far more progressive than his father and genuinely cared about the people beneath him; before his fall, he's the person I would have bet on to actually make the Imperium a better place. Yet, as the Great Crusade ground on and on, he began to see more of the cracks in the façade, the true problems with the Imperium he was helping to build. It started with the Interex, but only grew in scope from there, he began to question, but at the same time, felt the weight of responsibility and "trust" that Big E had placed in him. He didn't want to believe that the Imperium was what it was, he wanted to believe that his father actually truly cared about his sons and the people of his empire. It's debatable if the moment the Emperor turned from Horus to let him die actually happened or was a warp trick, but it didn't matter anymore, because Horus had learned enough about who his father was and what he had done to believe it, and that's what caused his final step into the abyss.

- Alpharius: The epitome of the ends justify the means, it was Alpharius' reliance on working outside the light of day, keeping all the secrets and trusting no one that led to his "fall". It's been heavily implied that Alpharius never actually fell, but was subverting Horus' forces from within. That being said, when the time came for him to make his ultimate play, he had no ally to count on. His insular and secretive nature, much like that of any secret police, left no one to trust him when he needed it most, and was thus struck down by Dorn. The whole Alpharius/Omegon thing would take way too long to get into here, but in essence, whichever one of them died at the hands of Dorn on Pluto was solely the fault of the secret police mentality that they conducted the Alpha Legion with.

- Lorgar: The most obvious of all, no truth can exist other than the truth of the great leader. In a society where everyone is forced to think a certain way and never to question, the philosophers and thinkers are the first to suffer. Had Lorgar been given the freedom of religious expression, something obviously anathema to Big E's empire (except when it's not ala Mars because hypocrisy), he never would have fallen.

On the surface, sure the Imperium are portrayed as the good guys, the heroes, but taking any kind of look under the surface and it's very clear that they've caused nearly all of their own problems. Their greatest enemy is LITERALLY the one they created, an obvious allegory to the fictional enemy at the gates that fascist regimes build themselves up on. Much of the lessons and take downs of the Imperium within 40k are a lot more subtle than people give these writers credit for, and it can be hard to see because of the in universe views of many of the point of view characters, but it is there. It's a cautionary tale of how these regimes rise to power, what they look like, what the people within them believe, and how frighteningly easy it is to unknowingly see them as the heroes, when you are just fed their propaganda. The truth is very clearly there for us to see though, and that's the point of it all, the lesson of 40k, to look beneath the surface of a society, a cause, or a person's actions, to the reason behind it, to question our own beliefs and the people we support, and get us to ask why we do so.

 morganfreeman wrote:
Worth noting that fascism is not a system of government, it’s more of an ideology. Basically fascism is the idea that we (whomever ‘we’ constitutes can vary) are strong and we do not just deserve to rule, but we are a combination of genetically disposed and divinely selected. And while we are so chosen, they (again, they can vary and continues to once each ‘they’ are dealt with) have subversively toppled us from our chosen position been intentionally undermining us to keep us down.

It’s key hallmarks are militarism (so we can regain our rightful place), intolerance (finding your ‘they’), and an obsession with a near mythical and perfect past when we were strong and ontop before they conspired to drag us down (we will be great again).

To this end fascism can apply to any form of government in the same way that capitalism can. While it’s most suited to forms of dictatorship, it’s theoretically possible to see stuff like fascist democracies or even fascist communisms.

So the imperium is undeniably fascist, and quibbling over what form or structure the government takes is beside the point.

But if your concept applies to essentially every government on earth, its surely meaningless?

Fascism is a 20th century ideology, rooted in the concepts and ideas of that specific era.
if you can go:
Napoleon? Fascist.
Louis XIV? Fascist.
England and France in the 12th century? Absolutely Fascist, look at how they tick through my list.

Then maybe your list isn't all that useful.

If to be a non-fascist state you need a happy go-lucky liberalism, then the number of historical examples is few, and essentially none when under any degree of duress.

I mean how many of these does say the US in WW2 tick? Most of them by my count. But its not a fascist state (cue twitter hipsters arguing otherwise).

Tyel wrote:
But if your concept applies to essentially every government on earth, its surely meaningless?

That's because morganfreeman is wrong because you can't have a fascist democracy or fascist communism, they are opposing concepts and theories.

If to be a non-fascist state you need a happy go-lucky liberalism, then the number of historical examples is few, and essentially none when under any degree of duress.

I mean how many of these does say the US in WW2 tick? Most of them by my count. But its not a fascist state (cue twitter hipsters arguing otherwise).

Let's test that shall we?
Authoritarian - Nope. Democratically elected government which went to the polls in 1944 to re-elect FDR.
Ultranationalist - Nope. In fact, WW2 took the US out of its isolationism and thrust it into the spotlight as one of the first modern global powers.
Dictatorial leader - Nope. FDR was democratically elected and at any point could have been removed from power if he hadn't died in office. His VP took over and was also then voted into office.
Centralised autocracy - Not an autocracy. The US has both the Senate and House of Representatives to check the power of the President.
Forcible suppression of opposition - Nope. Elections were held midwar in 1944 and the opposition was allowed to run.
Belief in natural social hierarchy - This is the only one where there is a point to be made with the oppression of non-White Americans and even then it was absolutely nowhere near the level of fascist governments.
Subordination of individualism - Nope. A nation built on immigrants did pretty well being individualistic.
Strong regimentation of society and economy - Nope. That's what the free market was for.

Wow, how did you manage to be so completely wrong?

It does run into the issue that 40k is a late 20th early 21th century tabletop game rooted in concepts and ideads specific to this era.

Its writers didn't come up with new political and ideological ideas for it, nor is it a historical era. But rather it is a mismatch of militarism, might makes right, divine rule, genocides everywhere, and putting that together yes it would kinda be ideologically fascist.

It doesn't get the cultural and political distance actual historical regimes get, and when someone talks about it they will be using current political and cultural concepts because the 41/42 millenium doesn't really exist as a historical or political entity.

So what’s the end game of all this ranting? If 40K doesn’t conform 100% to your current political beliefs, it is fascist, and anyone that likes the game is a Tory, Trumper, or fascist by default? Maybe you would be happier if we instituted a plan where you can only write or work for GW by showing a party membership card from your ‘approved’ list? Maybe we should do it at the register for anyone buying any 40K stuff as well…the game ain’t what it used to be, in a lot of ways. My take is that it is game has certainly gotten blander over the years? Know why? So GW can sell more junk to the skeptical parents of kids. But I guess for some, it can only be the vast fascist conspiracy in action.

 totalfailure wrote:
So what’s the end game of all this ranting? If 40K doesn’t conform 100% to your current political beliefs, it is fascist, and anyone that likes the game is a Tory, Trumper, or fascist by default? Maybe you would be happier if we instituted a plan where you can only write or work for GW by showing a party membership card from your ‘approved’ list? Maybe we should do it at the register for anyone buying any 40K stuff as well…the game ain’t what it used to be, in a lot of ways. My take is that it is game has certainly gotten blander over the years? Know why? So GW can sell more junk to the skeptical parents of kids. But I guess for some, it can only be the vast fascist conspiracy in action.

What?
No, seriously, what?

Observing "The Imperium is a horrific fascist government," is just an observation.

Yeah no one is "ranting". It's been a remarkably civil discussion on some of the finer aspects of political ideology and its representation in fiction before that culture war outburst.

Found the one who does not understand the satire behind it

"Totalfailure", how fitting.

 Gert wrote:

Let's test that shall we?

Wow, how did you manage to be so completely wrong?

I think because you are skipping over things.

Authoritarian - Yes. The Government imposed conscription, nationalised railways, mines and other sectors. It broke up and banned strikes through various labour laws. 120k people of Japanese descent (and smaller numbers of Germans and Italians) were interned.
Ultranationalist - Yes. The US view post Pearl Harbour was that the Japanese should be killed to essentially the last man. Attitudes to Germans grew worse throughout the war. The general belief in US cultural superiority - and the right to impose US-style constitutions around the world is surely not in question.
Dictatorial Leader - Sure, I'll give you this one. FDR was elected in free and fair elections.
Centralised Authority - Partially give you this one. Yes Congress existed. But executive Power to prosecute the war was centralised. How much Congress can control the President in matters of war remains an enduring issue in the US to this day. FDR was more constrained in domestic policy (with Congress sometimes insisting on holding back - or going further - than FDR personally wanted).
Forcible suppression of opposition. Sure, I'll give you this one. Formal political opposition was permitted. Republicans were free to run on the idea that FDR was a Communist. Although you do however still have those internment camps to wave away.
Belief in natural social hierarchy. You've given me this one.
Subordination of individualism. Which is why I'm a bit mystified why you are arguing against this one. 1940s US is racist, sexist, classist etc. You have conscription, strike breaking and various other impositions. Your individuality is rather clearly subordinated to the cause of winning the war.
Strong regimentation of society and economy. The US didn't turn 40% of its economy towards the war on a whim. If you say its not Fascist because people were paid, then what do you think was happening in Germany? There was a combination of carrot and stick. Corporations who got on board got profitable contracts. Those who didn't faced nationalisation, expropriation. Strikes were broken up and made illegal by a range of labor laws. This is not laissez-faire capitalism. Society and the economy is being regimented to win the war.

Clearly the US is not a fascist country. But from the list, I think you tick 5 out of 8 of your list, with some quibbles on the other 2.

I can't see GW doing it - but if Guilliman and the Lords of Terra decided to run for election, would the IoM cease to be fascist under your definition, even if everything else remained the same? They've already discussed various factions, not hard to go and establish political parties. Although does anyone want this in their Grimdark Eternal War game? Probably not.

GW missed a perfect opportunity to really bring in some modern satire with the return of Guilliman.

They should have had the Ecclesiarchy refuse to recognise him as he wasn't toeing the line of what 10,000 years had done to religion in the Imperium, so that the return of the son of their god and what he claimed were the ideals of said god directly clashed with the new tenets they had built. So they get a sniper to put a turbo round through his brain as he is a false prophet.

Bring that satire of fundamentalists full circle by pointing out that many christians today would try to crucify Jesus if he returned as stuff like prosperity gospel is about as far from his teachings as you can get, and people have a lot of money and power invested in not having their followers realising that.

In fact, I'd have had the Imperium completely purge the Ultramarines afterwards. They are created from the seed of a traitorous heretic after all, and how better to demonstrate the self destructive purity politics of the Imperium and its insanity than them deciding to wipe out a military force that gave them millennia of loyal service because their primarch didn't fit the current view and was too much of a threat to the power of the high lords. But that would annoy the space marine players, so it would never happen.

Also, the Imperium is explicitly fascist. It ticks pretty much every single box in Umberto Eco's list of major fascist characteristics. About the only ones you could maybe say it doesn't is the appeal to the middle class and the sexual aspects of machismo. But then, Eco never said that fascism needed every single one of these characteristics to be fascism, just that these are the more common characteristics observed in fascist ideology.

"The cult of tradition", characterized by cultural syncretism, even at the risk of internal contradiction. When all truth has already been revealed by tradition, no new learning can occur, only further interpretation and refinement.

"The rejection of modernism", which views the rationalistic development of Western culture since the Enlightenment as a descent into depravity. Eco distinguishes this from a rejection of superficial technological advancement, as many fascist regimes cite their industrial potency as proof of the vitality of their system.

"The cult of action for action's sake", which dictates that action is of value in itself and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science.

"Disagreement is treason" – fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith.

"Fear of difference", which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate, often in the form of racism or an appeal against foreigners and immigrants.

"Appeal to a frustrated middle class", fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups.

"Obsession with a plot" and the hyping-up of an enemy threat. This often combines an appeal to xenophobia with a fear of disloyalty and sabotage from marginalized groups living within the society. Eco also cites Pat Robertson's book The New World Order as a prominent example of a plot obsession.

Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as "at the same time too strong and too weak". On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.

"Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy" because "life is permanent warfare" – there must always be an enemy to fight. Both fascist Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini worked first to organize and clean up their respective countries and then build the war machines that they later intended to and did use, despite Germany being under restrictions of the Versailles treaty to not build a military force. This principle leads to a fundamental contradiction within fascism: the incompatibility of ultimate triumph with perpetual war.

"Contempt for the weak", which is uncomfortably married to a chauvinistic popular elitism, in which every member of society is superior to outsiders by virtue of belonging to the in-group. Eco sees in these attitudes the root of a deep tension in the fundamentally hierarchical structure of fascist polities, as they encourage leaders to despise their underlings, up to the ultimate leader, who holds the whole country in contempt for having allowed him to overtake it by force.

"Everybody is educated to become a hero", which leads to the embrace of a cult of death. As Eco observes, "[t]he Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death."

"Machismo", which sublimates the difficult work of permanent war and heroism into the sexual sphere. Fascists thus hold "both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality".

"Selective populism" – the people, conceived monolithically, have a common will, distinct from and superior to the viewpoint of any individual. As no mass of people can ever be truly unanimous, the leader holds himself out as the interpreter of the popular will (though truly he alone dictates it). Fascists use this concept to delegitimize democratic institutions they accuse of "no longer represent[ing] the voice of the people".

"Newspeak" – fascism employs and promotes an impoverished vocabulary in order to limit critical reasoning.

Yeah the lack of modern satirical critique shows that it wasn't the satire itself gw cared about selling, but the image it was originally presented with in the 80s.

That image was conserved to sell. The satire it represented, not so much.

There are so many modern angles of satire they could mine if the satire was important, but it's clear it's not.

Satire I wish mined:

A lowly tech adept discovers a killer joke. A Joke so powerful that it kills everyone who hears it.

5 lords of terra are lost before appropriate measures are enacted. The joke is given to the Minotaurs (The LEAST SILLY ones) for testing. The entire chapter is wiped out over night. In an effort to weaponize this, they put it into the heads of several Astropaths, and point them towards the Warp, with extremely satisfying results. 15 Daemon lords, and one Chaos god are destroyed in the coming months. In an unforeseen consequence, the Orks who hear it are actually made stronger, when they get angry due to now understanding the joke. The Eldar are also unable to understand it. Slanesh giggles, but does not die.

Tyel wrote:

 Gert wrote:

Let's test that shall we?

Wow, how did you manage to be so completely wrong?

Authoritarian -

<snip>

What?

You keep using these words, and then clearly showing that you don’t know what they mean

A government utilizing power is not authoritarian in and of itself. Likewise, growing popular dislike/ distaste / even hatred for those a country I’d at war with is not nationalism; let alone ultranationalism.

There are MANY valid criticisms which can be laid at the feet of US, especially WW2 era US. However these aren’t some of them.

Tyel wrote:
I think because you are skipping over things.

I'm not going to derail this thread further by breaking down just how wrong you are. All I'm going to ask is why is it important that the Imperium doesn't get labeled as fascist?

 morganfreeman wrote:

Tyel wrote:

 Gert wrote:

Let's test that shall we?

Wow, how did you manage to be so completely wrong?

Authoritarian -

<snip>

What?

You keep using these words, and then clearly showing that you don’t know what they mean

A government utilizing power is not authoritarian in and of itself. Likewise, growing popular dislike/ distaste / even hatred for those a country I’d at war with is not nationalism; let alone ultranationalism.

There are MANY valid criticisms which can be laid at the feet of US, especially WW2 era US. However these aren’t some of them.

Authoritarianism is a spectrum, and arguably exerting state power is authoritarian to varying extents (with the other end of that spectrum being libertarianism/anarchism with minimised state power). Plus, a lot of countries are more authoritarian than they try to present as. WWII era USA would be one of these IMO, given large swathes were experiencing segregation at the time. I agree it wasn't fascist though.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
GW missed a perfect opportunity to really bring in some modern satire with the return of Guilliman.

They should have had the Ecclesiarchy refuse to recognise him as he wasn't toeing the line of what 10,000 years had done to religion in the Imperium, so that the return of the son of their god and what he claimed were the ideals of said god directly clashed with the new tenets they had built. So they get a sniper to put a turbo round through his brain as he is a false prophet.

Bring that satire of fundamentalists full circle by pointing out that many christians today would try to crucify Jesus if he returned as stuff like prosperity gospel is about as far from his teachings as you can get, and people have a lot of money and power invested in not having their followers realising that.

In fact, I'd have had the Imperium completely purge the Ultramarines afterwards. They are created from the seed of a traitorous heretic after all, and how better to demonstrate the self destructive purity politics of the Imperium and its insanity than them deciding to wipe out a military force that gave them millennia of loyal service because their primarch didn't fit the current view and was too much of a threat to the power of the high lords. But that would annoy the space marine players, so it would never happen.

Also, the Imperium is explicitly fascist. It ticks pretty much every single box in Umberto Eco's list of major fascist characteristics. About the only ones you could maybe say it doesn't is the appeal to the middle class and the sexual aspects of machismo. But then, Eco never said that fascism needed every single one of these characteristics to be fascism, just that these are the more common characteristics observed in fascist ideology.

Spoiler:

"The cult of tradition", characterized by cultural syncretism, even at the risk of internal contradiction. When all truth has already been revealed by tradition, no new learning can occur, only further interpretation and refinement.

"The rejection of modernism", which views the rationalistic development of Western culture since the Enlightenment as a descent into depravity. Eco distinguishes this from a rejection of superficial technological advancement, as many fascist regimes cite their industrial potency as proof of the vitality of their system.

"The cult of action for action's sake", which dictates that action is of value in itself and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science.

"Disagreement is treason" – fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith.

"Fear of difference", which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate, often in the form of racism or an appeal against foreigners and immigrants.

"Appeal to a frustrated middle class", fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups.

"Obsession with a plot" and the hyping-up of an enemy threat. This often combines an appeal to xenophobia with a fear of disloyalty and sabotage from marginalized groups living within the society. Eco also cites Pat Robertson's book The New World Order as a prominent example of a plot obsession.

Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as "at the same time too strong and too weak". On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.

"Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy" because "life is permanent warfare" – there must always be an enemy to fight. Both fascist Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini worked first to organize and clean up their respective countries and then build the war machines that they later intended to and did use, despite Germany being under restrictions of the Versailles treaty to not build a military force. This principle leads to a fundamental contradiction within fascism: the incompatibility of ultimate triumph with perpetual war.

"Contempt for the weak", which is uncomfortably married to a chauvinistic popular elitism, in which every member of society is superior to outsiders by virtue of belonging to the in-group. Eco sees in these attitudes the root of a deep tension in the fundamentally hierarchical structure of fascist polities, as they encourage leaders to despise their underlings, up to the ultimate leader, who holds the whole country in contempt for having allowed him to overtake it by force.

"Everybody is educated to become a hero", which leads to the embrace of a cult of death. As Eco observes, "[t]he Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death."

"Machismo", which sublimates the difficult work of permanent war and heroism into the sexual sphere. Fascists thus hold "both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality".

"Selective populism" – the people, conceived monolithically, have a common will, distinct from and superior to the viewpoint of any individual. As no mass of people can ever be truly unanimous, the leader holds himself out as the interpreter of the popular will (though truly he alone dictates it). Fascists use this concept to delegitimize democratic institutions they accuse of "no longer represent[ing] the voice of the people".

"Newspeak" – fascism employs and promotes an impoverished vocabulary in order to limit critical reasoning.

40k sticks so closely to this list that it makes me think someone at GW used it for inspiration at some point or another when developing the imperium

Probably. The IoM is supposed to be a pastiche of every tyranny in history. The worse excesses of the Roman Empire and the HRE, the USSR, the Third Reich, Genghis Khan, name it and it will probably be represented somewhere in the Imperium.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
GW missed a perfect opportunity to really bring in some modern satire with the return of Guilliman.

They should have had the Ecclesiarchy refuse to recognise him as he wasn't toeing the line of what 10,000 years had done to religion in the Imperium, so that the return of the son of their god and what he claimed were the ideals of said god directly clashed with the new tenets they had built. So they get a sniper to put a turbo round through his brain as he is a false prophet.

Honestly, there's still time to do something like this. If I was GW at this point and really wanted to make my poster boys "the good guys" I'd absolutely have the UM driven out of the Imperium and develop them as more of a good humans faction while letting the Imperium itself become more overtly villainous.

I just want them to go back to being an incredibly inefficient and paranoid bureaucratic structure. Like, using exterminatus on a world due to a clerical error because some intern made a typo, or executing some poor bloke for possessing a demonic artifact that's really just a useless bauble that just happened to have a crack on it that looked like a chaos symbol.

You'd think a British company would have seen Brazil or Monty Python, but I guess not.

Except that still happens.

Hell, the novel Iron Kingdom has two Imperial factions having an appendage measuring contest about who can be the biggest d-bag before it ends up in a full-scale war because neither side wants to back down with the Imperium sending in the Marines Malevolent to murder the leader of the opposing faction.
The whole venture ends with the Knight world weakened with its queen dead, and the Imperium losing its fleet flagship to Red Corsairs.