ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, August 02, 2016

The Communist perspective on fascism

Keep illuminating article entitled "Divided They Fell" from International Socialism in mind when you observe the modern anti-fascists in action:
The Communist Party organisation began to change fundamentally in the mid-1920s. Concomitant with the degeneration of the Russian Revolution, Stalinisation of the KPD began under the leadership of Ernst Thälmann. Freedom of discussion and internal democracy were replaced piece by piece by a mood of unquestioning discipline and authoritarian leadership. Oppositional currents were discouraged from speaking openly and eventually forced out of the party. No longer held politically accountable to the membership, in 1929 Thälmann and Stalin agreed upon an ultra-left course against the SPD, concluding that the Social Democrats represented a form of “social fascism”. This disastrous line would eventually prove fatal for both the Social Democrats and the Communists.

The theory of social fascism dictated that Nazis and Social Democrats were essentially two sides of the same coin. The primary enemy of the Communists was supposedly the Social Democrats, who protected capitalism from a workers’ revolution by deceiving the class with pseudo-socialist rhetoric. The worst of them all were the left wing Social Democrats, whose rhetoric was particularly deceptive. According to the theory, it was impossible to fight side by side with the SPD against the Nazis under such conditions. Indeed, the KPD declared that defeating the social fascists was the “prerequisite to smashing fascism”. By 1932 the KPD began engaging in isolated attempts to initiate broader anti-fascist fronts, most importantly the Antifascischistsche Aktion, but these were formulated as “united fronts from below”—ie without the leadership of the SPD. Turning the logic of the united front on its head, SPD supporters were expected to give up their party allegiance before joining, as opposed to the united front being a first practical step towards the Communist Party. Throughout this period the leaderships of both the SPD and the KPD never came to a formal agreement regarding the fight against Nazism.

Another fatal consequence of the KPD’s ultra-leftism was that the term “fascism” was used irresponsibly to describe any and all opponents to the right of the party. The SPD-led government that ruled Germany until 1930 was considered “social fascist”. When Brüning formed a new right-wing government by decree without a parliamentary majority in 1930, the KPD declared that fascism had taken power. This went hand in hand with a deadly underestimation of the Nazi danger. Thus Thälmann could declare in 1932: “Nothing could be more fatal for us than to opportunistically overestimate the danger posed by Hitler-fascism”.The KPD’s seeming inability to distinguish between democratic, authoritarian and fascist expressions of capitalist rule proved to be its undoing. An organisation that continually vilified bourgeois democratic governments as fascist was unable to understand the true meaning of Hitler’s ascension to power on 30 January 1933, the day the KPD infamously (and ominously) declared: “After Hitler, we will take over!”
To this day, "fascism" still means nothing but "any and all opponents to the right of the speaker". Note that SPD refers to the Socialist Party which established the Weimar Republic and is currently the junior partner in Germany's governing coalition, and the KPD is the Communist Party.

Labels: ,

39 Comments:

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents August 02, 2016 1:54 PM  

To this day, "fascism" still means nothing but "any and all opponents to the right of the speaker"

This definition of "Fascist" is the flip side of the operating philosophy "No enemies to the left". Crude rhetoric, but it beats actually thinking, hence the popularity.

Anonymous Shorty August 02, 2016 1:55 PM  

French communists couldn't even wait until the NAZIs were even out of their country to start attacking OSS and SOE units. Marxism destroys everything it touches.

Anonymous Elipe August 02, 2016 1:55 PM  

So back then, they were shrieking "Hitler is literally Hitler!"?

Huh. Leftist rhetoric hasn't changed much.

Anonymous Grimdark August 02, 2016 2:18 PM  

I wonder if they will make the same mistakes again. I wonder who is funding the antifascists...

Anonymous Broken Arrow August 02, 2016 2:19 PM  

Interesting the rhetoric has outlasted and been more important to the rise of socialism than the ideas themselves.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr August 02, 2016 2:22 PM  

Communism, fascism, socialism, liberalism...just different labels on the bottle. It's all the vile venom of totalitarian Leftism within.

Blogger Orville August 02, 2016 2:23 PM  

Mussolini started out as an International Socialist as was his father before him. Fascism, Nazism and Communism are all first cousins of each other.

Blogger Dave Hardy August 02, 2016 2:27 PM  

@3 Almost, they were insisting everybody EXCEPT Hitler was literally Hitler.

OpenID basementhomebrewer August 02, 2016 2:29 PM  

Orville wrote:Mussolini started out as an International Socialist as was his father before him. Fascism, Nazism and Communism are all first cousins of each other.

It all has the same flaw in belief that government is able to improve all aspects of the lives of individuals, rather than simply being a means for protecting people from physical threats to their property and person.

Anonymous LastRedoubt August 02, 2016 2:34 PM  

Was just dealing with an overeducated idiot on twitter who was convinced that fascists weren't socialists, in fact "opposed" socialists.

Blogger professorastro August 02, 2016 2:38 PM  

I think Goldberg discussed how Stalin called everything to his right as fascist, both before and after the war.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents August 02, 2016 2:40 PM  

Was just dealing with an overeducated idiot on twitter who was convinced that fascists weren't socialists, in fact "opposed" socialists.

MPAI. Q.E.D.

If you have time to burn, troll these types by asking them to define their terms, starting with "Fascism". For a small effort on your part you can chew up a lot of their time.

Blogger Noah B August 02, 2016 2:43 PM  

More and more I'm struck that labels are basically worthless. Fascist can mean almost anything, as can socialist. Even "libertarian" is used to refer to everything from anarchy to right-wing nationalism.

Blogger pyrrhus August 02, 2016 2:55 PM  

As Marine Le Pen has said, "there is no left or right, only nationalists and globalists".

Anonymous farmer August 02, 2016 3:05 PM  

Thats more shades of lefty than I even knew existed. I wonder how much material difference there even was. Sometimes people just manufacture division in order to aid their own advancement to power.

Anonymous tittyCUCKing August 02, 2016 3:09 PM  

One of the biggest, most successful lies the left ever pulled off was to pin the fascists on the right. The truth is both are leftist ideologies, the difference being communist = Jew controlled; fascism = non-Jew

Anonymous ZhukovG August 02, 2016 3:10 PM  

Hmmm, It seems to me that 'International Capitalism' is worse than 'National Socialism'.

'National Capitalism' would be better still.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2016 3:29 PM  

Collective "ownership" (which invariably devolves to Animal Farm) or private ownership (which I'm beginning to think may be out-and-out aristocracy), are those the two choices?

It seems like all forms of collective ownership lead inexorably to totalitarian leftism & Animal Farm.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2016 3:35 PM  

All leftism rests on a foundation of lie, that all animals are equal (and some are more equal than others, of course.)

What might work a lot better is an explicit acceptance that human nature builds hierarchies, and further expecting that the better of us should have more voice, better being demonstrated (and not by being the more fascile liar during the "promise everyone everything part of a political campaign.)

Anonymous Malcolm August 02, 2016 4:22 PM  

LastRedoubt wrote:Was just dealing with an overeducated idiot on twitter who was convinced that fascists weren't socialists, in fact "opposed" socialists.

Worth reading von Mises on this:

"The Marxians are not prepared to admit that the Nazis are socialists too. In their eyes Nazism is the worst of all evils of capital­ism. On the other hand, the Nazis describe the Russian system as the meanest of all types of capitalist exploitation and as a devilish machination of World Jewry for the domination of the gentiles. Yet it is clear that both systems, the German and the Russian, must be considered from an economic point of view as socialist. And it is only the economic point of view that matters in debating whether or not a party or system is socialist. Socialism is and has always been considered a system of economic organization of society. It is the system under which the government has full control of production and distribution. As far as socialism existing merely within indi­vidual countries can be called genuine, both Russia and Germany are right in calling their systems socialist."

https://mises.org/library/socialist-calumny-against-jews

OpenID basementhomebrewer August 02, 2016 4:22 PM  

dc.sunsets wrote:All leftism rests on a foundation of lie, that all animals are equal (and some are more equal than others, of course.)

What might work a lot better is an explicit acceptance that human nature builds hierarchies, and further expecting that the better of us should have more voice, better being demonstrated (and not by being the more fascile liar during the "promise everyone everything part of a political campaign.)


How you measure "better" and by whom is where things get sticky. All institutions created by man are flawed and all will eventually be converged unless their goals include actively resisting convergence. Even an organization strongly built against convergence is still going to make mistakes.

Anonymous Malcolm August 02, 2016 4:28 PM  

pyrrhus wrote:As Marine Le Pen has said, "there is no left or right, only nationalists and globalists".

She's quite right. I remember years ago reading a quote by the (fervently anti-Communist) Enoch Powell along the lines of "Even if England were to become Communist, I would gladly still fight and die for her."

At the time (being Libertarian) I thought this the most irrational nonsense. Now, it makes perfect sense to me.

Trying to find the exact quote I came across this fabulous example of lolbertarianism (by chance, a blog I actually used to follow back in the day) which sums up the absolute obsession of libertarians with 'Magic Dirt' and refusal to acknowledge that evolution did not conveniently stop at a point, or specific region of human anatomy, that progressives wish it had:

http://www.countingcats.com/?p=19028

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2016 5:41 PM  

@ basementbt,
True, your point is supported by the fact that in a monarchy you may get an occasional bad seed...but his or her relatives can always depose or poison the clown.

The key, to me, is to have a system where the vast majority of citizens can never under any circumstances rise to power. Only then will citizens see their interests served by treating the government as a necessary evil to be carefully kept in check, instead of what we have now where every faction expects to helm leviathan and is happy to see it expand like an omnipotent hydra.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2016 5:46 PM  

The libertarian (I too was afflicted) is blind to HBD. In hindsight it is frightening to realize how effective was the brainwashing. I thought I was better than that.

Anonymous Malcolm August 02, 2016 6:16 PM  

dc.sunsets wrote:The libertarian (I too was afflicted) is blind to HBD. In hindsight it is frightening to realize how effective was the brainwashing. I thought I was better than that.

Indeed. For me Gamergate led to my switching from "MSM may have a bias but the reported facts are reliable - just need to ignore biased take on them" to "Jesus Christ these scum are absolutely shameless in their lies" and to the Red Pill/Manosphere.

From there to the wider Alt-Right and eventually HBD essentially filled all the gaping holes in why libertarianism could work (for certain ethnic groups, to an extent) and blatantly doesn't for others and why mass-immigration is absolutely fucking insane.

OpenID basementhomebrewer August 02, 2016 6:25 PM  

dc.sunsets wrote:@ basementbt,

True, your point is supported by the fact that in a monarchy you may get an occasional bad seed...but his or her relatives can always depose or poison the clown.

The key, to me, is to have a system where the vast majority of citizens can never under any circumstances rise to power. Only then will citizens see their interests served by treating the government as a necessary evil to be carefully kept in check, instead of what we have now where every faction expects to helm leviathan and is happy to see it expand like an omnipotent hydra.


Now that is an interesting thought. Qualification involving a series of very challenging physical and mental trials televised live by anyone press who wishes to show up to the events.

I think starting with the British SBS/Delta force qualification challenge of running from point to point with undisclosed qualification time requirements would be a good start to get extremely athletic and mentally tough individuals.

Determining the problem solving/ knowledge based trials would be harder because the best design would be one that couldn't easily be cheated or gamed.

That method, sufficiently girded against cheating/collusion, would weed out very large swaths of the population from ever hoping to qualify for office.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2016 7:34 PM  

That method, sufficiently girded against cheating/collusion, would weed out very large swaths of the population from ever hoping to qualify for office.

The cynic in me just figures either the system would be gamed or the judges bought. The point is to insure that 99+% of the populace knows, to its core, that it will never---ever---rule.

Only then will citizens wisely treat (political) government as George Washington termed it, "a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

This is where the progressive cult got off track. The cultists came to see the state as the path to use coercion to make people better, ushering in the Kingdom of God on Earth. Strip every idealist socialist, every leftist, every progressive, every SJW to their essence and this is what you'll find, a child-like mental cretin who thinks Magic Uncle Sam, if run by the "right people," can make Bread into Wine and a Fish to Feed the Multitudes. What a warped notion of Christianity.

They are utterly, completely corrupt idolaters. Sodom and Gamorra, indeed, and I'm not particularly religious.

Anonymous Godfrey August 02, 2016 7:36 PM  

National Socialism is merely a socialist heresy. As an example, Protestantism has many sects, right? Well, so does socialism.

The National Socialist German Labor Party was a political sect that combined... wait for it... here it comes... nationalism and socialism.

Anonymous LastRedoubt August 02, 2016 10:53 PM  

@12 A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents

MPAI. Q.E.D.

If you have time to burn, troll these types by asking them to define their terms, starting with "Fascism". For a small effort on your part you can chew up a lot of their time.


MPAI but I'm still sometimes shocked by how thoroughly...

Sure, the guy had a sickle in his twitter handle, so him actually having read some of the background texts doesn't surprise me, but you really have to have drunk the kool-aid to so thoroughly keep arguing the "fascism/DS/etc. are not socialism" line.

After another round of socialism etc. are all totally different, I said sure, like Eastern orthodox and Calvinists are completely different, but they're all still Christianity -

...and the reply was that I had yet to make a point.

They literally can't understand a world with sufficiently different underlying assumptions, that the various strains of socialism would appear to have fundamental commonalities.

Anonymous LastRedoubt August 02, 2016 10:57 PM  

@28 Godfrey

Even as I occasionally get caught off guard by the zealous "no true socialist" / "one true socialist" types, yeah, you'll get people who argue, party platform to the contrary, that they weren't socialists.

And neither was Venezuela.


The degree to which the "intellectual" class has come to believe and espouse that the problem with "National Socialism" was the nationalism they shared with every country of the time including those opposed to them (which dictated the choice of scapegoats), and not the socialism they shared with almost every murderous totalitarian regime of that century, is amazing.

Anonymous BGKB August 02, 2016 11:11 PM  

Thats more shades of lefty than I even knew existed.

Not really they just change the name every time they fail. ACORN has the same players every time they get busted & reform.

In hindsight it is frightening to realize how effective was the brainwashing

Inner city hospitals for over 6 years. I worked with a black doctor that malpracticed himself to death with a medication error, computerized pharmacies would prevent such now.

sufficiently girded against cheating/collusion, would weed out very large swaths of the population from ever hoping to qualify

Would last until the first jew entryismed

Blogger Mountain Man August 02, 2016 11:51 PM  

@16
Its not that simple . The Rothschilds helped with the financing that propelled Hitler into power. Many elite Jews made a killing off the Nazi war machine - while the less politically connected within their tribe were being hurled into ovens

Blogger Parallel August 03, 2016 12:20 AM  

As John C Wright posted recently:

"In unreality, words have emotional import only, and are used only to express emotions, much like the barking of a dog expresses anger, or the purr of a cat expresses pleasure. What you are reading is a Rorschach blot of words, merely one subjective meaning plastered atop another, forming the verbal version of what, when expressed visually, is seen in a modern art museum as a can of shit, or a bottle of urine, or some other thing alleged to be art. In unreality, ‘fascist’ means BARK! BARK! BARK!"

Reference: http://www.scifiwright.com/2016/07/defining-fascism-and-morlockery/

Anonymous map August 03, 2016 1:49 AM  

Fascism was a reaction against Communism. Communism is international socialism. What may you think is threatening about international socialism? Its universalism. An International Socialist All-Workers Party means that the condition of the German worsens while the condition of, say, the Pole, strengthens. The leveling of "workers of the world unite" operates against the nation with the wealthiest workers.

Hence, the formation of the Nationalist Socialist German Workers Party against the International Socialist All Workers Party.

The NSDAP simply used the collectivist machinery of the Communists to defeat them at their own game...a nice reversal on the "capitalist selling the rope that will hang them."

The practical and defensive nature of NSDAP did not turn Germany into the killing field the Bolsheviks created.

Blogger Tamquam August 03, 2016 2:21 AM  

Full blown Communism means the State owns the means of production, the producers and the product. National Socialism means the private ownership of the means of production, but the State owns the producers, the product. What the progressives seem to be aiming at is private ownership of the means of production, the product and the producers, but the State ownership of income.

An interesting book: "Icebreaker" by Victor Suvorov, translated by Thomas B. Beattie

Anonymous Bob August 03, 2016 3:56 PM  

The only significant difference I can see between the communists of today like Obama and the national socialists of Germany is the beneficiary of the state. At least the Nazis benefited the actual Germans. Where the US government benefits everybody but Americans.

Blogger Thucydides August 04, 2016 1:12 AM  

Since all these concepts and political parties are factions or i interpretations of Socialism, you are actually looking at the historical evidence of an intramural brawl. Of course, today trying to get people to understand is far worse, since they have been effectively indoctrinated by 1930 era Soviet propaganda that Fascism is "Right Wing", when even Mussolini himself was very clear the foundations of the Fascies Corporate State was Socialism, and he himself was a "man of the left".

Blogger lm August 05, 2016 12:27 AM  

I've had the same debate with a commie a neo nazi and a progressive. All this year. It's a hardened myth.

Blogger lm August 05, 2016 12:29 AM  

I've had the same debate with a commie a neo nazi and a progressive. All this year. It's a hardened myth.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts