Friday, August 12, 2022




Fascism: Left, Right, or Neither?

An article under the above title will appear in a forthcoming issue of The Independent Review. A summary of it follows

Where does the fascism of Mussolini’s Italy fall in the spectrum of political doctrines? Italy’s fascist government conducted a policy of partial socialization of private property, total collectivization of consciousness, and large-scale redistribution of wealth. Therefore, even if fascism was theoretically conceived by its founders as not belonging to either the Right or the Left, its practical implementation showed that the whole building of fascism gravitated toward the right flank of the Left.

You can however download a preprint in PDF. I give an excerpt below from it

Fascism: Left, Right, or Neither?

Although it was short-lived from a historical perspective, its basic ideology and practice have confounded political scientists until the present day. There is no consensus among various political and academic circles (sociological, historical, and economic) regarding its place on the political spectrum. Fascism has become the most controversial politico-economic doctrine, for which no answer has yet been found that would satisfy all interested parties.

The reason is that fascism was theoretically conceived as a compromise between liberal capitalism and socialism, and as such, was deemed to possess the properties of both doctrines. One of the disputing parties has the opportunity to exaggerate the features of individualism in fascism and to assert its belonging to the reactionary form of capitalism. Another sees the features of collectivism and classifies fascism as a kind of socialism. Finally, the third argues that fascism occupies its own unique niche on the political spectrum: it is neither the left nor the right.

The unprecedented ambiguity in defining and understanding fascism was, first of all, the result of vicious interspecific struggles among different socialist currents. In particular, the initial response to the phenomenon of fascism predictably came from the communist camp in the inter-war period. It also marked the beginning of the direct and thoughtful falsification of the nature of genuine fascism. Bolsheviks insisted that fascism did not dismantle a capitalist state. They asserted that fascism was the revolt of the petty bourgeoisie, which had captured the state’s machinery.

The Marxist-Leninist arguments were as follows: The fascist core consisted of former social-chauvinists, reformists, and revisionists, who, in Lenin's words, “went to the right” and therefore are agents of the petty bourgeoisie. It follows, then, that fascism is a counter-revolution organized by this reactionary class stratum. Trotsky (1932) stated, “Italian fascism was the immediate outgrowth of the betrayal by the reformists of the uprising of the Italian proletariat.”

However, the identification of fascism with the petty bourgeois counterrevolution turned out to be a rather unconvincing and to some extent emotional explanation. Indeed, as a subclass that did not receive due attention in Marxism, except that it had to disappear from the face of the earth because of the concentration of capital tendency, could arrange a counter-revolution? Surely other, more powerful and understandable forces described by Marxism had to be involved. Of course, the Marxist ideologues immediately found such counter-revolutionary forces. Bulgarian communist Georgi Dimitrov (1935) asserted that “fascism in power was … the open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialist elements of finance capital.” Furthermore, he stated, “Fascism is the 4 power of finance capital itself.”

The communist camp began discrediting fascism on several fronts. They did not accept a mass character of the fascist movement; they described bourgeoise of all ranks as a driving force of the fascist counter-revolution; they theorized about various forms that fascism could take in different countries and assigned all authoritarian regimes to fascism, except the Soviet one. Such lines of thought have remained unchanged for years and were reinforced after World War II, as the Soviet Union and Western allies were victors, and the Left had an opportunity to write and rewrite history at will.

Marxists tried hard to camouflage the actual features of fascism, producing several conflicting explanations of the phenomenon that all insisted the doctrine has nothing to do with either socialism or the worker movement. Reverberation of the Marxist approach can be found in many scientific treatises on fascism and its place on the political spectrum that appeared after World War II

It is truly amazing the way the Left distort reality to support the Marxist view of Fascism. You can see it in summary form in that well-known Leftist rag "Wikipedia". Wikipedia says Fascism was Rightist on two main grounds: Its authoritarianism and its nationalism. The first ground is a real laugh. Without a doubt the most authoritarian form of politics is Communism. So is Communism Rightist? Its authoritariansm in fact identifies Fascism as Leftist

The second focus in Wikipedia is on Fascism's Nationalism. That argument has better traction because modern-day Leftists reject Nationalism. But Leftists did not always do that. Hitler was born in the 19th century (1889) and in the 19th and early 20th century, many Leftists were nationalist. One of the most fervent 19th century nationalists was in fact Friedrich Engels, the collaborator of Karl Marx. So the nationalism component of Fascism was thoroughly Leftist in its day. Wikipedia deliberately ignores history.

For a fuller historical treatment of Fascism, see my extensive article on the subject


**********************************************

Trump Raid Brings Us One Step Closer To Civil War

There are cases which cannot be overdone by language, and this is one. There are persons, too, who see not the full extent of the evil which threatens them; they solace themselves with hopes that the enemy, if he succeeds, will be merciful. It is the madness of folly, to expect mercy from those who have refused to do justice... Thomas Paine, The Crisis, December 23, 1776

The shocking FBI raid on former President Donald Trump’s home in Palm Beach, Florida has escalated America’s 21st century crisis and, as we predicted in our four-part series “The Coming Civil War” made a civil war all the more likely.

Right now, one thing, perhaps the only thing, keeping America from devolving into civil war is the refusal of conservatives to emulate the city-burning violence of the ANTIFA cells in Washington, DC, Portland, Oregon and Seattle and the BLM organizers across the country.

What it will take to release that cork from the bottled-up rage on the Right is unknown, but we must assume that conservative tolerance for injustice and oppression is not infinite and that the unjust arrest of former President Donald Trump would certainly be an incitement to violence from his supporters.

And maybe that’s what Democrats and their Deep State allies want.

Some wise observers have suggested that Democrats and their allies on the Left would like nothing better than an excuse to follow-up the J6 witch hunt with a more general crackdown on conservatives. There’s a certain logic to that analysis, because the Left has never been stronger than they are now, while at the same time the 2022 midterm election threatens them with losing the power they corruptly seized in the 2020 election.

It would be entirely logical for the Left to provoke the confrontation now when they are in complete control of the government and all the levers of power and means of state violence.

What’s more, having seized all the levers of power and means of state violence they have completely corrupted the law enforcement and judicial institutions that might have restrained them just a few years ago.

If reports are to be believed, the raid was prompted by complaints from the head librarian of the National Archives that the former President had taken classified materials from his office in the White House to his home in Florida.

This is a completely specious justification said Kash Patel, a former top Trump administration official, who told Breitbart News back in May that a report claiming classified materials were found at Mar-a-Lago is misleading and that the documents were actually already declassified by then-President Donald Trump, but the classification markings had not been updated.

“Trump declassified whole sets of materials in anticipation of leaving government that he thought the American public should have the right to read themselves,” Patel told Breitbart News.

However, as our friend Ben Weingarten wrote in his latest column for Newsweek, the specific legal grounds for the raid, like the grounds for the coming indictment, are really beside the point.

Trump's crime, wrote Mr. Weingarten, was and always has been, that he threatened The Regime's power and privilege—in so doing, representing tens of millions of Americans who The Regime considers an impediment to its total control, and who it holds in utter contempt.

That's all the "predication" The Regime needed to pursue him from the day he emerged in Trump Tower to declare himself an unprecedented political force, and, since, treat all manner of like-minded Wrongthinkers the same.

The pretense of the rule of law is gone, said Weingarten, and to delude oneself into thinking otherwise after the two-tier, Soviet standard of justice we have seen applied again and again over the last six years would be dangerous folly.

Having suffered what it perceived to be a near-death experience in the election of Donald Trump, Ben Weingarten concluded The Regime must now show that anyone and everyone from the lowliest of non-violent January 6-ers held in pretrial detention to Trump himself can, and will, be crushed if they dare to not submit.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said the raid of Trump’s home represents “another escalation in the weaponization of federal agencies against the Regime’s political opponents,” while noting that people like President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden “get treated with kid gloves.”

“Now the Regime is getting another 87k IRS agents to wield against its adversaries? Banana Republic,” DeSantis said.

Banana Republic it is, and if we don’t repel it now, a Banana Republic is what we will become.

*******************************************************

Hispanics shift right

By Rick Manning

When a prominent researcher leaves the far-left Center for American Progress and lands at the much more conservative American Enterprise Institute, it is something that makes you scratch your head.

When that researcher is the co-author of the 2002 book, “The Emerging Democratic Majority” which predicted that the browning of America was destined to create an unstoppable Democrat majority, you sit up and notice.

But when the author, Ruy Teixeira, is telling anyone and everyone that the Democrats are losing the middle class, it forces you to question what is happening and why?

Market Research Foundation has been at the forefront of the shift of blue collar voters with special focus on Hispanics from the reliable left to their new status as swing voters who have increasingly rejected big government policies and those who care more about race than prosperity.

Big change is happening, and our friends at Market Research Foundation are all over it. Click here to learn more about their research that has predicted the shift that manifested itself in Mayra Flores’ victory in a Texas border congressional district special election in June.

https://dailytorch.com/2022/08/hispanics-shift-right/ ?

******************************************************

Gender clinics in danger of legal suits

Lawyers say Australian gender clinics may face legal action following news that Britain’s Tavistock clinic is facing a major medical negligence law suit from youngsters who claim they were “started on a treatment pathway that was not right for them”.

The legal action may have significant implications for several Australian gender clinics based at children’s hospitals across the country, where Tavistock’s contentious practices have played a strong influence in treatment.

Leading compensation law firm Gerard Malouf & Partners is exploring the prospects and feasibility of a similar class-action lawsuit in Australia.

In Britain, The Times reports that 1000 families are expected to join the medical negligence lawsuit, which is understood to allege that the gender-identity clinic “rushed” some young patients into treatment.

The Tavistock clinic is accused of recklessly prescribing puberty blockers with harmful side effects and is also alleged to have adopted an “unquestioning, affirmative approach” to children identifying as transgender.

The clinic is to be shut down after an independent review, led by Hilary Cass, found it was leaving young people “at considerable risk” of poor mental health and distress, and was “not a safe or ­viable long-term option”.

University of Queensland law professor Patrick Parkinson, who was involved in a landmark British High Court ruling that prohibited children under the age of 16 from consenting to puberty-blocking treatment, said the prospects of similar action in Australia were “very likely”.

“I’m expecting to see it here, I’m expecting to see it against hospitals and against individual doctors. Sooner or later, this is going to end up in the courts as a negligence issue,” he said.

“I think Australian gender clinics apart from Sydney are probably less conservative and less cautious than the Tavistock was. The decision of the British government raises serious questions about the continuation of the model in Australia and really justifies a major inquiry being set up.”

Professor Parkinson said the British government and the National Health Service lost confidence in the model of treatment that Tavistock promoted.

“The results of the closure of Tavistock is going to be that a mental health approach will be the first line, and I suspect that ­puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones will only be prescribed as a last resort in the most serious cases where psychotherapy does not prove to be effective,” he said.

Queensland paediatrician Dylan Wilson said he believed several young adults around the country who had been injured as result of being prescribed puberty blockers or hormone treatments as minors might have recourse to the courts.

“One hundred per cent there are children who have been harmed,” Dr Wilson said. “Even if they think it was worth it at the time, there are children who have suffered infertility and sexual dysfunction as a result of treatments and they may only be realising that now.

“If you’re puberty-blocked at an early stage, there are inevitable consequences. You can’t not be infertile if you’re puberty-blocked in the very first stages of puberty.”

Dr Wilson questioned the standard of care in gender clinics that take a gender-affirming approach. “The standards of care have never been held in high regard outside of gender clinics themselves,” he said.

“They publish their own ­papers and they say the paper we publish is evidence that what we’re doing is right. “They write the guidelines and they say ‘We’re following the guidelines’. “These are not internationally accepted guidelines.”

****************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

*****************************************

No comments: