I wonder if the Weimar Republic had rent-a-fascists. I wonder if these ones know that Stalin used his own "antifa" (expendable Communist baboons) to help Hitler become chancellor, and that Stalin was an ally of Hitler for the first year of the war.
I wonder if the Weimar Republic had rent-a-fascists. I wonder if these ones know that Stalin used his own "antifa" (expendable Communist baboons) to help Hitler become chancellor, and that Stalin was an ally of Hitler for the first year of the war.
Indeed. In fact, a tacit alliance between Nazis and Communists (directed from Moscow) can probably be said to cover a whole decade and a half, beginning even before 1933, if either Trotsky or Kennan are right.
I donтАЩt think so-both the Communists and the Nazis looked for disaffected personalities first, the ideology could be added later. Hitler himself said he could convert a communist to Nazism much easier than he could a тАЬnormieтАЭ, centrist democrat type.
One of the Proud Boy leaders confirmed the basic truth of this when asked why he became a Proud Boy instead of an Antifa type тАЬBecause I saw the Proud Boys YouTube firstтАЭ.
That's an interesting way to put it. Hitler actually claimed to be a socialist at the outset (hence the name of the party) because the public mood was on the left as in much of the world and sent goons (brownshirts) out in mobs to attack communists in the street. So, yes they had rent-a-fascists. Stalin redefined socialism in his era to be a centralized system of industrialization within the Soviet Union only rather than a progressive internationalist movement consistent with Marx-Lenin... they were like-minded fascists in the end with respect to their economic plans and they governed in similar ways which made them natural allies as you said. What's disturbing to think about today, though, is that the Allies were actually on the fence about the Weimar Republic right up until 1939 (1942 for US) because it was so good for business
In strict and narrow senses, both socialism and liberalism are 19th century myths that are not wholly serviceable to analyze 20th and 21st century politics. The core point is not (just) that Hitler was a socialist and Stalin a fascist--though on a certain level that's certainly true--but that both were totalitarians and saw liberal democracy as the enemy more than each other. That's the fact (along with the delusion of a world revolution) that undoes Trotskyism.
The Bolsheviks killed bottom up communism, which was happening to some extent in Russia. Soviets were originally groups of workers who got together to make collective decisions. While I view collective decision making as difficult or even impossible, perhaps it depends on scale. In any case, before the final victory of communism there were some experiments that more closely approximate true collective decision making. I donтАЩt know enough about this but the prospect is intriguing. My understanding of human nature makes me pessimistic about group decisions. All this to say that collectivism has so far always devolved into a top down system.
You are correct, except that Stalin's misplaced affection for fellow socialist Adolf Hitler was a bit over a year beginning with the Molotov - von Ribbentrop Pact in July 1939 and ending with Barbarossa in the summer of 1941. The whole thing was a marriage of convenience, somewhat like two wolves agreeing as to who gets what portion of a sheep they are about to slaughter. It was karma at overload level for Stalin when Hitler began Operation Barbarossa, it took him days to recover from shock-induced stupor to come to grips with the reality that his friend Adolph had betrayed him.
Following Kennan, I say the alliance between Hitler and Stalin was both real and much longer than that--going back to the Communist coinage of "social fascists" to describe Social Democrats well before 1933. The street fights of Nazis and Communists served the purpose of destabilizing the Weimar Republic. The Hitler-Stalin Pact was a fruit of that kinship, not its origin. Hitler of course always knew he was going to invade Russia, but Stalin genuinely strove to avoid this realization, and to believe that he and Hitler had a more important common enemy in Britain, France, and the US.
I suppose that that the fly in the ointment would be the introduction of Benito Mussolini and his facist political model - Mussolini exerted a powerful mentor-like influence in his relationship with Hitler. I am not sure about the timeline of this relationship however. And I am not sure how much Mussolini influenced Hitler's attitude towards the Soviets. Any thoughts?
To my knowledge Mussolini was a model for Hitler before and perhaps even after the latter's ascension to power.
I like Ernst Nolte's thesis (qualified by Francois Furet) that 20s-30s-40s right wing extremism in Italy, Germany, and France (Action Fran├зaise) (= fascism as a generic) adopted the methods and models of the extreme left, especially Leninism. It emulated the totalitarian ideology, party, and party-state of its adversaries (of course with adjustments). Furet qualifies this (while affirming it at core), pointing out that the fascist right drew on its own sources of anti-bourgeois and anti-liberal rage. It didn't just pick that up from the radical left. Lenin was, nevertheless, a model for both Mussolini and Hitler, though of course they rejected the Bolshevik ideology in favor of nationalism or racialism (far more popular, as it happens!). This understanding of the centrality of Lenin has been more recently argued, too, by the historian Robert Gellately.
Thank you for the comment re. Mussolini's role. After reading Barzini's The Italians, I came to believe that Mussolini's nationalist fervor was from tapping into the Italian sense of inferiority and proclivity for losing wars and more to the point, the lack of respect coming from other nations that considered the Italians their lessers. He was a politician with seemingly boundless energy and a physical fitness fanatic and as such, along with his nationalism he rose to the top of the post WWI political heap. Hitler admired this almost to the extent of fawning admiration, as I recall.
Yes the original antifa punched a lot of Nazis like the current idiots say they want to do, and even killed a bunch, and the chaos they helped create arguably only empowered Hitler.
I wonder if the Weimar Republic had rent-a-fascists. I wonder if these ones know that Stalin used his own "antifa" (expendable Communist baboons) to help Hitler become chancellor, and that Stalin was an ally of Hitler for the first year of the war.
Non aggression pact lasted almost 2 years
Indeed. In fact, a tacit alliance between Nazis and Communists (directed from Moscow) can probably be said to cover a whole decade and a half, beginning even before 1933, if either Trotsky or Kennan are right.
A socialist civil war
I donтАЩt think so-both the Communists and the Nazis looked for disaffected personalities first, the ideology could be added later. Hitler himself said he could convert a communist to Nazism much easier than he could a тАЬnormieтАЭ, centrist democrat type.
One of the Proud Boy leaders confirmed the basic truth of this when asked why he became a Proud Boy instead of an Antifa type тАЬBecause I saw the Proud Boys YouTube firstтАЭ.
Ideology is precisely the vehicle of disaffection, alienation, and resentment in the age of mass democracy.
That's an interesting way to put it. Hitler actually claimed to be a socialist at the outset (hence the name of the party) because the public mood was on the left as in much of the world and sent goons (brownshirts) out in mobs to attack communists in the street. So, yes they had rent-a-fascists. Stalin redefined socialism in his era to be a centralized system of industrialization within the Soviet Union only rather than a progressive internationalist movement consistent with Marx-Lenin... they were like-minded fascists in the end with respect to their economic plans and they governed in similar ways which made them natural allies as you said. What's disturbing to think about today, though, is that the Allies were actually on the fence about the Weimar Republic right up until 1939 (1942 for US) because it was so good for business
In strict and narrow senses, both socialism and liberalism are 19th century myths that are not wholly serviceable to analyze 20th and 21st century politics. The core point is not (just) that Hitler was a socialist and Stalin a fascist--though on a certain level that's certainly true--but that both were totalitarians and saw liberal democracy as the enemy more than each other. That's the fact (along with the delusion of a world revolution) that undoes Trotskyism.
The Bolsheviks killed bottom up communism, which was happening to some extent in Russia. Soviets were originally groups of workers who got together to make collective decisions. While I view collective decision making as difficult or even impossible, perhaps it depends on scale. In any case, before the final victory of communism there were some experiments that more closely approximate true collective decision making. I donтАЩt know enough about this but the prospect is intriguing. My understanding of human nature makes me pessimistic about group decisions. All this to say that collectivism has so far always devolved into a top down system.
You are correct, except that Stalin's misplaced affection for fellow socialist Adolf Hitler was a bit over a year beginning with the Molotov - von Ribbentrop Pact in July 1939 and ending with Barbarossa in the summer of 1941. The whole thing was a marriage of convenience, somewhat like two wolves agreeing as to who gets what portion of a sheep they are about to slaughter. It was karma at overload level for Stalin when Hitler began Operation Barbarossa, it took him days to recover from shock-induced stupor to come to grips with the reality that his friend Adolph had betrayed him.
Following Kennan, I say the alliance between Hitler and Stalin was both real and much longer than that--going back to the Communist coinage of "social fascists" to describe Social Democrats well before 1933. The street fights of Nazis and Communists served the purpose of destabilizing the Weimar Republic. The Hitler-Stalin Pact was a fruit of that kinship, not its origin. Hitler of course always knew he was going to invade Russia, but Stalin genuinely strove to avoid this realization, and to believe that he and Hitler had a more important common enemy in Britain, France, and the US.
I suppose that that the fly in the ointment would be the introduction of Benito Mussolini and his facist political model - Mussolini exerted a powerful mentor-like influence in his relationship with Hitler. I am not sure about the timeline of this relationship however. And I am not sure how much Mussolini influenced Hitler's attitude towards the Soviets. Any thoughts?
To my knowledge Mussolini was a model for Hitler before and perhaps even after the latter's ascension to power.
I like Ernst Nolte's thesis (qualified by Francois Furet) that 20s-30s-40s right wing extremism in Italy, Germany, and France (Action Fran├зaise) (= fascism as a generic) adopted the methods and models of the extreme left, especially Leninism. It emulated the totalitarian ideology, party, and party-state of its adversaries (of course with adjustments). Furet qualifies this (while affirming it at core), pointing out that the fascist right drew on its own sources of anti-bourgeois and anti-liberal rage. It didn't just pick that up from the radical left. Lenin was, nevertheless, a model for both Mussolini and Hitler, though of course they rejected the Bolshevik ideology in favor of nationalism or racialism (far more popular, as it happens!). This understanding of the centrality of Lenin has been more recently argued, too, by the historian Robert Gellately.
Thank you for the comment re. Mussolini's role. After reading Barzini's The Italians, I came to believe that Mussolini's nationalist fervor was from tapping into the Italian sense of inferiority and proclivity for losing wars and more to the point, the lack of respect coming from other nations that considered the Italians their lessers. He was a politician with seemingly boundless energy and a physical fitness fanatic and as such, along with his nationalism he rose to the top of the post WWI political heap. Hitler admired this almost to the extent of fawning admiration, as I recall.
Grievance is a must for fascists.
Yes the original antifa punched a lot of Nazis like the current idiots say they want to do, and even killed a bunch, and the chaos they helped create arguably only empowered Hitler.