/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19941349]

Yesterday we had a nice thread about fascism. Very informative.

But the anon who wrote a long effortpost about fascism never replied when people asked him what books should one read to get a better understanding of fascism as an ideology, so this thread is to get some suggestions (and hopefully to summon fascistanon so he can elaborate further).

[Anonymous No.19941356]

Pic related: the effortpost.

[Anonymous No.19941365]

>>19941356
>organic
>hierarchical
>fash faggots actually unironically mean this

[Anonymous No.19941376]

>>19941365
Shut up commie. Your kind doesn't have the brain or the knowledge to engage in discussions.

[Anonymous No.19941383]

>>19941349
Fascists are unironically niggerbrained. They can never admit this to themselves.

[Anonymous No.19941387]

>>19941365
They always say that shit, but how it works in practice party membership determines your job prospects is never made clear, they clearly have no idea.

[Anonymous No.19941390]

>>19941383
>NOOOO STOP TRYING TO HAVE A MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION! FASCISTS NEED TO BE IGNORANT REDNECKS BECAUSE THAT'S THE STEREOTYPE WE LIKE TO PROPAGANDIZE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO ARGUE WITH THEM BECAUSE WE KNOW THEY'D WIN

[Anonymous No.19941392]

>>19941376
You dumb cunt, what the fuck are you even bitching about with your horseshit about 'knowledge'? You invoked nature, while equating it with hierarchy, perhaps the least natural structure even invented. Your kind is the most braindead on this planet, get out and fuck off back to /pol/ where you came from, retard

[Anonymous No.19941398]

>>19941390
>Fascists
>winning
Lel

[Anonymous No.19941402]

>>19941390
Don't be mad at the truth, fagist. It'll just hurt your feefees more

[Anonymous No.19941403]

>>19941387
Learn to speak english before coming here to shit up the board. Mongoloid commie.

>>19941392
What a surprise, the commie inbred mongoloid doesn't understand the concept of "knowledge". I guess living your life regurgitating the propaganda you swallowed from your masters is easier for a shitwit like you.

[Anonymous No.19941417]

>>19941349
thats some cringe shit OP, my policy is "the most competent should rule" lmao.
>The human condition itself
>actively encourage meritocracy
Shills for a party based state....meritocratic and hierarchical

[Anonymous No.19941420]

There is one anon on /lit/ who is really big into Italian Fascism and while he does great work I think he is a bit like a Communist who only accepts Leninism as valid Marxism and is dismissive of any other theories or manifestations or understandings of Marxism except as strained through Lenin. I agree with him on most things but I think he is too exclusive of non-Mussolinian fascism.

For a basic introduction to fascism I recommend an overview book like Paxton's or Payne's, then read Sternhell's Neither Right nor Left / Birthplace of Fascist Ideology books, Gregor's Ideology of Fascism, Griffin's Nature of Fascism and Fascism and Modernism, Mosse's Crisis of German Ideology and The Fascist Revolution: Toward a General Theory, Armin Mohler's and Roger Woods' books on the Conservative Revolition. Sadly Mohler only got an English translation a few years back and it's spotty, but you can still get the ideas at least.

This should give you plenty of material and expose you to most interpretations so you can then go your own way. There's no real perfect order to these, although if you are interested primarily in Italian fascism I recommend focusing on Gregor and Sternhell first, if German fascism, then the others. Sternhell will also introduce you to the French milieu and you may find yourself more interested in Drieu la Rochelle and Brasillach. If you want an overview of the different interpretations of fascism over the years try Gottfried's short book Fascism: The Career of a Concept, you could even read that first.

I also recommend reading Nolte's work and not reducing it to the caricature of the mimesis thesis.

Reading primary sources is also important. If you are interested in third positionism, try Primo de Rivera's essays. If you are more into volkisch thought and palingenesis, maybe Codreanu instead. But as you read more history you will start to have your own ideas about what you want to read and where you think fascism came from and where it's headed.

If you don't mind post-war writings, Maurice Bardeche is interesting. Also on the post-war "fascist international," read The Beast Reawakens, and there's an interesting biography of Yockey out there too.

I also recommend reading about an aspect of fascism that is usually neglected, its war against finance capital on a global scale. It was essentially a breakaway civilisation (see for example Evola's attempt to turn the SS into an international fraternity and aristocracy). This is a useful introduction to many names and ideas:
https://counter-currents.com/tag/breaking-the-bondage-of-interest/

[Anonymous No.19941422]

>>19941392
>You invoked nature
I didn't invoke anything. I'm not the author of that post, as I CLEARLY said in the OP. What a stupid piece of shit you are. Can't even read and want to roleplay as a debater. Ridiculous.

>while equating it with hierarchy, perhaps the least natural structure even invented
Hierarchy wasn't "invented", stupid shit for brains. It emerges naturally and inevitably in every social species. Take a group of wolves and they'll naturally develop a hierarchy. Take a group of chickens and they'll naturally develop a pecking order. Humans are no exceptions, since individuals are born with natural strengths and talents of different magnitude. Hierarchy is natural. Trying to suffocate it by reducing everyone to the lowest common denominator, like you commies try to do (failing everytime) is what's artificial. Stupid piece of shit my fucking God how fucking idiotic do you need to be to not even understand something like this fucking hell go drink diarrhea and die quietly.

[Anonymous No.19941433]

>>19941420
Thanks man. This thread has served its purpose, I'd say. I managed to get my recommendations and to shit in some commie's mouth.

[Anonymous No.19941435]

>>19941390
Who said anything about rednecks? I said you’re niggerbrained.

[Anonymous No.19941437]

>>19941422
The fact that every society operates as a multitude of overlapping hierarchies should make me support fascism and a one party state?

[Anonymous No.19941443]

>>19941435
>the shit for brains is still blabbing about
Your mother is a piece of shit for birthing a mongoloid like you. Should've just taken it up the ass from her brother.

[Anonymous No.19941444]

>>19941403
Guess what, retard, faggy maymays from /pol/ don't qualify for knowledge, they qualify for what fashshitsm deep down truly is, the angry seethings of lonely losers. No amount of 'muh propaganda' (lol as if the right has no propaganda or business interests) can change that, and even if under the extreme off chance you manage to take power of anything, we can always make the very safe bet that you'll just fuck it up as usual.

The sun rises, life ends, and righttards will always fuck up, often even harder than any leftist ever could

[Anonymous No.19941453]

>>19941422
>It emerges naturally and inevitably in every social species.

That must be why you don't accept the current libdem 'globohomo' hierarchy, because it's so completely natural.

Lol, you fags can't even make a point you agree with, no wonder no one accepts your bullshit

[Anonymous No.19941473]

>>19941443
>yo momma
Typical niggerbrainedness.

[Anonymous No.19941479]

>>19941365
>>19941383
>>19941402
>>19941444
Literally no arguments made here

[Anonymous No.19941492]

>>19941479
Motherfucker, you claim that hierarchical power structures are completely natural, while you probably took on your ideology in defiance of the current paradigm of the current hierarchical power structure. I don't even need to refute your shit for brains worldview, you seem to be more than capable of that yourself, fucktard

[Anonymous No.19941494]

>>19941453
>That must be why you don't accept the current libdem 'globohomo' hierarchy, because it's so completely natural.
The United States lost Afghanistan. Just because the west has been liberal for three centuries doesnt mean the rest of the world is or that it’s natural. Acting in your self interest in natural, which is why liberal countries do illiberal shit to maintain their hegemony

[Anonymous No.19941497]

>>19941479
>debate me
That’s some kikebrained shit right there.

[Anonymous No.19941502]

>>19941492
I’m not even that anon you assblasted schizo, but believing that hierarchy = good doesn’t mean “this particular hierarchy = good”

[Anonymous No.19941514]

>>19941494
The entire globe is becoming liberal, it is inevitable. Its the global energy minimum of societal development

[Anonymous No.19941566]

>>19941502
>the real™, infallible hierarchy has never been tried

This is literally what you mock communists for, for saying exactly this. I can't even be bothered, you're so fucking stupid

[Anonymous No.19941605]

incel general

[Anonymous No.19941633]

Remember, ignore trannies.

[Anonymous No.19941720]

"Long live the new world of the 20th century!
Long live fascist Italy!
Long live Soviet Russia!
Long live Hitler's Germany!
Long live the Spain that we will do! Down with the bourgeois and parliamentary democracies!"

"Thered shirtofGaribaldifits Ramiro Ledesma and his comrades better than theblack shirtof Mussolini."

[Anonymous No.19941747]

>>19941720
That quote is from Payne, here is the full context. He was a national syndicalist to the core and measured everything against it. Very interesting figure.

[Anonymous No.19941787]

I've got this book, seems to be very rare. Picture stolen from the internet because I can't be bothered to take my own. It's called The Philosophy of Fascism by Mario Palmieri. It's a very nice book, seems to be made from sheepskin or something. My edition is signed by the author.

I have another called The History of the Facist Movement by Gioachino Volpe. I haven't read this one since it's in very poor shape.

There's a great book called Mussolini as revealed in his political speeches that traces the development of Musollini's political thought from Marxism to fascism. Needless to say, all o the above books are incredibly rare.

There's a lot other books here: http://bibliotecafascista.blogspot.com/p/books.html

[Anonymous No.19941797]

>>19941787
Clicked the wrong picture, this is the book I mentioned.

[Anonymous No.19941865]

>>19941787
Italian Fascist aesthetics were so... aesthetic.

[Anonymous No.19941908]

>>19941865
They were a lot more forward thinking than the Germans. This interesting little design is in a book about travel in Italy.

[Anonymous No.19941946]

I'd love there to be a book that describes the spectrum from more reactionary to more modernist forms of Fashion. Fascism being a dialectic of these tendencies is what fascinates me about it.

[Anonymous No.19941952]

[Anonymous No.19941992]

[Anonymous No.19942165]

>>19941952
Are you the anti-nazi spammer
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/filename/genocide3/image/iU1ztfd6NYFnUL7imngfmw/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/i0OstoqxJWfLmUCnkOfb4A/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/uOcw34PhB5WCOhoRt2y7lQ/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/filename/autistichitler/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/Hscz5rbprn90GrWyWbYI4Q/

[Anonymous No.19942242]

>>19942165
nigga what lmao

[Anonymous No.19942256]

>>19941492
Hierarchy exists in every human society. You commies pretend to look back to some fictional "nature" that we all know nothing about to make the claim that hierarchy is unnatural.

[Anonymous No.19942267]

>>19942242
There's a guy who shows up usually on /tv/, /int/, /his/ but lately /lit/ too and posts the same demoralization images of Germans crossdressing, retards and furries in Nazi outfits, usually with iPhone cloud filenames. He's annoying so I was worried it was him about to ruin the thread.

[Anonymous No.19942324]

>>19941356
in a way, this characterization would imply that fascism is a means to an end/ a flavour of orgnanization rather than an ideology per se. Anything from religion to culture to language to race can be chosen as the nexus of the fascist polity. Interesting that using this description one can equally imagine fascist Italy or even a "liberal" fascist culture that upholds rights of women/gays/troons, while still being explicitly culturally chauvanist and exclusive.

[Anonymous No.19942325]

>>19941349
>But the anon who wrote a long effortpost about fascism never replied when people asked him what books should one read to get a better understanding of fascism as an ideology,
that's because they were getting their understanding through tertiary sources, probably mostly wikipedia
generally i advise against trusting anyone who makes effortposts on 4chan, they normally don't know what they're talking about in my experience

[Anonymous No.19942336]

>>19942256
I agree. I think the ideal would be to organize societies based on IQ hierarchies, with Jews/Chinese as the ruling class, whites as the middle class, and all else at the bottom. It would be most efficient and promote maximum strength and satisfaction.

[Anonymous No.19942486]

>>19941492
>you claim that hierarchical power structures are completely natural, while you probably took on your ideology in defiance of the current paradigm of the current hierarchical power structure.
The current hierarchy might be natural, but it is hidden and not recognized by the masses, instead we are presented with an egalitarian falsity, meanwhile the actual society is not egalitarian at all. Fascism aims to eliminate this ignorance by making people realize the actual state of affaris, thus providing people an adequate worldview and framework to operate in, and also the power structures formed in a fascist society are healthier and more benevolent towards people, since everybody recognizes the presence of hierarchies, unlike nowadays hierarchies are truly seen only by those in power, and a different picture is presented to everyone else.

[Anonymous No.19942574]

>>19942486
>Fascism aims to eliminate this ignorance by making people realize the actual state of affaris, thus providing people an adequate worldview and framework to operate in
You guys can never answer what this means in practice. All societies are formed from overlapping hierarchies, thats simple enough. But, your fascist hierarchy world view in practice is just one party state nepotism; it ultimately dilutes your ideology by inducing the ambitious to join the party until it becomes a bourgeoise dictatorship.

> are healthier and more benevolent towards people unlike nowadays hierarchies are truly seen only by those in power
Fascist states are clearly murderous, on a scale from around 20,000 in Italy to hundreds of thousands in Germany, not very benevolent. In a fascist society there is no ability to cycle elites outside of the party structure, unlike in liberal democracy where elites can be peacefully cycled through elections as different interest groups wane and rise. Fascist states with interest groups rigidly set in stone and no having no political representation will create an unhealthy society that is less benevolent towards the population

[Anonymous No.19942604]

>>19941349
You need to be 18+ to stay here

[Anonymous No.19942672]

>>19942574
>You guys can never answer what this means in practice.
What is your question?
>to hundreds of thousands in Germany
Are you confusing Germany with Soviet Union? What hundreds of thousands are you talking about? There was barely anyone imprisoned until the war began.
> In a fascist society there is no ability to cycle elites outside of the party structure
What's the point of cycling elites outside of party?
>unlike in liberal democracy where elites can be peacefully cycled through elections as different interest groups wane and rise
Factually incorrect. Look at any liberal democracy like the US or UK, to be in the elite, you have to be born as an elite. Look at a country which barely pretends to have democracy like Russia, which de-facto has one party system and you would see that political and economical elites are comprised primarily of people with humble origin.
>as different interest groups wane and rise
Why do we want different interest groups fighting for power, especially when those interests groups are not what they present themselves to be?
>Fascist states with interest groups rigidly set in stone and no having no political representation will create an unhealthy society that is less benevolent towards the population
Well if you say so.

[Anonymous No.19942683]

>>19942486
Yeah okay this is just some more 'real hierarchies have never been tried'. You're a retard

[Anonymous No.19942723]

>>19942683
>'real hierarchies have never been tried'
Where did I say something like that? If you lack reading comprehension that much, what are you doing on this board?

[Anonymous No.19942744]

>>19942723
>The current hierarchy might be natural, but it is hidden

True, you said something even gayer

[Anonymous No.19942772]

>>19942744
True that you lack reading comprehension?

[Anonymous No.19942879]

>>19942672
The NAZIs murdered hundreds of thousands of its own citens. Jews,, leftists, the infirm, some rightists

Interest groups capture the one party state, cannot be easily dislodged without a Stalin like figure, prevent needed reforms. The military, petroleum sector, and the collective farm lobbies massive influence led to the failure of Soviet state to reform in the 80s. They forced Gorbachev to tailor his reforms to them leading to the inflationary crisis. Had the facists survived long enough they would have met a similar fate.

Elite circulation is not about changing who is elite but allowing new elites access to government. In your facist one party state circulation is impeded. Democracy changes whose in government, allows new interest groups (steel barons lose influence tech gains it in a crude example) to influence policy through new governments, alleviates social tension. Read Pareto and Burnham:

"When governing or nongoverning elites attempt to close themselves to the influx of newer and more capable elements from the underlying population, when the circulation of elites is impeded, social equilibrium is upset and the social order will decay. Pareto argued that if the governing elite does not "find ways to assimilate the exceptional individuals who come to the front in the subject classes," an imbalance is created in the body politic and the body social until this condition is rectified, either through a new opening of channels of mobility or through violent overthrow of an old ineffectual governing elite by a new one that is capable of governing."

[Anonymous No.19942901]

today I will remind em

[Anonymous No.19942920]

>>19941787
The concept of autarchy is batshit insane and moronic. Global trade is necessary for specialization and specialization is necessary for efficiency. How can a country with no iron produce agricoltural machinery. How can a country with no phosphates produce fertilizer? Cow dung? Yeah that's fucking inefficient and good luck getting enough cow shit to fertilize every field.
I am Italian and I absolutely abhor fascism and hate mussolini. Why? Because he sent hundreds of thousands of men to die for a stupid ideal and he sold out country to Hitler.
Fascism and communism and authoritarianism in general lead to an unhappy populace, economic stagnation, and war. Fascism and communism are both collectivist ideologies and collectivism is the most cuckhold ideology out there.
Individualism, FREEDOM, the free market, freedom of speech and of enterprise. Freedom is more important than life. I'm not a dog with a master that fucking tells me what to fucking do and I'm not going to put aside my own well being and ambitions just for a "greater good" that really just ends up fattening the pockets of those who govern.
The best places to live on Earth are democratic free market countries with no niggers and commies in them.

[Anonymous No.19942922]

>>19942901
Strasser is retarded but responding to him with hideously boring cliche Marxist-Leninst drivel is not the answer.

[Anonymous No.19942926]

>>19941502
>believing that hierarchy = good doesn’t mean “this particular hierarchy = good”
it literally does lmao

[Anonymous No.19942929]

>>19942920
Nigga I posted about books

[Anonymous No.19942931]

>>19942922
all fashists are class cucks and are easily btfo by the marxist concept of the state

[Anonymous No.19942975]

>>19941356
Jesus Christ

[Anonymous No.19943083]

>>19941865
WOAAA AESTHETIC BRO!! AESTHETIC!!!

SOO COOLL I LOVE FASCISMM !!! SO AESTHETIC!

AESTHETICS! LOL

[Anonymous No.19943109]

>>19943083
Life must be aesthetically justified

[Anonymous No.19943111]

>>19943083
>WOAAA AESTHETIC BRO!! AESTHETIC!!!
>SOO COOLL I LOVE FASCISMM !!! SO AESTHETIC!
>AESTHETICS! LOL

[Anonymous No.19943130]

>>19943111
DUDE SO AESTHETIC LOL!!!!! JUST SAVED IT!!!

AESTHETICS!!

[Anonymous No.19943132]

>>19941356
what a load of deluded horseshit. apparently skipped all history classes at school or is an amerimutt.

[Anonymous No.19943141]

>>19941356
is this effortposting? AHAHAHAHAH

[Anonymous No.19943183]

>>19942975
>>19943132
>>19943141
Feel free to provide constructive criticsms.

[Anonymous No.19943193]

>>19943183
look out the window and be grateful

[Anonymous No.19943200]

>>19941433
>>19941479
I think they're behaving the way they perceive internet reactionaries to behave towards them. It's fascinating to see the tone change from in discussions of their ideas and authors, to this. In one context their political opponents are niggers and kikes, but in another the blacks and jews are fine btw stop focusing on race. Fascinating. They must be seething from previous discussion(s).

[Anonymous No.19943251]

>>19942901
I am not even a Strasserite, I prefer Werner Sombart's post-Marxist national socialism and other forms of national syndicalism like Roberto Michels. But this doesn't really seem to answer the Strasserite position. He simply states that the Strasserites think that the state is a mediator, and then states that Marxists think it isn't. How is that "learning" something? Granted Strasserism presupposes one ontology of the state, but then this guy just presupposes a class warfare view in which all human culture (including states and their institutions) are reified forms of the class struggle.

If the proof is in the pudding, like Engels said, shouldn't we compare and contrast the actual results of fascist economics with the economic situation in the USSR? In the USSR, the revolutionary ideal of Trotsky, Luxemburg, and Lenin imploded into a Stalinist racial-imperial state as soon as it had to deal with geopolitical realities. Lenin thought that the nationalities would naturally coexist in some kind of democratic union, but (and this supports the fascist position that nations, and thus nation-states, are natural formations), they all wanted to rebel from the USSR and go their own way as effective ethnostates. The principle of self-organisation they democratically chose was their traditional ethno-linguistic-cultural identity, their "people" (Volk, gens, etc.). The USSR in response went full realpolitik and used the traditional Russian nationality (led by, it must be admitted, a disproportionate proportion of Jews at first) to reassert something that looked suspiciously like the conventional Russian imperial Großraum, or konkrete Ordnung/nomos (Schmitt).

The USSR then functioned, again, suspiciously similar to the worst tendencies in the tsarist authoritarianism it had supposedly superseded: a totalitarian censorship regime, mobilising the population via propaganda and an institutionalised public religion (Orthodoxy / Mialectical Materialism), ruled over by a caste of loathed bureaucrats (apparatchiks / Djilas' "New Class") with a secret police (Okhrana / Cheka). It was a nation-state with a dominant ethnic group (Russians, initially Jews) ruling over an empire of subject nations just like the Imperial Russian Großraum.

Every single thing about the development of the USSR proved the class warfare teleology of Marxism wrong. The dictatorship of the proletariat never happened, Lenin's blanquist vanguard melted into a junta led by clique after clique, and then generations of sincere propaganda and millions of genuinely committed communists trying to spark the true classless society never succeeded.

[Anonymous No.19943262]

>>19943251

It should be remembered in all this that Marx's/Lenin's teleology is based on the idea that the revolution and its vanguard are only the spear-tip of the class struggle that is really, objectively carrying on beneath it, cf. Marx's remarks about how the best thing for any socialist movement to do in any country is to focus on sparking the revolution locally ASAP because it will then spread like wildfire to other nations (in his letter on the Polish question I believe, I can't remember). So even imperfections and errors like the USSR inevitably made in the concrete particulars of its situation should have conduced to revolution - the same dialectical factors that caused the revolution in the first place should have continued to work upon Stalinism too, so that if Stalinism was a dead end, as the tsars were, it too would be smashed through. If the apparatchik "new class" WAS just a new bourgeoisie draped in red flags, it should have suffered the same fate as any other bourgeoisie.

But it didn't. The classless society not only never arrived, but things got WORSE from a Marxist perspective, both in the old bourgeois countries and in every country that experienced a revolution. Where is the "proof in the pudding" of Engels' remark and Marx's projections that classlessness that NATURALLY results from the dictatorship of the proletariat, once revealed, and no matter how imperfect in its manifestation, would NATURALLY spread like wildfire?

>>19943200
They are just spamming to clog up the thread because /leftypol/ started dying recently. It split over tranny discord drama (no, I am not joking, literal trannies) and is now split between two different sites with userbases that hate eachother, despite only being a few hundred people at most.

[Anonymous No.19943274]

>>19942931

[Anonymous No.19943287]

>>19943274
wich never happened

[Anonymous No.19943289]

it's just ethnonationalism

[Anonymous No.19943295]

>>19943262
Here is a contrast with the situation under the Nazis:
>How then did Germany “break the bondage of interest”? Few now know. Rearmament is not a sufficient explanation. Prof. A. J. P. Taylor, the eminent British historian, and hardly a Nazi sympathizer, writes:

>"Fascism, it was claimed, represented the last aggressive stage of capitalism in decline, and its momentum could be sustained only by war. There was an element of truth in this, but not much. The full employment which Nazi Germany was the first European country to possess, depended in large part on the production of armaments; but it could have been provided equally well (and was to some extent) by other forms of public works from roads to great buildings. The Nazi secret was not armament production; it was freedom from the then orthodox principles of economics . . . the argument for war did not work even if the Nazi system had relied on armaments production alone. Nazi Germany was not choking in a flood of arms. On the contrary, the German Generals insists unanimously in 1939 that they were not equipped for war and that many years must pass before “rearmament in depth” had been completed."

This is because the fascist states genuinely rebelled from the world financial system and the principles of usury-capital, which is really just a pyramid scheme, draped in nonsense economic theory as propaganda for British and American (with some French as useful idiots) financial tyranny. There is no need to posit a 19th century, utopian socialist "classless society," any more than there is a need to posit an atavistic anarchist utopia where all forms of social organisation disappear. Third positionism incorporates the best of Marxist critique without its utopian components, which is why it enabled Germany to actually create a socialist dream society (for a brief time).

All it takes is basing economics on real production and taking national health as a value. Not substituting the laissez faire mythology of classical economics with the mythology of a post-national utopia.

[Anonymous No.19943313]

>>19943287
It did tho.
You just don't understand geo politics

[Anonymous No.19943330]

>>19943251
>Stalinist racial-imperial state as soon as it had to deal with geopolitical realities.
never happened plus wtf does that even means? some sort of georgian ethnonationalism?
>lenin thought that the nationalities would naturally coexist in some kind of democratic union
they did for a long time and the bolsheviks only won the civil war trough the support of many different ethnicities
>The principle of self-organisation they democratically chose was their traditional ethno-linguistic-cultural identity, their "people" (Volk, gens, etc.)
>democratically choose
many fought and voted against the ussr dissolution
>It was a nation-state with a dominant ethnic group (Russians
most soviet leaders where not russian

[Anonymous No.19943333]

>>19943313
I need this nigga's biography of Mussolini translated into English immediatly

[Anonymous No.19943340]

>>19943313
nice cope

[Anonymous No.19943351]

>>19943340
>nice cope

[Anonymous No.19943364]

>>19943330
>voted against the ussr dissolution
This is dishonest. Leftypol likes to frame Gorbachev's vote as a referendum on the preservation of the USSR. It was in fact a vote between maintaining the union as it was or Gorbachev's reformed union. The reformed union won

[Anonymous No.19943366]

>>19941365
Organic hierarchy is social interaction. Like when we're both with a group of people and I'm talking to them and having fun and you're not, that's because I'm higher on the hierarchy.
Or like if you got a group of men together to do anything. The one with more knowledge or capability is higher on the hierarchy.

[Anonymous No.19943371]

>>19943333
Do you know any romance languages already? Italian isn't hard.

>>19943330
Sovietization is widely regarded as Russification both by scholars today and by anybody who wasn't Russian under the USSR, even by Russians too (who saw it as a good thing). Do you exclusively get your tankie propaganda from /leftypol/ infographics and informal conversations with other tankies?

[Anonymous No.19943383]

>>19943371
>Do you know any romance languages already?
Unfortunatly not, frustrating too because my dad used to speak Italian.

[Anonymous No.19943409]

>>19943364
For further clarification, the vote in question is the 1991 Soviet Union Referendum.

The question was: Do you consider necessary the preservation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics in which the rights and freedom of an individual of any ethnicity will be fully guaranteed?

The effect would have been to create a new union that would have effectivly ended the Soviet Union. 77.85% of votes were in favour. Obviouslt the august coup hastened the demise of the Soviet system even faster.

[Anonymous No.19943420]

>>19941349
>>19941356
You call THAT an effort post? Not the anon who argued for 10 post on whether Fascism was 'anti-marxist'?

[Anonymous No.19943499]

>>19943262
>>19943251
What does Fascism replaced Dialectical Materialism with? Idealism?

[Anonymous No.19943532]

>>19941420
>There is one anon on /lit/ who is really big into Italian Fascism and while he does great work I think he is a bit like a Communist who only accepts Leninism as valid Marxism and is dismissive of any other theories or manifestations or understandings of Marxism except as strained through Lenin. I agree with him on most things but I think he is too exclusive of non-Mussolinian fascism.
You're probably talking about me. Because Fascism is Mussolini. Fascism is Italy. Once you start to make the case that there was a Fascism that existed outside of Italy and Mussolini then you open the floodgates of interpreting everything as Fascism. Fascism is not an ideology. It's not a theory. It's a method of organizing the object in your vision. [whatever that vision may be]. If someone like Mosley was a 'Fascist' [whose politics was run of the mil social democracy with a patriotic bent] then why can't anyone be? The man who brought Fascism to Spain pre-falange was sympathetic towards the CNT and was later murdered by the republican state. Why were the Maoists not Fascists then? Really they exhibited all the features of generic Fascism.

Once you acknowledge a Fascism outside Mussolini, then you acknowledge that everyone is a Fascist who tries to shape the world to fit their image. Then you will understand some people [like Mussolini] are not ideologues and approach politics pragmatically.

[Anonymous No.19943541]

>>19943499
Gentile famously spoke highly of dialectical materialism as a theory of history.

[Anonymous No.19943547]

>>19943251
Good thread, I've seen people link Gramci's thought to that of Gentile (Main Philosopher of Fascism), if I don't misremember a guy called Diego Fusaro goes into this, especially due to their revision of Marxism tends to mix up. But overall and tracing back the revisions that eventually develop into Mussolini's thought, Engels could be considered one of the first revisionists since he tried to encapsulate the theory of darwin within the framework of Marxism, but all of this just caused confusion. Eventually you got people like Kautsky that try to add up the idea of struggle for existence but in the end disregard it. Lenin of course comes into place as one heterodox revisionist, Sorel himself could be considered part of this line of thought that eventually develops into the introduction of idealist values into Marxism.

When Mussolini comes into place, he takes a hold of all the previous revision before him, and eventually develops its own practical yet formulated way of Socialism distanced from Marxism through a drink of different sources, especially from figures like Sorel, Nietzsche, Proudhon and Corradini. He pretty much ends up with a conclusion that was once summarized like this by him: "The future of the proletariat is a problem of will and ability, not of will alone, not of ability alone, but of ability and will at the same time. You have escaped the game of political influences." As he said several times, he was trying to make Marxism stay away from Marx and lead it torwards the practicality of a realistic revolution. The conditions that gave away torwards his line of thinking can be seen as first a recognition of the biological/evolutionary impulses of humanity, and the Nationalism on display during WW1. Which is something I see take form, it happened in the Axis and even the eastern block post-war with it’s “Russification” and purges. It seems like a totalitarian culture, or in other words an ethnogenesis, which can absolutely to destroy Capital accumulation instead of simply trying to co-op it.

[Anonymous No.19943553]

>>19943499
Didn't Gentile also have some criticisms of Marx?

[Anonymous No.19943562]

Fascism is a boomer Marxian ideology. If you're far right today your only realistic option is traditionalist nationalist, which combines Christianity, antisemitism, and capitalism.

[Anonymous No.19943570]

>>19943553
>>19943541

[Anonymous No.19943579]

>>19943499
yes hegel

[Anonymous No.19943625]

>>19943547
>Socialism distanced from Marxism through a drink of different sources, especially from figures like Sorel, Nietzsche, Proudhon and Corradini.
I don't think so. There was never a period he distanced himself from Marx. He read Nietzsche while he was still a socialist, which should explain why he was such a militant as one.

>The fact is that as a young man Mussolini accepted all the essential theoretical and interpretive propositions of Marx. His published writings between 1902 and 1914 contain innumerable references to Marx and only seven allusions to Babeuf and eight to Proudhon. Both his published writings and what we can reconstruct of his reading during this period indicate a preoccupation with the ideas of Marx that far exceeds any concern he had for other thinkers. Mussolini's point of departure was unquestionably Marx. No adequate reconstruction of his thought is possible if that fixed point is neglected. Not only was he a convinced Marxist, he was a knowledgeable one as well. His published writings contain regular references to the works of Marx and Engels. He specifically refers to every major piece of Marx's published writings available at that time. He alludes to Marx's writings in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, the "Theses on Feuerbach," "Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right," A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, The Class Struggles in France, as well as Capital and the Communist Manifesto. In a number of places he not only alludes to The Poverty of Philosophy, but provides extensive quotations as well. He also provides quotations from the Contributions to the Critique of Political Economy, the Marx-Engels correspondence, Marx's articles in the New York Tribune, and the Communist Manifesto. There are references to Engels' The Conditions of the Working Class in England in 1845, quotations from the Anti-Duhring, and Engels' famous introduction to Marx's Class Struggles in France. He was not only familiar with the most important Marxist authors of the period, including Karl Kautsky and Wilhelm Liebknecht, some of whose work he translated, but he had read the works of theoreticians such as G. Plekhanov and Rosa Luxemburg, and Marx critics such as Werner Sombart. ... Whatever one thinks of his Marxism today, Mussolini was accepted by his socialist peers as a Marxist theoretician. He rose to leadership in the Italian Socialist Party at least in part on the basis of his recognized capacity as a socialist intellectual.

>>19943570
This is was what he criticized in particular: "It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness." The dialectic does not exist externally from your consciousness.
>>19943579
No. One of Gentile's works was 'Reform if the Hegelian Dialectic'. Even during his time he rejected the Hegelian label.

[Anonymous No.19943657]

>>19943547
Sorel is not Marxist revisionism. Sorel was a response to Marxist Revisionism and social democracy. Sorel is pure Marxism and class struggle.

[Anonymous No.19943662]

>>19941356
Wow, this guy's a retard!

[Anonymous No.19943691]

>>19943625
Sure, Mussolini translated stuff but even you must notice their are camps of people who’ve read Marx and take bits pieces and drop theories that never arrived or are empirically wrong, here are some basic positions that inevitably emerged out of the revisionist controversies, maybe you could give me some insight on my thoughts here: (1) bourgeois interpretations of Marx, like Engels' and Kautsky's, which then inevitably decay into Machism and Bernsteinism, (2) a radical "return to Hegel" like that carried out by Lukács, Lenin, Trotsky, Korsch, and Luxemburg, but which then become a mythology and eschatology, and has the additional problem that the proletariat at large does not follow it and has to be dragged to its own supposed party by bourgeois Hegelian philosophers, and (3) voluntarist pragmatism, which manifested early as Sorel's eclectic Marxism, but also as the always-eclectic French socialists' return to pre-Marxist French traditions like Proudhon as a way of overcoming paradoxes in Marx's thought, which in turn generates national syndicalism, which is essentially fascism.

I believe Gramsci was pretty damn close to figuring out what had to be done… probably the most interesting Marxist of the 20th century, he falls into camp #3, even though he identifies with camp #2. Gramsci is a voluntarist pragmatist, i.e. he is an irrationalist. His ultimate answer to the "why?" and "how?" of proletariat revolution is not a Hegelian eschatological myth, like Lukács, but the much more Sorelian admission that myth is permissible and that socialist "morality" or “will” precedes dialectical "science." Which I find to be influenced by Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.19943701]

>>19943657
>Putting idealism into Marxism
>Not revisionism.
Biggest revisionist there was, Lenin hated him too

[Anonymous No.19943724]

fascism was not unique compared to right wing counter revolutionary mentalities and movements before and after it
it stole a ton of ideas from the US like its colonialism and racism, and its workerism/professionalism from a twisting of industrial syndicalism into a feudalistic to-each-their-lot-in-life mentality

[Anonymous No.19943731]

>>19943691
Hey that's my post! Or everything after "some insight on my thoughts here:" is mine
>>/lit/thread/S19624550#p19632006

It was freaky reading this until I realised what was going on, because I knew from the first part that it wasn't a copypasta but everything after that seemed so familiar.

[Anonymous No.19943787]

>>19943701
>we should use propaganda
>oh no you've done an idealism
Lol
You know why Lenin hated him?[never heard this] if he did it wouldn't be because of his idealism. It's because Sorel advocated for using trade unions as a class weapon, and this was against the interests of Lenin and his barracks communism. All power to the soviets my ass.
>>19943691
Mussolini in his socialist days would belong to the 'third camp'. Gramsci identified himself with Mussolini while the latter was head of the PSI. Though I'd be critical of equating Fascism with 'National Syndicalism' because there was an actual syndicalist wing of Fascism that would do a lot of labor agitation and opposed the regime for favoring capital over labor.

[Anonymous No.19943803]

>>19942256
If you actually had any knowledge you'd know that the consensus is that hunter-gatherer societies were largely lacking in hierarchies. Nonetheless, hierarchies clearly existed in every communist state that has existed so far, so I'm not sure why you think hierarchy is something incompatible with it. I don't mind hierarchies as long as they're justified, but in all right wing hierarchies, it's not based on merit but luck and nepotism.

[Anonymous No.19943813]

>>19942267
Cope

[Anonymous No.19943820]

>>19943813

[Anonymous No.19943830]

>>19943820
>>19943813

[Anonymous No.19943834]

>>19942165
>>19942267
he's here! >>19943813

>five straight years of this
>confirmed israeli
i really hope you get paid at least

https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/i0OstoqxJWfLmUCnkOfb4A/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/uOcw34PhB5WCOhoRt2y7lQ/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/filename/autistichitler/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/Hscz5rbprn90GrWyWbYI4Q/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/DVwx-Qw-9W1L2alR8ocCNg/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/3mdzcH1n9rsXk4L8Ae1qcQ/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/u_L_hTSqcPwu23DniSvZPw/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/SaOmCfMsxKPa00ZzQPBE3A/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/qNYKPJ0j0hdFgFhS7w33pg/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/0CtKEDQzX1_Mom82z_WqjA/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/QKP4zXdowFivPrvNWTuQDA/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/_eg4I7NQepXDH47AKJ9ndQ/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/_Ssj2YUS67-jL_yRXwrlyg/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/kTDz5tO0YieK29FPwM0GSg/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/L07uh6LzhHvnxsXcVFG19g/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/UoYwRlfHFlOW3Yu5TEe2kw/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/Es1PMnWRnJsGvam-NDcklg/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/x3iYBihAiCJs5NWKr_TZ0w/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/y02z_A57Yk-pRamE8WmtRQ/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/P_uuY7nsw8qXEhmDNr0CKw/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/uUITMYGpgaf2vg_lwtwMpA/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/OJyIsvEgF_RVx8_GsvAVzg/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/CTL4aD1njNdsQHFMyunShg/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/3PKDjDk1kRfVoQom8eVGKg/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/tP3G50odskVJ6SrLy4LZQw/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/I4DONSxWk5ntFoC7zQNoRg/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/dHBwPGCbltQ8oclIfAwd9w/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/tazHlV-fEGPyZLdwOwf1OQ/
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/ZVuAF0jmWWcp6huEcSu8Ew/

[Anonymous No.19943835]

>>19943830
>>19943820
>>19943813

[Anonymous No.19943837]

>>19943820
This thread is talking about the PNF. Not german autism.

[Anonymous No.19943844]

>>19943834
>has this whole copypasta living in fear of shitposts
How you know the meme is working

[Anonymous No.19943854]

>>19943835
>>19943830
>>19943820
>>19943813
Nazi tranny memes shall snuff out every board of 4chan

[Anonymous No.19943863]

>>19943844
>"the meme"
>spend five years spamming the same nazi tranny picture on 10 different 4chan boards all day, during both work days and weekends
hell of a meme, israelanon

are you a mod on /leftypol/? in one of your posts you warned people for being off topic, why would a /leftypol/ staff member bother with this low level ineffective trolling?

[Anonymous No.19943864]

>>19943834
Woah we got a keyboard warrior here

[Anonymous No.19943865]

>>19943200
sorry this isn’t pol. enjoy trying to solve your self defeating and self hating ideology though

[Anonymous No.19943869]

>>19943854
So what they cross dressed. Literally who cares. Men do it for fun. It's fun. So what. These men fought in the bloodiest war in the history, they have literally been through hell and you're going to cast judgment on them?

[Anonymous No.19943874]

>>19943869
>>19943865
>>19943864
note the /leftypol/ brigade bringing in friends from discord, including to false flag.

[Anonymous No.19943875]

>>19943834
Like half these pics at me. I’ve saved the rest for later

Thank you

[Anonymous No.19943879]

>>19941349
>>19941365
The idea that nature isn't hierarchical isn't one my mind can even entertain - it's self-evidence that nature is hierarchical. From the way wolves behave. To the food chain. To social circles. To the way females choose a mate. Very foreign concept.

[Anonymous No.19943882]

>>19943863
A lot of buzzwords there

You’re literally so paranoid about it you’re bringing it up out of nowhere. Your hysteria makes me hard

[Anonymous No.19943887]

>>19943874
What the fuck did I do, motherfucker? Let the men dress how they want. Fuck you.

[Anonymous No.19943891]

>>19943869
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3DRMXuCvx0&t=25s

Literally you

[Anonymous No.19943892]

>>19943875
they're all you
https://leftypol.org/leftypol/res/513986.html

you can spam all you like, i just want more people to notice your spamming/brigading schtick.

>>19943887
be more subtle

[Anonymous No.19943893]

>>19943854
>shall snuff out every board of 4chan
just hide the threads that trigger you, you dumb gay retard

[Anonymous No.19943897]

>>19943834
All these filenames are different from the ones ITT

You’ve lost

[Anonymous No.19943910]

>>19943879
Except it's not, the evidence suggests hunter-gatherer societies weren't hierarchical. Not all animals are, but regardless that's what should separate humans from beasts - to rise above such base instincts. You will never be at the top of the hierarchy, it is beyond cucked to want a system that reinforces it to its extremes (e.g. monarchy, capitalism).

[Anonymous No.19943913]

>>19943892
>posts dead link
Yeah I’m sure I’m from there.

Meds, your fear of Nazi tranny memes is driving you wacky

[Anonymous No.19943917]

>>19943891
So what. I don't care.
>>19943892
>be more subtle
About what? Soldiers dress up as ladies to have fun. So fucking what, motherfucker? Have you ever been deployed?

[Anonymous No.19943920]

>>19943913
If they were effective memes you could just post one instead of slamming a thread with dozens of them to the point its unusable. You could just be posting blank squares and it would have the same effect

[Anonymous No.19943926]

>>19943920
Yeah but then it wouldn’t drive you insane and make you live in terror of them

Your response here makes me happy and energized. I was about to post my last Nazi tranny meme before this thread. You’ve turned my life around

[Anonymous No.19943932]

>>19943920
He’s just fucking with you dude calm down holy shit

[Anonymous No.19943936]

>>19943913
wait did they really delete the /leftypol/ thread? it was up as of a few days ago. that's hilarious, that shows they don't like being found out. i hope someone archived it or screenshotted it, there are some /pol/ threads with screenshots of it if you google the url at least.

>>19943897
there are so many of them that only a few can be posted as examples. also he now posts with an iphone which changes the filenames, which is even funnier because it means he's manually selecting them every time.

the fact that you are so eager to deny it proves that the accusation matters. who cares, it's already ineffectual, i just want to make it slightly more ineffectual by making the people who read fascist threads on /lit/ more aware of it. now everybody knows you're a schizo unemployed tranny who posts gay hitler memes all weekend for 5 years.

[Anonymous No.19943939]

>>19943932
You sound less calm than me tbqh

[Anonymous No.19943946]

>>19943936
Wew

[Anonymous No.19943949]

>>19943926
I usually just hide the thread anon. It's not really the end of the world that I cant talk about the Pianist or American History X on /tv/.

[Anonymous No.19943950]

>>19943926
in 1.5 more years this will be you

[Anonymous No.19943952]

>>19942165
>>19943820
>>19943813

Speak of the devil and he shall appear!

This thread is hilarious

[Anonymous No.19943953]

>>19943910
What evidence? I haven't seen any evidence. And moreover, it seems that if you approach humans from a Darwinian standpoint, hierarchy certainly seems natural -- the "strong" move forward while the weak lag behind. Advanced animals, like wolves are. And it even happened in socialist systems, wouldn't you agree? A hierarchy? I mean, is there any modern example of a equalitarian society in the world in the last century? Two centuries? When? And in what way? Do you think women treat all men equally when trying to choose a mate? Or that they approach men indiscriminately, not concerned with things like strength, beauty, power, social status, and so on?

[Anonymous No.19943955]

>>19943949
American history x is literally redpilled about Nazis being gay

[Anonymous No.19943959]

Nazis were inclined towards homosexual behavior

[Anonymous No.19943965]

>>19943959
>>19943955
>I have posted pictures of crossdressing Nazis for 6 years to own the chuds
>t. literal tranny

[Anonymous No.19943969]

Well I think it’s time for me to post some Nazi tranny threads on pol

Why don’t you follow me schizo anon we can have fun

[Anonymous No.19943971]

>>19943953
Socialism doesn't have anything to do witb egalitarianism or equality. Anyone who goes around saying those empty meaningless things has never read Marx. Socialism is the power of the working class over the owner class. It's that simple.

[Anonymous No.19943974]

>>19943965
Not even him but why would he make fun of trannys if he was a tranny

[Anonymous No.19943981]

This guy obsessed with the crossdressing pics really brings it on himself

Stfu and get back on topic

[Anonymous No.19943989]

>>19943969
you leave more of a trail than you think my trans friend, i don't have to go to /pol/ to follow you

>>19943974
it's a man who dresses like a woman and thinks he represents international workers by chatting on discord all day, i have no idea why they do anything they do

[Anonymous No.19943990]

>>19943787
>>19943625
He took distance from Marxism though, it's one thing to step away and another to fully differentiate yourself from the idea. Throughout the evolution of his thought, he states that Socialism has to distance itself from the Dogma of Marxism given the fact that this wouldn't make it practical/appliable to reality.

"We have entered fully into a period which can be called the transition from one type of civilization to another. The ideologies of the nineteenth century are collapsing and can find no one to defend them. Is it not symptomatic of this that there are socialists tired of the socialism which had been mummified by Marxist dogma?"

http://bibliotecafascista.blogspot.com/2012/03/between-two-civilizations.html

Mussolini considered himself a Socialist until the end of his days, that's for sure, nevertheless, he took distance from Marxism out of a practical need, which, albeit you can say he maintained in some form those ideas, the way in which he ideologically moved made it so he distanced himself from Marxist Theory and transformed into his own thing.

"
The accusation of inconsistency is without foundation. My behaviour has always been consistent in the sense of looking to the substance, not the appearance of things. I have adapted myself, socialistically, to reality. As the natural development of society proved more and more of Marx's predictions to be wrong, true socialism retreated from the possible to the probable. The only feasible socialism that can be truly implemented is Corporativism—a merging point, a place of equilibrium and justice, with respect for collective interests."

http://bibliotecafascista.blogspot.com/2013/05/last-testament-of-benito-mussolini-1945.html

[Anonymous No.19944058]

>>19943989
You’ll never catch me!

[Anonymous No.19944079]

>>19943990
Which 'Marxist dogma' did he distance himself from? There is no such thing as Marxist dogma, there is however the dogma of parties who take claim to the theories of Karl Marx and appropriate it for themselves.

[Anonymous No.19944086]

>>19943971
Oh please. It's the elimination of class differences - specifically, the capitalist class. Dictatorship of the proletariat. Followed by the 'withering away' of the State. All else will cause equality between peoples, sexes, races, and so on.

[Anonymous No.19944098]

>>19944086
t. Never read marx or engels

[Anonymous No.19944138]

>>19944079
That of Materialism, Historical Materialism & Internationalism. You should read Zeev Sternhell, he argues that Fascism was an extreme revision of Marxism, ending in a departure from Marxism, and becoming an Idealist way torwards Socialism.

[Anonymous No.19944145]

>>19943262
>But it didn't. The classless society not only never arrived, but things got WORSE from a Marxist perspective
No they didn't.

[Anonymous No.19944153]

>>19944138
>that of materialism
Fascists deny Marx was a materialist in the first place.

[Anonymous No.19944182]

>>19944153
Nah, Gentile, being a subjective Idealist, didn’t peruse the typical route of arguing that Marx was a vulgar materialist like most people do. Rather he argues that Marx was a confused idealist who tried to correct Hegel by dialectically blending idealism and materialism into one.

[Anonymous No.19944203]

>>19944098
I've read plenty, faggot. What I've never done is asserted that hierarchies are some sort of CONSTRUCT. You definitely suck cock.

[Anonymous No.19944205]

>>19944182
And this goes against what I said how?

[Anonymous No.19944213]

>>19944203
>What I've never done is asserted that hierarchies are some sort of CONSTRUCT.
Neither did Marx or Engels.

[Anonymous No.19944305]

>>19943295
>This is because the fascist states genuinely rebelled from the world financial system and the principles of usury-capital, which is really just a pyramid scheme, draped in nonsense economic theory as propaganda for British and American (with some French as useful idiots) financial tyranny.
This "rebellion against the world financial system and the principles of usury-capital" takes the form of an extreme doubling down on the contradictions which produced the fascism in the first place. You posted about why the Germans broke with economic logic by employing everyone in the arms industry and went to war in 1939 when the generals insisted they were not equipped for it. Well, the reason is simple: the German economy would've collapsed. They had no choice but the looting of the countries they invaded and occupied allowed them to kick the can down the road for a few more years.

>>19943691
>Gramsci is a voluntarist pragmatist, i.e. he is an irrationalist. His ultimate answer to the "why?" and "how?" of proletariat revolution is not a Hegelian eschatological myth, like Lukács, but the much more Sorelian admission that myth is permissible and that socialist "morality" or “will” precedes dialectical "science."
Basically the sentiment of the working class with regard to radical or revolutionary concepts is irrelevant. Revolution isn't a discrete political event put to referendum but is defined in the aftermath of power transition by those assuming power.

>>19943953
> And moreover, it seems that if you approach humans from a Darwinian standpoint, hierarchy certainly seems natural -- the "strong" move forward while the weak lag behind.
Social Darwinism is supposed to be the "strong" helping out nature to select the "weak" out. That leads to Nazism, although another argument against it is that it misinterprets the "strong" as being lions or tigers or bears on the top of the food chain than being adaptive to any circumstance like cockroaches and worms -- such that in history many "strong" powers in history (i.e. Nazi Germany) perish while the supposedly "weak" survive. Anyway, that's an example of why natural science cannot be directly translated into political philosophy.

[Anonymous No.19944356]

>>19944305
>This "rebellion against the world financial system and the principles of usury-capital" takes the form of an extreme doubling down on the contradictions which produced the fascism in the first place.
Overproduction in itself is not a contradiction.
>went to war in 1939 when the generals insisted they were not equipped for it.
They were as well equipped for it as they were ever going to get. Hitler should have started the rearmament process sooner and been on the offensive since day one, but he foolishly thought he could secure relations with the Polish, French, and English.
>Well, the reason is simple: the German economy would've collapsed.
German heavy industry was simply not profitable. Germans were the largest exporter of heavy industry in the world yet the average German had a fraction of the income of the British. War was a way for Germans to get access to new markets.

[Anonymous No.19944368]

>>19943953
Also the theory of Social Darwinism reflected the Nazi style of governance where subordinates in the hierarchy would be given overlapping responsibilities and then basically "fight" each other so the strong will rise. To no surprise, the internal Nazi system was constant infighting among the subordinates. It oddly enough has some similarities to what accelerated the demise of Sears, the U.S. department store chain, which was struggling against the competition and was taken over by a CEO who was an Ayn Rand enthusiast and implemented similar practices in the company.

[Anonymous No.19944388]

>>19944356
>Overproduction in itself is not a contradiction.
Yes it is because it leads to:

>German heavy industry was simply not profitable ... War was a way for Germans to get access to new markets.

[Anonymous No.19944393]

>>19944368
>the internal Nazi system was constant infighting among the subordinates
Hardly. The nazi political machine ran about as well one could have hoped.

[Anonymous No.19944409]

>>19944388
>Yes it is because it leads to:
That's not a contradiction within Germany, but the world system. There is no restructuring of the economy Germany could have done to improve wages at that point. War was inevitable because filthy international capitalists cut up Germany in sucb a way to guarentee it to implode.

[Anonymous No.19944417]

>>19944388
>Yes it is because it leads to
That's not a contradiction within Germany, but the world system. There is no restructuring of the economy Germany could have done to improve wages at that point. War was inevitable because filthy international capitalists cut up Germany in such a way to guarantee it to implode.

[Anonymous No.19944442]

>>19944393
There was no "machine" in the sense of a rational system but individuals and factions battling each other for Hitler's favor which seriously undermined the war effort. The Nazi "state" was neo-feudalist chaos. It was similar to the medieval feudal system really and born out of a similar ideas about the divine hierarchy of rule. The Nazi state operated on a similar principle but if you replaced the role of God with Hitler. The problem is, he was never really keen on actually ruling, and tended to seize on something, and then lose interest. This tendency manifested itself in the way that he would appoint people to ministerial posts, and then later create entire departments, or new posts that directly impinged upon the positions of others.

You also really see this unravel in '44-'45 where the "logic" of the Nazi "system" is expressed fully.

[Anonymous No.19944451]

>>19944417
>That's not a contradiction within Germany, but the world system. There is no restructuring of the economy Germany could have done to improve wages at that point. War was inevitable because filthy international capitalists cut up Germany in such a way to guarantee it to implode.
The outcome was determined by the class struggle. German capitalists didn't want to be "eaten" by the British and American capitalists but they didn't want to be "eaten" by their own workers (i.e. socialism) either hence the shift to extreme nationalism, militarism, conscription by the fascist state.

[Anonymous No.19944506]

>>19944442
>which seriously undermined the war effort
There is no evidence for this.
>You also really see this unravel in '44-'45 where the "logic" of the Nazi "system" is expressed fully.
Again, it worked about as well one coukd have hoped.
Please don't use meaningless buzzwords like 'neo-feudalism'
>>19944451
>but they didn't want to be "eaten" by their own workers (i.e. socialism)
Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of political economy would know that this post is retarded. Socialism cannot happen in a vacuum.

[Anonymous No.19944576]

>>19944506
>Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of political economy would know that this post is retarded. Socialism cannot happen in a vacuum.
For Marxists anyways, the primary cause of change to any system is internal to that system while external forces have a secondary effect -- although they do have an effect. So it's not the case from that perspective that Germany had no internal contradictions and it was only the world system acting upon it that led to the rise of Hitler. But I agree that you shouldn't look at countries in siloes, isolated from the world system in which they operate.

[Anonymous No.19944641]

>>19944576
>So it's not the case from that perspective that Germany had no internal contradictions
This was my shit phrasing. I meant to say there was nothing contradictory to the way the Nazis structured their economy given their goals and the political reality of Europe at the time. The fact is Germany needed resources, and they quite literally needed living space. There was nothing else they could really do given their situation. The world was a much more hostile place then.

[Anonymous No.19944673]

>>19944641
>There was nothing else they could really do given their situation.
I disagree. Or rather I don't accept that what the Nazis did was "the only thing they could've done." They could've just stopped being Nazis.

[Anonymous No.19944697]

>>19944673
Uh no, acquisition of new capital was the only way the Germany could have avoided a collapse into poverty. In those days not every country wasn't a liberal democracy you can just expand into. Hence: war.

[Anonymous No.19944709]

>>19944697
Ww2 was proletariat revolution.

[Anonymous No.19944946]

>>19944697
Germany wanted to avoid being dominated by the liberal capitalists to the west and the communists to the east and the result was that it split between both.

>>19944709
It was part II of the Europe's second "Thirty Years War." The German right was influenced by Nietzsche and Goebbels declared "the year 1789 has been erased from history" upon the Nazis rise to power. They believed that the Enlightenment had unleashed liberalism and also communism, and the communists themselves believed they were expanding on the Enlightenment. The Nazis rejected all leveling impulses, believed that inequality was the natural state of man, in blood and aesthetics, that the strong survive and the weak perish, and that war and conquest are enlivening and a solution to decadence. The Nazis thought the past 2,000 years of European history since the fall of the Roman Empire needed to be overturned with Christianity being a form of slave morality that Jews had created to enslave Europeans.

>The foundation of the National Socialist worldview is the knowledge of human inequality. No one will likely disagree with this as long as we stick to physical appearance. It is obvious that the “red skins,” the “yellow people,” the Negroes, and the whites are very different. And all whites are not the same. The careful observer can find differences in physical size and shape. The color of the eyes, hair, and skin also varies greatly.

>But there are also spiritual differences between people. That is particularly clear when various people speak about a particular subject. For one person, work is a “curse,” “God’s punishment,” a burden that one should remove as rapidly as possible. For the other, it is a necessary part of existence that gives human life its meaning. For one, bravery and loyalty are nothing but great stupidity. He would rather be “a coward for a few minutes” than to “be dead for the rest of one’s life.” For another, bravery and loyalty are the characteristics used to value and esteem people. He holds to his word, in good times or ill. He cannot live without honor and would rather die than be a coward.

[...]

>Even today, National Socialism’s racial thinking has implacable opponents. Freemasonry, Marxism, and the Christian churches make common cause in this matter. World Freemasonry conceals its Jewish plans of world domination behind slogans of “humanity.” The Jew and the Turk can achieve its degrees just as well as the Christian. Marxism has the same goals as Freemasonry. To conceal its true aims, it used the slogan of “Equality, Freedom, and Brotherhood.” Under Jewish leadership, Marxism wants to unite everything “that has a human face.”
https://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/hjhandbuch.htm

[Anonymous No.19945264]

>>19944946
Inequality is a fact of nature. The problem with nazi racial thinking was that it was not scientific.

>The Nazis rejected all leveling impulses, believed that inequality was the natural state of man, in blood and aesthetics, that the strong survive and the weak perish, and that war and conquest are enlivening and a solution to decadence.
This is all 100% true, however the nazis did not believe in it. The fact is that Hitler did not want war. Historians today still cannot agree whether Hitler was a Christian or not, so I'm going to need evidence that he personally hated it.

>Germany wanted to avoid being dominated by the liberal capitalists to the west and the communists to the east
They wanted to not be poor.

[Anonymous No.19945284]

>>19941365
If you don't believe humans have natural hierarchy then you're too stupid to live. Go back, you mouth breathing normie.

[Anonymous No.19945389]

>>19943803
No society has advanced through the stages of civilization without hierarchies. They are a natural, God-given tool to facilitate human life

[Anonymous No.19945399]

>>19943803
This is a lie.

In any organization, there is hierarchy. There cannot be any sort of social group that does not have a form of hierarchy. In every life form above the single cell organism, there exist various forms of hierarchy. So, of course there were hierarchies in hunter gatherer societies.

[Anonymous No.19945629]

>>19943262
>Oh, you're upset?
I didn't know Lukashenko is an empath.

[Anonymous No.19945707]

>>19942879
>The NAZIs murdered hundreds of thousands of its own citens. Jews,, leftists, the infirm, some rightists
What hundreds of thousands are you talking about? They didn't kill lefties, Ernst Thälmann was put in prison and was even allowed to exchange letters with commies from Moscow.

[Anonymous No.19945725]

>>19942879
>Elite circulation is not about changing who is elite but allowing new elites access to government.
You haven't read Pareto. Even the very citation you gave contradicts your statement.
> In your facist one party state circulation is impeded
Well If you say so. But I agree that liberal democracy is good at circulating jews and their subversive elements.

[Anonymous No.19945761]

>>19945707
The Jews just went to the east......

[Anonymous No.19945764]

>>19945725
Hasn't read Pareto, bases his worldview on anti-Semitism. absolutel state of facists

[Anonymous No.19945785]

>>19945761
This thread is not about holohoax. I was explicitly asking about pre-war killings.
>>19945764
If you've read Pareto, it just shows how retarted and inattentive you are, in the same post >>19942879 you write
>Elite circulation is not about changing who is elite but allowing new elites access to government
>When governing or nongoverning elites attempt to close themselves to the influx of newer and more capable elements from the underlying population, when the circulation of elites is impeded
> Pareto argued that if the governing elite does not "find ways to assimilate the exceptional individuals who come to the front in the subject classes," an imbalance is created
Do you see the contradiction between your statement and Pareto's writings?