Would you work with fascists in order to establish a socialist state?

[Viet Minh]

This is just a theoretical question, lets take the US as an example. If there was a definite certainty that if leftist groups temporarily allied with fascists and neo nazis, in order to overthrow the system, then would divide into two seperate states, one fascist, the other leftist (possbly subdivided between anarchists and ML's) would you consider this as an option?

Well there's been stupider threads than this, so shoot me! :p

PS my considered answer is no
PPS no bullshit sectarian debates, this is just a general leftist state, leave it at that!

[RGacky3]

no, stupid question, no basis in any sort of reality.

[PhoenixAsh]

OP: no

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I wouldn't see the point....why would anyone work with fascist to create a socialist state? All that would happen is endless conflict on the new borders and who knows how much war,as the fascist continually try to invade and conquer.

My answer would be no....instead fight against the fascists.

[Viet Minh]

I wouldn't see the point....why would anyone work with fascist to create a socialist state? All that would happen is endless conflict on the new borders and who knows how much war,as the fascist continually try to invade and conquer.

My answer would be no....instead fight against the fascists.

The point would be that some might argue there will always be fascists, racists and idiots. If there is a state for them to have their rallies and goose step about to their hearts content, it means we don't have to have them living next door to us. If there are no blacks or muslims or jews there to opress how much harm can they do? Well there might be the odd skirmish between the nordics and aryans, but who cares really. If they try to invade we send them packing, leftists far outnumber them and there are many more leftist states to support us. Besides I'll bet my life the vast majority will be queing to join the leftist side.

Maybe we are being divided and conquered? We fight the fascists, they fight us, and the capitalist elite sit back and laugh their asses off.

[PhoenixAsh]

Fascists will in all probability actually join the current government against communists and socialists.

Neo-nazi's on the other hand....might not. You can bet your life that there will be a war though. Socialism and Fascism/Nazism can NOT live side to side...at all. Not to mention the fact fascism requires external enemies in order to establish controll.

Both the goal of fascism and Nazis is neutralising the left.

[#FF0000]

No.

Ignoring the fact that, historically, the state has sided with fascists to put down socialist uprisings...


Maybe we are being divided and conquered? We fight the fascists, they fight us, and the capitalist elite sit back and laugh their asses off.

Anti-Fascism is such a peripheral thing though. It's not like all of us are out fighting fascists 24/7. There just aren't any to fight/care about.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

The point would be that some might argue there will always be fascists, racists and idiots. If there is a state for them to have their rallies and goose step about to their hearts content, it means we don't have to have them living next door to us. If there are no blacks or muslims or jews there to opress how much harm can they do? Well there might be the odd skirmish between the nordics and aryans, but who cares really. If they try to invade we send them packing, leftists far outnumber them and there are many more leftist states to support us. Besides I'll bet my life the vast majority will be queing to join the leftist side.

Maybe we are being divided and conquered? We fight the fascists, they fight us, and the capitalist elite sit back and laugh their asses off.

It seems reasonable to assume that they couldn't really do much to oppress minorities (since it would all be some sort of screwed up white supremacist crap) when they have their own state,but my focus is more on international relations. (plus they would be imperialists,which means that nothing would stop them from spreading their propaganda to other countries,thereby causing harm).

How many times are we to "send them packing"? What happens when they build a large military industrial complex loaded with a vast multitude of tanks,warplanes,chemical weapons,and armored troops,and the socialist state has to respond by developing a large military of our own? It would essentially be a Stalin/USSR event all over again.A fascist state next door,and a oppressive (though much better than what they have) socialistic state of our own.

That's my opinion,anyway.

(what's your definition of fascism? White Nationalist,Nazism,Black Nationalism as practiced by the New Black Panther Party,or something else? In the strictest terms,I think there are different shades of fascism,which manifest as varying styles of government)

[danyboy27]

some communist worked with hitler against the state and we all know how well it went for them.


It would be foolish to think that beccause we both fight against liberal and conservative that, when they will have a chance they will not wipe us out they will not do it.


anti-communism and anti-socialist is the verry core of any fascist movement.

[Red Commissar]

I'm not sure what kind of scatterbrained fascist would work with any stripe of Red movement to acheive a socialist state.

On the other hand, in the midst of a revolution, they would become opportunistic. They would try to carve out their own territory while simultaneously joining ranks with the state to fight a socialist-aligned uprising while fighting the state in areas it has already taken.

[Revolution starts with U]

I would ally with the state to fight fascism before the other way around... that I can say for sure.

[danyboy27]

communists in germany made the fatal error of doing the other way around, expecting fascist to just make the state decay at a level so high it would mean a revolution would end up after the fascist would take Power.

Hell they even joined their efforts into wildcat strike back then.

[Nolan]

Working with fascists may help in bringing down the liberal state, but then we'd have to deal with the fascists themselves, who are worse opponents.

It's sort of like the situation Stalin faced: Yes the fascists are dead, but now we have this imperialist liberal superpower at the height of its power through war and more than willing to intervene personally to stop revolutions.

So it depends what the situation is.

[Tomhet]

I'd exploit and take advantage of facists, use their fire/man/financial power..
Depends how strong they are as a unit, and if we can turn on them and stomp them out..

[Viet Minh]

Interesting replies, thanks! Let me just reiterate I do not support the existence of any Fascist state, anywhere, at any time. Its up to the left to oppose them whatever means necessary. And I suppose its their raison d'etre to likewise destroy leftists, so the two bordering each other would not work, I didn't really think that through! Mostly because it wasn't a serious question, just a thought that occured to me ages ago thinking of a novel.

I think the Fascists would definitly take the viewpoint that all of the USA belongs to them, and so would invade the leftist country at the earliest opportunity. So yeah, wouldn't work.


(what's your definition of fascism? White Nationalist,Nazism,Black Nationalism as practiced by the New Black Panther Party,or something else? In the strictest terms,I think there are different shades of fascism,which manifest as varying styles of government)

Its more your ideas of Fascism tbh whatever it means to you. Sorry I know thats a cop-out, I'll say for the sake of discussion any group who explicitly identifies with Fascism, National 'Socialism' or White Nationalism to keep things relatively more simple.

[danyboy27]

I'd exploit and take advantage of facists, use their fire/man/financial power..
Depends how strong they are as a unit, and if we can turn on them and stomp them out..

wouldnt work bro, fascist are inherently anti-communist and anti-socialist.

if a fascist give you money, it will be for their own interest, to sell their idea of a red menace to the conservative, who will then allow them in power, who will in return, put you and your buddies in a concentration camp.

[Geiseric]

Facsists are never to be trusted, having a united front with them will end in bloodshed on our side .
didn't work in germany, won't work nowadays.

[danyboy27]

On another hand, you could have an united front composed of social democrat, socialist, communist and disgrunted liberals.

such alliance could have stopped hitler dead in its tracks back then.

Both the fascist and the conservatives played on the division within the left in time of crisis to wipe them out, and i think that a valuable lesson we, leftist could learn from what happened in Italy and Germany.

We dont agree with liberal and social democrat, and nothing is forcing us to do so, that why when something progressive is done by them, we shall support them and when they are doing something reactionary we should condemn them.

While being authentic in our action and gestures, we shouldnt isolate ourselves, otherwise we will end up in the camps, and nobody will speak out for us or about the governement, until they too are jailed or repressed.

[mosfeld]

If uniting with them proves beneficial to the cause of socialism, then yes. In semi-feudal, semi-colonial countries there are often fascist or semi-fascist organizations which have progressive tendencies. Two examples:

In China, a temporary United Front with the Kuomintang to drive out the Japanese invaders was possible due to progressive elements within the organization (i.e., anti-imperialism). This strategy proved highly beneficial to the Maoists -- several cadres joined the CCP, they gained the support of the toiling masses, drove out the Japanese and later won countrywide victory (excluding Taiwan).

In Afghanistan, during the war against Soviet social-imperialism, the Maoist ALO united with several Islamist organization which had progressive anti-imperialist tendencies. Some people point out the illegitimacy of this United Front due to the later murder of Faiz Ahmad by Islamists. However, the Islamists who murdered him were Golbuddin Hematyar's Hezb-i Islami, who Ahmad singled out as a "nefarious, ultra-reactionary, anti-national and anti-democratic political band and underlined the danger this ultra-reactionary band posed for the revolutionary movement and democratic forces in Afghanistan (...) " The fact that he got murdered by enemies does not somehow negate the legitimacy of the United Front strategy.

[Kiev Communard]

I'm not sure what kind of scatterbrained fascist would work with any stripe of Red movement to acheive a socialist state.

On the other hand, in the midst of a revolution, they would become opportunistic. They would try to carve out their own territory while simultaneously joining ranks with the state to fight a socialist-aligned uprising while fighting the state in areas it has already taken.

Some Third Positionists could be induced to tactically co-operate with the Left, as is the case of Russian Nazbols or Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the generally Third Positionist left-wing peronistas (such as Montoneros (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montoneros)) in 1970s were prepared to work with the Marxist guerillas against the economically liberal military regime, but this is still exceptions from the general rule. The mainstream fascists (including Islamic fundamentalists, as they clearly follow corporativist and class-collaborationist approach) are sworn enemies of the Left, as the example of Iranian Revolution of 1979 showed. The clerical-fascist Islamic Republic Party (led by Khomeini) used the courage of the Fedayeen and People's Mujahideen (the latter were basically followers of Islamic variant of liberation theology) to topple the Shah, and then seized power with the help of petty bourgeoisie, massacring the leftists of all stripes, their former "allies", in the process.

[Rafiq]

Oh boy. It would make more sense that fascists would work with the state againstu us first.

[PhoenixAsh]

.....unbelievable that so many seem willing to sell out to the fascists.

[PhoenixAsh]

In China, a temporary United Front with the Kuomintang to drive out the Japanese invaders was possible due to progressive elements within the organization (i.e., anti-imperialism). This strategy proved highly beneficial to the Maoists -- several cadres joined the CCP, they gained the support of the toiling masses, drove out the Japanese and later won countrywide victory (excluding Taiwan).

O...you mean under orders from the Comintern to work with the KMT? Which was funded by the USSR and assisted by Soviet advisors.... And were later forced to be completely insubordiante after they did not want to anymore???

And later the KMT still massacred communists on unbelievable scales and forced them on that long, long march of which only what?...10% survived?
And nearly exterminated them? The only reason they were saved was the invasion by Japan....and the greater need of fighting a common enemy.

Yeah...working with the KMT was SUCH a big advantage for the communists ....it only took the imperialist aspirtations of another feudal state to save communism in China.....:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:




In Afghanistan, during the war against Soviet social-imperialism, the Maoist ALO united with several Islamist organization which had progressive anti-imperialist tendencies. Some people point out the illegitimacy of this United Front due to the later murder of Faiz Ahmad by Islamists. However, the Islamists who murdered him were Golbuddin Hematyar's Hezb-i Islami, who Ahmad singled out as a "nefarious, ultra-reactionary, anti-national and anti-democratic political band and underlined the danger this ultra-reactionary band posed for the revolutionary movement and democratic forces in Afghanistan (...) " The fact that he got murdered by enemies does not somehow negate the legitimacy of the United Front strategy.

Yeah...and what happened later to those communists? Where are they now? Such a big help....:rolleyes:

[Rafiq]

I think it's obvious that working with Bourgeois factions.... Of any kind will lead to the ultimate demise(or large weakening) of a worker's revolution.

We have learned this from Afghanistan and Iran, and with no doubt we will learn it again in Palestine and Lebanon!

[ʇsıɥɔɹɐuɐ ıɯɐbıɹo]

First I will laugh at the OP.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Then I answer.

NO.

If any other poster above me has a comment I want to comment on watch below.

[danyboy27]

I think it's obvious that working with Bourgeois factions.... Of any kind will lead to the ultimate demise(or large weakening) of a worker's revolution.

We have learned this from Afghanistan and Iran, and with no doubt we will learn it again in Palestine and Lebanon!

It somehow depend of the leaning of the actual faction you are dealing with.

Then again Its important to stay authentic and to criticize when needed.


Social democrat and liberal could be somehow reasoned with, but dont expect any kind of durable collaburation from right wing nationalists, especially the real fascist.

The ultimate goal of fascist and right wing nationalist is our destruction, the Goal of social democrat is to make capitalism more Humane. Of course they will work hard to keep the system has it is, but they are less likely to bit us in the ass the same way conservative and fascist would.

You know, i sortof understand mosfeld argument, and i guess when you find yourself in a fucking desperate situation, you would take anything to get out of a ditch.

But, if you have the choice between the help of fascist or social democrat, this is a no brainer.

[psgchisolm]

Working with fascists ends the same way every time. Betrayal and fellow comms being killed. I'd rather work with the state to fight fascists than work with fascists against the state. Unless the state is pulling a gaddafi and killing people left and right just because. ONLY AND ONLY THEN when the people are in direct trouble and there is no other alternative(due to weapons by military, numbers ect) would I EVER work with Fascists. And that would be VERY FUCKING LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES.

[Nolan]

I thought we were talking about fascists, not the KMT, Afghan islamists, or anyone else.

[Isolationist]

To be honest, I beive if THERE was some sort of revolution in the USA, the "fascists" would have a much greater chance of winning the revolution then leftists. You to to any rural part of America and theres lots of rednecks that hate foreigners and blacks. On the other hand there aren't that many leftists (well there could be - just never known about them).

Stormfront is a perfect example of this. They have 200,000 members +
You guys have 20,000 members.

[#FF0000]

To be honest, I beive if THERE was some sort of revolution in the USA, the "fascists" would have a much greater chance of winning the revolution then leftists. You to to any rural part of America and theres lots of rednecks that hate foreigners and blacks. On the other hand there aren't that many leftists (well there could be - just never known about them).

Nope. Minorities make up too significant a number of the population. I'm sure plenty of folks would be down with the racist bit of Fascism, but they just really couldn't do much about it. There'd be too much resistance.

Not to mention the ideas of fascism honestly probably wouldn't catch on. Fascism's all about a mythical, idealist concept of the Nation and it's history. The most "heroic" time in Americas history was it's victory... against Fascism.


Stormfront is a perfect example of this. They have 200,000 members +
You guys have 20,000 members.

How many of those are troll accounts, though?

[Nolan]

Stormfront has a lot of members because it is infamous in the world outside of the movement and is THE white supremacist forum community. In contrast, RevLeft is hardly known among the left.

[Astarte]

This is just a theoretical question, lets take the US as an example. If there was a definite certainty that if leftist groups temporarily allied with fascists and neo nazis, in order to overthrow the system, then would divide into two seperate states, one fascist, the other leftist (possbly subdivided between anarchists and ML's) would you consider this as an option?

Well there's been stupider threads than this, so shoot me! :p

PS my considered answer is no
PPS no bullshit sectarian debates, this is just a general leftist state, leave it at that!

I understand what you are saying and actually think it is a fairly astute observation.

The "fascists" of the USA currently are of a proto/semi-fascist variety - the Tea Party - funded by wealthy insurance capitalists as a pseudo-grassroots movement; now they rely on the state to repeal abortion's laws, ban gay marriage, ephemeral wedge issues, etc... and of course defend their corporate interests (via "bailouts" and "taxbreaks"), but then rhetorically they are right wing libertarian "individualist" with apparently great "anarcho"-capitalist illusions and aspirations. The ignorant and misinformed follow this line in the USA because during the Cold War the war of position set culture in favor of the Right with all the anti-Communist propaganda.

Someone mentioned that the "fascists would probably side with the government" that is the knee-jerk mechanical answer, but I doubt a Tea Party person would ever side with the Obama administration due to the sheer racism inherent in them as well as the rhetorical "Obama is a Communist" camoflague - to them the Communists already are in power (yes, that is how stupid they are, modern John Birtchers).

I do not think a United Front with these people is possible. More likely would be an alliance with the bourgeois democratic government against them...

[Le Socialiste]

No. I will never side with those who identify themselves as fascist - what's more, I suspect today's "fascists" would feel the same towards leftists in general. However, if there were the potential for a peoples' and workers' uprising, one that both socialists and fascists supported, I would still break with those who even played with the idea. That's opportunism, pure and simple. Besides, if we did win, the fascists wouldn't be content with splitting the nation up. They'd be invading the moment things went their way. So no: I would not consider siding with fascists in the hope of toppling the U.S. government. Such an alliance can't lead anywhere towards true revolutionary action, and can only result in prolonged warfare. It would be the Spanish Civil War on a much larger scale - only this time the fascists and socialists would have fought and won together, then proceeded to bomb the other into oblivion. I just don't see such a pact ending well (not to mention it goes against everything I believe and stand for).

[#FF0000]

Someone mentioned that the "fascists would probably side with the government" that is the knee-jerk mechanical answer, but I doubt a Tea Party person would ever side with the Obama administration due to the sheer racism inherent in them as well as the rhetorical "Obama is a Communist" camoflague - to them the Communists already are in power (yes, that is how stupid they are, modern John Birtchers).

The Nazis weren't big fans of the Weimar either. Fascists don't ally with the state. They ally with business.

[Agent Ducky]

I don't think leftists and fascists could unite against a "common enemy." I mean they're so radically different, and even within one sect (ex. Leftists can't all agree therefore can't all unite) so how would far-left and far-right unite?

[Astarte]

The Nazis weren't big fans of the Weimar either. Fascists don't ally with the state. They ally with business.

Indeed. But even fascist elements in the Freikorp would act as kind of shock troops for the Weimar Republic if I'm not mistaken (as in Luxemburg's death the fall of the Bavarian Soviet Republic).

Today's "fascists" would never work hand in hand with the state like that... unless it was for the party in state power which most unblushingly pursued the interests of big capital and filled "the folk" with grandiose ideas of capital accumulation via rugged individualism and "hard work".

[MarxSchmarx]

I guess the attraction to some of alliances of convenience with fascists are that the blundering fascist buffoons are assumed to be less formidable of an enemy than the sleek modern state with its intelligence analysts, apologists in all corridors of power, and deep resources. To some extent it is true that traditionally "alliances" (by at least some leftists) with fascists have gone poorly in states like the Weimar republic that are quite weak or, in the case of Iran, fragile, and so these examples are not really pertinent because they violate the assumption that the modern state is too formidable for the left to face alone (also note that the left was, in at least Germany and to some extent Iran, much more powerful viz. the state than it is in the global north today).

But as others pointed out, there really is no rational basis to believe the fascists would be any easier to defeat when they are more powerful. Moreover, the practicalities of such collaborations make them meaningless and no leftist or fascist for that matter would seriously consider it.

So while there might be a kernel of truth to the idea that the modern state is extremely powerful and that the left is extremely weak by comparison, if allying with the even weaker and more useless fascist clowns is the best we can do I think our movement has much bigger problems.

And you know, there are such things as principles. It's a bit like saying we will fight for woman's emancipation, but the organizations we build to this end will all be dominated by men and decide that women will have no roll in it. Sometimes it is not only counter-productive, but actually downright hypocritical, to neglect the means to an end.

[Viet Minh]

Nope. Minorities make up too significant a number of the population. I'm sure plenty of folks would be down with the racist bit of Fascism, but they just really couldn't do much about it. There'd be too much resistance.

Not to mention the ideas of fascism honestly probably wouldn't catch on. Fascism's all about a mythical, idealist concept of the Nation and it's history. The most "heroic" time in Americas history was it's victory... against Fascism.



How many of those are troll accounts, though?

U can say for sure at least 2 :D


I understand what you are saying and actually think it is a fairly astute observation.

The "fascists" of the USA currently are of a proto/semi-fascist variety - the Tea Party - funded by wealthy insurance capitalists as a pseudo-grassroots movement; now they rely on the state to repeal abortion's laws, ban gay marriage, ephemeral wedge issues, etc... and of course defend their corporate interests (via "bailouts" and "taxbreaks"), but then rhetorically they are right wing libertarian "individualist" with apparently great "anarcho"-capitalist illusions and aspirations. The ignorant and misinformed follow this line in the USA because during the Cold War the war of position set culture in favor of the Right with all the anti-Communist propaganda.

It does always look to me as an outsider like there are well armed right wing militias and terrorist groups, though of course nothing that could touch the US military. And therein lies the problem, once the government falls all that weaponry becomes available to the revoluitonaries, and (no offence ferret) i'm betting most of the army would side with fascists.


Someone mentioned that the "fascists would probably side with the government" that is the knee-jerk mechanical answer, but I doubt a Tea Party person would ever side with the Obama administration due to the sheer racism inherent in them as well as the rhetorical "Obama is a Communist" camoflague - to them the Communists already are in power (yes, that is how stupid they are, modern John Birtchers).

I do not think a United Front with these people is possible. More likely would be an alliance with the bourgeois democratic government against them...

lol yeah i noticed that, how right wing do you have to be to think Obama is a communist? :D :D

[hatzel]

Indeed. But even fascist elements in the Freikorp would act as kind of shock troops for the Weimar Republic if I'm not mistaken (as in Luxemburg's death the fall of the Bavarian Soviet Republic).

Therefore we should know that our real enemies are...SOCIAL DEMOCRATS!!! :cursing:

[RedAnarchist]

Obviously this is a subject that is both controversial and evokes strong emotions from leftists, and I think we should clarify a few things regarding alliances between leftists and fascists/neo-Nazis/white nationalists/white supremacists etc.

In the early 1990s, soon after the USSR collapsed, many “red-brown” alliances were formed, and this allowed for the legitimisation of such groups as the National Bolsheviks, National Anarchists, communitarians and various other Third Positionists. In some countries, such groups even developed support amongst the working class.

I then must make it very clear that if anyone advocates such alliances, even under specific circumstances or conditions, then it is very much incompatible with their being a member of this forum. It is unacceptable regardless of the language used, or whether it is under the banner of any political movement, revolutionary leftist or not.

This thread is therefore closed.

- RedAnarchist