What should have internationalists done at WWII?

[Omsk]

Oh dear lord...my point was that accusing this or that theoretician of not being a militant for things like not being imprisoned by this or that bourgeois leader is completely futile and laughable, a point which you just confirmed, thank you.

Oh dear lord...
Actually,you just fired a blank.See,bringing up Stalin on everything does not work you know.Next time when you think about mentioning Stalin in any context,learn a bit about him.

[Kowalsky]

so what, marx lenin luxembourg leaders were shot by the nazis crying "world revolution, against fascism and bolshevism" and fausto atti was shot in his sleep by toglaitti henchmen and mark chirik avoided execution because of a sympathetic cop. of course tons of communists died in the name of antifascism. that was the whole communist critque of antifascism, capitalist states tying workers to their defense

these kinds of arguments could only stand up if fascist movements were not tied to (not to say build up and paid by) the capitalist states...
what "internationalists" failed to understand during the rise of fascism in Italy was the class nature of militant antifascism, so they refused to support a movement that could stop fascism and hegemonize tha whole antifascist front. the formation of the united front with the "democratic" bourgeois forces, some 15 years later, was the price to pay for not being able to stop fascism at his rising

[black magick hustla]

these kinds of arguments could only stand up if fascist movements were not tied to (not to say build up and paid by) the capitalist states...

And antifascism was tied to democratic states and the soviet union (which most internationalists considered capitalist by that point)/

what "internationalists" failed to understand during the rise of fascism in Italy was the class nature of militant antifascism, so they refused to support a movement that could stop fascism and hegemonize tha whole antifascist front. the formation of the united front with the "democratic" bourgeois forces, some 15 years later, was the price to pay for not being able to stop fascism at his rising

fascism was the price to pay for the defeat of the working class in italy in the two red years and for the defeat of the german revolution in the late 1910s. fascism in italy wasn't so different from any other strongman dictatorship btw.

[HEAD ICE]

Bordiga lived in his house during the whole WWII

I agree that Bordiga's silence during those years clouded a lot of his thinking later in his life and he his politics were really confused post WWII, but as Zanthorus mentioned Bordiga was under house arrest, and he would also be arrested at random to make sure he wasn't doing anything political. The police stormed and arrested him at his wedding.

50thousands of italian communist partisans (stalin's bootlickers, according to you) died during the guerilla against nazism and fascism

50,000 died for Hiroshima, Emmett Till's murderers, and imperialism in Latin America. The fact so many young people were butchered for capitalism is a shame and not something to be celebrated.

[Die Neue Zeit]

WWII was an excellent case for the bankruptcy of "revolutionary defeatism" outside a revolutionary period and the advocacy of class-struggle defencism outside a revolutionary period (in this case, "tankie-ism").

[RED DAVE]

WWII was an excellent case for the bankruptcy of "revolutionary defeatism" outside a revolutionary period and the advocacy of class-struggle defencism outside a revolutionary period (in this case, "tankie-ism").

This is so, but it still doesn't justify the hideous sell-out of the German Social Democrats (and your hero Kautsky) at the beginning of WWI when a revolutionary situation was in the offing. Even if, as in the USA, a revolutionary situation was not imminent, revolutionary defeatism or calls for the US to stay out of the war, were correct.

RED DAVE

[Die Neue Zeit]

Who said I supported the social patriotism and not-so-class-strugglist defencism in WWI?

Your tendency of American non-Cannonite Trotskyism, OTOH, provided cover for bourgeois imperialism in the guise of Third Campism. The class-struggle defencism extends to supporting Soviet foreign policy in the Third World (anti-colonialism being part of "tankie-ism").

Even if, as in the USA, a revolutionary situation was not imminent, revolutionary defeatism or calls for the US to stay out of the war, were correct.

That's not defeatism. That's properly applying the centrist line of "peace without annexations or indemnifications" (Hugo Haase).

[Kowalsky]

And antifascism was tied to democratic states and the soviet union (which most internationalists considered capitalist by that point)

The fact that "internationalists" considered the Soviet Union a capitalist state doesn't mean that it was a capitalist state. Anyway, at the rising if italian fascism no one considered the Soviet Union a capitalist state, and there were no liberal-democrat states that did anything to stop fascism
We can say the same thing about the rise of Hitler.
During the spanish civil war the liberal-democrat states refuged themeselves behind the non-interference pact.
In facts, liberal-democrat states joined formed the antifascist coalition only after the aggression by Germany, Italy and Japan... so, what are we talking about?

fascism was the price to pay for the defeat of the working class in italy in the two red years and for the defeat of the german revolution in the late 1910s. fascism in italy wasn't so different from any other strongman dictatorship btw.

The defeat of the two red years was a great failure, but at the end of 1920 there was nothing of inevitable in the rising of fascism... the Socialist Party, the labor unions and the Communist Party refused to support militant antifascism, that was class-rooted. Socialists and unionists made so because of their opportunism (they thoguht that they could find some sort af arrangements with fascism), the communist just because the party had a sectarian leadership. Militant antifascism was able in many local cases to rise the level of the clash to a level so high that population defensed the antifascist and that the authorities were obliged to stop the fascist squads, the defence of Parma is clear example of this... Unluckly, cause of the lack of support from nation-wide structure, thise poattern was not replayed on national scale, even though the March on Rome could be defeated military in an quite easy way...
So, the price to pay for refusing to collaborate with some bourgeois forces (hegemonized by working class organizations) during the 20's, was to collaborate with borgeois states during the 40's...

I'm not going to give any comment on fascism being a "normal dictatorship", that's non-sense...

[Kowalsky]

I agree that Bordiga's silence during those years clouded a lot of his thinking later in his life and he his politics were really confused post WWII, but as Zanthorus mentioned Bordiga was under house arrest, and he would also be arrested at random to make sure he wasn't doing anything political. The police stormed and arrested him at his wedding.

50,000 died for Hiroshima, Emmett Till's murderers, and imperialism in Latin America. The fact so many young people were butchered for capitalism is a shame and not something to be celebrated.

that's a very low level provocation, come on, you can do better

by the way, Bordiga was able to stay at his home as the fascists regime considered him not being dangerous. indeed, during the whole duration of the fascist regime and the ww2, internationalists did nothing of dangerous against the fascist regime.

[Zanthorus]

Third Positionism.

It's 'Third Campism'. Third Positionism is ultranationalist crap.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ My bad. I edited my post for correction.

[HEAD ICE]

that's a very low level provocation, come on, you can do better

by the way, Bordiga was able to stay at his home as the fascists regime considered him not being dangerous. indeed, during the whole duration of the fascist regime and the ww2, internationalists did nothing of dangerous against the fascist regime.

I'm not going to argue with this because it is clear you are simply ignoring easily ready facts of the persecution of internationalists during WWII. That doesn't surprise me along with your rejection of internationalism given your affiliation to that eurocommunist Frankenstein you list as your organization that I assume you are doing so without irony.

[black magick hustla]

The fact that "internationalists" considered the Soviet Union a capitalist state doesn't mean that it was a capitalist state. Anyway, at the rising if italian fascism no one considered the Soviet Union a capitalist state, and there were no liberal-democrat states that did anything to stop fascism
We can say the same thing about the rise of Hitler.
During the spanish civil war the liberal-democrat states refuged themeselves behind the non-interference pact.

some democratic factions of the bourgeosie had a non-interference pact but it by the emergence of WWII the democratic bosses were clearly aligned as an antifascist faction.

The defeat of the two red years was a great failure, but at the end of 1920 there was nothing of inevitable in the rising of fascism... the Socialist Party, the labor unions and the Communist Party refused to support militant antifascism, that was class-rooted. Socialists and unionists made so because of their opportunism (they thoguht that they could find some sort af arrangements with fascism), the communist just because the party had a sectarian leadership. Militant antifascism was able in many local cases to rise the level of the clash to a level so high that population defensed the antifascist and that the authorities were obliged to stop the fascist squads, the defence of Parma is clear example of this... Unluckly, cause of the lack of support from nation-wide structure, thise poattern was not replayed on national scale, even though the March on Rome could be defeated military in an quite easy way...

the march on rome was a symbolic gesture, by that time landowners and industrialists were clearly aligned behind the fascists. this was the reason why the march to rome was not defeated.

So, the price to pay for refusing to collaborate with some bourgeois forces (hegemonized by working class organizations) during the 20's, was to collaborate with borgeois states during the 40's...

that is some gramscite trash. "working class organizations" by that time were agents of soviet imperialism.

I'm not going to give any comment on fascism being a "normal dictatorship", that's non-sense...

i think you could make an argument for german national socialism to be "special", but italian fascism was not particularly more brutal than the myriad of 20th century anticommunist dictatorships. it was played up because fascism was clearly an obstacle of the comintern.

[black magick hustla]

tby the way, Bordiga was able to stay at his home as the fascists regime considered him not being dangerous. indeed, during the whole duration of the fascist regime and the ww2, internationalists did nothing of dangerous against the fascist regime.

by that time the left wing of the icp was ousted and defeated by stalin's men (togliatti and gramsci) so of course left wing militants were completely neutered.

although there were plenty of left communists in italy who did lengthy tenures in fascist prisons. also togliatti did consider the left wing dangerous, to the point that damen barely escaped death and the cowardly stalinists murdered atti in his sleep.

[Savage]

Oh dear lord...
Actually,you just fired a blank.See,bringing up Stalin on everything does not work you know.Next time when you think about mentioning Stalin in any context,learn a bit about him.

You still seem oblivious to the jocular nature of that post, perhaps an exhaustive use of smiley faces in future would make it easier for you.

[black magick hustla]

[QUOTE=Die Neue Zeit;2097690]
Your tendency of American non-Cannonite Trotskyism, OTOH, provided cover for bourgeois imperialism in the guise of Third Campism. The class-struggle defencism extends to supporting Soviet foreign policy in the Third World (anti-colonialism being part of "tankie-ism").
[QUOTE]
i actually understood this post (i think). anyway its pure slander to say third camp lead to state department socialism. the forrest johnson tendency was "third camp" as well as "socialism or barbarisme"

[Die Neue Zeit]

Your tendency of American non-Cannonite Trotskyism, OTOH, provided cover for bourgeois imperialism in the guise of Third Campism. The class-struggle defencism extends to supporting Soviet foreign policy in the Third World (anti-colonialism being part of "tankie-ism").

i actually understood this post (i think)

Haha

anyway its pure slander to say third camp lead to state department socialism. the forrest johnson tendency was "third camp" as well as "socialism or barbarisme"

Was the Forrest Johnson tendency Trotskyist? There were only two big Trotskyist tendencies, the Cannonites and Shachtman-Draper. The latter coughed up Third Campism, and we all know their Afghanistan line in the 1980s.

[Zanthorus]

The Johnson Forest tendency was Raya Dunayevskaya, C. L. R. James and their associates. I'm not intimately familiar with their history but my impression is that it would be more accurate to view them as a break from Trotskyism.

[Die Neue Zeit]

In which case their particular Third Campism doesn't count re. my critique.

Broadly speaking, Mao (who toasted with Suharto and Idi Amin) could be considered a Third Campist too.

[black magick hustla]

The Johnson Forest tendency was Raya Dunayevskaya, C. L. R. James and their associates. I'm not intimately familiar with their history but my impression is that it would be more accurate to view them as a break from Trotskyism.

i always considered third camp trotskyism as a break from trotskyism to be honest. i dont consider the cliffites trotskyistts because they differ widly from FI orthodoxy.