Left-wing Fascism

[tallguy]

I think you've misunderstood me. I meant that right wing implies that it favors rigid social hierarchy. Authoritarian states aren't necessarily right wing (although it the case of fascism they are) because they can, theoretically, be used as a temporary entity to eliminate counterrevolutionary elements and accelerate society on its path to egalitarianism.

I described fascism as right wing not because of the level of statism, but because of its extreme nationalism and Social Darwinism.

Then I think we are dancing with words here. Or, rather, I think you are defining fascism in such a way as to only include a certain sub-class of political thought. which I think is philosophically disingenuous. I may have further misunderstood you, so please bear with me.

If we take an Ayn-Randian extreme form of right wing anarchist libertarianism, this would regard itself as far from fascism as it is possible to be. Of course, someone like me would argue that such a philosophy is flawed because, without some kind of constraint on some humans some of the time, such an anarchistic system would eventually collapse into a system where a tiny minority were able to rig the "free" markets such that they were no longer free (in other words, fascism). Thus destroying the Randian wet dream in short order. However, at least in principle, if not in practice, this form of right wing philosophy is anathema to fascism.

However, there is another form of right wing philosophy that overtly esposes a dictatorship of the "strong" over the "weak". In whoch case we can easily identify such a phiosophy as fascist.

Conversely, we can take a socialist libertarian anarchist philosophy and find that this, too, would consider itself anathema to fascism. However, it is possible to equally argue that such a system would, in the absence of some degree of limitation of liberty of individuals to act as they please, quickly deteriorate into factions competing for power such that eventually one of them would gain sufficient advantage as to dictate to others. Again, conversely, there would be others who would call themselves socialists who would consider that the above risks of deterioration are sufficient that an authoritarian regime would be the only way of ensuring that such deterioration did not occur. however, in assuming an authoritarian position of power, they too could be accused of adopting similar functional system of power as the right wing facists could they not?

My question to you is this. Why do you consider only a right wing form of extreme authoritarianism to be fascistic? What name do you have for extreme left wing authoritarianism? Of, if you consider that all forms of right wing anarchism will eventually and inevitably deteriorate to authoritarianism in the absence of some degree of limitations on liberty, why do you not equally consider that all forms of left wing anarchism will not equally and inevitably deteriorate in the absence of such limitations?

[ComradeViktor]

There's no doubt that modern neo-fascism is a genuinely right-wing, authoritarian ideology centered on empowering the interests of a secluded race, culture, or religion.

However, let's not ignore that fascism used to be a left wing ideology for it's time. The idea behind the founding of fascism was that socialism was a good economic system in upholding the interests of the national proletariat and petit bourgeoisie, but it's problem was internationalism. Because the founding documents and people of fascism were extremely nationalist, denying the Marxian concept of World Revolution.

So this is where terms like "National Socialism," "Conservative Revolution," and "Third Position" come along. Out of a belief that fascism is a mix of two sides in the spectrum, which separates it from the spectrum altogether. Socialist economics from the left wing, and Nationalist fervor from the right wing.

The first leader to put fascism in to practice was a former socialist, Benito Mussolini from what was the Kingdom of Italy. Until he was kicked out of the Party for being overly reckless in his revolutionary activism [perhaps a mistake of on our (fellow comrades of Socialism/Communism) parts]. His economic policies were often along the lines of Syndicalist. Creating economic enterprises of shared powers between petit bourgeois managers and the proletariat, also leaving the peasants almost autonomous altogether!

Now of course, our modern conception of fascism is a product of the greater fascist power that emerged and committed some of the most notorious atrocities in history, the Greater German Reich, aka Nazi Germany. Modern neo-fascists, as you'd find in the Third KKK, Golden Dawn, NSM, The Right Sector, IronMarch forums, etc., generally subscribe to this "NazionaleSozialismus" variant of fascism. Which is racist, totalitarian, reactionary, and somewhat more tolerant of a plutocratic, state-sponsored form of capitalism. Rather then the early 20th century nationalist variant of what is arguably old-style socialism.

But there is still a few fragments that represent early fascism. Including The National Bolshevik Party, neo-Strasserist/Black Front movements, the modern Falangist Party in Spain, and arguably the Ba'athist movement in the Middle East.

[keine_zukunft]

Fascism and national socialism do have essentially leftwing roots but deviated into sinister ideologies of segregation, extermination and total control. look at casapound for example. i last heard they have been giving lectures on marx!!

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Fascism and national socialism do have essentially leftwing roots [...]

Only to the extent that Mussolini was formerly in the PSI, and that he was joined by former syndicalists and anarchists who had turned to chauvinism in the First World War. There was, however, nothing "left wing" about Italian fascism, from the day the first fascist squads were organised to the collapse of the Salò regime.

but deviated into sinister ideologies of segregation, extermination and total control.

It didn't "deviate" into anything, chauvinism, militarism and extreme conservatism were part of fascism since its founding.

look at casapound for example. i last heard they have been giving lectures on marx!!

So what? They're still fascist scum. Are you trying to say leftists have anything in common with CasaPound?

[keine_zukunft]

So what? They're still fascist scum. Are you trying to say leftists have anything in common with CasaPound?

Im pointing out that the right is trying to co-opt elements of leftist economic critique not trying to say that they are anything but fascists. but let's look at these groups, they do have certain things in common with left wing groups too. obviously their aims are different, look at the autonomen nazis and casapound who show solidarity with palestine and with the ira sure their reasons for supporting them are different. but this is the face of the new wave of fascism is that it's become more of a nationalism for all, so they can have a false veneer of equality. as for your other points fascism in the italian sense was a deviation from syndicalism, infact there's historical evidence that certain groups of italian fascists fought against franco despite the official line which was pro-franco. there is a difference between ultra-conservatism and fascism. the deviation wasn't an accident the deviation was entirely deliberate and then it was obviously fused with the national element. If you read some their theory like say for example books that have come out of the french new right, there is a clear defined leftist theorectical influence infact thinkers like alain de benoiste openly say that they take ideas from gramsci and althusser!! i think it's important that politics can intersect and that the dichotomy between left and right doesn't always apply. this is even more so especially with the evolution of fascist theory and new popularity of national anarchism within the past 25 years or so.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Im pointing out that the right is trying to co-opt elements of leftist economic critique

It always has, even before fascism. You can find a lot of backhanded praise of socialism in the works of the arch-reactionary Donoso Cortez, for example.

not trying to say that they are anything but fascists. but let's look at these groups, they do have certain things in common with left wing groups too.

I have to admit that statements of this sort have always puzzled me. "They have something in common." Everything has something in common with something else. The question is - are these similarities significant? And what does that mean, politically?

I don't see any significant similarities between fascism and socialism. But since you do, one can legitimately ask you - what does that mean, politically? If you think groups like CasaPound have moved closer to socialism, what does that mean for our relation to these groups?

as for your other points fascism in the italian sense was a deviation from syndicalism

Not really. At most, there were former syndicalists like de Ambris, who had turned to chauvinism, in the early fascist movement. The movement itself began with a fusion of the most extreme chauvinist wing of the social patriots, veteran's associations, and certain Liberal elements.

infact there's historical evidence that certain groups of italian fascists fought against franco despite the official line which was pro-franco.

What groups? And again, what does that mean to you, politically?

i think it's important that politics can intersect and that the dichotomy between left and right doesn't always apply.

Why is it important?

[Mrcapitalist]

Only to the extent that Mussolini was formerly in the PSI, and that he was joined by former syndicalists and anarchists who had turned to chauvinism in the First World War. There was, however, nothing "left wing" about Italian fascism, from the day the first fascist squads were organised to the collapse of the Salò regime.

"There were a few, usually small, fascist movements whose social and economic goals were left or left-centrist. Hendrik de Man in Belgium and Marcel Déat in France, both former socialists, were among those who hoped eventually to achieve a fairer distribution of wealth by appealing to fascist nationalism and class conciliation. In Poland the Camp of National Radicalism (Oboz Narodowo-Raykalny) supported land reform and the nationalization of industry, and fascists in Libya and Syria advocated Arab socialism. In Japan, Kita Ikki, an early theorist of Japanese fascism, called for the nationalization of large industries, a limited degree of worker control, and a modern welfare program"
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...nomic-programs

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Britannica assumes a bourgeois notion of "leftism", and furthermore assumes that "economic policy" can be separated from the rest of the ideological framework. Communists leftists don't advocate a welfare state, nationalisation under a bourgeois state, or class collaboration.

[#FF0000]

Opposition to liberal economics or even capitalism doesn't equate to leftism. Mistrust of free market economics has been and is common among arch conservatives.

[Primagen]

What in the hell is this?

Okay so sometimes I type in paradoxical political beliefs in Google to see if there is any group claiming to be them..Well, Wikipedia has an article on Left Fascism.

Supposedly it something like left-wing terrorists who incorporate ideals of socialism into fascism..

Sounds like Glenn Beck wrote this article to me.

When people use the term, they're often referring to a sort of system where a centralized power is used to enforce their idea of equality, like the Khmer Rogue. I've also heard the term used in reference to hate-speech laws in Europe being used to weed out political dissidents, like heresy laws. This is a particularly common concern for anyone who discusses the dangers of Islamization in the West, regardless of whether or not the offenders have actually expressed racist views (from my experience, they don't, more often than not.)

As with anything that has the word "fascism," the term is mostly used as a rhetorical device, and discussions over "left-wing fascism" are more over semantics than over the fundamental merits of any system.