In all fairness, ZX3 didn't know what Marxists meant by "state". I was offering help.
The best way to fight fascists is to enact legislation baning their manifestations and publications.
Results 1 to 20 of 25
There is an interesting question being posed on the "Anti-fascist" board. As I am no Left winger, I cannot post a note on that forum. But insofar as this particular forum has grown somewhat boring, degenerating into debates as to who was responsible for the execution of Charles I, or launching assaults upon capitalism, to be met with stony silence when there is a response, or an inability to even defend socialism (Go read the "Communist manifesto") or with a progression of four letter words, I thought I would somewhat bring that thread here.
What is the best way to defeat fascism?
So far, the responders on the other forum have been limited to suggesting putting up posters, or "educational events" or calling for infiltration ect. I tend to find such proposals to be completely inadequate at best and counterproductive at worse.
In all fairness, ZX3 didn't know what Marxists meant by "state". I was offering help.
The best way to fight fascists is to enact legislation baning their manifestations and publications.
Understanding fascism is important to defeating it but unfortunately the roots of fascism are difficult to identify in any simplistic manner. In the “mass psychology of fascism” and “the irrational in politics” it is argued that fascism is not just a reactionary stage which capitalism reverts to when threatened it stems from internalised sexual repression which is enforced by an hierarchal society and the patriarchal family model. Historically fascism has always been a tool of the ruling class in times of severe crisis, when the working classes become organised and a serious threat to Capital, fascism has stepped in and crushed the revolution. As such it is an ideology rooted primarily in capitalism and patriarchy.
“effective resistance to fascism must be based on a class analysis of society, an internationalist perspective that attacks imperialist war, a multi-racial, anti-racist/sexist, organized approach willingness to consider violence, and the grasp of the critical role of ideology in combatting fascist practice” - Rich Gibson's
Personally, I found "The irrational in politics" about the least convincing of Brinton's works (generally I'm a big fan) as it seems too influenced by Reich for me. Saying that, a few people rave about Reich's work on fascism so perhaps its worth looking at in more detail. Anyone able to help?
One weapon we have now that they didn't have in the 30's is history. If people are being fooled by fascism we can show them what happened in Germany, Italy, Spain and in South America, and ask them if that is really a reigime they want to live under.
I wrote this in an essay I posted on here, the best way to defeat fascism is for a united front on the left wing; a mass workers party. One of the reasons that fascism has never had any real success in Britain was because Labour was the mass workers party. Now that it has become just another capatilist party the BNP are gaining council seats and I don't think it's a coincidence.
When has there EVER been a united Left wing front?
In a roundabout way a kind of agree with you with respect to the rise of BNP, though perhaps not for the same reasons.
It is true the Labor Party has swung Right over the past 20 or so years.
Its also true that over the past few years, there has been a lot of resistence within the party on that drift, and more calls and efforts to swing back toward the Left.
And it seems that the BNP is winning its seats, or at least gaining votes, at the expense of the Labor Party. So one can conclude that BNP base is being formed upon the base of disgruntled Laborites, Laborites who are not happy with the status quo of the Labor Party.
I would think that a united Left wing front, assuming one could be cobbled together, would not work, because the BNP is being made up of people who who largely agree already with what the united left front already proposes.
Except that by banning their works it makes it more difficult to claim the "moral ground" so to speak in opposing tyranny and such.
I do understand what the Marxists mean by "state." But no whatever they wish to call its successor of what they create, it is still "the state." It will perform the exact same function.
There's nothing tyrannical about protecting people from threats to our freedoms by the promotion of fascism.
And in reply to your second paragraph: whatever.
Read "The mass psychology of fascism" by Wilhelm Reich. It's amazing.
When the labour party was formed for one, and mainly when labour has been left wing.
It's not, the disgruntled labourites are mainly left wingers, and the BNP are mainly people who feel the tories aren't right wing enough. They're being voted for by the working classes who would for a socialist party but aren't being given the oppurtunity to.
Definatley not true. Fascism is the dialectical oppisite of socialism.
That quote is from Mussolini. Fascism is not anti-capatilist, despite what they might try and tell you otherwise.
On another board I post on, someone from Belgium had started a thread about banning fascist ideologies in Europe. I had a kneejerk reaction to say that it should be banned but then then person who started the thread pointed out that fascist ideologies would only go underground and thus becoming more dangerous.
Look at groups like Combat 18 and Blood and Honour in Germany. Although the German state has outlawed and banned these groups and the use of fascist salutes, they have merely gone underground and found new ways of disguising themselves, particularly in youth-oriented culture.
The best solution as I see it is a multi-front approach:
1. Education : The best way to combat ignorance is with education. I'm not talking just about the education you recieve in schools/universities either. We should educate people about what fascism is, how it manifests itself, and ultimately why it is counter-productive to the best interests of everyone, especially the working class.
2. Infiltration/intelligence on fascist activities: This is perhaps the most dangerous yet most helpful part of anti-fascist activity. The more we know about the inner-workings of these groups and the key organizers, the better. As we have seen time and again, these groups are prone to destruction from internal disputes and the best way to help it along is to have someone on the "inside".
3. Leftist alternatives: To structures of power that have typically been out of the reach (physcially, financially, etc) to the poor and disenfranchised. This could come about as supporting or helping out women's clinics and health centers, helping out at local or inner city community centers, food co-ops, general health clinics, etc.
4. Culture: If we are exposed to different cultures, we have a greater understanding of how others live, and can gain perspective on their way of life, their culture , etc. By better understanding one another we stand a greater chance of building a better world.
We can talk of riots and petrol bombs and revolutions all day long, But if we fail to organize we'll waste our lives on protest songs
Why are you all so worried about facist here in the west? It's been a very long time since a facist organization has had anywhere near the level of support that would make them a threat.
You should be worried about these Islamofacists who believe the whole world needs to be converted to Islam. There the real threat.
And yet there are plenty of murders, beatings and bombings that can be traced back to fascist organisations. Within the past few years, here in the UK. Being in radical opposition to Fascism, can cost your life.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/s...000/2499249.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/bombs/Story/0,,204785,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2122238.stm
Not threatening enough for you?
Why not look at the armed Nazi uprising in Russia?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sSj7DR-XF4
"How you cling to your purity, young man! How afraid you are to soil your hands! All right, stay pure! What good will it do? Why did you join us? Purity is an idea for a yogi or a monk. You intellectuals and Bourgeois anarchists use it as a pretext for doing nothing. To do nothing, to remain motionless, arms at your sides, wearing kids gloves. Well, I have dirty hands. Right up to the elbows. I've plunged them in the filth and blood. But what do you hope? Do you think you'll govern innocently?"-Jean-Paul Sartre
How does any of this even compare to flying planes into buildings? The Islamos want to convert or kill you, and they will use nuclear weapons against us if given the chance. Will you still believe this after the nuke goes off?
Another interesting point to note is that way more people have been murdered in the name of communism than facism in the last century. The combined murder rate among the U.S.S.R., China, North Korea, Pol pot, Cuba, and whatever other mass murdering communists regimes I forgot, is in the 100's of millions.
NOTE: THIS POST IS A LIE
-edited by RedZeppelin
Source for that?
Sciences & Environment rocks my bedroom.
[FONT=Arial]Say what you mean and say it mean...[/FONT]
"Frankly if we have a revolution and you stop me eating meat, I'm going to eat you."- The inimitable Skinz.
Be careful, lest the time comes where we have to weigh you against a duck.
Since when did Castro commit mass murder?
If I kill everyone I know in the name of Brad Pitt, does that then mean that you can blame him for these deaths? Of course not.
Using the name of something does not mean you are using it correctly, and I see you have 80 posts so I am supposing that by now, you know what communism actually is, and are thus aware that none of these are communist?
You clearly have absolutely no idea what the hell you are talking about. You name a few countries, mention Pol Pot and cite Cuba as one of these countries, which is a nation with absolutely no record of large-scale murder (other than the fascists of course, but even that wasn't particularly large-scale.)
I agree with Jazzratt, a source would be marvellous.
“People think they have taken quite an extraordinarily bold step forward when they have rid themselves of belief in hereditary monarchy and swear by the democratic republic. In reality, however, the state is nothing but a machine for the oppression of one class by another, and indeed in the democratic republic no less than in the monarchy.”
- Friedrich Engels
Yes I am aware of this claim. But since everytime a communists revolution takes place these mass murdering dictatorship is what emerges I consider them the same thing. The reason your "true" communism never emerges is because it is a Utopian dream. How is the next revolution going to be any different? Is the risk of turning the United States into the next Stalinist slave society really worth the risk?
I will be very inpressed if you can answer these questions
Could you please, for the love of fuck, produce evdicence that Cuba and Vietnam are or were mass-murdering disctatorships? Please - just one reliable source (so no Gusano shit for Cuba.).
It is a rational system based on the matireal circumstances and their shortomings, which it aims to improve.Different from the chimeric dictatorships? Easily, for a start it will exist and secondly it will be run rationally. As for the 'risk'? Yes it bloody well is worth it, because the risk is miniscule.
I'll be impressed if you can accept the answers rather than what you'll inevitably do, which is post the same shite I've heard at least ten times before - just in an even less interesting way.
Sciences & Environment rocks my bedroom.
[FONT=Arial]Say what you mean and say it mean...[/FONT]
"Frankly if we have a revolution and you stop me eating meat, I'm going to eat you."- The inimitable Skinz.
Be careful, lest the time comes where we have to weigh you against a duck.
