Fascism is National Syndicalism.....

[tsihcrana laicos]

What are you gona do, guest?

[jacobhaller]

Anarchism isn't mob rule; anarchism is mutual aid; but even mob rule would be an improvement on plute rule. Anarchism seeks to help people by building networks independent of the state, and independent of other power centers; this helps people directly (by creating med clinics, food distro, etc.) and indirectly (by dispersing power away from states, and bypassing or precluding tyrannies).

Anarchism has nothing to do with Fascism. Fascism was not anarchist in Spain, socialist in Germany or Italy, democratic in Greece or Cuba or Chile, or anything but corrupt, anywhere.

[JudeObscure84]

Anarchism has nothing to do with Fascism. Fascism was not anarchist in Spain, socialist in Germany or Italy, democratic in Greece or Cuba or Chile, or anything but corrupt, anywhere.

no one is saying that anarchism has anything to do with Fascism, rhetorically. I am just saying that the main point seperating the two is the ideal of the nation state. Fascists are syndicalists but they are nationalists. Anarcho syndicalists are anarchists and reject the nation state. But they are both ideological blood brothers. Fascists split from the movement because they saw the errors in anarchism(by following thier own flawed philosophy) and adopted that the nation state should serve the needs of the union, i.e. supressing other unions, keeping the union together with strong nationalism, exhausting the military and education the population in fascist ideology.

Read Burnett Bolletens Spanish Civil War books. Even while the CNT rejected the Spanish state, they still relied on commitees which ironically turned into mini-states that were as brutal as the Fascists.

Face it guys. Fascism is just another Marxist heresy in the lines of Maosim, Stalinism and Syndicalism.

[tsihcrana laicos]

Just because some anarchists like using syndicates doesn't mean they have anything to do with fascism. In fact, as they are anarchists, they are completely against fascism. In no way are they "idealogical blood brothers".

[JudeObscure84]

Just because some anarchists like using syndicates doesn't mean they have anything to do with fascism. In fact, as they are anarchists, they are completely against fascism. In no way are they "idealogical blood brothers".

As while many fascists dislike anarchists, and totally against it. Its the anarchy that keeps anarchists together and its nationalism that keeps fascists together. but thier outlook on economics and production control varies very little.

[Levee_En_Masse]

hey Jude, why don't you try actually reading one of Marx's works, say 'The Civil War In France', and tell me how the proletarian democracy he wrote so enthusiastically about is at all similar to fascism.

[tsihcrana laicos]

An anarchist outlook on production and economy could be anything, so long as its not authoritarian.

Fascist economies are highly controled and centralized. Quite the opposite of anarchist ones.

[Levee_En_Masse]

I agree with the above poster. And I would like to add that Anarchism in practice is against the hierarchy of the workplace. Is Fascism against this? No. Just because Mussolini was once a socialist doesn't make it (or anarchism) comparable to Fascism. Many Neocons were once socialist, does this make them socialist? Again, no. They brought over the Stalinist organizational model to the Right as well as language and tactics, but it can be seen that they are really interested in protecting the privilege of the capitalist class behind their smokescreen morality. How are the Fascists any different? They were just a precursor to the modern Neocon phenomena. They aren't Marxist heretics, they are proponents of autarchic state capitalism using nationalism and patriotism as a smokescreen.
And on the subject of fascism, what someone like Jude propose as an alternative to it if he thinks it to be so similar to anarchism? Could you seriously recall the Spanish Civil War and tell me that Stalinism or Leninism or Bourgeois Democracy can be desirable alternatives??

[JudeObscure84]

An anarchist outlook on production and economy could be anything, so long as its not authoritarian.

Fascist economies are highly controled and centralized. Quite the opposite of anarchist ones.

Well we're speaking strictly about syndicalism here. Not anarcho-commies or anarcho-capitalists. The Spanish Civil War was a fight between national syndicalists and anarcho syndicalists. Remember that Francos party was the Flange National Syndicalists. The opposition was a composite mix of republicans, commies and socialists.
And if you think that anarchist economies are anything but, then you should read about the commitees the CNT started in the collective areas of Catalonia.

hey Jude, why don't you try actually reading one of Marx's works, say 'The Civil War In France', and tell me how the proletarian democracy he wrote so enthusiastically about is at all similar to fascism.

What kind of anarchist are you and why are you bringing up Marx? Syndicalism is a marxist critique in itself. I never said it had anything to do with pure Marxism. I even said it was a Marxist heresy. It commands for the direct action of the workers union to sieze control of the state and use it to serve the means of the people.
Remember that Mussolini said that where they split with Marx is on class struggle, for they believe its a struggle about nations.

I know how it feels. Fascism is like the black sheep of political ideologies. No one wants it and right fully so. The left says its extreme right wing, and the right says its another leftist philosophy. and frankly guys, they're right it is in the same class of left wing ideals.

[Guest]

I agree with the above poster. And I would like to add that Anarchism in practice is against the hierarchy of the workplace. Is Fascism against this? No. Just because Mussolini was once a socialist doesn't make it (or anarchism) comparable to Fascism. Many Neocons were once socialist, does this make them socialist? Again, no. They brought over the Stalinist organizational model to the Right as well as language and tactics, but it can be seen that they are really interested in protecting the privilege of the capitalist class behind their smokescreen morality. How are the Fascists any different? They were just a precursor to the modern Neocon phenomena. They aren't Marxist heretics, they are proponents of autarchic state capitalism using nationalism and patriotism as a smokescreen.
And on the subject of fascism, what someone like Jude propose as an alternative to it if he thinks it to be so similar to anarchism? Could you seriously recall the Spanish Civil War and tell me that Stalinism or Leninism or Bourgeois Democracy can be desirable alternatives??

woah, buddy you are diving into unexplored territory, please check your facts at the door. I have provided facts and writings from the Fascists themselves and you still refuse to believe that it was a leftist class of ideals. The only aspect of deception used by the Fascists was the notion of nationalism. Syndicalists were leftist intellectualls obssessed with workers, and they strangley adapted the mode of conduct of the workers and noticed that they were mostly conservative and patriotic. So in essense they were fooling people that they were nationalistic to win the workers while expousing their leftist ideals. You have it the other way around, Levee. You think they were faking thier leftist rhetoric. Their rise to power was due to thier accomidation of the "Third Way". A means not capitalistic and not communistic. So how can you say that they were state capitalists? Do you even know the economic philosophy of corporative syndicalism or syndicalism in general?

[Guest]

JudeObscure84 ^

[JudeObscure84]

tsihcrana laicos wrote

Where's your evidence?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... ce&s=books

The best book on the Spanish Civil War. ^ Even Noam Chomsky himself commended Bolloten on his objectiveness.

As noted by testimonials reported by Burnett Bolloten:

"The committee is the paterfamilias. It owns everything; it directs everything. Every special desire has to be submitted to it for consideration; it alone has the final say."

"If someone has a girl outside the village, can he get money to pay her a visit? The peasants assure me that he can."

"I tried in vain to get a drink, either of coffee or wine or lemonade. The village bar had been closed as nefarious commerce."

"With the abolition of money, the collective held the upper hand since anyone wishing to travel had to get 'republican' money from the committee."

Bolloten further notes that "Puritanism was a characteristic of the libertarian movement. . . excessive drinking, smoking and other practices that were perceived as middle-class attributes were nearly always censured." [pages 68–69]

[JudeObscure84]

They were just a precursor to the modern Neocon phenomena. They aren't Marxist heretics, they are proponents of autarchic state capitalism using nationalism and patriotism as a smokescreen.

Where's your evidence?

[Levee_En_Masse]

What kind of anarchist are you and why are you bringing up Marx? Syndicalism is a marxist critique in itself. I never said it had anything to do with pure Marxism. I even said it was a Marxist heresy. It commands for the direct action of the workers union to sieze control of the state and use it to serve the means of the people.
Remember that Mussolini said that where they split with Marx is on class struggle, for they believe its a struggle about nations.

Damn, you might as well call anything a Marxist heresy then if you use that kind of criteria. I'm sorry, but Marxism could not encompass a swaggering dictator like Mussolini coming along and announcing the Second Roman Empire and embarking on a campaign of militarism in Africa. With that, you might as well call someone like Bismarck a Marxist heretic! And how exactly was it that Fascists or National Socialists sought to improve the living conditions of the population? By extensive military spending? Sending them off to die in war? It's a bit of a stretch to say that nationalism was a mere rhetorical gimmick when the states in question actively sought to pour their material resources [down the drain] into quests of supremacy against other peoples. And while you might respond by saying that Hitler for example implemented public works programs, they were usually related to such militarism (a highway built for use by tanks for example). These are hardly the "means of the people", and clearly the working class had no input in policy in the case of Fascist regimes. What is vital to anarchism is a society in which the people can participate in decisions affecting their everyday lives, and Fascism was not that.

[Levee_En_Masse]

Its the anarchy that keeps anarchists together and its nationalism that keeps fascists together. but their outlook on economics and production control varies very little.

Riiight. Then one might as well take that reasoning and extend it. Hey, all ideologies are the same because.....it's the conservativism that keeps the conservatives together, the liberalism that keeps the liberals together, and the communism that keeps the communists together. And then let me validate that with unsubstantiated statements about how they are not at all different because somehow mutual aid, autarchy, and market capitalism are not at all different systems..