Gentile admits that fascism emerged out of George Sorel's Syndicalism which he admits "conceived itself the genuine interpretation of Marxist communism". So if you follow the chain of custody (Syndicalism based on Marx, fascism based on Syndicalism, thus fascism based on Marx too):
> "It is necessary to distinguish between socialism and socialism—in fact, between idea and idea of the same socialist conception, in order to distinguish among them those that are inimical to Fascism. It is well known that Sorellian syndicalism, out of which the thought and the political method of Fascism emerged—conceived itself the genuine interpretation of Marxist communism. The dynamic conception of history, in which force as violence functions as an essential, is of unquestioned Marxist origin. Those notions flowed into other currents of contemporary thought, that have themselves, via alternative routes, arrived at a vindication of the form of State—implacable, but absolutely rational—that finds historic necessity in the very spiritual dynamism through which it realizes itself." - Origins and Doctrine of Fascism: With Selections from Other Works
Then he makes the weak distinction between fascism and Marxism, which rests only on the idea that national identity should also be made a component of the doctrine instead of only class:
> "Fascism combats the abstract class conception of society, rejecting the entire notion of antithetical class interests upon which the artificialities of "class struggle" rests. The concept has already been largely abandoned by theorists. Marxism succumbed to that criticism as quickly as it previously had been elevated by theorists. To the theoretical criticism, practical failure has been added with the advent of the Great War. In the circumstances of the Great War, individual societies were compelled to abandon all ideologies—in order to adapt themselves to reality. They were forced to do so by the internal and irresistible logic of their own organic nature. [The very needs of the war] testified to the solidarity and intimate unity, both moral and economic, of the constitutive classes of the social and State organism."
That's an add-on, not a fundamental change on the economic side of things. In other words, National Marxism with a synthesis of class and national identity. They merely took the economic side of Marxism and tweaked around some of the philosophical concepts, and packaged it up with patriotism and references to Italian history, in order to make Marxist socialism more appealing to the Italian masses.
Follow @redideologies
> "It is necessary to distinguish between socialism and socialism—in fact, between idea and idea of the same socialist conception, in order to distinguish among them those that are inimical to Fascism. It is well known that Sorellian syndicalism, out of which the thought and the political method of Fascism emerged—conceived itself the genuine interpretation of Marxist communism. The dynamic conception of history, in which force as violence functions as an essential, is of unquestioned Marxist origin. Those notions flowed into other currents of contemporary thought, that have themselves, via alternative routes, arrived at a vindication of the form of State—implacable, but absolutely rational—that finds historic necessity in the very spiritual dynamism through which it realizes itself." - Origins and Doctrine of Fascism: With Selections from Other Works
Then he makes the weak distinction between fascism and Marxism, which rests only on the idea that national identity should also be made a component of the doctrine instead of only class:
> "Fascism combats the abstract class conception of society, rejecting the entire notion of antithetical class interests upon which the artificialities of "class struggle" rests. The concept has already been largely abandoned by theorists. Marxism succumbed to that criticism as quickly as it previously had been elevated by theorists. To the theoretical criticism, practical failure has been added with the advent of the Great War. In the circumstances of the Great War, individual societies were compelled to abandon all ideologies—in order to adapt themselves to reality. They were forced to do so by the internal and irresistible logic of their own organic nature. [The very needs of the war] testified to the solidarity and intimate unity, both moral and economic, of the constitutive classes of the social and State organism."
That's an add-on, not a fundamental change on the economic side of things. In other words, National Marxism with a synthesis of class and national identity. They merely took the economic side of Marxism and tweaked around some of the philosophical concepts, and packaged it up with patriotism and references to Italian history, in order to make Marxist socialism more appealing to the Italian masses.
Follow @redideologies
Google Books
Origins and Doctrine of Fascism
Giovanni Gentile (1875-1944) was the major theorist of Italian fascism, supplying its justifi cation and rationale as a developmental form of dictatorship for status-deprived nations languishing on the margins of the Great Powers. Gentile's "actualism" (as…
😁10👍8🐳2💯2🔥1
Natsoc myth #1: "Hitler tried to save Europe from Communism"
Reality: Hitler's economic doctrine was very close to Communism so how could he save Europe from something he was dutifully implementing in his own country? His Molotov-Ribbentrop pact gave a green light for Stalin to expand into Poland and the Baltics. German and Soviet troops held a joint victory parade in Poland after their joint conquest. During Molotov-Ribbentrop, both countries ceased criticizing each other and began mutual praise. Hitler privately admired Stalin and his socialist autocracy. His invasion of the USSR had little to do with ideology and everything to do with plans for Lebensraum (conquering fertile soil in the East for German ethnic/territorial expansion, which Hitler outlined clearly in MK). The "fighting Bolshevism" bit was propaganda to convince dupes to join the fight for his living space. Remember, Goebbels said he'd "rather go down with Bolshevism than capitalism".
Natsoc myth #2: "Hitler was fighting for Western civilization"
Reality: Hitler was fighting for German supremacy in Europe, not the West in general. From David Irving: "Aboard his yacht Grille at Kiel he told Goebbels in May of his vision of a United States of Europe under German leadership". Hitler said: "the goal was the Nordic domination of Europe, and through America Nordic-Germanic domination of the world." Bombing and invading a dozen Western countries is a funny way of showing his love for it. Hitler and his top brass all declared Slavs an "inferior race" incapable of statecraft and compared them to animals. This is not someone who "loved the West," it is someone who loved only Germanics/Nordics and sought the subjugation of the rest of the White race. Even his love of Germans ended when he declared his people inferior and not worthy of survival because they lost the war.
Follow 👉 @redideologies
Reality: Hitler's economic doctrine was very close to Communism so how could he save Europe from something he was dutifully implementing in his own country? His Molotov-Ribbentrop pact gave a green light for Stalin to expand into Poland and the Baltics. German and Soviet troops held a joint victory parade in Poland after their joint conquest. During Molotov-Ribbentrop, both countries ceased criticizing each other and began mutual praise. Hitler privately admired Stalin and his socialist autocracy. His invasion of the USSR had little to do with ideology and everything to do with plans for Lebensraum (conquering fertile soil in the East for German ethnic/territorial expansion, which Hitler outlined clearly in MK). The "fighting Bolshevism" bit was propaganda to convince dupes to join the fight for his living space. Remember, Goebbels said he'd "rather go down with Bolshevism than capitalism".
Natsoc myth #2: "Hitler was fighting for Western civilization"
Reality: Hitler was fighting for German supremacy in Europe, not the West in general. From David Irving: "Aboard his yacht Grille at Kiel he told Goebbels in May of his vision of a United States of Europe under German leadership". Hitler said: "the goal was the Nordic domination of Europe, and through America Nordic-Germanic domination of the world." Bombing and invading a dozen Western countries is a funny way of showing his love for it. Hitler and his top brass all declared Slavs an "inferior race" incapable of statecraft and compared them to animals. This is not someone who "loved the West," it is someone who loved only Germanics/Nordics and sought the subjugation of the rest of the White race. Even his love of Germans ended when he declared his people inferior and not worthy of survival because they lost the war.
Follow 👉 @redideologies
👍17😁10🔥4🫡4❤2💯2🐳1
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
How exactly is this guy Nordic? Clearly not. Even their Nordicism was not rooted in reality, since many of them didn't have the phenotype to fit the ideology.
😁18👌8⚡3👍3
"In the days that followed, much to the surprise of his lunch guests, Hitler continued to express his regard for Stalin. The Soviet dictator’s life resembled his own, he told them: the Georgian, too, had worked his way up from ‘an unknown man to the leader of a state’."
Source: Volker Ullrich, Hitler Downfall ( Hans Baur, Ich flog Mächtige dieser Erde, Kempten (Allgäu), 1956, pp. 178f.)
Source: Volker Ullrich, Hitler Downfall ( Hans Baur, Ich flog Mächtige dieser Erde, Kempten (Allgäu), 1956, pp. 178f.)
❤🔥8😁1
Hitler outlines the basic socialist mentality here, that you don't work to earn your daily bread for yourself or your family, but to "serve the group". He doesn't realize that working in general serves the group, as you're providing goods or services to the group via the market. Example, if you work in a barber shop or a bakery you're providing useful services (haircuts & food) to the group that make their lives easier and they compensate you with their dollars. But if you don't earn anything for your work, then you're a slave to a group that gives you nothing in return for your service to it. How is that a fair deal?
He says:
> "The Aryan’s peculiar ability for the building up of a culture is not grounded in his intellectual gifts alone. If that were so, they could only be destructive and could never be able to organize; the innermost essence of organization demands that the individual renounce his own personal opinions and interests, and lay both at the service of the larger group. By serving the common interest, he receives his reward in return. For example, he doesn’t work directly for himself but makes his productive work a part of the activity of the group to which he belongs—not only for his own benefit, but for all. The spirit underlying this attitude is expressed by the word ‘work,’ which to him doesn't mean earning one's daily livelihood but rather a productive activity that doesn’t clash with the interests of the community."
So you don't work for yourself (or your family), but for the exclusive benefit of others? That's slavery. Slaves don't earn a wage and are forced to work against their will for the benefit of others (not surprising that Hitler had a bunch of slave labor camps). Hitler is telling you that your purpose in life is not to better your own lot, but to better the lot "of the group," even though working in general does help the group as well as yourself. If nobody worked, then society would collapse. Getting up in the morning to do a job, any kind of job (plumbing, auto repair, fishing, cooking, cleaning, child care, handiwork, construction, accounting, etc.), is helping other members of the group. So what he's saying is superfluous.
He goes on:
> "Whenever human activity is directed exclusively to the service of the instinct for self- preservation, it’s called theft, usury, robbery, burglary, etc. This state of mind, which forces self-interest into the background in favor of the community, is the first prerequisite for any true human culture. From this alone rises all the great works of humanity, that bring little reward to the creator but is a source of great blessings for posterity."
So now he is describing criminal acts like theft, but everyone already agrees that is a crime. Yeah, crime is bad. Very profound, Hitler. He then says that the great works of humanity "bring little reward to the creator". That's just not true. The great works bring different types of rewards to the creator. It could be monetary compensation, personal fulfillment (enjoyment), or admiration/respect from others. Often, all of those things go together. Think about a painter. A painter gets personal enjoyment from painting. It is his love, his passion. That is a reward in itself. What could come later is other rewards like money, fame, respect, etc. But if the artist got $0 from his work en perpetuity, he would have to do something else to earn his daily bread and do art purely as an entertaining hobby. If the creator got no reward at all from the work, he wouldn't have done it in the first place.
He goes on:
> "It’s this spirit alone that explains why a people can endure a harsh but honest existence, but at the same time consolidates the foundations on which the community exists. Every worker, every peasant, every inventor, state official who works without ever achieving fortune or prosperity for himself is a representative of this sublime idea—even though he may never become conscious of the profound meaning of his own activity."
He says:
> "The Aryan’s peculiar ability for the building up of a culture is not grounded in his intellectual gifts alone. If that were so, they could only be destructive and could never be able to organize; the innermost essence of organization demands that the individual renounce his own personal opinions and interests, and lay both at the service of the larger group. By serving the common interest, he receives his reward in return. For example, he doesn’t work directly for himself but makes his productive work a part of the activity of the group to which he belongs—not only for his own benefit, but for all. The spirit underlying this attitude is expressed by the word ‘work,’ which to him doesn't mean earning one's daily livelihood but rather a productive activity that doesn’t clash with the interests of the community."
So you don't work for yourself (or your family), but for the exclusive benefit of others? That's slavery. Slaves don't earn a wage and are forced to work against their will for the benefit of others (not surprising that Hitler had a bunch of slave labor camps). Hitler is telling you that your purpose in life is not to better your own lot, but to better the lot "of the group," even though working in general does help the group as well as yourself. If nobody worked, then society would collapse. Getting up in the morning to do a job, any kind of job (plumbing, auto repair, fishing, cooking, cleaning, child care, handiwork, construction, accounting, etc.), is helping other members of the group. So what he's saying is superfluous.
He goes on:
> "Whenever human activity is directed exclusively to the service of the instinct for self- preservation, it’s called theft, usury, robbery, burglary, etc. This state of mind, which forces self-interest into the background in favor of the community, is the first prerequisite for any true human culture. From this alone rises all the great works of humanity, that bring little reward to the creator but is a source of great blessings for posterity."
So now he is describing criminal acts like theft, but everyone already agrees that is a crime. Yeah, crime is bad. Very profound, Hitler. He then says that the great works of humanity "bring little reward to the creator". That's just not true. The great works bring different types of rewards to the creator. It could be monetary compensation, personal fulfillment (enjoyment), or admiration/respect from others. Often, all of those things go together. Think about a painter. A painter gets personal enjoyment from painting. It is his love, his passion. That is a reward in itself. What could come later is other rewards like money, fame, respect, etc. But if the artist got $0 from his work en perpetuity, he would have to do something else to earn his daily bread and do art purely as an entertaining hobby. If the creator got no reward at all from the work, he wouldn't have done it in the first place.
He goes on:
> "It’s this spirit alone that explains why a people can endure a harsh but honest existence, but at the same time consolidates the foundations on which the community exists. Every worker, every peasant, every inventor, state official who works without ever achieving fortune or prosperity for himself is a representative of this sublime idea—even though he may never become conscious of the profound meaning of his own activity."
❤3👏3😁3
Red Ideologies
Hitler outlines the basic socialist mentality here, that you don't work to earn your daily bread for yourself or your family, but to "serve the group". He doesn't realize that working in general serves the group, as you're providing goods or services to the…
Continued from above...
He's endorsing a poverty cult here, basic socialist thinking. He's preaching the idea of pure selflessness, charity and putting yourself at the mercy of strangers' benefit. Very few humans embrace such a worldview, other than maybe religious monks. Every human has the capacity for charity and selflessness, some more than others, but it is against human nature to care more for others than yourself. Would anyone expect a father to care more for the children of others than his own, even if of the same nationality/ethnic group? It doesn't make sense to do that, it is against natural instinct.
What Hitler is preaching here played out in the Third Reich and all socialist states. One aspect of that is foregoing personal desires for whatever is deemed required by the state. Think about career. Say you want to be a film director. That's your dream. Well, too bad Johnny, the socialist state says there's no need for more film directors, instead you're going to work in a factory building armaments for the regime. If you refuse, you're being a "selfish individualist" and are put in a concentration camp. That's exactly what happened in every socialist state. Citizens could rarely choose their own path in life but be assigned one by the state. You are a cog in a machine, any personal desires thrown out the window for the "benefit of the group," which conveniently is decided by the bureaucrats themselves to suit their own whims/desires. The bureaucrats themselves have selfish desires that they demand you support with your labor (like Hitler's Lebensraum dream), but somehow they're not being selfish for demanding their citizens sacrifice everything for their grandiose pet projects, right?
It's all hypocritical nonsense to justify raw power and the elimination of any dissent from the State.
Follow @redideologies
He's endorsing a poverty cult here, basic socialist thinking. He's preaching the idea of pure selflessness, charity and putting yourself at the mercy of strangers' benefit. Very few humans embrace such a worldview, other than maybe religious monks. Every human has the capacity for charity and selflessness, some more than others, but it is against human nature to care more for others than yourself. Would anyone expect a father to care more for the children of others than his own, even if of the same nationality/ethnic group? It doesn't make sense to do that, it is against natural instinct.
What Hitler is preaching here played out in the Third Reich and all socialist states. One aspect of that is foregoing personal desires for whatever is deemed required by the state. Think about career. Say you want to be a film director. That's your dream. Well, too bad Johnny, the socialist state says there's no need for more film directors, instead you're going to work in a factory building armaments for the regime. If you refuse, you're being a "selfish individualist" and are put in a concentration camp. That's exactly what happened in every socialist state. Citizens could rarely choose their own path in life but be assigned one by the state. You are a cog in a machine, any personal desires thrown out the window for the "benefit of the group," which conveniently is decided by the bureaucrats themselves to suit their own whims/desires. The bureaucrats themselves have selfish desires that they demand you support with your labor (like Hitler's Lebensraum dream), but somehow they're not being selfish for demanding their citizens sacrifice everything for their grandiose pet projects, right?
It's all hypocritical nonsense to justify raw power and the elimination of any dissent from the State.
Follow @redideologies
💯6👍4🥰4😁2
Hitler thought of the German masses as dull and dumb who could only understand simplistic mantra-like phrases. A true lover of his people.
From MK:
> "The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings—that is, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will appeal to the hearts of the masses. The fact that our ‘bright boys’ don't understand this merely shows their conceit and mental laziness. Once we see the need to concentrate the persuasive forces of propaganda on the masses, the following lesson results: It’s a mistake to make propaganda multi-sided, as if it were a system of scientific instruction. The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget. Such being the case, all effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials, and those must be expressed in stereotyped formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forth. If this principle is forgotten, and if an attempt is made to be abstract and general, the propaganda will turn out ineffective; the public won’t be able to digest or retain what’s offered to them in this way."
Follow @redideologies
From MK:
> "The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings—that is, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will appeal to the hearts of the masses. The fact that our ‘bright boys’ don't understand this merely shows their conceit and mental laziness. Once we see the need to concentrate the persuasive forces of propaganda on the masses, the following lesson results: It’s a mistake to make propaganda multi-sided, as if it were a system of scientific instruction. The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget. Such being the case, all effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials, and those must be expressed in stereotyped formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forth. If this principle is forgotten, and if an attempt is made to be abstract and general, the propaganda will turn out ineffective; the public won’t be able to digest or retain what’s offered to them in this way."
Follow @redideologies
👍7❤5😁3
Forwarded from Wignats of the World
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
😁15🔥3👍1
Economist puts Soviet Russia, Mao's China and Nazi Germany under the same category of "true examples of socialism".
And he defines socialism as "when the government owns the means of production"... not a welfare state (which can exist alongside a mostly market economy).
Follow @redideologies
And he defines socialism as "when the government owns the means of production"... not a welfare state (which can exist alongside a mostly market economy).
Follow @redideologies
💯15😱4
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
Was Hitler’s Anti-Communism a Fraud? | Martinez Politix Investigates
Duration: 01:23:38
Topic: In this episode of Martinez Politix Investigates, I look at the common wisdom that Adolf Hitler was an “anti-communist” crusader and break down a series of reasons why Hitler’s anti-Communism was a fraud. I look at Hitler’s own anti-capitalist economic views and policies which were highly similar to that of Soviet communists; Hitler’s private admiration for Stalin and his socialist system; Hitler’s Molotov-Ribbentrop pact which saw the two countries become allies engaged in trade & a joint conquest of Poland; Hitler’s real reason for attacking the USSR (Lebensraum, conquering new living space for German exploitation and not an ideological crusade against Stalinism); and more.
📽 WATCH THE VIDEO 📽
Follow 👉 @martinezpolitix
Duration: 01:23:38
Topic: In this episode of Martinez Politix Investigates, I look at the common wisdom that Adolf Hitler was an “anti-communist” crusader and break down a series of reasons why Hitler’s anti-Communism was a fraud. I look at Hitler’s own anti-capitalist economic views and policies which were highly similar to that of Soviet communists; Hitler’s private admiration for Stalin and his socialist system; Hitler’s Molotov-Ribbentrop pact which saw the two countries become allies engaged in trade & a joint conquest of Poland; Hitler’s real reason for attacking the USSR (Lebensraum, conquering new living space for German exploitation and not an ideological crusade against Stalinism); and more.
📽 WATCH THE VIDEO 📽
Follow 👉 @martinezpolitix
👍6😁6
The Nazis replaced traditional religion with worship of the Party and Hitler personally.
NS/Fascism = Worship of the State/Party/Leader.
Follow @redideologies
NS/Fascism = Worship of the State/Party/Leader.
Follow @redideologies
👏13❤4💯4😁3👍2
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
CJB schools uneducated dolt Dennis Wise on Hitler being cut from the same cloth as Marxist socialists.
Wise doesn't even know what Communism is. He defined it vaguely as "internationalism"... but that has no meaning because Hitler also did internationalism in the sense that he moved his armies outside of his borders to invade and conquer other countries, backed sides in civil wars (like Spain), financed kindred movements abroad, and even said his aim was "Nordic domination of Europe...and the world".
The dummy then claims the Japanese attacked China to "stop Communism" but there was no communist government in China at this time (Mao came to power in 1949) AND Nazi Germany supported the Chinese forces fighting the Japanese invaders before switching to the Japan alliance when it became apparent they would win.
Follow @redideologies
Wise doesn't even know what Communism is. He defined it vaguely as "internationalism"... but that has no meaning because Hitler also did internationalism in the sense that he moved his armies outside of his borders to invade and conquer other countries, backed sides in civil wars (like Spain), financed kindred movements abroad, and even said his aim was "Nordic domination of Europe...and the world".
The dummy then claims the Japanese attacked China to "stop Communism" but there was no communist government in China at this time (Mao came to power in 1949) AND Nazi Germany supported the Chinese forces fighting the Japanese invaders before switching to the Japan alliance when it became apparent they would win.
Follow @redideologies
🐳7🔥4👍2😁2
NS Germany had peaceful Germans executed by guillotine for protesting against the war policies.
This would be equivalent to the US government executing Iraq war protestors.
True love of their own people.
Follow @redideologies
This would be equivalent to the US government executing Iraq war protestors.
True love of their own people.
Follow @redideologies
😱9🥰7👍1😢1🫡1
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
How could Hitler save Eastern European Slavs from Communism when he hated them and liked Stalin?
📽 WATCH FULL VIDEO on RUMBLE OR ODYSEE 📽
Follow 👉 @martinezpolitix
📽 WATCH FULL VIDEO on RUMBLE OR ODYSEE 📽
Follow 👉 @martinezpolitix
😁8👍4