The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 134
Fascism wasn’t just a “bad thing” that happened in the first half of the twentieth century, and it’s not just a bogus word the Left throws around today about everyone and everything it doesn’t like. It was an explicit totalitarian ideology of state power that arose as a reaction to Communist provocation and libertine excesses in the 1920s and 1930s. That doesn’t go far enough in describing it, though. It is, in fact, the dialectical antithesis of Marxism and libertinistic “liberalism,” which is to say that it is an ideology that has many things in common with Marxism while positioning itself as its philosophical and political opposite. In fact, Fascism is a form of idolatry: idolatry of a state acting as God the Father of a people whose lives are given meaning by submitting fully to its advancement and glory. In this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, host James Lindsay reads through Benito Mussolini’s Doctrine of Fascism to make it very clear what Fascism is in every regard and why it’s nothing like a good answer for Americans beset by Woke Marxism today. Join him to understand this crucially important issue.
Subscribe to the New Discourses Podcast on SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, Rumble, Odysee, or by RSS.
Additional episodes of the New Discourses Podcast are available here.
5 comments
Dear Sociologist.
I hope that by „Mr S“ you mean me.
Thank you for your response.
Herr Schütze
Is it true that the people of the United States of America and others (e.g. United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) have only experienced capitalism, never communism/international-socialism or fascism/national-socialism?
If you look at the surface of their history, you would like to say: Yes. But if you look deeper, you will find that since the end of the Second World War or at the latest since the 1960s they have been experiencing what has been experienced in continental Europe since the French Revolution (1789) or at the latest since the Russian Revolution (1917). History somehow repeats itself – on a large and small scale. In this case it started with early socialism as thesis (at the same time as capitalism as a thesis), then high socialism as antithesis (communism/international-socialism and its own antithesis, fascism/national-socialism) and finally late socialism, which can be seen in the statements at the WEF, and these statements show the synthesis of the thesis of capitalism and early socialism and the antithesis of communism/international-socialism and fascism/national-socialism. You can also read it e.g. in Klaus Schwab’s last books and also in those of Noah Yuval Harari.
In this topic, therefore, we are dealing with two three-steps: (1.) an inner or smaller and temporally closer together three-step and (2.) an outer or larger and temporally more distant three-step, which superimposes the other. According to this insight, fascism/national-socialism can only be an opponent of capitalism indirectly, namely in its superimposed form; it is directly an opponent of communism/international-socialism, and as such it came into being, as a reaction to communism/international-socialism.
If the thesis is capitalism, the antithesis of which is communism/international-socialism and both synthesis is fascism/national-socialism, then fascism/national-socialism cannot be communism/international socialism, because it is not identical with it, it is its negation. Only communism/international-socialism is „based upon the denial of private property rights“ (**). We also have empirical evidence for this. I give four of several examples, ordered by the duration of fascist/national-socialist rule:
Portugal: 42 years (1932-1974);
Spain: 39 years (1936-1975);
Italy: 21 years (1922-1945);
Germany: 12 years (1933-1945).
In none of these countries has private property been abolished. And if you want to tell me then that the duration of these systems was not long enough for that, I answer you with three arguments: (1) in all of the named countries, but especially in Spain and Portugal the systems lasted long enough to support my assertion; (2.) the fascist/national-socialist systems are not very much economic, but almost only political dictatorships, they do not destroy the market, but leave it room for manoeuvre, restrict it only where it seems necessary from a political point of view (and from this point of view, by the way, there have been restrictions on the market in continental Europe even after the end of the respective fascist/national-socialist systems – „social market economy“ is what they call it -, again and again, even more so today). (3.) Communism/international-socialism, on the other hand, had from the beginning nothing better to do than to abolish private property in the first place, although there was almost no private property in Russia or later also in China, which is why a farmer with a cow was allowed to be shot, for example in the Ukraine, because he was considered a „class enemy“, a „citizen“, a „capitalist“; the expropriation of these expropriators took place from the very beginning, so that immediately, from 1917 (beginning in Russia), one could see what communism/international-socialism was all about: Expropriation of the so-called „expropriators“ through murder and terror!
See also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8x-cp7SXAs%2B&t=1209s .
“The Global Empire of Palestine
The Palestinians have something better than a state. They have the backing of today’s worldwide power brokers.”
Lee Smith, tablet magazine Dec 2023
“By promoting the Palestinians’ cause [in the 1970s], the Europeans joined them in creating the prototype of ‘Third World man.’ The collaboration served the narcissism of Western elites, and the political ambitions of the Western-educated elites of the ‘decolonized’ world who weaponized their resentment to extract money and arms from their onetime overlords. A century removed from the apex of their strength, and their will to defend a civilization built by better men long depleted, Western elites’ self-image is sustained by Third World man. By attributing to Westerners responsibility for his suffering, Third World man fathoms the reservoir of their once formidable power and hints they may again someday be replenished… Western vanity [is] the source of Third World man’s magic.
Polish psychiatrist Andrzej Lobaczewski… argued that what he called macrosocial evil is the function of pathologically evil individuals. They disguise their true ambitions for power, wealth, and notoriety behind ideology, using terms like ‘social justice’ which are vague enough to convey the righting of wrongs, to animate social movements united by grievance. Inside these movements, genuine psychopaths and those who adapt most easily to a pathological order rise to positions of power and influence. Evangelizing on behalf of deviant and destructive causes and desecrating, or criminalizing, what is true, beautiful, and natural, in turn lays waste to social structures, institutions, industries, entire nations. The rise of the Empire of Palestine represents this pathological process on a global scale…
The Empire of Palestine is a… forgery. A postcard from the continent of unreason… everywhere you look the mark of civilizational suicide is on the horizon as Western elites assemble under the imperial banner. Flown in European capitals and university campuses, it represents the longings of a powerful faction within the West of those exhausted by life and wanting one last time to feel something like life coursing through their veins as they await the cleansing fire, redemption culminating in the coup de grace.”
@Cameron,
You commented “… fascism is a combination of capitalism & socialism…”
That is incorrect. Fascism, like Socialism and Communism, is based upon the denial of private property rights. Fascism permits the surface appearance of private property ownership while the State controls–thereby factually owns–the property. Socialism and Communism flat-out deny private property rights, making no pretense of private ownership. These three expressions of Statism are antithetical to Capitalism, which is based upon private property rights, which make possible the physical exercise of all of one’s other legitimate individual rights, to wit: self-ownership and bodily autonomy; personal liberty; privacy; self-defense; ownership and bearing of any and all types of weapons in any quantity; freedom of speech in all forms; freedom of association; freedom of non-association, including peaceful discrimination for any reason whatsoever; and freedom of contract. Theocracy is a religious expression of Statism that denies those same rights. Atheism, properly understood, is a metaphysical position, not a political one. Statists politicize it by coercively imposing it upon people, as Bolsheviks did when they established Soviet Russia.