Very good Francis. I like how you’ve outlined our current “democracies” are essentially transnational international communist cartels.
You’ve nicely described how it is easy for people to talk past each other when terms aren’t clearly defined. Yes fascism, like democracies may both be good or bad.
Thank you for your comment. This is an important message of my essay. The documented atrocities of the Nazi regime for example, cannot be ignored or glossed over. But nor can the documented accomplishments of the same regime in restoring German national self respect after the disastrous and humiliating Treaty of Versailles and its accomplishment in stopping the march of communism into Western Europe. Similarly, the documented atrocities of our modern democracies (neo-con wars killing millions of people, millions destroyed by abortion, euthanasia, transgenderism etc.) cannot be ignored or glossed over. And (as you brilliantly point out), our modern “democracies” are “essentially transnational international communist cartels.”
This is simply evidence that you have been entirely brainwashed by a group of people whom the Creator of mankind described as "liars and murderers from the beginning."
I remember one old woman describing how these evil nazis nailed her to a door when they retreated from the bolshevik menace at war's end, and how they used to shovel shit into the food supply.
Another one - a man this time - when exposed as the complete liar he was, admitted the fact, but simply added "In my mind it really happened."
As my mother used to say, "You cannot do anything with a liar," and this is what the jew is.
All this "documented atrocity" you speak of shatters into ten million pieces when actually analysed by somebody with any sort of rationality and claim to scientific objectivity.
Every part of this "documentation" you speak of is simply the recorded statements of the jews who were there at the time - millions of whom seem to have survived these camps, and are today claiming compensation for the horrors they endured therein.
Anybody who ever completed a basic entry-level course in arithmetic might reasonably ask themselves how it might be that six million died, whereas their numbers post-war were greater than pre war.
But such is the power of the narrative they have spun, aided and abetted by individuals such as the Ninth Duke of Portland, who was the head of psychological operations in Britain during the war, who freely admitted that the entire story was a complete hoax.
The real spectrum is individualism vs collectivism. Fascism is not opposite to Communism any more than Shia is opposite to Sunni. They are simply factions of the same collectivist ideology, driven by the anti-Christian dogma that the "greater good" is an honourable aim. The "greater good" (which is NOT populism) merely strives to enable a dictator or part of elites to decide what is in the interests of the citizens by dictat and tyranny, thereby creating a "collective" slave class and an "elite" ruling class. In the current situation the ruling class is the WEF, CFR and the select families that control them. It is fascism/communism by stealth.
In the 1970s it was necessary to portray free (individualist) societies as "right wing" and at the same time portray Nazis as "right wing" in order to create a "free societies are Nazi societies" brazen lie. The media were used to enact this, and they were mostly successful.
No, fascism is not a good thing. It is a socialist doctrine that hates the Christian church and persecutes Christians just like all collectivist regimes do.
Communism is by no means a collectivist ideology, although it is portrayed as such.
If you look at the overwhelmingly judaized composition of the communist party and its apologists, and understand the complete contempt the jew has for all the other races of mankind, you will understand that the revolution in Russia was by no means to create a workers' state, but rather, to subvert the entire wealth of the state into their exclusive hands - the workers remained as grindingly poor and tyrannized as ever they might possibly have been under the Tsarist regime.
Contrast that with the astonishing increase in real workers' rights in "fascist Germany," whereby the people were given interest free loans to buy farms, which were cancelled if they went on to have four children, with pro rata reductions for fewer.
Even the very animals benefited from this fascist ideology - Hitler banned all animal experimentation on day one after his accession to power.
Communism of course, is by very definition antichrist and anti God, whereas the church was protected in Germany - contrast that with the wholesale demolition of churches in soviet Russia.
Germany of course had no elite class, in fact it was identified with egalitarianism, whereby a farm boy could achieve whatever his natural talents made him suitable for - in Russia, it was your ethnicity and that only, which marked you out for despotic power and tyranny.
Without the fascism you seem to abhor, the whole of Europe would have fallen beneath the soviet curse, whereas because of the efforts of the fascist Hitler, a mere half of it suffered that appalling fate.
You wrote "communism is by no means a collectivist ideology".
The problem with collectivists is that in order to avoid the realisation that collectivism is a tyrannical, evil and satanic ideology, collectivists will always find a new spin.
In the USSR, collectivization was promoted to the world as the realization of a workers' state, whereas it was nothing of the sort, as I pointed out.
In NS Germany, the collectivization was for the good of the people, and it worked wonderfully well - so well that it had to be destroyed, and so the jews declared war on Germany at their WJC in Amsterdam in April 1933.
So collectivization is not per se evil, as you seem to think.
You two are are arguing semantics without addressing each other's points: you're saying collectivism is a tool to impose elite tyrrany, and he's saying it's a masquerade of collectivism because it uses collectivism as a tool to impose elite tyrrany.
Try to get past it - or at least to understand that your blanket demonization of collectivism is a logical fallacy.
Everything hinges on who is doing the work - in Germany, it was done for good reasons, and ones which as I stated, resulted in enormous prosperity for everyone - not just for some mythical "elite."
I salute your commendable effort to clarify these political terms that are overused and distorted in every way in our time.
My question is : why would it be necessary, or even useful, to put a label or to categorize the political phenomena that are currently taking place?
I believe that these various designations, populism, leftism, fascism, communism, capitalism, nationalism, democracy..., are ideologies that have described movements, situations and contexts that belong to the past. But I don't think any of them can describe the current political space, which has changed so much in a few centuries that it doesn't correspond to any of this in my opinion.
For example, to think that supporters of the U.S. Democratic Party are "communists" or "populists" is, in my opinion, ridiculous. For the ideology of communism, which has never materialized anywhere in the world, promoted and apologia for a society without class or government, where capital belongs to the people who govern themselves. We are very far from that, are we not?
So to me neither the Democrats, nor the "elites," nor the "globalists" are communists or fascists or nationalists. They are at best power-hungry delusionsional technocrats. And they are many other things for which we have no names.
Fundamentally, they are either jews or jew apologists.
You only have to note that virtually every single US Congressman has an AIPAC minder to understand where the driving ideology active in the west today comes from - or who it comes from.
The evidence is undeniable, although faithfully covered up and dissimulated via a fully bought over mainstream media.
Blaming all the 'isms' is useless - it's like blaming termites for being termites and they won't listen to you anyways.
Here's the real question: How long will the millions of American and most of Western churchianity keep pretending to worship Jesus while actually serving DaSynagogue of Satan? Who dat?
Most folks - secular or churchian - don't even believe it exists. While Old Scratch has convinced the whole world that it doesn't exist - it literally runs the show by subterfuge and deception through its multiplicity of manifestations which we see and blame for our socio-economic problems. Old Scratch's best game is 'you and him go fight' - and we are his best suckers - just study history.
I have been all of these - Russia hater, anti-communist, zionist neocon, end-time religionist......did I forget any?
It took me decades - yes, discovering truth and reality is a process - never an end state. And the hardest part is - it takes effort and perseverance - www.crushlimbraw.com - that's basically my story, right or wrong.
That literally is the HARDEST part for most folks - they cannot admit they were wrong - thus living in delusion - and disabling themselves from repentance, the first step in Christianity.
Always remember the primary -ism, from which all the others you mention derive, ie judaism.
Hitler removed these people from Germany, and the nation immediately flourished beyond measure - so much so that the judaics, of whom Churchill was one, and Roosevelt and Eisenhower others - had to band together to destroy both him, his nation, and any future mention in polite conversation of National Socialism.
Did you ever read the links I provided in my first comment? The evidence provided by your reply this time indicates you did not or there is a serious reading comprehension issue.
The Judaism question was rhetorically intended and if you had read further through the links, you might have discovered that. The links I provide are to articles written by various authors who make up the bulk of DaLimbraw Library and who have done the heavy work of research - all of which I read at some time and found worth archiving - I have found that I learn more by reading what others have written.....rather than yapping my own gums.
You can link and read - your choice - I don't spoon feed!
It's a real pity that these "constructs" - i.e. the "Left" and the "Right" cannot come together and see they have a common enemy. Wouldn't it be great if Stew Peters and Chris Hedges, for example, could sit down and realize they are, in their own ways, hovering over the exact same target? But no, the Left and Right must be kept apart and in their respective, tail-chasing silos. Pity, that.
"...astonishing increase in real workers' rights in "fascist Germany," whereby the people were given interest free loans to buy farms.." "Germany of course had no elite class, in fact it was identified with egalitarianism, whereby a farm boy could achieve whatever his natural talents made him suitable for.." - egalitarianism for the populace, yes... *in the unquestioning-absolute-service-to-the-State* ! AH implemented an ultimate cradle-to-grave control over the minds and bodies of his citizen-subjects ! The Group..The State.. meaning The Fuehrer is Supreme in all decisions as to what- and how- the citizen's resources ought be put to the service of the Nation- the State - personal private individual preferences and goals, at best, secondary considerations ! Egalitarianism *Not* for the Fuehrer and his loyal Party members in positions of arbitrary power and authority decreeing themselves the PhilosopherKing-wisdom to arbitrarily and at any whim change- and create new rules and demands- to exert control over the citizen !
In NS Germany, it worked magnificently well, and so justified itself.
The greatest good was accorded to the greatest number of ordinary individuals in Germany - Hitler returned six million to productive employment in less than five years, as well as introducing a welter of new rules which stripped power from jewish elites, and returned it to the hands of native-born Germans.
Such was his undeniable success, that the jews had to band together via their endless international alliances with jews in other countries to destroy both him and this astonishing system he created.
"...Germany of course had no elite class..."; "...astonishing increase in real workers' rights in "fascist Germany,"..." ; well, how about including this analysis of the history :
See Leonard Peikoff's "Ominous Parallels'; he fabulously describes the evolution of collectivist-versus-individualist ideologies throughout history, from Plato and Aristoteles onward through Luther, Augustine, Rousseau, Hegel, Kant, Marx, Schiller, Schopenhauer, and and and… into 'the inevitability of Hitler's Germany'… (by the way, much due to the *elite class in Germany* ! )
1) my understanding of "fascist" is that it is not synonymous with "nationalist". Rather, my understanding is that in the modern (20th century and beyond) sense of the word, "fascism" is the tying or bundling together of the court, government, and administrative state into one tightly controlled, centralized unit, as we saw in Western countries during COVID.
2) "Populist" seems to now mean "democratic outcomes that I don't like", and is used almost exclusively by those on the left of the political spectrum. When the left wins and votes in a government and allows biological males to play in women's sports, that is "democracy". When the right votes in a government that disallows it, that is "populism".
1. You are absolutely correct in your assessment of the tyranny during covid using some of the fascist ideas of the twentieth century (of corporatized control and judicial control, for example). However, the tyranny was in fact transnational/international in its wielding of power and it sought to make the imposition of the tyranny as uniform as possible ("operation lockstep") - in these and several other features, it resembled closely the transnational communists.
Fascists such as Franco and Mussolini (and Hitler during the early years of his rule) were profoundly nationalist and had no international ambitions. They promoted as far as they could, the well-being of their own people, believed in private property and capital and allowed industry to flourish. Of course, as we know, Hitler's regime became murderous and nasty as the second world war progressed.
2. There is no doubt that the word "populist" has been abused and used by the woke left to characterize any outcome they don't like. The fascists were fundamentally populists, who carried out the will of their people and who believed that to look after the well being of their own people first, should be the primary political mandate and goal of their governments. In this latter sense, they do resemble the "populism" of President Trump.
Thank you for this clarifying and courageous essay, Francis. If anyone is intrigued by the "controversial" or otherwise taboo ideas brought up in this piece, I recommend (indeed urge) looking in to a few of the following resources with an open mind. Decide for yourself what to think.
And lastly this fascinating documentary on Oswald in England during the war (WWII) period. One will be surprised and shocked to learn that the so-called "Fascists" were fervently anti-war. But their "opponents" wanted the millions of casualties in the name of "Democracy".
Dr Christian is to be highly commended for being the first person I have any recollection of who has dared to suggest that fascism is not always and invariably bad, evil, and wicked.
He is absolutely right that as a system, it emerges as being the only one available which can confront the real evils of communism - the effete democracies of the west rolled over and fought for it and against their own best interests when it emerged a few decades ago after the bloodbath in imperial Russia.
It seems somewhat unlikely that these democracies actually did oppose the system post war - it is strongly arguable that the massive military build-ups during the so called "cold war" were simply the means whereby military spending could be grotesquely inflated on the back of the "communist threat" posed by the usual suspects, ie those co-religionists of the Frankfurt School which was mentioned.
Any suggestion that those WW2-era fascist regimes engaged in the mass murder of "jews, Poles, and gipsies" of course has to be seen in the light of the yellow press pushing a gaslit version of history, whereby their greatest fear is that a National Socialist system might one day re emerge to once again challenge and destroy their stranglehold on world finance.
A minor quibble though, it seems highly unlikely that the Roman Empire used the "fasces" as a symbol of unity and strength - far more likely, as I was always told, that the rods and the axe symbolized the state's right to bind its members to obedience, backed up with the threat of execution, ie the axe, if they had the temerity to challenge its authority.
Very good Francis. I like how you’ve outlined our current “democracies” are essentially transnational international communist cartels.
You’ve nicely described how it is easy for people to talk past each other when terms aren’t clearly defined. Yes fascism, like democracies may both be good or bad.
Thank you for your comment. This is an important message of my essay. The documented atrocities of the Nazi regime for example, cannot be ignored or glossed over. But nor can the documented accomplishments of the same regime in restoring German national self respect after the disastrous and humiliating Treaty of Versailles and its accomplishment in stopping the march of communism into Western Europe. Similarly, the documented atrocities of our modern democracies (neo-con wars killing millions of people, millions destroyed by abortion, euthanasia, transgenderism etc.) cannot be ignored or glossed over. And (as you brilliantly point out), our modern “democracies” are “essentially transnational international communist cartels.”
There were no "atrocities of the nazi regime."
This is simply evidence that you have been entirely brainwashed by a group of people whom the Creator of mankind described as "liars and murderers from the beginning."
I remember one old woman describing how these evil nazis nailed her to a door when they retreated from the bolshevik menace at war's end, and how they used to shovel shit into the food supply.
Another one - a man this time - when exposed as the complete liar he was, admitted the fact, but simply added "In my mind it really happened."
As my mother used to say, "You cannot do anything with a liar," and this is what the jew is.
All this "documented atrocity" you speak of shatters into ten million pieces when actually analysed by somebody with any sort of rationality and claim to scientific objectivity.
Every part of this "documentation" you speak of is simply the recorded statements of the jews who were there at the time - millions of whom seem to have survived these camps, and are today claiming compensation for the horrors they endured therein.
Anybody who ever completed a basic entry-level course in arithmetic might reasonably ask themselves how it might be that six million died, whereas their numbers post-war were greater than pre war.
But such is the power of the narrative they have spun, aided and abetted by individuals such as the Ninth Duke of Portland, who was the head of psychological operations in Britain during the war, who freely admitted that the entire story was a complete hoax.
The real spectrum is individualism vs collectivism. Fascism is not opposite to Communism any more than Shia is opposite to Sunni. They are simply factions of the same collectivist ideology, driven by the anti-Christian dogma that the "greater good" is an honourable aim. The "greater good" (which is NOT populism) merely strives to enable a dictator or part of elites to decide what is in the interests of the citizens by dictat and tyranny, thereby creating a "collective" slave class and an "elite" ruling class. In the current situation the ruling class is the WEF, CFR and the select families that control them. It is fascism/communism by stealth.
In the 1970s it was necessary to portray free (individualist) societies as "right wing" and at the same time portray Nazis as "right wing" in order to create a "free societies are Nazi societies" brazen lie. The media were used to enact this, and they were mostly successful.
No, fascism is not a good thing. It is a socialist doctrine that hates the Christian church and persecutes Christians just like all collectivist regimes do.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350425183_How_and_Why_Fascism_and_Nazism_Became_the_Right
You misunderstand the nature of these ideologies.
Communism is by no means a collectivist ideology, although it is portrayed as such.
If you look at the overwhelmingly judaized composition of the communist party and its apologists, and understand the complete contempt the jew has for all the other races of mankind, you will understand that the revolution in Russia was by no means to create a workers' state, but rather, to subvert the entire wealth of the state into their exclusive hands - the workers remained as grindingly poor and tyrannized as ever they might possibly have been under the Tsarist regime.
Contrast that with the astonishing increase in real workers' rights in "fascist Germany," whereby the people were given interest free loans to buy farms, which were cancelled if they went on to have four children, with pro rata reductions for fewer.
Even the very animals benefited from this fascist ideology - Hitler banned all animal experimentation on day one after his accession to power.
Communism of course, is by very definition antichrist and anti God, whereas the church was protected in Germany - contrast that with the wholesale demolition of churches in soviet Russia.
Germany of course had no elite class, in fact it was identified with egalitarianism, whereby a farm boy could achieve whatever his natural talents made him suitable for - in Russia, it was your ethnicity and that only, which marked you out for despotic power and tyranny.
Without the fascism you seem to abhor, the whole of Europe would have fallen beneath the soviet curse, whereas because of the efforts of the fascist Hitler, a mere half of it suffered that appalling fate.
You wrote "communism is by no means a collectivist ideology".
The problem with collectivists is that in order to avoid the realisation that collectivism is a tyrannical, evil and satanic ideology, collectivists will always find a new spin.
That one is a doozy.
I explained myself when I stated that fact.
In the USSR, collectivization was promoted to the world as the realization of a workers' state, whereas it was nothing of the sort, as I pointed out.
In NS Germany, the collectivization was for the good of the people, and it worked wonderfully well - so well that it had to be destroyed, and so the jews declared war on Germany at their WJC in Amsterdam in April 1933.
So collectivization is not per se evil, as you seem to think.
You two are are arguing semantics without addressing each other's points: you're saying collectivism is a tool to impose elite tyrrany, and he's saying it's a masquerade of collectivism because it uses collectivism as a tool to impose elite tyrrany.
I never stated that collectivism in Germany was a tool to impose elite tyranny.
In fact, I clearly stated that NS Germany was an egalitarian state, with no elite other than that defined by a person's unique skills and abilities.
He is? I couldn't get past "communism is by no means a collectivist ideology"
Try to get past it - or at least to understand that your blanket demonization of collectivism is a logical fallacy.
Everything hinges on who is doing the work - in Germany, it was done for good reasons, and ones which as I stated, resulted in enormous prosperity for everyone - not just for some mythical "elite."
I salute your commendable effort to clarify these political terms that are overused and distorted in every way in our time.
My question is : why would it be necessary, or even useful, to put a label or to categorize the political phenomena that are currently taking place?
I believe that these various designations, populism, leftism, fascism, communism, capitalism, nationalism, democracy..., are ideologies that have described movements, situations and contexts that belong to the past. But I don't think any of them can describe the current political space, which has changed so much in a few centuries that it doesn't correspond to any of this in my opinion.
For example, to think that supporters of the U.S. Democratic Party are "communists" or "populists" is, in my opinion, ridiculous. For the ideology of communism, which has never materialized anywhere in the world, promoted and apologia for a society without class or government, where capital belongs to the people who govern themselves. We are very far from that, are we not?
So to me neither the Democrats, nor the "elites," nor the "globalists" are communists or fascists or nationalists. They are at best power-hungry delusionsional technocrats. And they are many other things for which we have no names.
Fundamentally, they are either jews or jew apologists.
You only have to note that virtually every single US Congressman has an AIPAC minder to understand where the driving ideology active in the west today comes from - or who it comes from.
The evidence is undeniable, although faithfully covered up and dissimulated via a fully bought over mainstream media.
Communism, marxism, nazism, capitalism, socialism, leftism, conservatism, liberalism, etcetcetc......yadada yadada…..
Blaming all the 'isms' is useless - it's like blaming termites for being termites and they won't listen to you anyways.
Here's the real question: How long will the millions of American and most of Western churchianity keep pretending to worship Jesus while actually serving DaSynagogue of Satan? Who dat?
Most folks - secular or churchian - don't even believe it exists. While Old Scratch has convinced the whole world that it doesn't exist - it literally runs the show by subterfuge and deception through its multiplicity of manifestations which we see and blame for our socio-economic problems. Old Scratch's best game is 'you and him go fight' - and we are his best suckers - just study history.
Think not? And before you jump out of your self-righteous pew or pulpit, read the evidence - https://crushlimbraw.blogspot.com/search?q=Churchianity+synagogue+satan&m=1 - all of them! That's just for starters.
I have been all of these - Russia hater, anti-communist, zionist neocon, end-time religionist......did I forget any?
It took me decades - yes, discovering truth and reality is a process - never an end state. And the hardest part is - it takes effort and perseverance - www.crushlimbraw.com - that's basically my story, right or wrong.
That literally is the HARDEST part for most folks - they cannot admit they were wrong - thus living in delusion - and disabling themselves from repentance, the first step in Christianity.
https://crushlimbraw.blogspot.com/2024/09/while-blaming-isms-for-our-failures-we.html?m=0
"Blaming all the isms is useless."
Not at all.
Always remember the primary -ism, from which all the others you mention derive, ie judaism.
Hitler removed these people from Germany, and the nation immediately flourished beyond measure - so much so that the judaics, of whom Churchill was one, and Roosevelt and Eisenhower others - had to band together to destroy both him, his nation, and any future mention in polite conversation of National Socialism.
So - what is Judaism?
Obviously - the synagogue of satan, the world's first religion.
"jewish people do not like to admit it, but our god is Lucifer, and we are his chosen people."
Harold Wallace Rosenthal.
"Discovering truth is a process."
For you, the scripture was written, "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."
Did you ever read the links I provided in my first comment? The evidence provided by your reply this time indicates you did not or there is a serious reading comprehension issue.
I replied to the question you asked, ie "What is judaism?"
If you want me to address some point you were making via your links, then ask me to.
The Judaism question was rhetorically intended and if you had read further through the links, you might have discovered that. The links I provide are to articles written by various authors who make up the bulk of DaLimbraw Library and who have done the heavy work of research - all of which I read at some time and found worth archiving - I have found that I learn more by reading what others have written.....rather than yapping my own gums.
You can link and read - your choice - I don't spoon feed!
Did you see what they did to Phillip Hassler in Austria?
https://argentbeacon.com/music/mr-bond/music-videos/mr-bond-these-juden/
https://freemrbond.com/
Same thing they did to Richard Medhurst in Austria and the UK:
The REAL Reason Why The Establishment is Coming for Him (w/ Richard Medhurst)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/7r19puNvMZPp
It's a real pity that these "constructs" - i.e. the "Left" and the "Right" cannot come together and see they have a common enemy. Wouldn't it be great if Stew Peters and Chris Hedges, for example, could sit down and realize they are, in their own ways, hovering over the exact same target? But no, the Left and Right must be kept apart and in their respective, tail-chasing silos. Pity, that.
"...astonishing increase in real workers' rights in "fascist Germany," whereby the people were given interest free loans to buy farms.." "Germany of course had no elite class, in fact it was identified with egalitarianism, whereby a farm boy could achieve whatever his natural talents made him suitable for.." - egalitarianism for the populace, yes... *in the unquestioning-absolute-service-to-the-State* ! AH implemented an ultimate cradle-to-grave control over the minds and bodies of his citizen-subjects ! The Group..The State.. meaning The Fuehrer is Supreme in all decisions as to what- and how- the citizen's resources ought be put to the service of the Nation- the State - personal private individual preferences and goals, at best, secondary considerations ! Egalitarianism *Not* for the Fuehrer and his loyal Party members in positions of arbitrary power and authority decreeing themselves the PhilosopherKing-wisdom to arbitrarily and at any whim change- and create new rules and demands- to exert control over the citizen !
"The proof is in the pudding" as they say.
If a system works - then pursue it.
In NS Germany, it worked magnificently well, and so justified itself.
The greatest good was accorded to the greatest number of ordinary individuals in Germany - Hitler returned six million to productive employment in less than five years, as well as introducing a welter of new rules which stripped power from jewish elites, and returned it to the hands of native-born Germans.
Such was his undeniable success, that the jews had to band together via their endless international alliances with jews in other countries to destroy both him and this astonishing system he created.
"...Germany of course had no elite class..."; "...astonishing increase in real workers' rights in "fascist Germany,"..." ; well, how about including this analysis of the history :
See Leonard Peikoff's "Ominous Parallels'; he fabulously describes the evolution of collectivist-versus-individualist ideologies throughout history, from Plato and Aristoteles onward through Luther, Augustine, Rousseau, Hegel, Kant, Marx, Schiller, Schopenhauer, and and and… into 'the inevitability of Hitler's Germany'… (by the way, much due to the *elite class in Germany* ! )
collectivist versus individualist ideology throughout history - anti-reality-everything-goes and feelings over facts versus reality and logic and facts don’t care about feelings - and how the ‘The Group/State Above All’ (the socialist-communist-fascist-!) and ‘the individual is an expendable servant to the State’-collectivist ideology led to the destructive outcomes of the last century & today's parallels in society and politics repeating that same destructive history based on that same destructive ideology that leads to this moral relativism, justifying its adherents to invent - day by day - ever-changing- and new self-serving rules and means to bring about their self-decreed über-virtuous utopian ends - fascinating and so important to understand : https://www.amazon.ca/Ominous-Parallels-Leonard-Peikoff/dp/0452011175/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.10qSz2AUCxs8xMlVxoyIRlMdbF9yHt5vSVS6K-cB6PorNOr3lrrFQvdpy0kOzrg4ljrjUWsz6CLUmAVU69SXApEqKOVgbst7_YHDb5XmqUk.uvJnGvESCkrUh1gJZhHDZzMBtGXGEm1RICI1iI4Pxe4&dib_tag=se&keywords=peikoff+ominous&qid=1719089940&sr=8-1
I wonder how you can turn a failed artist and WW1` Wehrmacht corporal into part of an "elite class in Germany."
Hitler was despised by many of that old elite class because of his unremarkable origins.
2 quick comments
1) my understanding of "fascist" is that it is not synonymous with "nationalist". Rather, my understanding is that in the modern (20th century and beyond) sense of the word, "fascism" is the tying or bundling together of the court, government, and administrative state into one tightly controlled, centralized unit, as we saw in Western countries during COVID.
2) "Populist" seems to now mean "democratic outcomes that I don't like", and is used almost exclusively by those on the left of the political spectrum. When the left wins and votes in a government and allows biological males to play in women's sports, that is "democracy". When the right votes in a government that disallows it, that is "populism".
Many thanks for your comments, Chris.
1. You are absolutely correct in your assessment of the tyranny during covid using some of the fascist ideas of the twentieth century (of corporatized control and judicial control, for example). However, the tyranny was in fact transnational/international in its wielding of power and it sought to make the imposition of the tyranny as uniform as possible ("operation lockstep") - in these and several other features, it resembled closely the transnational communists.
Fascists such as Franco and Mussolini (and Hitler during the early years of his rule) were profoundly nationalist and had no international ambitions. They promoted as far as they could, the well-being of their own people, believed in private property and capital and allowed industry to flourish. Of course, as we know, Hitler's regime became murderous and nasty as the second world war progressed.
2. There is no doubt that the word "populist" has been abused and used by the woke left to characterize any outcome they don't like. The fascists were fundamentally populists, who carried out the will of their people and who believed that to look after the well being of their own people first, should be the primary political mandate and goal of their governments. In this latter sense, they do resemble the "populism" of President Trump.
It would be wrong to attribute "murderousness and nastiness" only to "Hitler as the war progressed."
A brief list of names, Dresden, Hamburg, Hiroshima, the Rhine Meadow camps, puts your one-sided remark into a clearer context.
Fascism is exactly what you say it is - but it is still a nationalist philosophy.
Hitler was very German-centric, just as Mussolini was very Italo-centric.
Both were fascists, both were nationalists.
Thank you for this clarifying and courageous essay, Francis. If anyone is intrigued by the "controversial" or otherwise taboo ideas brought up in this piece, I recommend (indeed urge) looking in to a few of the following resources with an open mind. Decide for yourself what to think.
Adrien Arcand's writings found here:
https://downwithhate.wordpress.com/
Adrien Arcand quotes:
https://downwithhate.wordpress.com/adrien-arcand-quotations/#jp-carousel-3133
See also:
Adrien Arcand: Canadian fascist. CBC 1962
https://www.bitchute.com/video/IVZQunO1NyzF
Oswald Mosley's writings on the subject:
https://www.colchestercollection.com/authors/M/oswald-mosley.html
Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered - Oswald Mosley (1936)
https://www.colchestercollection.com/titles/F/fascism-100-questions.html
and
https://books.ms/main/EA8DEA06F18537793CF3CC7CF3779A51
Louis Marschalko's book (1958) : The World Conquerers : The Real War Criminals
https://christiansfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/The-World-Conquerors-The-Real-War-Criminals.pdf
And lastly this fascinating documentary on Oswald in England during the war (WWII) period. One will be surprised and shocked to learn that the so-called "Fascists" were fervently anti-war. But their "opponents" wanted the millions of casualties in the name of "Democracy".
Oswald Mosley A Film by Spero Patria
https://www.bitchute.com/video/3kveI8LdSXUc
Dr Christian is to be highly commended for being the first person I have any recollection of who has dared to suggest that fascism is not always and invariably bad, evil, and wicked.
He is absolutely right that as a system, it emerges as being the only one available which can confront the real evils of communism - the effete democracies of the west rolled over and fought for it and against their own best interests when it emerged a few decades ago after the bloodbath in imperial Russia.
It seems somewhat unlikely that these democracies actually did oppose the system post war - it is strongly arguable that the massive military build-ups during the so called "cold war" were simply the means whereby military spending could be grotesquely inflated on the back of the "communist threat" posed by the usual suspects, ie those co-religionists of the Frankfurt School which was mentioned.
Any suggestion that those WW2-era fascist regimes engaged in the mass murder of "jews, Poles, and gipsies" of course has to be seen in the light of the yellow press pushing a gaslit version of history, whereby their greatest fear is that a National Socialist system might one day re emerge to once again challenge and destroy their stranglehold on world finance.
A minor quibble though, it seems highly unlikely that the Roman Empire used the "fasces" as a symbol of unity and strength - far more likely, as I was always told, that the rods and the axe symbolized the state's right to bind its members to obedience, backed up with the threat of execution, ie the axe, if they had the temerity to challenge its authority.