Talk:Fascism/Archive 5

Page protection

Can anybody tell me why the fascism article is protected? I want to start editing, but Angela won't let me -- not until the page is "unprotected". --Uncle Ed 20:50, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Erm.. as I posted on Wikipedia:Protected page:

Fascism - as per request; edit war between John Kenney and TDC over whether or not the Soviet Union was fascist. -- Hadal 23:27, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

If John and TDC (and everyone else concerned) have reached an agreement, I'll unprotect it. -- Hadal 20:53, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It's up to TDC, really. I will continue to revert any attempts to list the Soviet Union as a fascist state. john 21:05, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Okay, but what if it's in the form of John Smith, head of the XYZ Think Tank, called the Soviets "a murderous gang of fascists"?

Or perhaps more to the point, will you allow the term totalitarian to be applied to the Soviet Union, as in Jeanne Kirkpatrick and other American conservatives consider Nazi Germany and Russia under Stalin to be examples of "totalitarianism"? --Uncle Ed 21:18, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I am happy to have the Soviet Union, and communist China, listed as examples of totalitarianism in the totalitarianism article. They have certainly been described as such. This article is about fascism. To say that the Soviet Union was not fascist is not to say that the Soviet union was good. Just to say that "fascist" is a word with specific meanings, and that calling the Soviet Union "fascist" is simply to make the term meaningless. Especially since fascism has traditionally been a term used by the left - the right has tended, as you point out, to focus more on the idea of totalitarianism. Some elements of the left have frequently misused "fascism" to refer to any right wing, or even center-right regime. If we have the Soviet Union listed, because some people have occasionally called it fascist, we may as well have George W. Bush's United States - certainly that accusation has been made as well. john 21:40, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Any attempts to remove the USSR and a new addition, China, well result in my reinsertion of them. I have made a case, and a good one at that, that according to bothe the definition set forth in the article itself as well as this reference. http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/britt_23_2.htm TDC 21:22, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You have made a case but it's not convincing and based entirely on "appeal to authority" ie one guy who neglects to examine the political economy of fascism. Frankly, I doubt this guy would say the USSR was fascist if you asked him and would be surprised you're usinghim to back you up. Frankly, his article is a polemic arguing that the US is fascist which is also a contestable proposition. It's not meant to argue anything about the ex-Soviet Union. And the ex USSR fails on point nine I think it was "protection of corporations" and also on the point about religion. Implicit in his view is that fascist states are capitalist. The ex USSR was not capitalist (China's open to debate) User:Formeruser-83 21:37, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

What Andy says. The source you cit doesn't actually support the case you're making, and neither does the current definition in the article, which notes various ideas of fascism that are not to be found in Soviet communism. For instance, it notes that fascism is anti-communist. john 21:40, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Look, the problem is there are three issues here and the article can address eachone, but must keep them separate. 1) analyzing the classic Fascist regimes (Italy, Germany, Spain) in a critical, scholarly way. 2) a discussion of the use of "fascism" as an ideal type for an ideology, social movement, or political system, and the way political scientists who study comparative political systems compare fascism to similar regimes 3) popular, politically motivate uses of "fascism" and "fascist," which includes non-scholarly claims about Italy and Germany, and about other countries/regimes. Slrubenstein

TDC, here's an article arguing the US is fascist A Brief (But Creepy) History of America's Creeping Fascism by your argument we should now put an assertion in the article that the US is fascistFormeruser-83 21:53, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

From the Ayn Rand Institute: "Earlier this year, a professor at McGill University in Quebec, opposing a proposed chair in philosophy devoted to Ayn Rand's ideas, denounced Rand as a "fascist" and compared her to Hitler."

Well geez Louise, a professor ie an academic compares Ayn Rand's to Hitler and calls her fascist. Well if an academic says it it must be so. Guess that according to TDC's standards of scholarship we have no choice should but to add somthing to the fascism article asserting that Ayn Rand is a fascist.Formeruser-8322:02, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"Capitalistic Fascism: One wonders if the bizarre capitalism Rand espouses is a Vision or merely a poke-in-the-eye-with-a-sharp-stick to the Bolsheviks who caused her to be booted out of the Soviet Union. Giving her the benefit of the doubt, Randian capitalism, with its Leader Principle of the natural leadership of the Competent Capitalists, and her "A is A" one-truth belief system, show a fascistic bend echoed in her propagandistic portrayal of the hobbling of the Brave Capitalists by the whining toadies of mediocrity and the collective good. The one thing Rand truly hated besides altruism was collectivism. She is clearly uncomfortable with the tenets and "weakness" of democracy. Fascism may be a strong label, but Rand's economics are forthrightly anti-democratic and exclusionary, with much regard for the Man At the Top and little for the masses beneath. Her "greed is good" philosophy is taken to ridiculous lengths in its simple minded equation of money making with competence to lead."

You know, it's remarkably easy to find academics who claim Rand is a fascist. I guess we have to put it in the article, eh TDC?Formeruser-83 22:04, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Here's an article by conservative Whittiker Chambers which asserts that Rand is a fascist who would send people to the gas chambers. So far I've found more "evidence" that Ayn Rand is a fascist then TDC has found that the USSR is fascist. Guess we have to include a profile of Ayn Rand as a fascist figure nowFormeruser-83 22:07, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You mean CPUSA Whittiker Chambers, oh thats rich! But hey, if that gets you hard in the morning, then go for it.TDC 22:17, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

No, I mean Wittiker Chambers when he was a conservative anti-Communist. In any case he's only one source. But TDC, I am using *your* standards of evidence and frankly the arguments re Rand's fascism are far more convincing than your arguments re the USSR. You are aware that Rand was a cooperative witness in front of the House UnAmerican Activities Committee, ie she willfully and enthusiastically cooperated and encouraged an attempt by the state to suppress free speech (and McCarthyism was the closest thing the US ever developed to fascism). Formeruser-83 22:20, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The article was originally published in the bible of American conservatism, the National Review. Formeruser-83 22:22, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

So, have we come to the agreement that you will not object to and remove a well reasoned and sourced addition on the Fascism of Ayn Rand? I have a point. It has been well researched by academics and lay people alike and it will be a part of this discussion. I have made a case, and a good one at that, that according to bothe the definition set forth in the article itself as well as the references above that Ayn Rand is a fascist.Formeruser-83 22:11, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

AH, I am about to say something I almost never say here, and loathe to say: it is pointless to communicate with TDC because s/he willfully ignores or misconstrues every attempt to communicate, and has no understanding of historical scholarship. OF COURSE Chambers was a staunch conservative; he vigorously renounced his CPUSA affiliation when he denounced Alger Hiss. In any event, TDC simply misses your rhetorical point. Look, none of this discussion is in any way serving the purpose of the article. Above I suggested dividing the article into three major divisions; I'd like to know what you, John, and 172 think about that. We should focus on improving the article, not feeding trolls. Slrubenstein

Fascism and Christianity

I think there should be a mention in the article about the relationship between Catholicism and fascism.

Here are two sources The cat sat on the mat and Catholicism and Fascism: A brief retrospective

"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."

"In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was his fight against the Jewish poison.

"Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross.

"As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice." --all from a speech by Adolf Hitler, April 12, 1922

"The Ustashi movement is based on the Catholic Religion. For the minorities, Serbs, Jews and Gypsies, we have three million bullets. A part of these minorities has already been eliminated and many are waiting to be killed. Some will be sent to Serbia and the rest will be forced to change their religion to Catholicism. Our new Croatia will therefore be free of all heretics, becoming purely Catholic for the future years."

--Mike Budak, Croatian Minister of Religion, July 22, 1941,

Branco Bokun quoted a Roman Catholic priest as having made the following remarks on June 13, 1941: "Brethren, up to now we have worked for the Holy Roman Apostolic Church with the cross and the missal. Now the moment has come to work with a knife in one hand and a gun in the other. The more Serbs and Jews you succeed in eliminating, the more you will be raised in esteem in the heart of the Roman Catholic Church."

Someone has deleted all my comments from this page. I would like an answer Please.WHEELER 00:50, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Your comments are in the talk archive. The page was 48 kilobytes long when I created the fifth talk archive. Some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32 KB. Thus, there is a need to consider breaking long talk pages into smaller sections. 172 00:58, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I found my comments on Archive 5, how convenient. We don't continue discussions from previous Archives and their points. This is endless and it not conducive to anything. I am the only one that produced a quote from the Doctrine of Fascism in the Encyclopaedia and it gets removed. No one quotes from that document. Without quotes from that document this is just going to go around in circles.

On the previous Archive 5, I have uploaded an image of a diagram of the geneology of National Socialism. At the top of the list is John Hus. Mussolini wrote a book called "Hus". There is two copies here in America. We need to take account of this.

We need a better system to deal with all the points that have been brought up. This Talk: format is not conducive since things are archived and no one responds to them.WHEELER 01:02, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

How about this: Put that Blue box with sections continuosly on. And then we click to talk on the subject for resolution. Maybee we need that Bphpb message board format??? What do you think gents?WHEELER 01:03, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I would just ask that we be careful when making statements about the Catholic church and fascism to distinguish between different situations and areas. Croatia is an example of fascism and Catholicism working hand in hand (Filipovic-Majstorovic comes to mind, as does Mate Mugos, who wrote "Previously the priest worked with a prayer book; now it is time to take up the revolver" in an Ustashi newspaper. Tiso and his regime is another good example, On the other hand, according to Wytwycki, 20 percent of the Polish clergy was killed by the Nazis (The Other Holocaust, p. 51)--of course, all this while Cardinal Hlond was pleading vainly with the Pope to intercede. In France and even in Italy, the clergy frequently engaged in resistance, often hiding Jews (Benoit, etc.), while even in Germany Caritas was providing funds and other assistance to Jews (see, for instance, Phayer and Fleischner, Cries in the Night). Nor were certain German Protestant theologians much better (see, for instance, Ericksen, Nazi Theologians). Danny 01:05, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC) (who just happens to be Jewish ...)

I have just discovered that my comments have been archived to #5 yet 172 has managed to bring his comments forward to keep them alive so to speak. We have a bias here. A big bias.WHEELER 01:30, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thing is there's far, far more evidence linking Christianity (particularly Catholicism) with fascism than there is linking fascism and socialism. You'll find far more Christians, practicing Christians, clergy even, in fascist movements then you'll find ex-Socialists and you'll find far more socialists among the victims of the Nazis and far more socialists resisting the Nazis then you'll find practicing Christians. If someone's going to make an argument that fascism has its roots in socialism then it's certainly fair to put forward the facts linking Christianity and fascism eg the use of Christian symbols by the Arrow Cross movement and the Rexists in Belgium. The involvement of clergy with the Ustashe in Croatia. The fact that the Nazi movement was strongest in Catholic Bavaria and had the support of many prominent Cathlics. The role of Catholic parties in Hitler's rise to power and yes, the use of Christian rhetoric by fascists and Nazis to appeal to the masses. Any point that can be made linking socialists and fascists can be made ten times stronger linking Christianity (particularly Catholicism) and fascism. Formeruserr-83 01:35, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Please Formeruser-83 read thru the archived Talk. You have arrived late and I really do not want to rehash and repost points and quotes just to satisfy you. Please read all the archived sections. I have been here from the beginning of this brohaha; it seems that you just entered. I am the one that started this conflaguration.WHEELER 01:41, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hmm...Andy, I'm not so sure of this. There were lots of former socialists in fascist movements, starting with Mussolini himself. One could go on to those French ultra-fascists Déat (former Socialist) and Doriot (former PCF), to Oswald Mosley in Britain (formerly Labour), and so on. There's a pretty clear trajectory from socialism to fascism, for certain types. I would describe this as fascism being an attractive option for disillusioned former leftists, rather than trying to argue that this somehow proves that fascism was itself a socialist movement (by that standard, neoconservatism would presumably also be a socialist movement). As to Catholicism, it should be noted that in Germany, for instance, the Catholic Church was basically opposed to Nazism before it came to power, and that Hitler always viewed the Catholic Church as a source of opposition throughout Nazi rule. In other places, like Spain, Croatia, and Slovakia, (and arguably in Austria for Dollfuss and Schuschnigg's clericalist dictatorship, if you want to call that fascist) of course, the clergy played a major role in Fascism, and in France the more clerical elements were involved in Vichy, even if they didn't get on with the more fervently fascist elements like Déat and Doriot. I think the question of the relationships of fascism to both socialism and to christianity ought to be discussed in the article, but not with the political intent to "prove" that one or the other is the true ally of fascism, or whatever. john 01:46, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

John, this is an excellent point -- the issue is not whether there is a connection between socialism and fascism, or wther there is "more" of a connection or "less," than to Catholicism -- the issue is, what kind of connection. In early postings I objected to words like "is an outgrowth of" or "is a form of" or "has its origins in." Excellent point, very constructive -- thank you! Slrubenstein

Well, I'm not putting forward an argument about links between Nazism and Catholicism but between fascism and Catholicism, particularly in Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Croatia and Hungary. And I didn't say there were no ex-socialists among fascists I said there are *more* Christians than there are ex-socialists. Formeruser-83 02:00, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I would suggest that this is arguable, but, at any rate it's irrelevant. Slrubinstein is right - the important question here is not what but how. john 02:02, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Well, considering the number of *active* clergy in these movements I think the how is rather clearFormeruser-83 02:03, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I mean, what is the connection between the Catholic Church and fascism. And that relationship is quite complicated, when one looks at fascist movements as a whole, rather than just cherry-picking ones where a lot of clergy were involved. There is also a complicated relationship between socialism and fascism. The point is not to argue about which is stronger, but to try to explain these connections in as clear and comprehensive a manner as possible. john 02:10, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Well, the fascist economic model of corporatism has its origins in Catholic proposals regarding class relations particularly as put forward by Catholic trade unions. This is a pretty clear ideological influence and is much clearer than any ideological influnce from socialist ideas.Formeruser-83 02:14, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

See the article Roman Catholicism's links with democracy and dictatorships perhaps there should be a link from the fascist article to [[1]] ?

That sounds like a good idea. A lot of the Action Française type Catholicism certainly influenced fascist thought, especially in France, and so forth (obviously). At any rate, at the moment we should be focusing on a) getting the page unprotected; and b) doing a large scale reorganization of some sort, rather than quibbling about details. john 02:18, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Specifically, the fascist concept of corporatism comes from Leo XIII's 1891 encyclical, Rerum Novarum rather than from anything written by Marx Formeruser-83 02:20, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Please Formeruser-83 read thru the archived Talk. You have arrived late and I really do not want to rehash and repost points and quotes just to satisfy you. Please read all the archived sections. I have been here from the beginning of this brohaha; it seems that you just entered. I am the one that started this conflaguration.WHEELER 01:41, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Wheeler, I've checked the archives and see NO discussion of Catholicism and fascism. I understand you don't want to deal with this topic but the links are there and quite strong. All I see is a mention that you've removed a reference to the Concodorat (between Mussolini and the Vatican?) but no explanation as to why. Formeruser-83 02:43, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

As for the Marxist roots of Fascism section. Take it out and put in a link to Fascism and Marxism instead. Formeruser-83 02:58, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I could deal with that, just so long as there is one paragraph summary in this article. TDC 03:03, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

RERUM NOVARUM ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON CAPITAL AND LABOR

See also: CORPORATISM: INTEGRATED PLURALISM

as well as QUADRAGESIMO ANNO ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI ON RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SOCIAL ORDER Formeruser-83 04:33, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

"Mussolini as well as other early 20th century Fascists came to reject capitalism for the same reason they rejected communism: its internationalism and tendency to dilute the concepts of nation and race" This is just wrong. Mussolini and the fascists did not reject capitalism at all. They rejected liberalism as well as Marxism. The Fascists in Italy and elsewhere did nothing to overthrow capitalism or the capitalist class and they were, in fact, supported by many capitalists. 130.15.162.27 04:07, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Formeruser-83, I did not remove any reference to the Concordant from the site. I never did such a thing. "not feeding trolls. Slrubenstein " This is not wikietiquete. Just because I am a Christian, doesn't mean I am a troll. Whatever happened about talking about the facts. None of us is discussing the Doctrines of Fascism that Mussolini WROTE. Please let's pull that up and read it. Let's discuss facts and the geneology of it. WHEELER 15:54, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

WHEELER, I did not know you were a Christian. Moreover, I do not believe I called you a troll. So I just do not understand this message. I have criticized many of your postings but I never made ad homenim attacks and always explained my criticisms. Slrubenstein

USSR & fascism

TDC. Please cite a source that *explicitly* says the USSR was fascist. The source you cite does not say that, you're just infering it from his criteria. That's not good enough. Please find a scholarly source who actually descibes the USSR as fascist otherwise you don't have a leg to stand on. Formeruser-83 04:33, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I would like to know why to the constant reorginization of this page why my stuff is constantly being buried. Why there is no logical procession of this page.

I have just visited four different websites that have the Doctrine of Fascism. They have all excised the word 'Left' and instituted the word 'right'. Clearly, Ayn Rand and George Orwell saw this right. Here is clear and convincing evidence of the changing of words to suit the political power in control. This is an encyclopaedia. We do not change the facts or words of people.

The Web sites are www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/German...

www.historyguide.org/europe/duce.html; www.fmarion.edu; library.flawlesslogic.com; and www.politicsforum. What we have here is a determined ideology that wants to re-write history.WHEELER 17:58, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Wheeler, when are you going to address the points about Catholicism and Fascism? Don't you think it's significant that a Monsegnieur was the fascist dictator of Slovakia or do you prefer to put all the facts linking Catholicism and fascism down the memory hole and pretend if you don't think about it it must have never happened? 130.15.162.71 18:11, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

What is your source for claiming that Mussolini said "a century of the Left"? Perhaps that's the wrong source?130.15.162.71 18:15, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"8. Outside the State there can be neither individuals nor groups (political parties, associations, syndicates, classes). Therefore Fascism is opposed to Socialism, which confines the movement of history within the class struggle and ignores the unity of classes established in one economic and moral reality in the State; . . ." - Doctrine of Fascism 130.15.162.71 18:18, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I am know that some Catholics supported Fascism in Italy and elsewhere because it was anti-communist. The saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" holds true in many cases. America was friend with every dictator because of their anti-communism. War makes for strange bedfellows. I don't deny that some Catholics supported Fascism but some opposed Fascism. Look at most of the clergy of Latin America that support Liberation Theology. Liberation Theology is nothing but marxism.

Ted Kennedy and John Kerry are Catholics. They support abortion in defiance of church teaching. They are not good Christians. The whole Democratic Party is supported by the Catholic vote. Does it make the Democratic party ideals and platform Catholic? No. Write an article with references and include it in this definition. There is nothing stopping you. Will you include also the Catholics that opposed it? Just because some monarchists and some Catholics supported it doesn't make it monarchist or Catholic. There are many tentacles of the octopus of Fascism. But Fascism is Leftist as Mussolini defined it himself.WHEELER 18:26, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

WHEELER, I think the Mussolini quote above "Therefore Fascism is opposed to Socialism" should be in the article. Don't you? 130.15.162.71 18:28, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ted Kennedy and John Kerry are not Monsignieurs in the Catholic clergy unlike Monsignieur Tiso, the fascist dictator of Slovakia. 130.15.162.71 18:30, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

And Wheeler, what is your source that Mussolini said "left" and not "right". All the sources I can find say you're wrong. 130.15.162.71 18:32, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Challenge to Liberty by Herbert Hoover. He quotes it without the change in words from the websites. Pick up the book and read how Leftism is rewriting history and documents to suit itself and its propagandizing.WHEELER 18:37, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)