I don't subscribe to Trotsky but honestly his theory of fascism is just much tidier and more Marxist than Adorno's. The Holocaust as a crusade against Bolshevism was stressed every step of the way, even soldiers carrying out were told it was the only way to eradicate Bolshevism. Fascism from Pinochet to Franco to Mussolini to Hitler was always a drastic and last alternative to communism taking over. If the Nazis focused especially on Jews it was because they were strongly associated with communism and eradicating them the only way to save Germany from and Europe from communist takeover
>>25187377>The Holocaust as a crusade against Bolshevism was stressed every step of the wayJohn Lukacs in 'The Hitler of History' says that the Nazi elite including Hitler didn't really give that much of a shit about Bolshevism and used exploited it mainly for propaganda purposes. I'd believe it. Most fascists from that era seemed more hostile to liberal capitalism than to communism - Mussolini certainly was. Jews were associated not only with Marxist socialism (a "degenerated" materialist version of pure Germanic socialism) but also with capitalism, banks, usury, speculation.Pinochet and Franco were not fascists but rather conservative authoritarians. They were not concerned with revolutionising society but rather with preserving the old bourgeois order.
That is this was really the plan, no? Tall order to kill 6 million people juts like that.
>>25187377>>25187413The trouble is there has been exactly one fascist leader in history and that was Mussolini. Nazism and Francoism were completely different political and economic philosophies that happened to be lumped in due to the happenstance of a wartime alliance (I've even seen particularly deranged people try to work out a way to shove State Shinto in there too).
>>25187377i see how it's a neater fit for the brain of someone reared on turn-based strategy games but i don't see how it's more Marxist, or even why we're comparing Trotsky and Adorno in the first place
>did Adorno or Trotsky construct a better haphazard strawman of their rival political ideology?
>>25187413The theory that Hitler was secretly an ultracapitalist is the sort of dreck that post-post-modernist retardation gives us. I think it must be an intentional misunderstanding of history to preserve the psyche of inveterate communards who want to believe that theirs is the only true oppositional position to communism.
>>25187650oppositional position to capitalism, rather*. I am illiterate. But you know what I mean.
>According to the reports of Angelo Alliotta, a secret informant of the fascist police in Italy who visited Bordiga's home in Formia where he holidayed with his wife, Bordiga showed support for the Axis powers. According to Alliotta, Bordiga believed Nazi Germany was weakening the "English giant", which to him was "the greatest exponent of capitalism", and thus the defeat of Britain would bring about revolutionary conditions in Europe. Bordiga also criticised Joseph Stalin for allying with the western Allies against the Axis in April 1943.
https://archive.org/details/PaetelNationalBolshevistManifestohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bolshevism>National Bolshevism as a term was first used to describe a faction in the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) and later the Communist Workers' Party of Germany (KAPD) which wanted to ally the insurgent communist movement with dissident nationalist groups in the German army who rejected the Treaty of Versailles. Heinrich Laufenberg and Fritz Wolffheim led the faction and it was primarily based in Hamburg. They were subsequently expelled from the KAPD which Karl Radek justified by stating that it was necessary for the KAPD to be welcomed into the Third Congress of the Third International, although the expulsion would likely have happened regardless as Radek previously dismissed the pair as "National Bolsheviks" (which was the first recorded use of the term).>National Bolshevism was among several early ultranationalist, and according to some fascist, movements in Germany that predate Adolf Hitler's Nazi Party. During the 1920s, a number of German intellectuals began a dialogue which created a synthesis between radical nationalism (typically referencing Prussianism) and Bolshevism as it existed in the Soviet Union. The pro-Soviet syncretic Society for the Study of the Soviet Planned Economy (ARPLAN) was founded in Germany in 1932, and contained both far-left and far-right radicals. ARPLAN's membership was very heterogenous: Niekisch was an active ARPLAN member, as was the Nazi politician Ernst Graf zu Reventlow.
>>25187413Goebbels was a Strasserist before Adolf split him off from them. All interwar period politics revolved around the question of what to do about the capitalist-imperialism question until Hitler subsumed it with a crazy racial and anti Bolshevism ideology upon a disastrous war.
>>25187704>Hitler subsumed itHitler synthesized it, he didn't subsume anything.
>>25187650‘National Socialism’ was just the Manifesto Ideology of the USA in the 1800s (wipe out natives and resettle with Anglos) except taken up to 20 with the extermination and replacement being needed to be accomplished within a fraction of the time hence the ovens and gas chambers. When seen that way you can see the train of thought seeing Nazism as the very end goal of unrestricted capitalism and Imperialism.
>>25187650Manifest destiny *
>>25187377>The Holocaust as a crusade against Bolshevism was stressed every step of the way, even soldiers carrying out were told it was the only way to eradicate Bolshevism.a holocaust is what bolsheviks deserve
>>25187413>Most fascists from that era seemed more hostile to liberal capitalism than to communism - Mussolini certainly was...>Pinochet and Franco were not fascists but rather conservative authoritarians. They were not concerned with revolutionising society but rather with preserving the old bourgeois order.ok, so fascism means nothing but uncle adi and the holy hoax, the rest is either conservative authoritarianism or populist authoritarianism which is different from fascism because hating marxism isnt popular, while authoritarianism isnt a bad thing, only opposition to marxism is bad
>>25187661The British Empire was already destroyed by WWII
>>25187485I personally, for one, do not believe Mussolini's government was special and idiosyncratic and totally unique event in history. He was an opportunist who had no principles and changed policy over and over to what he needed until the Grand Council of Fascism deposed.Fascism as the term is used generally refers to a shared phenomenon of governments. One can use a different title for this phenomenon such as Fagotism or whatever you prefer, however it comes to the same thing
>>25187896>>25187897Manifestly retarded analysis is more like it.
>>25187485They were all counter-revolutionary governments. Call them whatever you like but they all shared one goal in eradicating bolshevism. Hitler and many germans believed the jews were essential elimants in said bolshevism but they werent the only ones.
>>25187955Don’t know what you’re rambling about
