One of my many pet peeves is the incessant mischaracterization of the Nazis as being "far right" on some sort of linear political spectrum. There are no common elements between the economic/social controls that the Nazis imposed and the typical, liberal, capitalist, small-d democratic form of government practiced by most western nations. The communist assertion that the Nazis were "far right" is patently false.
[More about political spectrums at the bottom.]
My understanding of the history of leftist ideology is that the communists originally call themselves "left wing socialists" while they label fascists and similar ne'er-do-wells as "right wing socialists". Free markets don't even register on the communist political spectrum. Those of us that support free minds and free markets exist outside of their reality.
Fascist governments have historically engaged in social and economic controls that are very similar to those imposed by communists. The problem is that no socialist group wants competition. As a result, the first thing the socialists do after getting into power is shoot the communists. And vice versa. They are competing to position their faction as the best expression of collectivist ideology.
I came across a brief essay by Gustavo Jalife at The Conservative Woman. His thoughts on the topic are quite similar to mine.
The characterisation of the ‘far right’ as nationalist, racist and authoritarian ideologies that seek to eliminate democratic systems, even through violence, is repeated daily by mainstream media pundits who deliberately try to smear whoever defends democracy by resisting the intrusion of the state into every crevice of private life. However, the formula perfectly applies to forces dwelling on the opposite side of the political arc. The Soviet Communist Party, the National Socialist German Workers’ Party NSDAP (the Nazi Party), the National Fascist Party of Italy and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, among other totalitarian ensembles, fit the description precisely. That the flagrant subversion of a primary concept has taken root even among presumably learned people confirms the resounding success of one of the greatest propaganda operations ever undertaken.
Gustavo referenced a longer essay by Allen Gindler titled "How and Why Fascism and Nazism Became the ‘Right.’” originally published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies. I'm still chewing through the essay, but there were some early nuggets worth quoting.
Instead, Marxism is a particular and extreme current of socialism called communism. In other words, Marxism is undoubtedly leftist, but the Left is not entirely Marxist. Marxism did not invent socialist thought, which originated centuries earlier and is known by the collective name “utopian socialism.” Marxism’s founders initiated the communist camp and clearly distinguished themselves from contemporary socialists, whom they contemptuously called “so-called socialists.”
and
According to Engels, the last group—democratic socialists—shared the majority of communists’ political objectives but stopped short of accepting all the provisions of Marxist doctrine. They were satisfied with achieving goals within the framework of social democracy. Communists engaged in partnerships with democratic socialists and tried to convince them to embrace communist thought in its entirety.
and
The lesson to be learned and remembered is that left-wing intellectual circles were vibrant yet at the same time hostile environments. Despite the fact that the Left has only one common enemy—capitalism—intractable contradictions in the tactics and strategies of its overthrow made them implacable adversaries. Even though the bourgeoisie was the Left’s openly proclaimed enemy, they were treated less harshly than opponents from their leftist circles, who were treated like vile traitors. History showed that as soon as one of the left-wing parties gained real power, it immediately persecuted its fellow socialists from other factions.
I invite you to read the essay for yourself. Thus far it is a clarifying piece that documents the history of leftist factionalism. From my perspective, there are no significant differences between socialism (even so-called "democratic socialism") and communism. The only differences are a matter of style...and how they put the bullet in your head for having the temerity to utter the phrase they hold in highest contempt; "I disagree".
---
Regarding political spectrums. The entire framing of politics as a linear spectrum also has roots in early French republics and other parliamentary systems. Representatives in those governments had partisan seating such that those on the perceived "left" were seated to the left.
A more accurate depiction of political options is offered in the image below. Whenever I engage with one of these quiz-based political maps, I generally wind up somewhere in the green circle. Communists generally end up somewhere toward the left edge of the black circle and fascists end up in the blue area of the black circle. My point is that communists, socialists, and fascists frequently have far more in common than might be imagined if one uses the flawed, linear political spectrum that places communism at one extreme and fascism at the other.
Horseshoe theory is real.
Most western societies, including the United States, including the much-reviled MAGA movement, generally fall into a range that is a bit above and a bit to the left of my green circle. You can take one such quiz here.
No comments:
Post a Comment