Replies

Fascism is a leftist ideology, period.

You really need to go beyond Jonah Goldberg's sound bites and learn some history.

The very definitions of "Left" and "Right" go back to the French Revolution, when the radical anti-monarchists with their mantra of liberte, egalite, fraternite sat on the Left aisles of the National Assembly while the conservative monarchists sat in the Right aisles. From then on, "Left" and "Right" were not defined in terms of the size of government, but by whether the political movements worked to overthrow the traditional hierarchy of the aristocracy, the Church, and the landowner classes vs. upholding them in some form. By this and any reasonable historical definition, fascists were reactionary right-wing movements while Communists and Socialists were radical left-wing movements.

The first thing Bolsheviks and other Communists did when they came to power is line up aristocrats, military officers, and clergymen in front of firing squads. In contrast, fascists presented themselves as defenders of the aristocracy, the Churches, the military officers, as well as the bankers and industrialists.

If, as you and Goldberg argue, Communism and Fascism are "the same," perhaps you could explain why it is that when Fascists came to power, the first thing they did was crack down on labor unions and restore property to landowners and noblemen, while the first thing Communists did was to seize the property of aristocrats and landowners and give them to "worker's communes."

Now, as to the counterargument that Fascism and Communism are both anti-individualistic and authoritarian, the response is that this has nothing to do with Left or Right-wing ideology. The military in general and the Marine Corps in particular are profoundly anti-individualistic. Does that make the USMC a "Left Wing" institution? Theocratic governments and absolute monarchies from the 17th and 18th centuries were authoritarian, but I've yet to hear Louis XIV or Frederick the Great called "left-wing radicals." I doubt they'd have much in common with Karl Marx.

I suppose it's considered ancient history, but the terms Left and Right originally come from the French Revolution and the seating arrangements in the Estates General.

The Left opposed the king and they opposed the clergy.

I look at the Left today and my primary observation is that the Left opposes Christianity. All else that the Left supports, flows from this primary fact. Therefore, I say that the Left of 2014 is largely the same as the Left of 1789.

One can claim that Fascists of the WWII era voiced support for the Church, but their actions generally did not follow their words. Much of the anti-Nazi movement in Germany was based in Christian opposition. The Pope did not support either Mussolini or Hitler, though people who oppose the Church like to disparage the Pius and claim he did.

The Left is all about secularization and the growth of State Power over individual power. I have a hard time seeing Fascism as anything other than this.

Now, as to the counterargument that Fascism and Communism are both anti-individualistic and authoritarian, the response is that this has nothing to do with Left or Right-wing ideology.

That's right. Anarchism was historically considered a Left Wing movement, because it sought to overthrow the aristocracy, the clergy, and the landowners/industrialists. Nobody of sound mind considered Mikhail Bakunin a reactionary or a conservative because he was anti-government, because he and other radicals saw the government of their times as tools of the hated upper classes. Come to think of it, didn't Marx and Engels write that the state would "wither away" once independent worker's communes were established? Does this make them "conservatives"?

I heartily agree with your posts 49 and 50 (and I would have pinged you to my own posts if I could have remembered your name from last time we conversed). American conservatives simply refuse to wrap their heads around the fact that the American right is different from the right in Europe because the traditional social structures America and Europe are different.

The Birchite "totalitarian to anarchist" spectrum is incorrect and dishonest and does our side no credit. The original Right (in France) was certainly not individualistic or classical liberal (in fact, American right wing hero Frederic Bastiat sat on the Left side of the Assembly while he was a member). The terms "right" and "left" were confined to France until the early twentieth century, so the French Right is the Original Right. I'd be very careful about re-defining what "right wing" means apart from that authority.

It was French rightist Maurice Barres who said "the individual is nothing; society is everything." Furthermore it was the original French Right that advocated a sort of Spartan society of "warriors and monks." I've attempted to locate this last quote but have been unsuccessful.

Anyway, thanks again ek, for keeping us honest.

It depends on what you mean by fascist" and when they took over. The Nazis exterminated much of the aristocracy and siezed their property. They also took control of businesses and siezed assets from enemies. All fascist do this. To claim that this is mere gangsterism misses the point. The Party is the state, so it is nationalization.
Fascists taking over after communists do not restore the old order. They create a new order, where religion is a tool of the state and the party. Corporations are controlled buy the state and party.