‘Scratch a Liberal and You Will Find a Fascist Every Time’: Hollywood Icon James Woods Opens Up Abou

Even the USSR, and China under the CCP permitted capital accumulation.

"Marxist-Leninist interpretations...overstate the autonomous power of capital. Writing from this vantage point, one sympathetic critic argued that I resolve my confusion by assigning primacy, as the real enemy of the working class, to big business and finance capital, of which the Nazi regime was an 'instrument' or 'organ. I have found very little evidence to sustain this conception...many industrial archives have become accessible since my original research, but...they do not seem to underpin this theoretical approach. If there is no evidence of heavy, continuous and successful pressure on the regime from the side of big business and finance capital in matters of labor and social policy, the question becomes one of meta-theory, rather than of history."

"Here it remains a striking and important fact that the documentation with which I am familiar does *not* demonstrate effective business interventions in policies toward the working class at any of the turning points of these policies with which my book is concerned...although these policies were of vital interest to business. The decisive initiatives here seem to have come from the bureaucracy, the military and above all from the political leadership. On a host of lesser issues, such as workers rights to change jobs, special bonuses for coal miners and wage levels in general, employers were repeatedly overruled in the 1930s by the state authorities"
Tim Mason, "Social Policy in the Third Reich", p. 293.

 

With Dubya & Dick in office, it appeared to me that the Fourth Reich had been born. AUMF and the Global War On Terror delivered everything in spades that Dwight Eisenhower warned about in 1961.

Rich irony that today's Dems have followed the fascist lead of Dubya & Dick. John McCain joined up with Obama and Biden and Nuland in Ukraine way back in 2014. See what they have today.

 

Total crap. It's not a "Marxist interpretation."

Hitler, Mussolini, Franco... they all privatized government-owned businesses.

Stalin and Mao liquidated privately owned business of any significant size. Hitler did not. Nazi Germany was never a socialist state by any stretch of your fevered imagination.

You might have a partial point about business when Hitler took power, but not by the late-1930s.

I didn't say fascism was capitalist in nature. What fascists did do, however, is not threaten capitalists' assets. That went a long way toward garnering capitalist support in a binary circumstance where the Weimar Republic failed to assert itself against the extremes on the left and right.

Again, you miss the point. Capitalist chose the Nazis over Marxist-Leninism when they were forced to choose by the collapse of support for the political center.

 

Tim Mason, Ashby Turner, other historians who have researched the role of Big Business in detail contradict most of your assertions. See pull quotes in my posts to you.

Many anti-communists/anti-socialists believe the "Left" in power will crush capitalism, but that is usually not what happens in practice. The NEP (New Economic Program) allowed the USSR to survive by encouraging capitalism to stave off a total economic collapse.


"Among the first to describe the Russian economy under the Bolshevik government as “state capitalism”, was Lenin himself in 1918. By this term he meant state control of capitalist-owned industries. He had been impressed by the system of industrial control which the German government had built up during the war. If the Kaiser and the Prussian Junkers could control capitalist industry for their purposes why, thought Lenin, could not the Bolshevik Party control capitalist industry for the benefit of the workers and poor peasants of Russia?"

"The civil war and foreign intervention forced the Bolsheviks to take a number of emergency measures — like nationalising factories whose owners had fled, requisitioning grain from the peasants, causing inflation by an over-issue of paper currency. Some Bolsheviks regarded these as measures to set up a moneyless economy in Russia, but this was absurd. As soon as the Civil War was over in 1921 they were abandoned and Lenin again advocated a policy of state capitalism. The New Economic Policy (NEP), introduced that year, was described as a policy of developing capitalism in Russia under the control of the Bolshevik government."
WORLDSOCIALISM.ORG, STATE CAPITALISM FOR RUSSIA, Lenin’s economic policy,
https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb...70/no-788-april-1970/state-capitalism-russia/

In Nazi Germany business owners were sent to re-eduction camps by their workers if they did not follow the NSDAP/Fascist party line "Everything within the state, nothing outside the state". There is more evidence of resistance by Big Business to the state in Communist China than there ever was in Nazi Germany.

 

I took one of your quotes and put in in the context you should have considered. Why didn't you? Beat me, other than you may have a limited understanding of economics and politics, especially how they interact.

Marxist-Leninists often allow capitalist enterprises to exist for a period of time. Russia did, but under Stalin eventually killed free enterprise. The Gosplan started off as a small advisory body. Anyone who thought the Bolsheviks were going to allow capitalism to flourish--or even survive very long--was not looking at who these folks were.

Lenin died in January 1924 while the Bolsheviks were consolidating power. You do understand even Marxists-Leninists realize you can't do everything at once.

What makes you think Lenin or Stalin had any intention of not collectivizing the means of production?

Yes, with good reason. Marxist-Leninists take your assets. Fascists may allow you to keep most or all of your assets, but you no longer operate in a rule-based system. Why would most rich people want to be in a fascist political and economic jungle?

Capitalists and Marxist-Leninists are playing a zero-sum game over control of capital, economic output and distribution. Capitalists aren't stupid. They know Marxist-Leninists are an existential threat.

Lenin was a revolutionary socialist, not a capitalist or a fascist.

 

Is this reply supposed to contradict something from my post to you? If so, what -- specifically?

 

They have a very simple rule of thumb: anything I don't agree with is therefore extreme Liberal idealogy/extremism. But being simple is a lot of times simply wrong on all fronts.

 

LOL. You are partially right. But Twitter is a private company right? And right now, Twitter is on the same side as yours, which means you will defend private property rights. But when Twitter was against you, you were against private property rights. And that is how the Nazi party operated with private businesses. If the business did what the Nazi party wanted, there was no problems. If they didn't, there were problems, serious problems. And that is how the GOP operates now.

 

And by your own post, you really can't say that Fascism is left-wing either, right?

 

No.

The only thing what I quoted supports is the fact that private ownership of companies isn't an indication of fascism one way or another.

Especially since every example of authoritarian regimes with "free enterprise" had members of their parties embedded in those companies.

It's kind of like how the far left government types were embedded in Twitter. On the surface, free enterprise. In actuality, doing what they're told by their shadow members.

 

Twitter was a private company that was used by democrats to control who can speak, and what they can hear.

What companies have the GOP worked to shut down speech?

Go ahead and give me some examples of your claims.

 

They have nothing….

 

You're not interested in a discussion. Have a nice day.

 

I am always interested in discussion. Start here:

"I took one of your quotes and put in in the context you should have considered. Why didn't you? Beat me, other than you may have a limited understanding of economics and politics, especially how they interact." You

What quote? What context?

 

Exactly how does "Fascism" differ from "left-wing" factions like Democrats and Progressive Republicans?

 

Have you noticed how much of the Twitter communications discuss ways to make banning certain posts and posters fit into Twitter's Terms & Conditions?

Twitter execs were trying to find loopholes, ways around, Terms & Conditions so that Trump, Woods, Bhattacharya and so many others could be banned or punished otherwise.

So much for the 'ethics' of 'private companies'. In truth, all men holding power ought to be mistrusted.

 

What is "liberal ideology"?

 

Twitter clearly operated under the direction of the FBI/DOJ/DNC.

 

Anything that does not agree with whatever the flavor of the month is for conservatives.

 

Even with Elon Musk now as the owner?

 

No matter what Twitter does, even with Musk as CEO/Owner, it is still a private company. Musk is trying to replace advertisers with the $ 8-a-month charge. This has benefits and consequences if it applies for all blue-chippers on Twitter or even regular users. This will give greater leeway for Twitter to accept or ban users without warning and without fear of advertisers pulling out. The consequence is police and other government entities that have Twitter accounts. If they are charged the $8 a month, then whatever they say is now privileged, private information to those who are only on Twitter. And since these government entities rely on public, free information, that will now be in jeopardy, if Musk has his way.

The better question you need to ask yourself is why do conservatives praise private property rights when it suits them politically, but then rail private property rights as "corporate communism" when it does not go their way. In my state, conservatives do not respect private property rights when they post signs "no firearms allowed" for instance, but then praise private property rights when they do. Ben Shapiro does this as well as all other conservatives. And that is why conservatives always harped on Twitter and other websites when they have policies that don't fit their idealogy.

 

This website states it succinctly: "The main difference between fascism and communism is that fascism is characterized by a radical and authoritarian rule by a powerful dictator to establish national unity whereas communism is characterized by a totalitarian ruling to eradicate social class divisions through social ownership of production."

 

I identified the quote you used by citing your message.

You appear to think Marxist-Leninists, Bolsheviks in this instance, were encouraging capitalism. I explained about the Gosplan and how it quickly evolved from advice to edict.

Historians worth the read don't cherrypick.

 

Who hire James Baker?

 

IOW, Communism and Fascism in practice create a totalitarian state, and while they claimed to be polar opposites the "Anti-Fascist" Communist USSR formed an alliance with Nazi Germany to divide up Europe starting with the joint invasion of Poland.