more perspectives.. Theses on fascism in 2002 MIM Notes 264 • August 15,
2002 • Pages 1+5
Contemporary fascism was a hot topic at this year’s party Congress. In this issue we publish the resolutions MIM passed on the issue, including a definition of fascism (see page 4) and class alliances in the struggle against fascism (page 5).- The victory of fascism in our times by filthy scum that rose to power in Italy and Austria, the commemorations of Nazis and Nazi collaborators in the Baltic countries, Le Pen’s run-off victory for president in France in 2002, and the fascist surge in Belgium and Denmark demonstrates that contrary to bourgeois propagandists, the capitalist countries did not learn any lessons against fascism during World War II. Rather fascism arises as a sign of the decay of imperialism that the world continues to suffer under, because capitalism as a system is incapable of learning the true lessons of peace.
The pivot for fighting fascism and anti-Semitism is grasping the global pattern and local dynamics of parasitism. Those political leaders and movements which seek to increase imperialist country parasitism whether from the “left” or the “right” are feeding the flames of fascism. Whether stirred from the “left” or “right,” parasitic movements give birth to ultra-nationalism as a simple answer to alleged immigration “problems” and oppressor nation joblessness. It hardly matters what exact program stirs these fascist forces to life, because fascist activists and supporters are not politically conscious in a detailed way in most cases anyway. Today, those contending for parliamentary power, including fascists, are more or less synonymous with parasitism and for this reason there is a special meaning to opposing “democracy,” by which we mean majority rule within imperialist countries. It is in “democracy” where outsiders like Le Pen can posture their way into power only by offering more parasitism than the current elected officials like Chirac or Jospin.
Since neither Chirac’s nor Le Pen’s coalition in France opposes parasitism, the question of who to side with if anyone can only be strategic or tactical. It is not a question of ideological principle to support either. The proletariat of France should seek advantage however it can in the struggle between Le Pen and Chirac.
During World War II, siding against fascism automatically was part of a larger calculation of the global balance of forces. Today, if France and much of Europe goes fascist but the United $tates does not, there may be positive or negative impacts overall for the proletariat. Opposing fascism in the united $tates is perhaps more urgent strategically for the international proletariat than the rise of fascism in Europe. - MIM approves the following resolution for release as part of Congress documents. A more detailed analysis will appear in MIM Theory.
Imperialism has been overthrown in one country. It was not France in 1968. It was in the Soviet-occupied zone of Germany in 1945. In the imperialist countries, it is not general strikes, large wage increases or “30 for 40” that should be studied. It is the example of the downfall of Nazi Germany that is still the most relevant example of revolutionary history in the imperialist countries. It is a measure of the chokehold of revisionism in the imperialist countries, that the Soviet occupation of a zone of Germany is not widely upheld as an example of the road forward.
Although the German communists aided by the USSR during World War II set up anti-militarist and anti-Hitler committees, anti-militarism never took hold amongst a majority of Germans and the vast majority of the German population had to be persuaded by weapons instead of reason. Although Stalin considered the idea that the war should slow down in order to give the German people yet another few months to change their minds, in the end the only correct decision was to hasten the military conflict and thereby bring an end to much genocide. - In the essence of U.S. Government activity outside U.$. borders, the united $tates carries out a combination of genocide against the people and bribery of local ruling class lackeys. It is elementary that any proletarian movement in the imperialist countries must oppose their own governments’ oppression in the Third World, not least of all because any peaceful world will require that genocide be relinquished as a tool of “foreign policy.” Today there remain a majority of elected “democratic” politicians in the imperialist country who are too spineless or backward to say openly that those who commit genocide in the Third World will find that the oppressed people will “kill them back.” It is the duty of communist parties in the imperialist countries to cultivate the truth that contrary to the Amerikkkans who killed almost all the Native peoples in North America and contrary to Hitler who systematically killed many peoples and planned to kill many more, genocide does not bring lasting peace. Even in the killing of the most militarily defenseless victims as in the white settlers who killed Indians, the history of violence lasts to this day to produce the likes of the Columbine tragedy, where serial killers run amok spraying bullets everywhere — at a frequency not seen in countries without that history of genocide by gun-toting cowboys.
Today, the proletariat must be merciless to any politician who continues like the ostrich with its head in the sand to believe that modern weapons of militarism will not spread to the victims of genocide. Quite the contrary, the profit-system guarantees that where there is demand, there will be supply.
Whether it is Iraq, Afghanistan or the West Bank, it is clear that without openly adopting fascism, the essence of u.$.imperialism and its allies today is genocide and any tally of the victims of U.$. imperialism will show that it has implemented much more of Hitler’s genocidal plans than Hitler did. - For tactics of opposing fascism, it is important to cultivate the scientific non-voter, who is often maligned by so-called “democratic” forces as “apathetic.” The scientific non-voter is often conscious that s/he has not investigated a political situation and therefore does not vote — and in this way believes he or she is demonstrating minimal responsibility. The scientific non-voter is often disgusted by politicians who posture for votes and bribery. In contrast with “democracy” activists who believe that the votes of willfully ignorant but decadent people will somehow add up to social progress, the scientific non-voter is one reason why we communists should not pander to those who want “majority rule” in the imperialist countries. If communists do not make it clear that they believe politics requires strong scientific and leadership efforts, the scientific non-voter is liable to turn to hard-line fascism.
As communists we should already know that there is no way to prevent a general distrust and disgust regarding parliamentary politics. The only question is whether those disgusted with politicians posturing for votes withoutstanding for principles and difficult solutions will be diverted by fascists, brow-beaten by parliamentary cretins or won over by communists. We communists are here to say that politics is like any other area of life in that science really does matter and it is not a matter that the truth will arise through a majority vote of those who know very well that they do not pay much attention to the subject at hand. Majority input can only be helpful in most times in imperialist countries when the majority recognizes that it does not put in enough effort to be worthy of deciding whether someone should live or die in the West Bank for example. When the majority has realized clearly that only in exceptional political turmoil do the people themselves study political and social matters closely, the majority may decide to fall behind principled scientific leaders and support them in those areas where the majority does have knowledge and other kinds of power. - [Passed as amendment] Since U.$.imperialism is enemy #1 in the world, various tactical or strategic alliances cannot be ruled out as being contrary to proletarian interests, although each has limited usefulness to the international proletariat. One related road of conflict will involve the European Union (EU) in opposition to the Amerikkkan New World order, with the EU speaking as a whole. We suspect that this would be an imperialist reform movement within the New World Order; although other forces could also hide behind an EU conflict with the United $tates. Since overthrowing European imperialism entirely is not on the agenda, for now, MIM is pro-EU as a matter of opposing extreme European nationalism and old-style fascism. We point out that the New World Order can never be unified or peaceful.
https://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/mn/mn264.pdf#page=1
https://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/mn/mn264.pdf#page=5#
fascism #
mim #2002 #
perspectives #
eu #
usa 
