The rise of fascism cannot be understood without looking at what happened after the end of WWI in Italy and Germany. It grew out of the defeat of a working class political movement that called itself Communist. The Freikorps in Germany became the first cadres of the SA. These were the thugs culled from German armed forces after the war and hand picked for their fanatical nationalistic patriotism that blamed “Jews” for inventing “Communism” to destroy Germany. In the US today people think that there is a “Communist” world government conspiracy to make the United Nations the world government. It only takes a couple hours to read, but Mein Kampf still gives us an understanding of fascism if we aren’t afraid to read the ideas of those who we hate. Mussolini once described fascism as the perfect union of capitalism and the state. Arbeit Macht Frei was placed over the entrances of concentration camps not for the benefit of Jews interned there, but for the first victims of the camps, Communists.

Otto Von Bismarck and the Volkische Partei in the Germany of the 1870s were the forerunners of the modern fascists and they weren’t “leftist” at all. Bismarck created the first Social Security and National Health Insurance programs and initiated the first “anti-socialist” laws, as well as attacking German Catholics. Anti-semitism in Europe arose its ugly head and took on a modern racial, as opposed to religious, character during the Dreyfus Affair, helping give birth to both modern fascism and zionism.

All I can ask people to do is to sweep away the “opinionated” rhetoric regarding historical perceptions and study some actual history. The whole purpose of linking a generically termed “leftism” or “liberalism” as being the origin point of fascism is to let off the political hook the right. If the left created fascism, it also created those who fought it. The truth about the centrist politicians of the world was that they all did business with fascists and had no problem with fascism as long as it didn’t invade their own countries. Stalin only signed a pact with Hitler in hopes that he would attack the west first. The west only attacked Germany when they realized that the Nazis would attack them too.

Fascists did view themselves as the fulfillment of the enlightenment, so in a sense they were connected to political liberalism. One could say they were the bastard children of German social democracy. One could say they were created by a lot of wealthy capitalist bankers and businessmen who saw in a party of kooks and crackpots their salvation. All of these points contain some partial truths perhaps. The real truth is the pragmatic political center went over to the fascists because fascism sounded good to them at the time.

While there were certainly liberals who supported fascism and there were elements of liberal thought that played within the WWII-era fascist regimes, I think Goldberg’s point is more to attack leftist ideology than it is to truly illuminate the causes of historical fascism and how fascist acts may continue in the present. He wants to delegitimize the left rather than have a more comprehensive discussion. Or so it seems.

I’m playing with linguistics and theories here. There’s another post trying to get out.

More clear – fascists view the state as the primary means/mechanism of societal transformation. To whatever exent this applies to the neo-conservatives –my feelings are hurt. I did find this interesting:

A truly fascinating book might examine the historical context of fascism and then explore how the neo-fascist elements of our society are affecting our concepts and practice of freedom.

I wonder what neo-fascist elements you find unworthy enough to “delegitimize”? It seems like you might have a particular group in mind.