Friday, July 24, 2009

Ayn Rand on Fascism

"In this country, few people care to advocate, to defend or even to understand capitalism; yet fewer still wish to give up its advantages. So if they are told that capitalism is compatible with controls, with the particular controls which further their political interests - be it government handouts, or minimum wages, or price-supports, or subsidies, or antitrust laws, or censorship of dirty movies - they will go along with such programs, in the comforting belief that the results will be nothing worse than a "modified" capitalism. And thus a country which does abhor fascism is moving by imperceptible degrees - through ignorance, confusion evasion, moral cowardice, and intellectual default - not toward socialism or any mawkish atruistic ideal, but toward a plain brutal, predatory, power-grubbing, de facto fascism.
No, we have not reached that stage. But we are certainly not "an essentially private enterprise system" any longer. At present, we are a disintegrating, unsound, precariously unstable mixed economy - a random, mongrel mixture of socialistic schemes, communistic influences, fascist controls, and shrinking remnants of capitalism still paying the costs of it all - the total of it rolling in the direction of a fascist state.

. . .

Now let me mention, and answer, some of the standard objections by which today's "liberals" attempt to camouflage (to differentiate from fascism) the nature of the system they are supporting.

"Fascism requires one-party rule." What will the notion of "Government by Consensus" amount to in practice?

"Fascism's goal is the conquest of the world." What is the goal of those global-minded, bipartisan champions of the United Nations? And, if they reach it, what positions do they expect to acquire in the power structure of "One World"?

"Fascism preaches racism." Not necessarily. Hitler's Germany did; Mussolini's Italy did not.

"Fascism is opposed to the welfare state." Check your premises and your history books. The father and originator of the welfare state, the man who put into practice the notion of buying the loyalty of some groups with money extorted from others, was Bismark - the political ancestor of Hitler. Let me remind you that the full title of the Nazi Party was: the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany."
Ayn Rand, The New Fascism: Rule by Consensus , June 1965.

8 comments:

Christopher said...

Ayn Rand was a moron. Nationalism, not racism, is the central tenet of fascism. Racism is merely a possible logical conclusion of fascistic nationalism. Moreover, both the Italian and German variety of fascism were FERVENTLY anti-communist. Therefore, they couldn't have been socialist. The socialist part of the NAZI party is a relic of the Bavarian worker's party that Hitler took over in Bavaria. It is a relic, because nationalism is enough of an explanation for Germany's collectivism. Since they were fervently anti-communist, I would say it is pretty clear that they were anti-socialist.

Christopher said...

I am not surprised that Ayn Rand or one of her acolytes doesn't understand the definition of fascism. Obviously, they are trying to bend the truth to fit their argument. Liars.

Christopher said...

http://www.schoolshistory.org.uk/gcse/germany/economy.htm

Retards. No social safety nets. Expansion of the military. Wages not increased. Increased working hours for workers. Only one big public works project: the Autobahn, which makes sense if you are going to build a military machine.

Josh, why do the retards always follow the big retards who don't know anything about what they are talking about? WHY?

Christopher said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi#Ideological_competition

Josh said...

"Nationalism, not racism, is the central tenet of fascism."

Nothing I quoted said different; quite the contrary actually.

"cialist. The socialist part of the NAZI party is a relic of the Bavarian worker's party that Hitler took over in Bavaria."

The communists in Germany helped vote Hitler into power.

"Since they were fervently anti-communist, I would say it is pretty clear that they were anti-socialist."

They might have been anti-communist and anti-socialist, but that doesn't mean their ideology is the polar opposite of communism and socialism. Its simply of a differing of opinion as to who is in control. Fascism, Communism, and Socialism are all children of the same problem: statism, which is the polar opposite of capitalism.

"I am not surprised that Ayn Rand or one of her acolytes doesn't understand the definition of fascism. Obviously, they are trying to bend the truth to fit their argument."

Says the man that would completely ignore Mussolini's definition of fascism.

"No social safety nets. Expansion of the military. Wages not increased. Increased working hours for workers. Only one big public works project: the Autobahn, which makes sense if you are going to build a military machine."

Noone is trying to make the argument that fascism = socialism.

Christopher said...

"Nothing I quoted said different; quite the contrary actually."

Yes, yes it did. It suggested that the racism of Germany and its nationalism were unrelated. They were not. The Italian fascists were just as racist, but not nationally.. Either way, fascism is the exclusion of people who are not part of the nation, nation being defined by physical characteristics, just like race. Same fucking thing, different emphasis.

"The communists in Germany helped vote Hitler into power."

Could you give me a source on that, because everywhere I look I read about the communists and fascist fighting. I read about the communists being kicked out of the Bavarian Worker's Party. I read about them be suppressed by the Freikorps in 1919 when they tried to follow Lenin. In fact, all along Hitler's rise to power I read about their suppression and brutal murders. And finally, I read about their bodies being found in the ashes of the Holocaust.

"They might have been anti-communist and anti-socialist, but that doesn't mean their ideology is the polar opposite of communism and socialism. Its simply of a differing of opinion as to who is in control. Fascism, Communism, and Socialism are all children of the same problem: statism, which is the polar opposite of capitalism."

Statism doesn't exist. Fascism the answer to the excesses of nationalism and the threat of communism. Without the threat of communism and socialism, fascism can not exist.

"Says the man that would completely ignore Mussolini's definition of fascism."

I ignore Hitler's as well. I am more interested in facts.

"Noone is trying to make the argument that fascism = socialism."

"At present, we are a disintegrating, unsound, precariously unstable mixed economy - a random, mongrel mixture of socialistic schemes, communistic influences, fascist controls, and shrinking remnants of capitalism still paying the costs of it all - the total of it rolling in the direction of a fascist state."

+

"Let me remind you that the full title of the Nazi Party was: the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany."

Mixed economy = socialism, Josh.

Sounds like you are wrong. Sounds like Ayn Rand was asserting that fascism = socialism.

Josh said...

I need to read more before I am able respond further.

Christopher said...

Actually, you need to read, period.