oi

[Anonymous No.18515629]

I am convinced that Fascism was essentially Italian Leninism.

The more I look into it, the more it makes sense. The second world war was just a war of different kind of socialisms.

Suggest me literature in this regard, thank you.

[Anonymous No.18515647]

>>18515629
Perhaps, but it was more a war between nationalisms and globalism, and globalism won.

[Anonymous No.18515657]

Harukichi Shimoi, a Japanese Samurai who was buddies with Mussolini and D'Annunzio, thought fascism was just the logical continuation of the risorgimento. Not really about socialism so much as it was about Italian unification and promotion of a distinct Italian culture.

I translated his book "la guerra italiana vista da un giapponese" and published it on Lulu. It's about his experiences fighting with the Arditi during WW1. You might enjoy it.
https://www.lulu.com/en/us/shop/harukichi-shimoi-and-michael-paz/the-italian-war-as-seen-by-a-japanese/paperback/product-megpyn.html?page=1&pageSize=4

You can read some exerts here: >>/lit/thread/S18477402
It was a really interesting period in history. It's always cool to see other people on /lit/ who are interested in Italian fascism, because it's definitely been badly maligned postwar thanks to Mussolini's mistake of allying with Hitler.

[Anonymous No.18515668]

>>18515629
>I'm convinced of something
>Now give me literature to reinforce this
Nu/lit/ is such a fucking bore

[Anonymous No.18515674]

>>18515629
It was a reconfiguration of Sorelian syndicalism, which itself emerged out of the crisis of classical Marxism in the latter 19th century. The Spanish civil war was basically a syndicalist civil war. Most of the Axis adopted some degree of corporatist bargaining into their economic programs and did not eliminate trade unions.

Read Maier's Recasting Bourgeois Europe, James Gregor's Italian Fascism and Developmental Dictatorship, and David Roberts' The Syndicalist Tradition and Italian Fascism

[Anonymous No.18515717]

>>18515647
nationalism is socialism, they are not against one another.
even marxism is for patriotism.

german bolshevism opposed russian bolshevism, and italian bolshevism was just caught in the middle.

>>18515668
suggest me literature that goes against this, that is what I am asking for. my language was not clear, you're just projecting.

>>18515674
what was the crisis of classical marxism? why do you think mussolini chose to give support to the nationalists in spain? what were his other options?

[Anonymous No.18515724]

>>18515657
op here and thank you.

[Anonymous No.18515733]

>>18515717
"Workers of the world unite"
I beg to disagree.
Anyway globalism won the war and nationalism lost.

[Anonymous No.18515739]

fascism to me, is a stage between capitalism and socialism.

[Anonymous No.18515747]

>>18515733
>i beg to disagree
yes marxism is still for patriotism. are you going to tell me the communist movements in vietnam or cuba weren't nationalist in character?

[Anonymous No.18515760]

fascism does in fact have its roots in socialism, it was coined as an alternative and actually viable answer to the troubled relationship between capital and workers

[Anonymous No.18515772]

>>18515760
no, it was not an answer to the relation between capital owners and workers, fascist italy was not capitalist.

mussolini's opposition to socialism, or really the socialist party in italy was because they were liberals.

[Anonymous No.18515778]

>>18515733
>globalism won the war
It won the battle. Nationalism never went away, and with the cracks now showing in the current globalist system, it's on the rise once again.
If the US collapses, and there's no country able fill the void left behind, then the globalist system would collapse as well.

[Anonymous No.18515783]

>>18515629
Italian Fascism was basically just Nationalist Syndicalism, with some extra statism and biological/spiritualist elements thrown in. This is extremely based and is simply the natural extension of a modern Human Society without Internationalist influences.

[Anonymous No.18515785]

>>18515717
>what was the crisis of classical marxism?

Essentially a schism within the early socialist movement over strategy and eventually ideology. Downwardly mobile bourgeois leadership of socialist parties decided to accomodate themselves to the parliamentary process in European states in order to attain power, while revolutionary currents were mostly funneled into the direct, decentralized, violent revolutionary action of the syndicalists. The most significant revolutionary force in late 19th and early 20th century Europe on the left was not socialism but syndicalism. In Italy this reached a head during the debate within the Socialist party over intervention in WW1. Most of the syndicalists believed intervention would further the national interest and broke with the socialist leadership. Most of these heretical syndicalist cadres formed the nucleus of the early fascist movement, which was a substantive revolutionary force and not merely capitalism in decline.

The books I mentioned go into a lot more detail, but you may also want to check out Gregor's book on Young Mussolini, which tracks the intellectual development of early fascism

[Anonymous No.18515788]

>>18515747
Those examples were only possible before globalism had encroached. At this moment nationalist communism is literally impossible.
>>18515739
That makes no sense.

[Anonymous No.18515796]

>>18515778
You will live to see new Fascism rise as the international system eats itself and withers away. We were born just in time to witness the greatness.

[Anonymous No.18515800]

>>18515747
>yes marxism is still for patriotism.
Only as a means to an end. Marxists support nationalist movements on the condition that the nation in question is being exploited through imperialism or colonialism (as was the case for the nations you mentioned, Vietnam and Cuba). Marxists today would never support, say, an American nationalist movement. (I'm aware that American communists in the past attempted to appropriate patriotic imagery, but this attempt was a failure and has basically been abandoned by contemporary American communists.)

[Anonymous No.18515801]

>>18515778
>It won the battle. Nationalism never went away, and with the cracks now showing in the current globalist system, it's on the rise once again.
In some places perhaps, but in Europe and the US they've been diluting and poisoning the original populations to ensure nationalism cannot rise again. I hope I'm wronf though.
>If the US collapses, and there's no country able fill the void left behind, then the globalist system would collapse as well.
No it won't, it's much bigger than the US. That's the entire idea of globalism.

[Anonymous No.18515809]

>>18515788
>That makes no sense.
how does it makes no sense. socialism has never been achieved. ussr was basically fascism in practice.

[Anonymous No.18515813]

>>18515772
i suppose I dont know much about fascist Italy specifically but I can tell you with certainty that what i said definitely applies to Germany who effectively exercised a capitalist economy with a corporatist structure to streamline information to use in any sort of government intervention in the private economy, with the corpratist structure including an effective workers guild that the vast majority of workers took part in so workers had their own representation along side the various industries, so state, capital, and workers could all work together and support each other instead of working against each other, with the goal that this would allow everyone to get what they needed without going full fucking retarded with communism

[Anonymous No.18515817]

>>18515785
thank you thankyou.

[Anonymous No.18515822]

>>18515809
No, it really wasn't. It was authoritarianism in practice. I agree that socialism has never been achieved since that's impossible.

[Anonymous No.18515824]

>>18515813
>with the corpratist structure including an effective workers guild that the vast majority of workers took part in so workers had their own representation along side the various industries, so state, capital, and workers could all work together and support each other instead of working against each other
this is what dictatorship of the proletariat is

[Anonymous No.18515828]

>>18515801
The reason I say that is because of, surprising enough, the US's navy.
The Navy is key to the globalist systems, as through it's ability to project itself all across the world, it has facilitated the creation of a true international economy.
With the US gone and subsequently it's ability to support the Navy, the international trade system would collapse. All of a sudden, no one would be able to protect shipping lanes or even ports.
When the US collapses, however, is dependent on the Economy. If what I suspect is going to happens, happens, it would be within this decade.
The wheels are spinning, all it need now is contact with the ground

[Anonymous No.18515831]

>>18515796
Me to. I'm closer to National Socialism, though
I gotta get fit though. Cut the corn syrup

[Anonymous No.18515836]

>>18515822
>No, it really wasn't. It was authoritarianism in practice
ok, yes you are correct in this regard.
fascism is basically just "energy", "the power". of course it looks like authoritarianism, but that's how power is.

[Anonymous No.18515840]

>>18515831
>im for national socialism!
>destroy europe

[Anonymous No.18515842]

>>18515840
kek
Only France. Fuck France

[Anonymous No.18515846]

>>18515828
I'm sorry burger, the world is much bigger than the US and you're not as important as you'd like to think. When the US collapses, globalism will continue.

[Anonymous No.18515866]

>>18515629
No Italian Leninism is Italian maximalism including Gramsci and Bordiga.

Italian fascism is Italian Horthyism with D’Annunzian features.

[Anonymous No.18515871]

>>18515831
Based Brother, I'm doing something similar soon too. Good luck, and hopefully we will be able to witness it together.

[Anonymous No.18515874]

>>18515846
Only if someone assumes control of shipping lanes.
He's right that globalism is only possible with open shipping routes. I'd also argue that its only possible with unilateral control of shipping routes, otherwise you'd see a rise in mercantilism, piracy, territorial disputes disrupting trade, and a general return to the historical norm.

Even something minor, say a nationalist or islamist faction gaining control of Egypt and seizing the Suez canal, could completely destroy the world economy. Globalism isn't nearly as secure as you think it is, which is why western governments need to use extremely coercive strongman measures to keep it going.

[Anonymous No.18515875]

>>18515824
well like i said they had their roots in socialist thought but here the state isn't seizing the means of production, privately owned capital was still a thing, rich people benefiting and making profit from the labour of workers was still a thing etc, its just that both private capital of various industries and workers all had seats at the table and both were expected to both reap rewards here and make sacrifices there while the state, whose power relies entirely on keeping both happy, tries to keep everything balanced between the two

[Anonymous No.18515879]

>>18515846
I'm not a Burger.
And which country has the ability to Project it's power the like the US? No one.
I hate the Amerifats as much as anyone, but to deny it's role and impact on the Global economy is more retarded then your average Mutt.

[Anonymous No.18515880]

>>18515866
Gramsci and Bordiga is left com in my understanding.

[Anonymous No.18515890]

>>18515846
The world is more than West Europe as well. Western Europe combined can't come close to exerting the same influence as America's and Without America leading the helm of globalism it will not be as prevalent. The Middle East, Asia, and Eastern Europe is not aligned with globalism as you and burgers are. That's why we all await America's fall, because you will fall along with it, any notions otherwise are foolish.

[Anonymous No.18515892]

>>18515880
Bordiga was a leftcom (really he was THE leftcom) but Gramsci fits squarely within Marxism-Leninism.

[Anonymous No.18515893]

>>18515846
Not the same anon, but the US navy is literally the only thing holding international trade together. That international trade relies on profit margins and political circumstances also guaranteed by the US and it's systems. It's also that international trade which is already just barely able to supply enough electrical equipment, debt sinks, dragon dildos, and oil to keep everything running in most first world countries.

[Anonymous No.18515896]

>>18515890
Indeed. The troubles in France as well as the blockage in the Suez showed just how venerable Western Europe is.
America is fucked. It's not a question of IF it collapses, it's WHEN it collapses

[Anonymous No.18515897]

>>18515892
so why did he and mussolini not get along?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18515909]

>>18515629
Lenin himself wrote "Left-Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder.
Might also find something from Chomsky.
Then there’s Spain Betrayed, facts about the Stalinist involvement in killing off anarchists fighters

[Anonymous No.18515915]

>>18515909
Tits or GTFO

[Anonymous No.18515916]

>>18515892
Bordiga was a Leninist left com who adhered to Leninism in disagreement with the PCdI. Compare to the KAPD who comradely detested the RSDLP(b) or the Operaismo who criticised Lenin using Lenin.

[Anonymous No.18515919]

>>18515890
>That's why we all await America's fall, because you will fall along with it, any notions otherwise are foolish.

There are many people who can't see the forest for the trees. When American falters, it will have serious effects and people WILL come to realize the monumentous error in such globalization that rests too much on one country to uphold the system.

[Anonymous No.18515927]

>>18515909
FASCISM WILL BRING ABOUT SOCIALISM BUTTERMILK, I TELL YOU THIS EVERY TIME.
EVERY ANARCHIST IS A FAILED DICTATOR.

[Anonymous No.18515931]

>>18515916
>who criticised Lenin using Lenin.
rofl

[Anonymous No.18515932]

>>18515896
>>18515893
>>18515890
The obvious question, gentlemen, is what can /we/ do to help bring about the collapse of globalism?

If ownership of the Suez and Panama Canal were returned to their rightful countries I think that a collapse in global trade would be inevitable. These two points represent the Achilles heal of the entire global market.

[Anonymous No.18515934]

>>18515717
>german bolshevism opposed russian bolshevism
no it didn't soviets would've loved seeing rosa win

[Anonymous No.18515940]

>>18515932
Simple. Get ready for it.

[Anonymous No.18515944]

>>18515934
i used nazi as euphanism for german bolshevism.
nsdap absorbed every other movement in germany

[Anonymous No.18515950]

>>18515944
>i used nazi as euphanism for german bolshevism.
i mean german bolshevism as euphanism for nazi
hitler only had a hate boner for communism because it lost germany the war (in his beliefs)

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18515954]

>>18515915

[Anonymous No.18515958]

>>18515954
You may proceed with your argument

[banana No.18515964]

>>18515954
FAILED DICTATOR. FAILED DICTATOR. FAILED DICTATOR.