Fascism then and now

When we talk about fascism, each of us usually makes our own associations. In Russia, it is associated with World War II and the many victims of the Soviet people. In Latin America, it recalls the sad experiences of dictatorships. In Europe, it recalls its own political experiments, which eventually led to the Nuremberg Tribunal.

However, it cannot be overlooked that fascism is a direct product of bourgeois society with its specific aspirations and imperatives. We will consider this in more detail.

In the article «The International Situation», which was published on September 20, 1924, Joseph Stalin asserted that: «…fascism is the fighting organization of the bourgeoisie, underpinned by the active support of the social democracy…. In that case we can assume that social democracy is the objectively moderate wing of fascism.

There is no reason then to suppose that the militant organization of the bourgeoisie can achieve decisive successes in battles, or in the government of a country, without the unrestricted support of social democracy. In the same way, there is little reason to think that social democracy can achieve decisive successes in its battles or in the administration of a given country without the active support of the militant organization of the bourgeoisie: the fascist organizations. These organizations do not deny each other, but complement each other. They are not antipodes, but Gemini. Fascism is the unstructured political bloc of these two fundamental organizations, which emerged in the context of the post-war crisis of imperialism and is designed to fight against the proletarian revolution. The bourgeoisie cannot hold on to power without the support of such a bloc. Therefore, it would be a mistake to think that «pacifism» leads to the elimination of fascism. In reality, «pacifism» in the present situation is the very affirmation of fascism, with its moderate and social-democratic wing in the foreground.»

This is a fairly accurate and precise characterization of the interrelationship between these political phenomena, which has not lost its relevance after a hundred years. We must be honest with ourselves and recognize that most of today’s political parties in Europe are still a sort of «moderate wing of fascism», with minor differences. And even, many of the parties that assume themselves to be leftists, also support fascism, which has changed a little in its nuances, but essentially remains the same. Only now the fighting organization of the bourgeoisie is the NATO military bloc, since the capitals themselves have become transnational.

These self-proclaimed «pacifists» who are part of the European parliamentary parties unanimously supported the bombing of Libya in 2011 and also supported the destruction of Syria. Then, in 2014, they openly supported the coup in Ukraine, first by putting pressure on the constitutional president Viktor Yanukovych, and then by taking sides with the coup junta, which started killing its own citizens who disagreed with the ban on speaking their own language. Knowing from historical experience what such a policy could lead to in Ukraine, Russia rushed to the defense of the Russian-speaking population, but was immediately condemned by the fascist «pacifists» of the United States and the EU.

Warnings about this phenomenon came not only from Russia. Fidel Castro, during a meeting with Max Lesnick, prophetically said that at some point Russia would again have to fight fascism in Europe, only that fascism would now be called democracy.

In July 2014, Fidel Castro also discovered, with his own shrewdness, the relationship between the events in Ukraine and in the Gaza Strip, pointing out the similarity between the hostile actions of pro-imperialist, anti-Ukrainian and anti-Russian content of Petro Poroshenko’s aggressive government, and the systematic murder of hundreds of Palestinian children by Israel, which the then President of the United States, Barack Obama, described as an act of self-defense.

Undoubtedly, the role of the United States in sponsoring its fascist satellites in other regions of the world is enormous. American author John Goldberg did not accidentally title his book «Liberal Fascism», which describes the transformation of the US political system and the use of totalitarian methods in the administration of the state.

In fact, despite the democratic rhetoric in the United States, we can see many of those elements that were present in the original version of Italian fascism with the idea of a State-corporation. The system of governing the country in the United States is based on the principle of the iron triangle, where congressional committees, officials and interest groups (lobbyists) represent the real power that makes decisions based on their interconnected interests.

And since, in both the United States and the EU countries, the people are effectively alienated from decision-making, and the ruling neoliberal groups are increasingly incapacitated, there are attempts to brand as dictators many of the leaders of the states that oppose corporate fascism. These happen to be the leaders of countries where the state is socially oriented.

That is why in the liberal American and European press we constantly see accusations against Vladimir Putin, Nicolas Maduro, Xi Jinping, Miguel Diaz-Canel and several others.

Washington’s doctrines and official documents also show the desire of that country’s elite to maintain its hegemony, and many countries are openly considered a threat to the United States, although they do not even have a common border with them. The media propaganda and censorship of the Western political-oligarchic clans is not limited to controlled newspapers and television, but they try to manipulate social networks and carry out the so-called «abolition of culture», like the Hitler regime, which burned books by undesirable authors, or the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, under which works by leftist and Marxist theorists were also destroyed.

Hence the question of closer international cooperation to halt these dangerous tendencies. The military, political, diplomatic and media fronts are now closely interrelated. The coming victory of the Russian army somewhere near Kherson contributes to the defeat not only of Ukrainian comprehensive fascism, but also refutes the justification of NATO military assistance and demonstrates the futility of supporting the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev.

This being the case, the publication of texts of ideological critique of U.S. neo-imperialism in Latin American countries provides an additional theoretical basis and a deeper understanding of the destructive methods used by Washington in its foreign policy. Situational awareness, synchronization of actions and solidarity are the keys to our common victory.