As my readers know I never grow tired of skewering leftists and their silly notions that fascism is product of the right wing or conservative political thought. If you want to watch a leftist's head explode and all their so-called notions of moral relativism evaporate into nothingness try challenging, what is for them an axiomatic truth. Here then is a little contention, and some evidence to prove it, that will generate a whole new scale of cognitive dissonance, not to mention vituperative sputtering and maybe even some creative name calling.
So here we go. Step back if you repeat any of this, I wouldn't want you to get any spit on you, (or fists) some of them are violent! What socialists violent? Who ever heard of such a thing?!?
When push came to shove (quite literally) the left's beloved Stalin didn't hesitate to demonstrate his inner National Socialist self!
As soon as the German Panzer divisions began to roll east across the border one of the very first acts that Stalin under took (besides changing his underwear) was to walk across Red Square to St. Basil's Cathedral and solicit the aid of the Russian Orthodox Church and its inherent nationalism, in the construction of the campaign for the defense of "Mother Russia"! All the years of attacking and trying to destroy the church (religion was counterrevolutionary and anti-internationalist), all the decades of rhetoric about the march of "International Socialism" went right out the window. "Mother Russia" came first. The appeal to Russian nationalism in rhetoric and propaganda became just as naked as that visible at any Nazi torch light parade.
The overarching goal of both fascist National Socialism and communist International Socialism was and is the same, global conquest. The only significant philosophical difference between the two was/is that the communists believe that the normal human tendency towards national identity had to be destroyed as a part of creating a global socialist hegemony. They believe that this global hegemony was to be spread by means of local socialist revolutions that once achieved, would by their nature merge into a global internationalist cadre. For the communists being a socialist and a nationalist was an oxymoron.
The fascists took a different approach. They recognized the normal human tendency towards national identity and saw it as a tool to be used in the spread of the socialist ideal. From this perspective it was perfectly acceptable, even necessary to be socialist and a nationalist. Those countries that stood in the way of the spread of this movement were of course subject to conquest often justified by some false provocation. Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia and Slovakia all joined in with little hesitation. Others of course not so much and found themselves subject to local National Socialists propped up by occupying armies, (Quisling in Norway, Vichy France). This was no different than the Russian's false provocation of the need to "protect" Russian minorities when the re-occupied and annexed the Baltic States. They had learned the lesson well from the Nazis occupation of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia and their demands for access across the Polish corridor.
So does this mean that Stalin and his cadre suddenly moved from the left side to the right side of the political aisle in response to the Nazi invasion? Of course not, it was just a tacit, albeit unspoken recognition that the fascists perspective of using normal feelings of nationalist identity was the more powerful political tool. The people weren't willing or motivated by decades of propaganda to fight and die for the "internationalist" ideal, but they would fight and die to protect "Mother Russia".
As the Russians prevailed in their war in defense of "Mother Russia" and their armies rolled into Eastern Europe their very first acts were to follow the Nazi's model and put "local" communists in charge and back them up with an occupying army. For fifty years any loosening of the leash of occupation led to nascent independence movements and the quick reassertion of an even heavier yoke of occupation. I give you Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968. This condition remained in effect until the Soviet Union itself began to collapse under the weight of it's own bureaucratic corruption.
When two movements, that both proclaim the banner of socialism, both use the same lies and methodologies for conquest and subjugation, and the implementation of each result in the same tyranny and stacking of corpses like cord wood, don't tell me that one is "left wing" and the other is "right wing" or that one is benevolent and well meaning and the other is the essence of evil just because you say so or because some no doubt leftist college professor told you so.
The bitter fruits of the tree of socialist tyranny are inalterable. They can't be changed by disingenuous rhetoric. Evil is evil, tyranny is tyranny and political murder is political murder. The victims of Nazi slave labor and extermination are no less dead than the victims of Russia's starvation of the Ukraine or the slavery of the Gulag Archipelago. None found any comfort in the political "leanings" of their tormentors.
So my friends don't expect any of the leftist trolls you encounter to listen to or even attempt to understand the first bit of this. Few if any will even get to, never mind past the third paragraph before raw emotion takes over their already weak impulse control. Just take small comfort in the realization that their reaction is ample demonstration of the lie that is the progressivist or socialist or what ever label the left calls itself this week or month.
There's no difference to the victim whether the guy about to put a bullet in your head says this is because you're a Jew or because you're a class enemy or because you're a counter-revolutionary. It's the power to shoot you that is the problem in all three situations. The Framers of our Constitution did a pretty good job of trying to keep that kind of power out of human hands. Unfortunately, they didn't foresee the extent to which the political class would have the same interest in creating the dream of Heaven on earth and be equally besotted by the idea that man has the intellectual capacity and moral insight to be able to do that.
ReplyDelete