4 responses

  1. Gustav
    July 6, 2011

    You are very much wrong. Fascisim is a very, very different thing (ideologically speaking) to Stalinism, which is in turn, a subdivision of Communism and Leninism.

    Hitler was not a Fascist, he was a National Socialist, a political movement funded in Germany somewhat based in Italian Fascism. The first one exalted Race and Nation, while the latter preached with unity in Religion (Catholicism) and Culture.

    Fascism and NS shared many common beliefs thus they made an alliance between them and later with the Japanese Empire and its very own Japanese Militarism/Imperialism political movement.

    Stalin was never a Fascist (far right), he was a Communist/Marxist (far left) in theory at least. Fascism and Communism are one against each other in every sense. You should read the “Manifesto of the Communist party” and “The Capital” both by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels to further understand the Utopical Communism and Socialism.

    Fascism and NS are in turn based in more “Right-wing” politics such as: the Catholic Church, Racialism, Scientific Racism, State Cult among some other philosophies. NS was based with the book “Mein Kampf” by Adolf Hitler.

    While the far Right and far Left share many things such as: “Statism” or cult in the State and Government, cult of personality, absolutism, racism and other stuff doesn’t make them in any way ideologically compatible.

    Modern far-right movements are found in many countries such as France (anti-immigration), Germany (Neo-Nazi, Imperialists, Royalists, etc), US (Nativism), UK (Conservative), Iran (Islamic Revolution) , Israel (Zionism), Russia (White movement) and many others.

    If you want more info please let me know with an email.

    Thanks!

    Sources: International Relations and Political Studies in Humboldt Universität, Berlin.

    Reply

    • Prasad
      June 28, 2015

      I am an Indian and when I view history dispassionately, I find that imperialism and fascism are faces of the same coin. Churchill and Hitler were essentially both of same character. Haughty, boorish, amoral and racist. A Jew from modern-day Israel, though he may be of European descent and white, may feel that Churchill was better than Hitler because of what the latter did to Jews, but from an Indian stand-point of view, Churchill was an equally ruthless, pitiless and blood-thirsty animal.

      Reply

  2. Max
    June 16, 2012

    Have you ever wondered how Adolph Hitler — a mediocre painter of Austrian origin — transformed himself into Germany’s Fuhrer during the 1930s and 1940s? The Nazi phenomenon was no historical coincidence, and far less a philosophical whim made real by just one man. Nazism had its followers, many of them exceptionally wealthy, veritable alchemists of the financial world back then. According to research carried out over the last few years, Wall Street bankers (amongst others) financed Hitler’s rise to power whilst making large profits at the same time. http://szrzlj3.blogspot.nl/2012/03/photo-shows-soviet-soldiers-may-2-1945.html

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top
mobile desktop