Text of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, 1939
Commentary on Communist history and ideology with comparisons to other Totalitarian ideologies and movements. Also links contemporary political events to ideological themes and trends.
Friday, November 4, 2011
Stalinism & Anti-Fascism
The Government of the German Reich and The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics desirous of strengthening the cause of peace between Germany and the U.S.S.R., and proceeding from the fundamental provisions of the Neutrality Agreement concluded in April, 1926 between Germany and the U.S.S.R., have reached the following Agreement:..
Text of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, 1939
Text of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, 1939
To grasp the amplitude of Communist dishonesty both past and present one must consider the complex relationship of Communism to Fascism. One early and enduring aspect of Communist self-promotion was its draping itself with the mantle of anti-Fascism. Since the late 1920s the Communists have strutted about the world as the ultimate anti-Fascists, and thus the Vanguard of the Morally Superior. “Fascism” in this scenario represented everything that was wrong in the contemporary world, and Communists were, of course, “anti-Fascist.”
The logic of Communism as anti-Fascism is very simple, but its application, because of the infinite elasticity of the premises, makes it highly flexible and able to lead to whatever conclusions are requisite in order to justify any change in principle, policy, or goal. The most elemental syllogism is the following: Fascism is evil; Communism is opposed to Fascism; therefore, Communism is good. An “anti-Fascist” is simply another term for a virtuous person, and the syllogism is scarcely less than tautological. The logic belies the reality of what always has been the crude tribal psychology of Communism, an antagonistic world neatly divided into legions of the very Good struggling against the very Evil. “Fascism,” however, for J.S. Stalin, Mr. anti-Fascist, was always a moving target, a label of excommunication for whoever happened to be in the way of current Soviet objectives.
In the years between 1928 and 1935, the Soviets were anticipating the world-wide collapse of capitalism. Their most successful and serious ideological rivals at that time were the non-Communist Left, especially the reform-oriented Social Democrats, who had become a power and legitimate political force in Germany. Stalin promptly expanded the category of “Fascist” so as to make the Social Democrats appropriate objects of execration and abuse. They were now identified, “unmasked” as it were, as “Social Fascists.” How could this be? They were Socialists, good Marxist-Leftists of sorts who like their Communist brethren scorned the pursuit of profit and thoroughly loathed the capitalists. Nevertheless they had fallen in with the Fascists, that is, the capitalists, simply by participating with them in bourgeois politics. They competed in elections, played by parliamentary rules and eschewed violent revolution. Lenin had especially despised them for this. His preference and practice was to kill the opposition rather than have to compete with them for voter approval. Worst of all for Stalin, they had been politically successful in Germany, and at that time he perceived them to be his most serious competition for power and thus their assigned membership in the class of evil.
Stalin’s “Social Fascist” demonization of the Social Democrat Marxists in Germany turned into the perfect gift for Hitler. It fractured his major opposition on the Left and greatly assisted his consolidation of power. But once Hitler finished the strangling of the Weimar Republic and quickly turned his Third Reich into the most menacing and formidable military force in the world, Stalin suddenly realized that he now actually needed those Fascist German Social Democrats as allies on the Left. So, in 1935, “Social Fascism” fell out of the Stalinist lexicon and the Comintern made one of its most notorious about-faces and embraced the former “Social Fascists” in an anti-Fascist alliance that became known as the “Popular Front.” And so the Social Democrats went from being Fascist to Anti-Fascist after a few chin-strokes by the General Secretary and a consultation with his retinue of yes-men, the Politburo – Stalin was nothing if not flexible. The former collaborators with, and enablers of, capitalism – itself a fascist enterprise – were now embraced in the Party of the Good.
Thus, Stalin’s most successful and enduring contribution to the ideology that ruled such a large part of the globe was make it the moral counterpoise to Fascism. The Soviet Union proudly presented itself to the world as the bulwark of anti-Fascism. Fascism was a rapacious, anti-egalitarian, political force driven by crude theories of national and racial superiority, put into practice by moral cretins. Whereas Fascists were inherently chauvinistic, imperialistic, and aligned to a narrow self-interest of class or race, Stalinism presented itself as a modern, progressive force that promised emancipation from all the traditional bondages and relationships of inequality. Its goodness was comprehensive and ever expansive. Women would be equal to men. Racial bigotry and discrimination would fall away. Social and economic and cultural differences that set people apart and put them in opposition would finally and irrevocably disappear.
Soviet Communism projected itself to the entire world as the showcase of modern humanism, a wave that pushed reluctant people everywhere toward universal equality and progress which of course was the basis of its broad appeal. Stalin discovered that the mantle of anti-Fascism was an ideal strategy that could be continuously used to associate Bolshevism with these aspirational qualities and endow the Soviet Union with a broad and sweeping moral superiority such that to be opposed to them was to align oneself with the brutal forces of reaction. To be an anti-Communist was to be a Fascist. Though this moral dichotomy presented by Stalin and his successors had no place in reality, it was highly successful as propaganda. The anti-Communist as Fascist became a rote canard firmly and permanently embedded in the daily discourse of the Left where it continues to this day. This false imagery was certainly not impaired by the Nuremburg War Crimes Tribunals where the Soviets, the newly victorious anti-Fascists, sat in judgment over the vanquished, genocidal Nazis.
The Left still cannot resist the Fascist smear. George W. Bush throughout his eight years as President was routinely denounced as a Fascist, Hitler Redux, etc. The term, “Fascist,” however now seems used less as an insult (what does it really mean, anyway?) but more as a part of a self-referential ritual of moral affirmation. Calling someone a “Fascist” announces and affirms to the world the speaker’s moral and intellectual superiority, compassion and identification with the highest aspirations of humanity. Its use further assures that others know that he is no member of the knuckle dragging lumpenproletariat.
Comments (25)

Sort by: Date Rating Last Activity
Loading comments...
"Obama is a man of the left and the left hates guns more than almost anything else they remotely associate with the despised right, more than gas guzzlers, home school families, coal companies, confederate flags or pro-life protestors."
Fuck that bi-sexual deviant, communist nigger, that abomination who illegally occupied the Oval Office and disgraced this country for two-terms by this very fact.
Pardon my Yiddish.
Fuck that bi-sexual deviant, communist nigger, that abomination who illegally occupied the Oval Office and disgraced this country for two-terms by this very fact.
Pardon my Yiddish.
Black families were imported to Detroit as strike breakers to cross the picket line, when white men stood up on their hind legs and demanded to be treated equitably. Blacks were the useful idiots to help keep a lid on trade unions.
Blacks still play the fool, until it's time to play the rent a thug mob, to shake down productive citizens for the share of the FREE Gibs Me Dats!
Blacks still play the fool, until it's time to play the rent a thug mob, to shake down productive citizens for the share of the FREE Gibs Me Dats!
I do not believe racism is in any DNA, nor do I believe that President Obama knew or knows much about anything he talked or is talking about. Racism is not inherited. If you don't believe racism is learned, watch for awhile two little kids of different races playing with each other.
Dr. Rand Paul cites two studies about masks, both of which debunk the myth of the efficacy of masks in preventing the spread of Coronavirus. Just today, New York released their tracking data (another imperialistic tool used for controlling the masses) on the spread of Coronavirus in restaurants. It was 1.4%! Cuomo still ordered all restaurants and bars to close. I am quite sure there are few trustworthy corporations anymore, but my situation (older, some autoimmune disease) seems to compel me to make a voluntary choice and get the vaccine as soon as I can, even though I am fine so far. I go out a lot to church, some social gatherings, shopping, etc., but I take common-sense precautions used to prevent the spread of any virus. The Health Dictatorship, as Foster labels it, has got to be overthrown, otherwise the backbones of our economy and freedom, i.e., small businesses, will be destroyed. But perhaps that is, after all, the plan of the left!
By the way, Foster's new novel, Toward The Bad I Kept On Turning, is a great read. Though somewhat fantastical, it is chocked full of great stories and a lot of history. It is available on Amazon.
By the way, Foster's new novel, Toward The Bad I Kept On Turning, is a great read. Though somewhat fantastical, it is chocked full of great stories and a lot of history. It is available on Amazon.
Yeah, you can be a "racist" just by existing, without even thinking in "racist" terms or having "racist" motives. And if you simply want to state facts or have a conversation about racism, you will become a threat to the control aficionados, and will become racist by default. As foster suggests, if you're not part of the collective, you're not legitimate. And about diversity; is the "salad bowl" philosophy better than the old "melting pot" descriptor? No, not when speaking of nationalism. And the extremes to which the salad bowl philosophy have been taken certainly do not, as the Wokes claim, insure personal liberty. Just the opposite as diversity becomes groupthink!
Donald Trump's time is over! House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer have jointly asked Vice President Mike Pence to trigger Amendment No. 25 to dismiss President Trump.
What would anyone expect from far-left politicians like Pelosi and Schumer who, instead of preparing for the confirmation hearings for Biden's cabinet picks, would waste their time on this nonsense.
Foster has, once again, "hit the nail on the head." However, in my opinion, if the Democrats try to confiscate guns anywhere in this country, all hell will break loose!
They might not be so obvious about it. More likely they'll declare the manufacture of ammunition a contributor to global warming and order a halt to production.
When we visited Munich some years ago we decided to visit Dachau. The locals would not tell us how to get there or even admit of its existence. Nazification had indeed been accomplished, and continued even then. Now, here, we deplorables with our guns and God are being cancelled in much the same way. Those of you who doubt, make no mistake; gun control laws, including gun confiscation laws, will immediately increase as a first step, followed closely or even simultaneously by the attempt by the Democrats to once and for all institute an absolute right to practice their religion of abortion without limits. Wake up people. Foster is right. If we continue down the path of American denazification by altering our country's history through false and improper education and untrustworthy news, and if we do not expose the myth of "systemic" racism, our country, and all of its good people, will be totally ruled by and dependent on government. Is that what "the land of the free" is all about?
I didn't watch the inauguration because I was too busy doing more important things, so I can't comment first-hand on it. But from what I've seen and read about it, there were two differing observations. The conservative-leaning pundits and news media agreed with the assessment penned by Foster; the liberal news media thought it was "the best inauguration speech ever." Given the fact that it appears it was read verbatim from the teleprompter with no deviations, it obviously was not penned by Biden. It purportedly invoked religion and God more than any inauguration speech since Eisenhower. And this stuff was spouted by a man who represents a party whose religion is abortion! The best inauguration speech ever? Really? C'mon man!
Yes, millions can and have seen that Democracy has not prevailed. When the people turn over their power to the Washington Establishment, bolstered by a complicit mainstream media, only tyranny can result. Are we there yet?
The state should not be able to force people to give up the fundamental right to control over their own bodies unless exercising that right can be shown to be dangerous or detrimental to other people who also have the right to life. Abortion is an example; it's hard to argue that having an abortion is not really, really detrimental to another human life. The same can be true for vaccinations; if herd immunity is vitally important to the lives of everybody, then people can be forced to comply.
Another great blog from Stephen Foster. I religiously follow his blog, and though I sometimes disagree with him (see above) , I am never disappointed with his great thought processes, knowledge, and perfect-sense (usually) arguments and observations. This present blog is no exception: well-written and well- thought-out. I too, was a professor, and I share many of his experiences with the new "Studies curricula" and the problems and even downright horrors they brought and continue to bring. The cancel culture is, I believe, largely a product of the indoctrination graduates of these largely worthless grievance vocabulary majors have received and promulgated. Certainly the cancel culture has not made our lives happier, safer, nor more productive, as Foster points out by way of the rhetorical questions he asks at the end of the blog!
The New Normal will never be what I (and Foster, obviously) will ever accept. Even given our country's stated "rules of law," I fear people will have to get hurt before we jump over the cuckoo's nest.
There's that word "diversity" again popping up all over academia The results of invoking and then acting on the word in universities is mostly bull crap! I'm OK with you being diverse, as long as you don't mind me being diverse in different ways than you, and neither of us cause harm to each other or to others that are diverse from us. As famous Los Angeles actor Rodney King
once said, "Why can't we all just get along?
once said, "Why can't we all just get along?
Foster's recent post is ominous, predicting that our "democracy" is rapidly heading toward Marxism. Unfortunately, this is probably true. And yes, there is hope in resistance, but it may take much more than words and thoughts and is very scary to those of us who love our country!
From above: "Perceptions and opinions, as we know, tend to be error-prone, subjectively based, tendentious, and, at times held with fanatical fervor in the face of disconfirming, empirically-based reality." Very true. People's feelings often take precedence over facts, many times based on their own biases and observations and being convinced by a corrupt media that continually bombards them with confirming claptrap. But pretentious and insincere statements are often not true in the real world, and the failure of many to grasp that, either because of ignorance or because of willful denial, leads to failure, sometimes cataclysmic failure, of societies. Woke? I think not. Deceived? Absolutely!
It seems that our whole culture - or counter-culture now - has become one big abstraction. Though Foster makes the point, convincingly, I think, that we can't really declare war on an abstraction, perhaps we should do just that with the goal of quickly winning that war and getting back, as a new normal, to things that really matter to us.
I think the whole premise of "Hitler" returning has to do with the fear of the Washington D.C. politicians that the swamp will be drained and, thus, power lost. That can't be allowed to happen, so new Hitlers are discovered to take the focus off of the massive failures, avarice, and dishonesty practiced by the swamp creatures. For example, when Trump was elected, he had to be made a Hitler. His populist ideas and promises made could not be allowed to stand. And even though Trump accomplished a lot and kept a lot of promises, he had to be maligned even if it meant that the country would suffer. The mainstream news organizations were willing co-conspirators in this endeavor, and even now conspire to cover up the obvious and severe shortfalls of the new President. As a wise character named Pogo once said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us."
According to those on the left, everything white people do is racist. But, as Foster points out, nothing people of color do can possibly be racist. Astonishingly, we now have racist highways that were perpetrated on people of color by white people. But it should be apparent to all that the mainstream media, illustrated by what they say and how they say (or don't say) it, are definitely racist themselves. Racially-incited hatred from virtually every leftist group now, is becoming rampant, and we must find the truth-telling to end it! Thanks Stephen, for your truth telling.
Foster's newest blog, Moscow to Minneapolis, is not only true, but is "right on" in every respect. This is an absolutely great blog. And of course, as always, Foster makes his points so well with his mastery of the written word.
How did we (The citizens of the United States) get to this point of "collective madness" where we allow "Critical Race Theory" to not only explain everything but explain away everything not deemed desirable by so few?" Whatever happened to embracing critique and disagreement and civil discourse?
When, exactly, did the fourth estate morph almost completely into the fifth column and become the propaganda arm of the fictional systemic racism believers?
How did we (The citizens of the United States) get to this point of "collective madness" where we allow "Critical Race Theory" to not only explain everything but explain away everything not deemed desirable by so few?" Whatever happened to embracing critique and disagreement and civil discourse?
When, exactly, did the fourth estate morph almost completely into the fifth column and become the propaganda arm of the fictional systemic racism believers?
Why can't we all just get along? - Rodney King Possibly because there are many, usually on one side of the Black vs. White conflict, who prefer not to do so. Rather, they prefer to manufacture their own justice, whether it fits the facts or not.
This last blog about embalmed former "leaders" was interesting and readable. As I read it and the reference to Biden, I began to wonder if dementia could be compared to a kind of premature embalming. Surely Biden's present thought processes are little better than those that would come from a preserved corpse. And if Dr. Jill was not around to lead him out of his wandering ways and otherwise direct him, would old Joe be able to get through any day without being compared to an animated yet relatively mindless decedent? Which begs the question, did thinking people really vote for him? And, if so, can they succinctly explain why other than because they "hated" Trump?
Comments by IntenseDebate
Posting anonymously.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment