Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism

Product Information

This book starts out with a convincing polemic against fascist corporatism. Parenti summarizes the fascist regimes of Nazism and Mussolini and mentions the complicity of the US in these regimes before WWII by way of American corporate investment. He pushes on the western mind’s cognitive dissonance that we both condemn fascism yet actively participate in a similar system today. Such neo-fascist corporatism include foreign mutli-national corporate control, subversion of foreign sovereign economic autonomy, relics of the Bretton Woods economic system, IMF subprime loans that prohibit nationalization and subsidies of infant industries and not to mention covert and overt destabilization of democratically elected governments under the guise of communism moral panic. The global US economic and military meddling in global affairs since at least WWII really cannot be overstated and the significance of its impact is impossible to measure. Upon assuming state power, Hitler and his Nazis pursued a politico-economic agenda not unlike Mussolini’s. They crushed organized labor and eradicated all elections, opposition parties, and independent publications. Hundreds of thousands of opponents were imprisoned, tortured, or murdered. In Germany as in Italy, the communists endured the severest political repression of all groups. Parenti shows how “rational fascism” renders service to capitalism, how corporate power undermines democracy, and how revolutions are a mass empowerment against the forces of exploitative privilege. He also maps out the external and internal forces that destroyed communism, and the disastrous impact of the “free-market” victory on eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. He affirms the relevance of taboo ideologies like Marxism, demonstrating the importance of class analysis in understanding political realities and dealing with the ongoing collision between ecology and global corporatism. I'd recommend this book to all people who consider themselves to be leftists; especially to those Fukuyamaist social democrats, who think that capitalism is here to stay and it's the best we've got and we should just fight for social reforms rather than an entire system change, even though the welfare capitalism has systematically been disintegrated everywhere in the West since the overthrow of socialist countries and even though the economic exploitation of the so called Third World is greater than ever (the few rich Western countries extract over 3 trillion dollars a year from the poor countries in the world impoverishing them further and further; that's why over 4,5 billion people live in chronic poverty and it's a growing number of people) and social democracy can do nothing about that, because it's still the profit driven capitalist system that needs to expand and grow infinitely at the same time absolutely destroying the environment. During the 1920s, the Nazi Sturmabteilung or SA, the brown-shirted storm troopers, subsidized by business, were used mostly as an antilabor paramilitary force whose function was to terrorize workers and farm laborers. By 1930, most of the tycoons had concluded that the Weimar Republic no longer served their needs and was too accommodating to the working class. They greatly increased their subsidies to Hitler, propelling the Nazi party onto the national stage. Business tycoons supplied the Nazis with generous funds for fleets of motor cars and loudspeakers to saturate the cities and villages of Germany, along with funds for Nazi party organizations, youth groups, and paramilitary forces. In the July 1932 campaign, Hitler had sufficient funds to fly to fifty cities in the last two weeks alone.

Forgotten the title or the author of a book? Our BookSleuth is specially designed for you. Visit BookSleuthIn that same campaign the Nazis received 37.3 percent of the vote, the highest they ever won in a democratic national election. They never had a majority of the people on their side. To the extent that they had any kind of reliable base, it generally was among the more affluent members of society. In addition, elements of the petty bourgeoisie and many lumpenproletariats served as strong-arm party thugs, organized into the SA storm troopers. But the great majority of the organized working class supported the Communists or Social Democrats to the very end. I found this argument interesting, but it’s also pretty difficult to disprove. The “well, they had to do it that way because of the historical conditions” defense can be used to justify pretty much any shitty thing that a government (communist or otherwise) might do. In my opinion, Parenti spent too much time trying to rehabilitate the USSR, rather than just admitting they did a lot of crappy stuff. Admittedly, I know very little about Soviet history, so perhaps Parenti is right about everything, but he doesn’t cite sources for many of his claims, so I’m a bit skeptical.

Sporadic rebellion would be replaced by class-conscious revolution. Instead of burning down the manor, the workers would expropriate it and put it to use for the collective benefit of the common people, the ones who built it in the first place.” But I found the constant apologies for Soviet Russia pretty tiresome. Parenti attempts to answer a question I’ve often wondered about: why do all communist countries wind up with bureaucracy-clogged central planning and heavy-handed, authoritarian dictators? This is about as far from a Marxist dream as you can get. As an anarchist, I certainly have issues with Marxism-Leninism as an ideology. But it's worthwhile to read Parenti and consider his arguments. And to be frank, it's refreshing to engage with the thought of a grownup M-L like Parenti, Hobsbawm, etc., after constantly encountering the kind of Stalin-avi tank-kiddies on social media who say shit like "Stalin was the greatest genius in history," "Khrushchev was a revisionist," squalid authoritarian dictators are heroes of "anti-imperialism," and the like. To maintain profit levels, the large landowners and industrialists would have to slash wages and raise prices. The state in turn would have to provide them with massive subsidies and tax exemptions. To finance this corporate welfarism, the populace would have to be taxed more heavily, and social services and welfare expenditures would have to be drastically cut—measures that might sound familiar to us today. In the December 1932 election, three candidates ran for president: the conservative incumbent Field Marshal von Hindenburg, the Nazi candidate Adolph Hitler, and the Communist party candidate Ernst Thaelmann. In his campaign, Thaelmann argued that a vote for Hindenburg amounted to a vote for Hitler and that Hitler would lead Germany into war. The bourgeois press, including the Social Democrats, denounced this view as Moscow inspired. Hindenburg was re-elected while the Nazis dropped approximately two million votes in the Reichstag election as compared to their peak of over 13.7 million.

Select Format

Let it be said I have read many defences of the USSR, and Stalinism in general, but this is one of the worst defenses of an 'existing socialist' state Ive read for some time. How Parenti manages to go from logically asset stripping capitalism taking account of its errors to defending a society which was nothing more than an ill planned police state is startling.