If fascism arose again in Europe, what would the British response be?

[Dhimmi]

That seems a questionable judgement. Millions of Poles died during Hitler's occupation. The decades of communist rule really weren't comparable at all. And after about the mid-1950s, it makes no sense to call it a Stalinist regime.

The fact that resistance in the form of Solidarity eventually rose up in Poland if anything is an indicator that it wasn't such a totalitarian regime by then.

Then it's right to question it, but it's not one arrived at easily and quite recent to me. For us perhaps you are right but the Poles I've had chats with have been solely concerned with the Russian occupation and a sense of having been abandoned to it by the West. I'll not get picky over the details of the regime, I use Stalinist because that was the origin of the occupation- we all know it from that and getting semantic about it's entirity does distract from a speedy discussion of it. No attempt on my part to revise the history, nor to suggest that Nazi occupation was somehow not as bad as all that I assure you. Perhaps it's a generational thing, few folk left to recall the WW2 years, but for the latter it's quite recent.

Having denied pendantry though I must suggest that it wasn't really communist rule rather than a shadowy impersonation of it.

 

[Belushi]

IME Poles hate the Russians and the Germans about equally, and they tend not to make a distinction between German and Nazi or Russian and Soviet. The second world war and soviet era are just the most recent events in centuries of being fucked over by their neighbours to the man on the Lodz omnibus.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

IME Poles hate the Russians and the Germans about equally, and they tend not to make a distinction between German and Nazi or Russian and Soviet. The second world war and soviet era are just the most recent events in centuries of being fucked over by their neighbours to the man on the Lodz omnibus.

Indeed. Important to remember that this predates WW2.

 

[Pinette]

I hope, given some of the howlers you've posted, you're not going to claim that with age comes wisdom.

I commend to you the following tomes:

Richard Griffiths - "Fascism".
Karl Dietrich Bracher - "The German Dictatorship"
Adam Tooze - "The Wages of Destruction"
Ian Kershaw - "The Nazi Dictatorship" and "Weimar: Why Did Democracy Fail?"

Five books off the top of my head, spanning 50 years of academic endeavour, all of whose authors agree on the premise that Hitler's state was constructed around a premise of expansionism, and all of whom provide ample evidence.
ok - VP - Will read Fascism by R Griffiths as a starter to my political education. I am illiterate on that score.

To be fair, your bursts of self-righteousness make me puke.

 

[LLETSA]

Having denied pendantry though I must suggest that it wasn't really communist rule rather than a shadowy impersonation of it.

It really was Communist rule, in that it was rule by a Communist party that was part of the world Communist movement. It's the only kind of 'communist rule' the world is likely to see.

 

[Dhimmi]

It was communist rule by name I'll give you that, but idealogically it did fall short of being a workers democracy in favour of a totalitarian committee. I've seen communist rule elsewhere and it wasn't a bit like what I've seen in DDR and USSR.

 

[ViolentPanda]

IME Poles hate the Russians and the Germans about equally, and they tend not to make a distinction between German and Nazi or Russian and Soviet. The second world war and soviet era are just the most recent events in centuries of being fucked over by their neighbours to the man on the Lodz omnibus.

It has to be said that Catholic Poland did it's own fair share of oppressing, or does the Polish race memory still conveniently forget what they did in and to the Ukraine over the centuries?

 

[ViolentPanda]

It was communist rule by name I'll give you that, but idealogically it did fall short of being a workers democracy in favour of a totalitarian committee. I've seen communist rule elsewhere and it wasn't a bit like what I've seen in DDR and USSR.

I don't think it could have been the same, even given the same ideological commitment. Poland's industrial sector was still less than 15% of the entire economy when it became a satrapy of Moscow, and while industrialisation under Stalin did indeed politicise the workers, the pre-existing communist network that was built on in the DDR just wasn't of the same degree in Poland.

 

[LLETSA]

It was communist rule by name I'll give you that, but idealogically it did fall short of being a workers democracy in favour of a totalitarian committee. I've seen communist rule elsewhere and it wasn't a bit like what I've seen in DDR and USSR.

There's a difference between communist-rule (ie rule by self-declared communists committed to an interpretation of a communist ideology who are part of a wider movement of self-declared communists ...) and communism, which remains an abstraction.

Where have you seen communist rule other than the DDR and USSR?

 

[Casually Red]

And soon the Italian population will be facing very similar measures - and they also have a long history of popular resistance to oppression.
.

italy is a scenario were many people and politicians remain openly fascist ,with a long fascist tradition with an organised far right and no shortage of politicians whod put up with fascism if it suited . Along with an enconomic basket case , mass immigration from africa , a chaotic democratic system , internal regional divisions . And indeed a revolutionary left with a history and propensity to get it on .

Its a country were fascism in some form could well take root again .

 

[ayatollah]

I think you are right Casually Red - I don't think the Italians will react with British style passivity to the extreme austerity measures the IMF et al will require of them. Turbulent times ahead. As you say , the Italian fascist tradition (AND the socialist one of course) is a deep one - and The Northern League in particular reflect the continuation of this (Right Populist/neo-fascist) tradition even during the boom years.

 

[LLETSA]

italy is a scenario were many people and politicians remain openly fascist ,with a long fascist tradition with an organised far right and no shortage of politicians whod put up with fascism if it suited . Along with an enconomic basket case , mass immigration from africa , a chaotic democratic system , internal regional divisions . And indeed a revolutionary left with a history and propensity to get it on .

Its a country were fascism in some form could well take root again .

It could be said that fascism has already taken root in Italy and elsewhere in mainland Europe.

But even if a fascist part(ies) somehow managed to get into government, what could they do in a sitaution where governments no longer control their economies, in the midst of what's a worldwide depression in all but name, with a population most of which would be opposed to it to one degree or another and surrounded by governments and international institutions containing at least leading individuals and groupings would be opposed to it? Etc.

All of this would also apply to a radical left government.

 

[Dhimmi]

There's a difference between communist-rule (ie rule by self-declared communists committed to an interpretation of a communist ideology who are part of a wider movement of self-declared communists ...) and communism, which remains an abstraction.

Where have you seen communist rule other than the DDR and USSR?

Yes there is. Kerela, and tres socialistic in Seychelles.

 

[Dhimmi]

It could be said that fascism has already taken root in Italy and elsewhere in mainland Europe.

Well that's the odd part about the question... it's not really a what-if is it?

 

[LLETSA]

Yes there is. Kerela, and tres socialistic in Seychelles.

Yes there is what?

 

[Random]

Yes there is. Kerela, and tres socialistic in Seychelles.

The Indian ruling Communists in the state of Kerala? And another local party in the Seychelles? The Keralans are market communists like the Chinese, aren't they? Or do you mean the Naxalites?

 

[Sasaferrato]

There are number of countries across Europe in which the far right are becoming more popular. The French National Front, the Austrian Freedom Part etc. Given that we may be facing 15-20 years of economic depression, it is not beyond possibility that one or more countries may end up voting in an extremist government.

So what would the British response be to such an event? Prior to WW2 the far right had a prominent presence in the form of the BUF, but eventually we fell on the side of liberal democracy. Would the same happen again?

As the far right filth are equal to the far left filth, any replies will of course be equal.

It matters not to the oppressed whether the oppressor is right wing or left wing, the oppression is the same. Hitler, Stalin and Mao are equally odious.

 

[frogwoman]

As the far right filth are equal to the far left filth, any replies will of course be equal.

It matters not to the oppressed whether the oppressor is right wing or left wing, the oppression is the same. Hitler, Stalin and Mao are equally odious.

let's assume you're right about the far-left and the far-right for a sec, do you really think that the British government would act on the side of the oppressed? Even if it was labour?

 

[Sasaferrato]

let's assume you're right about the far-left and the far-right for a sec, do you really think that the British government would act on the side of the oppressed? Even if it was labour?

One would hope so. I don't think it would make any difference, TBH, whichever political flavour happened to be in government at the time. I don't think that the center-left is any less honourable than the center-right.

The recent NATO intervention in Libya is a good example of the international community acting in the interests of the oppressed. I suspect that the eventual outcome may not be that which was intended though.

 

[DotCommunist]

Shame about all them dead black libyans though eh.

 

[frogwoman]

One would hope so. I don't think it would make any difference, TBH, whichever political flavour happened to be in government at the time. I don't think that the center-left is any less honourable than the center-right.

The recent NATO intervention in Libya is a good example of the international community acting in the interests of the oppressed. I suspect that the eventual outcome may not be that which was intended though.

Realistically though?

 

[Sasaferrato]

Shame about all them dead black libyans though eh.

Ummm... I thought the people of Libya were Arabs? I take your point about the civilian deaths though, bombs and missiles do tend to inflict carnage over quite a wide area.

 

[LLETSA]

The Indian ruling Communists in the state of Kerala? And another local party in the Seychelles? The Keralans are market communists like the Chinese, aren't they? Or do you mean the Naxalites?

The point is that whether they're 'market communists' or not, it's still Communist rule and not 'communism.'

 

[Sasaferrato]

Realistically though?

Well, do you think that the people of Britain are inherently different from the people of 1914 or 1939? I think that the people of Britain would react as they have in the past. The people are not the government though.

If it was a 1939 situation again, we wouldn't have a choice, well, other than fight for survival or roll over, and we aren't known for rolling over.

 

[DotCommunist]

Ummm... I thought the people of Libya were Arabs? I take your point about the civilian deaths though, bombs and missiles do tend to inflict carnage over quite a wide area.

There have been widespread lynchings of black libyans and black migrant workers by TNC forces. Arising (iirc) from the false report that gaddafi had hired a black mercenary army

 

[Sasaferrato]

The point is that whether they're 'market communists' or not, it's still Communist-rule and not 'communism.'

That is an excellent differentiation, and it really doesn't matter what the ruling party is as far as the oppressed population are concerned. A Communist state elected in free election by the people is one thing, a Communist state by coup is another.

 

[LLETSA]

If it was a 1939 situation again, we wouldn't have a choice, well, other than fight for survival or roll over, and we aren't known for rolling over.

There is no 'we.'

 

[butchersapron]

That is an excellent differentiation, and it really doesn't matter what the ruling party is as far as the oppressed population are concerned. A Communist state elected in free election by the people is one thing, a Communist state by coup is another.

Not in Chile it ain't. Nor Italy. And so on.

(I know Chile wasn't communist - the point was that it appeared that way to the people who actually did carry out a coup)

 

[LLETSA]

A Communist state elected in free election by the people is one thing, a Communist state by coup is another.

A 'communist stae elected by the people,' would still be just communist rule, though. The outcome would not necessarily be communism. In fact it almost certainly wouldn't be communism.

 

[Sasaferrato]

There is no 'we.'

Not so sure about that, there certainly was in 1939. It is hard to see a similar situation arising again, due to NATO, the EU etc. I cannot see the far right achieving anything like the level of popular support that would be required to take over a single European country, never mind having enough support to wage war.

Apart from the nutters on both sides of the line, who are much louder than their numbers, European politics is drifting into the middle.