“The fascists of the future will be called anti–fascists.” — Winston Churchill
Are communism and fascism two sides of the same coin? The answer is YES!
I have stated many times before that the concept of individual rights is incompatible with socialism, fascism, nazism, or any form
or brand of collectivism. The fight between good and evil is not between fascism and communism; it’s between individualism and collectivism. Capitalism is the only individualist politics, as it recognizes individual rights to life, liberty, property, and his pursuit of happiness. Collectivism, which means the subjugation of the individual to a group, to the state, or to a gang of political savages, has a number of ideological forms or ‘isms’ such as communism or socialism, fascism, nazism, black nationalism, extreme nationalism, Islamic totalitarianism, etc.
Totalitarianism, communism/socialism, nazism, fascism, theocracy or religious authoritarianism— these are all part and parcel of collectivism, a social, economic and political outlook that stresses human interdependence and the primacy of a collective, rather than the significance of individuals. On the other hand, individualism is the moral, social and political perspective that puts emphasis on human independence and the importance of self-reliance and liberty; it is the opposite of collectivism.
One of the major parts of the nefarious propaganda of the brainwashed and brainless advocates of communism/socialism is the use of the term “fascism” in order to discredit those who oppose their evil agenda. They try to lump all dissenters and those who are able to grasp the idea behind their evil communistic agenda together as part of a single ideological umbrella- Fascism. They also brand the advocates of capitalism- the only economic and political system that recognizes individual rights- as supporters of fascism. Yet this dishonest and desperate trick only exposes those who were heavily indoctrinated and brainwashed into communism and socialism as a herd of nihilists and ignoramuses who don’t even know the real concept of fascism. If the socialists and liberals had any brains, they would understand that fascism and communism are two collectivist political systems that call for the subjugation of the individual to a collective or a state. Both fascism and communism reject the concept of individual rights, and glorify such collectivist mantras as “common good”, “public good”, “public welfare”, equality, egalitarianism, etc.
Is there any distinction between socialism and communism? I believe there’s none. A system that abolishes individual rights and makes men the means to the ends of others and the state would only lead to the rise of a dictator. The Leftists were also heavily hypnotized by Karl Marx’s evil lie that communism is different from socialism. The only difference between these two great lies is the number of deaths and the degree of man’s enslavement. However, Karl Marx who co-wrote the Communist Manifesto distinguished between communism and socialism.
Let me quote an excerpt of an online article entitled Hitler, Socialism, and the Radical Agenda:
Marx stated that Socialism is not a form of government but is a state, a policed and engineered state in which a nation takes on while in “Transition” from a Capitalist to a Communist society while the “Communist Utopia” is the ultimate desired outcome of the full transition; a world with no police, no property, no religion, no classes, even no need for government, no war… a fantasy land of everlasting harmony. However, can all this be attained peacefully and by simply tearing up land ownership deeds?
The answer is no, the “Transitional” state of Socialism is given the task to “Transform” the citizenry for the future super-state. So how does this Socialist apparatus deal with those who don’t want to be transformed?
Marx and other Socialists point out the need to remove undesirable elements of society. Most say these undesirables came in the form of the bourgeois ruling class, but it didn’t stop there. Societal planning required the choosing of political policies but more importantly who would be ideal to fit into this new Utopia and who would not.
Ultimately there was a measuring stick in which to choose who would stay and who would be removed.
I also stated the following in my earlier blog:
Like communism or socialism, capitalism is a word with objective, specific meaning. The French word “laissez-faire” literally means “let us alone.” According to Ayn Rand, the greatest contemporary philosopher who offered the best defense of this most moral economic system, capitalism simply means “a full, pure, uncontrolled, unregulated laissez-faire capitalism—with a separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.” Sison is right in saying that capitalism is about greed and self-interest. This is because the moral justification of capitalism does not lie in the altruist claim that it represents the best way to achieve the common good. Under a true capitalist system, the achievement of common good is merely a secondary consequence.
More than 20 years since the fall of the fascistic Marcosian era, the Filipino is still being fed with a mediocre lie—that this country is being confronted with a clash between socialism/communism and fascism. For decades, the Leftists who benefit from our semi-free system have been spreading the false dichotomy that the choice confronting this country is only fascism or communism. They attempt to corrupt people’s consciousness that the Philippines is being fought over by an alleged dictatorship of a right (fascism) or a left (communism), while capitalism is being ignored and eliminated, as if it had never existed at all.
It is true that the regime of Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, which is bordering on dictatorship, is an example of fascism. Under this collectivist system, the means of production are distributed to cronies or to political allies of the dictator. Only the people close to he President or those who are able to curry favor with the dictatorship can corner government contracts, subsidies, largesse and any kinds of financial or political benefit at the expense of the taxpayers’ money. Observe that under the Arroyo regime, members of the first family and political allies of the President got rich by graft and corruption. Mrs. Arroyo herself accumulated mysterious amount of wealth during her stay in power.
Under a truly capitalist society no one may initiate the use of physical force against others. Every individual is to be guided by objective laws and rational legal principles. In such a society, only proper function of the government is to protect individual rights. Thus the government acts as the agent of the individual’s rights of self-defense, and the use of force is only justified in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use.
What’s the distinction between communism/socialism and fascism. Ayn Rand, the greatest philosopher on earth, wrote the following:
The main characteristic of socialism (and of communism) is public ownership of the means of production, and, therefore, the abolition of private property. The right to property is the right of use and disposal. Under fascism, men retain the semblance or pretense of private property, but the government holds total power over its use and disposal.
Under fascism, citizens retain the responsibilities of owning property, without freedom to act and without any of the advantages of ownership. Under socialism, government officials acquire all the advantages of ownership, without any of the responsibilities, since they do not hold title to the property, but merely the right to use it—at least until the next purge. In either case, the government officials hold the economic, political and legal power of life or death over the citizens.
Under both systems, sacrifice is invoked as a magic, omnipotent solution in any crisis—and “the public good” is the altar on which victims are immolated. But there are stylistic differences of emphasis. The socialist-communist axis keeps promising to achieve abundance, material comfort and security for its victims, in some indeterminate future. The fascist-Nazi axis scorns material comfort and security, and keeps extolling some undefined sort of spiritual duty, service and conquest. The socialist-communist axis offers its victims an alleged social ideal. The fascist-Nazi axis offers nothing but loose talk about some unspecified form of racial or national“greatness.” The socialist-communist axis proclaims some grandiose economic plan, which keeps receding year by year. The fascist-Nazi axis merely extols leadership—leadership without purpose, program or direction—and power for power’s sake.
In this age of mediocrity and great compromise, it is not surprising that no one in this country ever attempts to offer a moral defense of capitalism and expose the evil of altruism and collectivism. The philosophy of both the mystics of muscle (communists/fascists) and the mystics of spirit (theocrats/religionists) is based on the morality of altruism, and the only corollary of the socio-political struggle of either group is collectivism.
The country and the Filipino people are trapped between a disgraceful and perilous struggle of two conceited evils— the Socialist-Communist proletarian movement, which is prepared intellectually, and the Fascist-Elite movement, which is backed by gold and goons. However, the most dangerous situation of all is not that one of these two clashing movements is winning, but the fact that the country lacks intellectual leadership, which should guide the people in their decisions.
Consider the following socialist and anti-capitalistic quotations by Adolf Hitler, who is considered a fascist by the socialists/communists and liberals:
“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”
“The party is all-embracing. It rules our lives in all their breadth and depth. We must therefore develop branches of the party in which the whole of individual life will be reflected. Each activity and each need of the individual will thereby be regulated by the party as the representative of the general good. There will be no license, no free space, in which the individual belongs to himself. This is Socialism—not such trifles as the private possession of the means of production. Of what importance is that if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot escape? Let them then own land or factories as much as they please. The decisive factor is that the State, through the party, is supreme over them, regardless whether they are owners or workers. All that, you see, is unessential. Our Socialism goes far deeper.”
Joseph Goebbels, the top propagandist of the Nazi regime, spoke of “the money pigs of capitalist democracy”: “Money has made slaves of us.” “Money is the curse of mankind. It smothers the seed of everything great and good. Every penny is sticky with sweat and blood.”
Goebbels also said: “[S]ocialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole.”
Consider the following socialist quotations by several members of the Nazi party:
“The concept of personal liberties of the individual as opposed to the authority of the state had to disappear; it is not to be reconciled with the principle of the nationalistic Reich. There are no personal liberties of the individual which fall outside of the realm of the state and which must be respected by the state. The member of the people, organically connected with the whole community, has replaced the isolated individual; he is included in the totality of the political people and is drawn into the collective action. There can no longer be any question of a private sphere, free of state influence, which is sacred and untouchable before the political unity. The constitution of the nationalistic Reich is therefore not based upon a system of inborn and inalienable rights of the individual.”
—Ernst Rudolf Huber, official spokesman for the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, 1939
“THE COMMON INTEREST BEFORE SELF-INTEREST.”
—NDSAP Program, Point 24, 1920
“We must rouse in our people the unanimous wish for power in this sense, together with the determination to sacrifice on the altar of patriotism, not only life and property, but also private views and preferences in the interests of the common welfare.”
—Friedrich von Bernhardi, 1912
“The worker in a capitalist state—and that is his deepest misfortune—is no longer a living human being, a creator, a maker. He has become a machine. A number, a cog in the machine without sense or understanding. He is alienated from what he produces.”
—Joseph Goebbels, 1932 pamphlet
“‘Private property’ as conceived under the liberalistic economic order … represented the right of the individual to manage and to speculate with inherited or acquired property as he pleased, without regard for the general interests … German socialism had to overcome this ‘private,’ that is, unrestrained and irresponsible view of property. All property is common property. The owner is bound by the people and the Reich to the responsible management of his goods. His legal position is only justified when he satisfies this responsibility to the community.”
—Ernst Rudolf Huber, official Nazi Party spokesman, 1939
Hitler’s Nazi Party against Capitalism:
“We German National Socialists have recognized that not international solidarity frees the peoples from the ties of international capital, but the organized national force. …The National Socialist German Workers’ Party asks you all to come … to a GIANT DEMONSTRATION against the continued cheating of our people by the Jewish agents of the international world stock-exchange capital.”
—Nazi Poster, 1921
“It is not to save capitalism that we fight in Russia … It is for a revolution of our own. … If Europe were to become once more the Europe of bankers, of fat corrupt bourgeoisies … we should prefer Communism to win and destroy everything. We would rather have it all blow up than see this rottenness resplendent. Europe fights in Russia because it [i.e., Fascist Europe] is Socialist. …what interests us most in the war is the revolution to follow …The war cannot end without the triumph of Socialist revolution.”
—Leon Degrelle, leading National Socialist figure, speaking on behalf of the Nazi SS in occupied Paris, 1943
“[W]e will do what we like with the bourgeoisie. … We give the orders; they do what they are told. Any resistance will be broken ruthlessly.”
—Adolf Hitler, 1931
“The internal and international criminal gang will either be forced to work or simply exterminated.”
—Adolf Hitler, 1931
“Today I will once more be a prophet. If the international Jewish financiers, inside and outside Europe, succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevisation of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!”
—Adolf Hitler, 1939