PDA

View Full Version : Capitalism = Fascism



ogenoct
Thursday, August 26th, 2004, 02:12 AM
http://www.northstarcompass.org/nsc0408/capfasc.htm

Capitalism = Fascism

By EUGENE KOZACHKOV
PSYCHOLOGIST, MOSCOW

I am not a historian or an economist, but I still have not lost all of my senses. Like many, I analyze the information that we get over our TV (but you must know what is the truth and what is a lie), plus information gained from your publication, I would like to make some comments for those that will read these few thoughts.

First: in a non-communist society all relations are based on money.

Second: basing itself only on money (read: personal property, personal business) – is the first step towards future fascism. Why so? Why did not Western Europe and the US not open up the Second Front during World War II until 1944?

Is it not because they were selling arms, technical know-how, products and other goods to both sides of the conflict? Why should they have gone into war to curtail such great profits from both sides of the conflict? And why did those leaders of Poland and some other countries in Europe stated that they "would rather lay down before Hitler, then let on their territory the Soviet Army?" Because they knew, that under Hitler and fascism, if they cooperated with him, they will save their private industries and profits, while under Soviet socialism this could never happen – these would be nationalized. So, it looked as if Communism was more dangerous than Fascism, because Fascism will save private enterprises, while under Communism, this will be taboo. Just try to remember that after the end of the World War II and the colossal loss of millions of its people, the USSR liberated most of Europe but had to keep on paying very high costs for purchases of arms and technical help, which the West was selling to the Soviet Union during the war - which was a life and death struggle with fascism, fighting and being killed by the armaments that the West supplied Hitler in the first place!

Thanks to World War II, Western imperialism managed to build multinational corporations from the profits gained during the war, corporations for:


Corporations that were manufacturing, designing war armaments, rockets, missiles.
Corporations manufacturing food products and derivatives.
Corporations that were manufacturing all of the hot-lubricating materials.
Corporations manufacturing building materials.
Corporations manufacturing medical equipment and medicines.
These corporations did not want to lose these tremendous profits they made during the war years, and they made the decision as the "Cold War" was started, that the profits and the markets must be saved and expanded at all costs. This became the new policy, and this former German fascism instituted itself internationally. Money must be made, and the biggest moneymaker of all time, is having wars and thus gain more markets. There are other methods of course and as effective as well. Here is an illustration of these new methods:

During the war year there was lack of food products and there came on the market synthetic Margarine, instead of butter. Yes, yes – this Margarine - which can last for a very long time, as opposed to the short life of butter, and the cost of producing it is practically a few cents. This corporation became extremely rich, selling it to the Germans and to the Soviets during Word War II plus expanding its sales practically all over the world. Then in 1950, the corporation decided that the market had to be enlarged even more and went on worldwide falsified promotional campaign, trying to convince the people that margarine can prevent the growth of cholesterol, which is found in butter. But scientific research showed exactly the opposite, that complete lack of cholesterol is dangerous, and also that margarine is the cause of many other diseases that could be prevented if butter was used instead.

But the billions spent on promotion, advertising did produce the desired results. "You want to lose weight - do not eat cholesterol, but eat margarine." The results are known: More than 60% of Americans after such a diet started to get sick from obesity and astherosclerosis. Is this not fascism But, profit is above all!

The same thing can be said about sugar substitute – saccharin. As is well known – Aspartam – the sugar replacement is found in all cold drinks in America – is a strong poison. It is like methyl. Methyl is a wood spirit, and using 30 grams brings on blindness, and 50 grams brings on death. But since Asparat is 500 times cheaper than sugar, in order to get the maximum profits, the US corporations in the food and drink business decided to include this in all products! Fascism? No, it’s just regular business…

I brought up these examples because, my terminology of tying German fascism and capitalism (universal fascism) to be more to the point and understood and that the reader should look, think!

Here are additional examples of this fascism-capitalism:

Yugoslavia – in Albania (Kosovo) there is established a strong and profitable business of transportation of arms and armament and narcotics for Europe, plus Yugoslav oil.

Afghanistan - the growing and distribution of narcotics and the military transport of these narcotics, plus the oil pipeline from Central Asia to the ocean.

Iraq – This is the best and most profitable business of the oil magnates, since they control all of the oil wells in Iraq, and thy can jack up the oil prices as high as they want to, as we see today all over the world. As the saying goes: "It’s business, it’s nothing personal!"

I want to touch on one aspect of this "business". Some think that the expansion of American style of life – this is just a cultural war. It’s unfortunately much more clever and dangerous, because everything goes that can be bought and sold. Their culture is aimed at the most basic human instincts. American advertising about food and drink – a normal thinking person cannot believe in what he is told.

USA was the first to suffer from this capitalism-fascism. Just look at Iraq where the American soldiers are dying. These soldiers are befuddled by American capitalism and the pseudo-American patriotism. The soldiers are not to blame – they are the products of this policy of capitalism right from the day they were born. It’s these American multinational corporations that are to blame, using the American Army to do their dirty work. Constant conflicts, wars, crisis – these are a constant source of profits.

What about Russia today?

*It shall be the producer of genetic modified foods for the multinational corporations – in order to obliterate the Russian agricultural potential. This is being done now on a very large scale.

*Market for armaments from the West. This demands many local wars and conflicts (Predniestrov, Chehnya, Narodny Karabakh and now even Crimea).

*Market for users of narcotics, grown and produced in Afghanistan and other places.

*Market for Western medicines, disused and banned medicines from the West. This is meant to dismember and close off all of the still remaining light industries that still exist in Russia.

The conflicts are before us, with NATO and its armies surrounding Russia. Friends of NATO are our enemies and in order to save capitalism in Russia, NATO is ready and willing to occupy Russia.

So the war of fascism against humanity is ongoing, coming from the form of nationalism, into capitalism-fascism. Our Motherland was able to defeat Fascism and save the world, now saw capitalism-fascism celebrating the holiday of victory over fascism last May – victory actually over themselves!

Now you can see as to why Capitalism hates the Soviet Union and Soviet people so much and the ideal of socialism-communism! Because it was the Soviet people who defeated capitalism-fascism!

Can we Communists stand up and defeat this menace? What ideals can we bring forth to defeat this onslaught of private gain and profit? We still have the strength and the dedication that is more powerful than riches and money!

Ogmios22188
Thursday, August 26th, 2004, 04:39 AM
Hmm, all very good points. I don't support the imperialist actions of our nation (The United States of America), and I do think that a gradual change from a capitalist society into a socialist one would do our nation well. All in all, we should fight wars for reasons other than money. Hopefully, with the coming elections there will be promise for our nation and for the world. To liberty and prosperity for all!

Slavictorious
Thursday, August 26th, 2004, 05:14 AM
Yes, Socialism is the best economy developed so far, unfortunatley, not too many countries have implemented a Socialist economy. Communists, yes, they didn't work, Capitalists...ugh, yes, unfortunatley, capitalism breeds dis-unity and immorality...
There is no dobut that Socialism is the Way Forward!

Ogmios22188
Thursday, August 26th, 2004, 06:16 AM
Well, I believe that Communism could possibly be achieved. However, it would need to come into being after a period of Socialism. Our nation would need to gradually become a Communist state by first becoming a Socialist one. Once our people have their mind wrapped around the Socialist concept, they'll accept Communism more readily. And, seeing as how I'm also an advocate of Democracy, I would want the people to be able to decide for themselves that Communism is the direction they want to go.

Jack
Thursday, August 26th, 2004, 10:33 AM
I believe, although I am a protectionist, socialism is a load of rubbish and I'll destroy this argument tomorrow afternoon.

Kel`Thuz
Thursday, August 26th, 2004, 12:18 PM
Oh please... How can you people retard yourselves to the level of Marxist sheeps?
Nationalistic, militant-libertarian free-market state is something to fight for.

Ogmios22188
Thursday, August 26th, 2004, 05:34 PM
Yes, and we've seen how well people do in a free market economy ;). Communism would need to come into being after a period of Socialism and when morals have shifted in my nation from being about what's good for me to what's good for us. When that happens, then equality can start to happen. I would most certainly die to ensure the equality and prosperity of my people, but not at the expense of others, unless they're the aggressors.

Grimr
Thursday, August 26th, 2004, 07:07 PM
I like Capitalism and Fascism so this is good news for me! :)

Vlad Cletus
Thursday, August 26th, 2004, 08:55 PM
I think actual duty for the state comes before the individual. Obviously, a nation with complete unity, and extreme pride can muster such great energies as a nation with self-profit, and abuseful private-companies never can. These aspects overall will propel the nation much farther than a Capitalistic/Democratic one.

Abby Normal
Friday, August 27th, 2004, 12:41 PM
This is silly! Fascist corporativism is not synonymous with 'free market' capitalism. I am not defending capitalism per se, as I am no fan of either; but they are indeed distinct.


Nationalistic, militant-libertarian free-market state is something to fight for.Only if you're even more of a 'sheep' than the average Marxist (a la Che Lives). :)

Oskorei
Saturday, August 28th, 2004, 05:22 PM
Interesting article, it shows some of the evils of Late Capitalism. However, the author is misusing the word "Fascism" in a way similar to most of the Left ("anything or anyone I dont like is Fascist").

Fascism was in reality a socio-political system that fought international Capital just like the USSR did, and that would probably have survived longer than the USSR if not defeated in WW2.

Darius
Saturday, August 28th, 2004, 11:32 PM
In the hands of the International manipulators, capitalism and communism are two sides of the same coin. Theoretically Capitalism seems to differ from Communism but in the end they both give a hotch potch, If put to work on their own. The "living for the dollar", in capitalism will render people stressed out thinking only about the dollar, of the day. While Communism with the equality dogma will only result in a National suicide. There is no creativity in Marxism!

This is all due to the prohibited evolution of the individuals. A direct war on the individualists, who is them who embrace in the Natural struggle of evolution. It is these individuals who in the end will result in the success of a country. Blending the uncapabable individual with the psychological aristocrat, means the destruction of a Nation's evolution altogether.

Whilst Capitalism is the evil tool, and total overtaken by the zionist forces, it is also the supporter of Marxist communism. The Cold war was a pure market for the Capitalist Regime in U.S.A. Whose dictatorship lies between to parties of the same type, Democrats and Republican. Both controlled by the international evil that is sweeping the world. Marxist Communism on the otherhand is a policy of internationalism as well, the later's policy being a union of Workers, rather than a Union of "Buy & Sell". Workers automatically need money for their daily bread and here we come, the money comes from the evil Capitalists, whom work out Asians by 1/3 of the pay an American gets.

Capitalism and Communism themselves Showed how much they are Jacobine Brothers, in the Second World war. They both United against their Biggest Threat, National Socialism. What different did National Socialism have from the other two prostitutes?

National Socialism was the only non-Marxist Communism, with a racial view. Fascism being a more pan-European form. It's the race that makes the people, and people who are quite mixed may feel no-belonging towards nations, Cause its people that makes nations, and people with highly mixed origins might feel distant from their roots. Homogenous Nations will make a Nation, and it will survive as long as they do. To preserve the Nation, here we come, we must apply a Communist ideology based on the support & propagation of the White race. Yes! Social services will serve the elite European to save him from extinction!

Ave!

Jack
Monday, August 30th, 2004, 07:13 AM
http://www.northstarcompass.org/nsc0408/capfasc.htm

Capitalism = Fascism

By EUGENE KOZACHKOV
PSYCHOLOGIST, MOSCOW

[font=Arial][size=2]I am not a historian or an economist, but I still have not lost all of my senses. Like many, I analyze the information that we get over our TV (but you must know what is the truth and what is a lie), plus information gained from your publication, I would like to make some comments for those that will read these few thoughts.

First: in a non-communist society all relations are based on money.

Rubbish. In traditional societies alliegence was owed to to the Gods, who spoke through the priest-king. In Middle Ages Europe society was based on estates, and protection-obedience agreements between the lord and his servants. Communism is infantile.


Second: basing itself only on money (read: personal property, personal business) – is the first step towards future fascism.

Wrong, actually. Fascism is a secular religion with three elements: reverence for authority, unity of the community, and the creation of perfection. Economics is not a ends, but an means in Fascism.


Why so? Why did not Western Europe and the US not open up the Second Front during World War II until 1944?

Is it not because they were selling arms, technical know-how, products and other goods to both sides of the conflict? Why should they have gone into war to curtail such great profits from both sides of the conflict? And why did those leaders of Poland and some other countries in Europe stated that they "would rather lay down before Hitler, then let on their territory the Soviet Army?" Because they knew, that under Hitler and fascism, if they cooperated with him, they will save their private industries and profits, while under Soviet socialism this could never happen – these would be nationalized.

Or perhaps the Poles wanted nothing to do with the Soviet Union because, as a Catholic nation, Poland had far more in common with West Europe than the barbarous collectivised prole-cult masses of the USSR.


So, it looked as if Communism was more dangerous than Fascism, because Fascism will save private enterprises, while under Communism, this will be taboo. Just try to remember that after the end of the World War II and the colossal loss of millions of its people, the USSR liberated most of Europe but had to keep on paying very high costs for purchases of arms and technical help, which the West was selling to the Soviet Union during the war - which was a life and death struggle with fascism, fighting and being killed by the armaments that the West supplied Hitler in the first place!

Actually, the USSR did not pay the United States a cent for the products it recieved under the Lend-Lease program.


Thanks to World War II, Western imperialism managed to build multinational corporations from the profits gained during the war, corporations for:


Corporations that were manufacturing, designing war armaments, rockets, missiles.
Corporations manufacturing food products and derivatives.
Corporations that were manufacturing all of the hot-lubricating materials.
Corporations manufacturing building materials.
Corporations manufacturing medical equipment and medicines.
These corporations did not want to lose these tremendous profits they made during the war years, and they made the decision as the "Cold War" was started, that the profits and the markets must be saved and expanded at all costs. This became the new policy, and this former German fascism instituted itself internationally. Money must be made, and the biggest moneymaker of all time, is having wars and thus gain more markets. There are other methods of course and as effective as well. Here is an illustration of these new methods:

Remind me what this has to do with Fascism.


During the war year there was lack of food products and there came on the market synthetic Margarine, instead of butter. Yes, yes – this Margarine - which can last for a very long time, as opposed to the short life of butter, and the cost of producing it is practically a few cents. This corporation became extremely rich, selling it to the Germans and to the Soviets during Word War II plus expanding its sales practically all over the world. Then in 1950, the corporation decided that the market had to be enlarged even more and went on worldwide falsified promotional campaign, trying to convince the people that margarine can prevent the growth of cholesterol, which is found in butter. But scientific research showed exactly the opposite, that complete lack of cholesterol is dangerous, and also that margarine is the cause of many other diseases that could be prevented if butter was used instead.

Stalin said that there was a shortage of food because of greedy prosperous farmers. 10 million dead Ukrainians later, they were still short of food.


But the billions spent on promotion, advertising did produce the desired results. "You want to lose weight - do not eat cholesterol, but eat margarine." The results are known: More than 60% of Americans after such a diet started to get sick from obesity and astherosclerosis. Is this not fascism But, profit is above all!

LOL. Does the author of this article know anything about Fascism?

What we have here is a rant about corporations and their links with West European liberal democracies. Not a single bit of proof that capitalism equals fascism.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Tuesday, August 31st, 2004, 07:19 AM
Let's review. The last time I checked, Communism had failed miserably. And the last time I checked, we were living in a state of Oil-Finance economic servitude which is called Capitalism.

Why not go with a proven winner. The things I admire most about National Socialism is the way they organized their science and technology for the benifit of the people (or the war effort). But also I admire the way they reorganized their economics. Dr. Haljamar Schact took a depression-ridden, defeated country, Germay, and made it into a world super-power in three or four years. NS economics means doing what is good for the people, the gene-pool of the country involved. Imagine a country or a world who used this principle as its guiding light? Imagine how this simple idea would affect energy policy, financial policy, health care, housing, credit, a country's foreign econmic policy and many other things I cannot even think of now.

Jack
Tuesday, August 31st, 2004, 12:48 PM
Let's review. The last time I checked, Communism had failed miserably. And the last time I checked, we were living in a state of Oil-Finance economic servitude which is called Capitalism.

Why not go with a proven winner. The things I admire most about National Socialism is the way they organized their science and technology for the benifit of the people (or the war effort). But also I admire the way they reorganized their economics. Dr. Haljamar Schact took a depression-ridden, defeated country, Germay, and made it into a world super-power in three or four years. NS economics means doing what is good for the people, the gene-pool of the country involved. Imagine a country or a world who used this principle as its guiding light? Imagine how this simple idea would affect energy policy, financial policy, health care, housing, credit, a country's foreign econmic policy and many other things I cannot even think of now.
Germany would have simply collapsed from overspending on the SS, the armed forces, the Hitler Youth, the worker's benefits schemes, not to mention the money it would have cost to occupy the USSR after it won the war (it costs a lot of money to crush guerillas, just ask the United States). Internal free economy works better than State coordination of the economy - all that's required is protectionism.

Taras Bulba
Wednesday, September 1st, 2004, 06:05 PM
Yes, Socialism is the best economy developed so far, unfortunatley, not too many countries have implemented a Socialist economy. Communists, yes, they didn't work, Capitalists...ugh, yes, unfortunatley, capitalism breeds dis-unity and immorality...
There is no dobut that Socialism is the Way Forward!

I say Distributism/Solidarism is the way forward....not socialism!


I wish I had Belloc's The Servile State to argue this further.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Monday, September 6th, 2004, 09:33 AM
Germany would have simply collapsed from overspending on the SS, the armed forces, the Hitler Youth, the worker's benefits schemes, not to mention the money it would have cost to occupy the USSR after it won the war (it costs a lot of money to crush guerillas, just ask the United States). Internal free economy works better than State coordination of the economy - all that's required is protectionism.

That "protectionism" you mentioned is spelled National Socialism.

VonPletz
Saturday, March 19th, 2005, 06:08 AM
Well, I believe that Communism could possibly be achieved. However, it would need to come into being after a period of Socialism. Our nation would need to gradually become a Communist state by first becoming a Socialist one. Once our people have their mind wrapped around the Socialist concept, they'll accept Communism more readily. And, seeing as how I'm also an advocate of Democracy, I would want the people to be able to decide for themselves that Communism is the direction they want to go.
There is no way that Communism can be successful. It breads corruption. Just look at the USSR (sorry former USSR). Also Democracy in its true form is also a complete disaster! Name one nation today that is a true democracy? Answer: NONE

In addition to corruption, Communism re-enforces the stagnation of a culture. The free market place where there is competition and that is the only way. Look at all the great advances that Germany achieved in WW2 through free enterprise and competition. Even today we are still working on programs developed and began by Germany in WW2.

Yes, Yes, Yes I know America invented the Atom Bomb....but did they? Or was it stolen intelligence and research from the Germans? It is a fact all the Allies fought over the great advances in production, rocket research (i.e. Redstone rockets and moon shots), jet airplanes, propulsion systems, and ecomonics that were designed by Germany in the 1930's!, etc.... I could go on and on.

Moderated Capitalism is the true answer because it breed progress not stagnation.

So Communism successful???? Hardly...the best thing Lennin and Stalin did was die!

Drakkar
Sunday, July 31st, 2005, 02:50 AM
Stalin said that there was a shortage of food because of greedy prosperous farmers. 10 million dead Ukrainians later, they were still short of food.
:roll

Requiem
Sunday, July 31st, 2005, 09:38 AM
Communism is just a different capitalism, just a society based around money.

That's why national socialism is different, everything is a means to an end, the economy, the state. A society without ideals but an economy has no purpose, such as our modern civilisation. It will eventually fall.

Jack
Monday, August 1st, 2005, 04:11 AM
That "protectionism" you mentioned is spelled National Socialism.
Actually it's spelled 'P-R-O-T-E-C-T-I-O-N-I-S-M'. Try not to put words in my mouth. Protectionism involves tarriffs and little, if anything, more. Not wage controls, or forced unionisation, or spectacular spending sprees on boat trips and cheap cars for workers.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Monday, August 1st, 2005, 05:18 AM
Actually it's spelled 'P-R-O-T-E-C-T-I-O-N-I-S-M'. Try not to put words in my mouth. Protectionism involves tarriffs and little, if anything, more. Not wage controls, or forced unionisation, or spectacular spending sprees on boat trips and cheap cars for workers.

Anarch, you have to have a manufacturing economy to start with before you even consider protectionism. The New England states of the original 13 Colonies had a manufacturing economy and that is why the only tax in the US Constitution is the tariff. This proved to be poisonous to the Southern States less than 100 years later because they depended on exporting agricultural goods and cheap inport of manufactured goods.

As for putting words in your mouth, you are the one who first mentioned protectionism, not me.

Jack
Tuesday, August 2nd, 2005, 12:48 PM
Anarch, you have to have a manufacturing economy to start with before you even consider protectionism. The New England states of the original 13 Colonies had a manufacturing economy and that is why the only tax in the US Constitution is the tariff. This proved to be poisonous to the Southern States less than 100 years later because they depended on exporting agricultural goods and cheap inport of manufactured goods.
Goods are not produced without the foreseen desire by consumers to purchase those goods. Manufacturing industries are perfectly well capable of coming into existence behind a tarriff wall. I have no position on the War between the States.


As for putting words in your mouth, you are the one who first mentioned protectionism, not me.
I mentioned protectionism. Protectionism is not National Socialism. I do not advocate National Socialism.

@ Requiem. Capitalism is nothing like Communism. You need to do some reading.

Drake
Tuesday, August 2nd, 2005, 12:50 PM
This is silly! Fascist corporativism is not synonymous with 'free market' capitalism. I am not defending capitalism per se, as I am no fan of either; but they are indeed distinct.
Indeed. This comparison angers me, as I am a fan of Fascism. Take a look at my post "The Problem with Corporatism": http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=18172


Interesting article, it shows some of the evils of Late Capitalism. However, the author is misusing the word "Fascism" in a way similar to most of the Left ("anything or anyone I dont like is Fascist").

Fascism was in reality a socio-political system that fought international Capital just like the USSR did, and that would probably have survived longer than the USSR if not defeated in WW2.Exactly; this article is bogus being that it doesn't take into account, because it wouldn't fit into the crackpot theory, the fact that one of the central tenets of Fascism is autarky. The purpose of autarky also contradicts the thesis of this article, which is to be able to wage war, but war for what purpose? To exploit foreign markets? No, for much more ideologically-based purposes, such as Lebensraum and the recovery of historically owned territories (and, most importantly, revenge). Fascism entails the submission of "corporate" power to state power, and likewise the submission of unions. The opposite of each would constitute free-market capitalism and communism respectively. Fascism is neither. It is immeasurably superior to both.

reshuisr
Sunday, August 14th, 2005, 07:52 PM
I think none of the above systems really work. The problem is economics is based on an ancient concept “Power”, nowadays capitalism, is just the way of how power has evolved in our world’s society. Power is deeply inherited in our genes, before we were humans; you can see in every animal society how power is present. Take the lions for example, only a male or a couple of them dominate in their clan. There will be always a “one” or a group of “ones” who need to maintain domination on others. Off course “Capitalism”, “Communism”, and “Socialism” have a lot of elements we can fount attractive to adopt.

But I think we have to build a new system, and this system needs to control and audit “power” based on the foundation of clear precepts, based on the human dignity of our communities, precepts and values, and also in “population control” and distribution of incomes.

I think all of us who have arrive to this forum, we are dreamers, dreaming with a better world, we share a vision of a Germanic unity, based on thousands of years of traditions and folklore. But our economic problem is beyond our race, it is on our deepest true nature.