bitmap@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA (05/02/84)
<.....> I'm interested in the theoretical and practical (effective) similarities and differences in fascism and socialism/communism. In particular, the differences between the Soviet system and the National Socialist (Nazi) system of 30's and 40's Germany. Other systems (Franco dominated Spain, Mussolini in Italy, Mao in China) may be considered, too. I'd like to hear what people think, and what they think that other people think, too. Some similarities come readily to mind. (i) Single party state (ii) Economic system dominated by the government [I don't really know the practical differences here, so I'd welcome informed comments] (iii) A class enemy (?) Jews in Nazi Germany, the middle (and rich) classes in the S.U.--differences here, of course, as the Nazis emphasized racism. To my knowledge, anti-Semitism (sp?) is not publicized in the S.U., while it was played up in Nazi Germany (although the Nazi death camps were shrouded in secrecy). In the S.U., a person is completely unimportant compared with the state--was this true in Nazi Germany (hereafter abbreviated N.G.) also? Theoretical (?) differences (i) N.G. emphasized nationalism (Ein Volk)--the unification of all German speaking peoples. The S.U., I think, emphasizes the internationalism of the "workers' struggle", although apparently the Russians are somewhat more favored than the Ukranians, say. (ii) Is the bureaucracy in the S.U. more important than it was in N.G.? Hitler seems to have had more personal power than, say, Kruschev (I'll have to learn how to spell some of these names, I guess), but Stalin seemed to have comparable power. Perhaps it was because a war tends to concentrate power in the hands of fewer people? Comments welcome. Sam Hall, UCB decvax!ucbvax!ucbtopaz!bitmap
band@ccivax.UUCP (Bill Anderson) (05/03/84)
An eye-opening (at least for me) discussion of most
of the major totalitarian and authoritarian governments of
the current century is covered in detail by Paul Johnson in
a book entitled "Modern Times" (NY: Harper & Row, 1983).
One of Johnson's themes is that these governments
flourished because of the rise of moral relativism. This was
based in its turn on an indefensible extension of the physical
theory of relativity into a doctrine of relativism (viz.,
everything is relative).
His discussion of the rise of Hitler and Lenin
(who was soon followed by Stalin), as well as Mussolini
and Franco is very informative. Johnson is not very kind to
the liberal way of thinking, but he does not hide his
opinions. There is a tremendous amount of food for thought
about totalitarian/authoritarian governments and how they
compare to the kind of democratic, and capitalistic, society
we have here in the United States. This book would be a basis
for a very informative (and I think informed) discussion.
--
Bill Anderson
...!{ucbvax!allegra | decvax}!rochester!ccivax!band