Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 31, 2020

Montenegro - Tiny Nation Vote Upsets Anti-Russian Front

by Debs is Dead
adapted from a comment

I dunno if the barcalounger lefties, who appear to be driven by whatever issue/subject/Thing, that all corporate media is currently venting about in unison, have noticed, but this weekend's (just past) poll in Montenegro has revealed that perhaps 'the Kremlin' is indulging in a little 'whatever you can do, I can do better', payback.

From today's BBC aka "tool of the neoliberal pipe dream":

"The Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) has been in power for 30 years.

Early results suggest the DPS - which has never lost an election - has won the largest share of the vote.

But the main opposition coalition, which leans towards Russia and Serbia, is close behind. Even if the DPS wins the most seats, it may struggle to form a governing coalition.

This could lead to Montenegro's first-ever transfer of power through the ballot box."


The heavily 'westernized' pro-euro whores are definitely in strife because just as there is no objectively measured way of determining what the correct vote in Belarus is, the Montenegro vote for a government which up until now has unfailingly supported EU/NATO tossage, chiefly by being a cypher for the political, social and economic problems that the EU/NATO consortium of naked self interest has visited upon the rest of Europe, Montenegro has become a mirror of the similar 'crisis' in Belarus.

The attempt to create a mess in Belarus may be a fail, but the response from the normal people in Montenegro seems to be a winner.

The result pointing to a claimed win for the pro-Ruskie official return of 32% of the votes in Montenegro versus the Montenegro fascist administration's alleged 'victory' return of 36% is far more credible than the claimed Belarus' opposition win when official numbers in Belarus are Lukashenko 80% and the fascists a portion of the rest.

Why? Because in spite of America's best efforts, Montenegro may now be a NATO member but most definitely is not a member of the EU. Consequently it is entirely possible that a state with full NATO access will align with the Russian economic coadunate.

Montenegro's soon to be realized position appears (at least to this observer), to be the premier configuration for any Euro state determined to obtain the best deal for its citizens outside of either group of assholes.

If Serbia does garner support from Montenegro that will alleviate Serbia from self serving destructive demands of either arsehole.

Yep I recognize we are meant to take sides, but as a dedicated fan of freedom from all outsiders, I wanna back whoever stands aside of either self indulgent play at attempting to show "how reasonable we all are nowadays". F**k em all, we humans never got ahead by listening to boss class lies.

Nevertheless the real interest from us who do not live in Montenegro must be: Does the American empire still have enough balls, ability, energy to deliver unwarranted violence upon the rest of us solely to claim victory?

I say no.

Posted by b on August 31, 2020 at 15:02 UTC | Permalink

next page »

Even before the Montenegro vote, the Usual Suspects had already declared that Montenegro couldn't be "allowed to go the Belarus way".

I checked what Euronews is supposed to be. It's alleged to be owned by an Egyptian, for what that's worth.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Aug 31 2020 15:11 utc | 1

Pretty obvious what is going to happen - western MSM will start claiming that opposition rigged the election and the DPS should have won 80% of the vote.

Posted by: Ghost Ship | Aug 31 2020 15:31 utc | 2

I disagree with Debisdead's conclusion. He's analyzing the situation from the point of view of institutionalism (i.e. History as the history of institutions), not the real, dialectical process involved in geopolitics.

Montenegro is a very tiny country, with a limited geographic importance (under Serbia's belly). There's nothing to grow there, nothing significant will ever come out of there.

As an artificial and very tiny nation, it will probably suffer the fate we already know for others of its kind: it will drift around, trying to sell itself to the highest bidder.

The situation is completely different in Belarus, which is a much bigger and more industrialized nation, with a much more mature State, a much more mature ideological unity and a much (incommensurately much) more important geographic position than Montenegro (the gateway to Moscow). Montenegro is just a figment of Bill Clinton's imagination.

Posted by: vk | Aug 31 2020 15:33 utc | 3

I just want to agree with Debs, no death from above for Montenegro. Much screaming and yelling, no actual effective action of any sort, should they go astray. Maybe after the dust settles, Uncle Sugar does have a long memory, but not any time soon.

Posted by: Bemildred | Aug 31 2020 15:35 utc | 4

Kindly stop misusing "fascist" to mean "bad." As a National Socialist (an actual fascist) myself, we'd probably agree on much more than we'd disagree. We certainly both oppose the imperialism of the Washington regime and European plutocrats. We certainly both want to break the stranglehold of corporate and financial power over people and governments. We certainly both want to assure citizens a basic level of human flourishing: housing, food, clothing, medicine, education, etc.

So while much of the commentary on this site (particularly for non-US news) is unique and excellent, it's impossible to take seriously writing which calls "fascist" every person and party the author dislikes. Is the Republican Party "fascist"? Of course not. Analogously, is the Democratic Party "communist"? Of course not. Are the opposition parties in Belarus "fascist"? Of course not. If anything, Belarus might itself be argued to be a White National Socialist state, and successful one at that!

In the same way, while I don't know about Montenegro specifically, I'm skeptical that the leading Democratic Party of Socialists are fascists. Particularly if they have "unfailingly supported EU/NATO." Get real.

Posted by: n | Aug 31 2020 15:43 utc | 5


I read Mein Kampf, and that very badly written book is still a fascinating insight into the psychology of "National Socialism" - and it is wrong in just about everything, including its interpretation of the theory of evolution.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Aug 31 2020 15:51 utc | 6

to Debs is Dead Nice to see you again. To others - I appreciate mostly all of your comments - something to make one think - even when you radically disagree. Certainly terms like "fascist" "commie" "liberal" etc are meaningless
and obscure any rational discussion. Alas. Perhaps a new vocabulary will come along.

Read fast. b has apparently banned me due some comments I made about unappreciated medicines.

Posted by: Miss Lacy | Aug 31 2020 15:55 utc | 7

"… Montenegro is a very tiny country, with a limited geographic importance (under Serbia's belly). There's nothing to grow there, nothing significant will ever come out of there.…"
Do not write this tiny nation off so quickly.
It has a voice and vote as other nations.

And fascism does have an accepted definition which is not flattering.

Posted by: dfnslblty | Aug 31 2020 16:10 utc | 8

Sadly I don't know enough about this specific area to have an opinion, but:

"I dunno if the barcalounger lefties, who appear to be driven by whatever issue/subject/Thing, that all corporate media is currently venting about in unison,"

Kudos for that! Yes it's obvious but this phrasing just seemed to nail it. Hey, "kids in cages" on the southern border was the worst thing in the world, now it doesn't matter. "Global warming" was the worst thing in the world, but today that's so 2019. Masks were stupid - now people not wearing masks is the worst thing in the world - unless it's black lives matter, then masks don't matter (well actually they might still matter, but only in reality, not in the corporate press).

Posted by: TG | Aug 31 2020 16:19 utc | 9

@Biswapriya Purkayast

I encourage you and others to read Thomas Dalton's recent translation of Mein Kampf (MK). Until Dalton, for reasons owing to historical accident and the overt bias of the translators, English-language translations of MK have been *atrociously* bad. Assuming you're being genuine when you say you've read it--in my experience, most haven't and are just parroting Jewish propaganda--this would explain why you think it was badly written.

Regardless, I'm unsure how you can credibly claim that MK could be "wrong in just about everything." It's Hitler's autobiography, his self-observed history of the NSDAP, plus his reflections on his philosophy and how it has changed over time. If you'd like a scientifically rigorous explanation of the theory of evolution, go elsewhere. The moral principles articulated by Hitler, such the necessity of designing our economic system to provide for every citizen in the national populace, does not depend on (and frankly, acts directly counter to) the disorder of natural selection.

Posted by: n | Aug 31 2020 16:23 utc | 10

A machine does not get tired.
The US is a robotic weapon of the representing the owners.
Failure is not an option.
Nothing can stand-up to it. Only it can destroy itself.
Forbidden Planet.

Posted by: jared | Aug 31 2020 16:31 utc | 11

Montenegro is small potatoes compared with China and happenings there I just posted to the open thread. Being part of NATO is just as bad as being part of the EU--citizens lose either way, double if they're in both. I also note Montenegro's been used as a whipping post for Western propaganda attacks aimed at the BRI project, which uses mirror projection blaming BRI for IMF-style debt peonage while NATO demands 2% of GDP.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 31 2020 17:03 utc | 12


Not only have I read it, I have written on the similarity between Hitler's prescription of effective propaganda techniques (blame the enemy absolutely, regardless of the facts, and permit no discussion on the matter) is similar to modern zionato techniques. I have written on how the zionato world view seems to be using Mein Kampf as an instruction manual.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Aug 31 2020 17:23 utc | 13

As I recall, all NATO members must agree on military actions, so even tiny members can veto things. NATO expansionism lost steam after the overt 2014 coup in Ukraine by the Obama team that killed thousands almost started a major war.

Posted by: Carlton Meyer | Aug 31 2020 17:37 utc | 14

This new coarse and apoplectic language does not help you make you make your point.

Posted by: Jon | Aug 31 2020 17:40 utc | 15

"I have written on how the zionato world view seems to be using Mein Kampf as an instruction manual."
Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Aug 31 2020 17:23 utc | 13

But didn't Goebbels get his propaganda technique from a certain Edward Bernays?

"Bernays was part of a sixteen-person publicity group working at the Paris Peace Conference. A scandal arose from his reference to propaganda in a press release. As reported by the New York World, the announced object of the expedition was 'to interpret the work of the Peace Conference by keeping up a worldwide propaganda to disseminate American accomplishments and ideals.'"

Posted by: Ebenezer | Aug 31 2020 17:53 utc | 16


So when Hitler explains his aims for a Lebenschraum on Russia, you obviously agree. You are in full agreement with the nigh genocidal goals he lays, aimed against the Russians (which included Belorussians and Ukrainians).

You clearly have no problem with the fact that your beloved Fuhrer attained power in Germany with the full blessings of the German oligarchy as the Secret Conference and the Industrial Petition prove. And that is without going into the epic levels of support his received from western corporations in his drive to revitalize the German military.

I should add that, leaving the murderous and genocidal aspects of your idol's ideology aside, there was a segment within the NS movement that was indeed anti-capitalist and it was liquidated by Adolf himself om the express wish of the very oligarchs he pretended to oppose (and who funded him).

Oh, as for Belarus, the country that maintained its Soviet traditions more than any other and honours its struggle against Nazism in WWII, it is absolutely offensive to describe it as National Socialist. Presumably, it hasn't gone thorugh your far-right indoctrination that solid socialist governmnents stood for regulated immigration (per classical Marxist theory) out of respect for labour principles, social mechanics and real internationalism and not due concerns based on to tribalist fantasies. Feel free to spout openly that crap in Russia or Belarus in Victory Day and see what happens.

Posted by: Constantine | Aug 31 2020 17:55 utc | 17

This new coarse and apoplectic language does not help you make you make your point.

Posted by: Jon | Aug 31 2020 17:40 utc | 15

I don't think the article was written by b himself, regardless of one's opinion about the quality of the content.

Posted by: Constantine | Aug 31 2020 17:57 utc | 18

@15 Jon

Neglecting to read the byline of the article - which clearly shows the authorship and the source - did not help you make your point.

Posted by: Grieved | Aug 31 2020 18:19 utc | 19

@Biswapriya Purkayast, @Constantine

Your game of "tell an outrageous lie and ignore the rebuttal" is not worth my time. (Or alternatively stated: "throw shit at the wall and see what sticks.") As Hitler himself experienced and described in Mein Kampf, you'll just say the same lie tomorrow, anyway. What you can't argue, and hence what you must go to any lengths to distract from, is the anarcho-communist terror from which the NSDAP saved Germany and to which Russia fell hostage. You spread conspiracy theories of oligarchs and capitalists in secret alliance with the NSDAP, but ignore the open alliance between capitalists and communists (with over half the world's GDP) to crush a few struggling European nations rising from the injustices inflicted on them after WWI.

I rest assured that any clear thinking individual can see past your atrocity propaganda ("murderous and genocidal"), guilt by association ("your beloved Fuhrer"), and not-so-veiled threats of violence ("Feel free to spout openly that crap... and see what happens"). You don't buy this when it comes to Middle Eastern countries (e.g. Syrian gas attacks) so why buy it about European nations?

If any such person is interested, pick up a copy of Dalton's translation of Mein Kampf. Give it an honest read. Judge for yourself if @Biswapriya Purkayast and @Constantine are telling the truth about what the book says. Even if you disagree with it, why lie about what's in it? And if they can't be honest about what Hitler actual wrote, why would you expect them to be honest about anything else? False in one thing, false in everything.

Posted by: n | Aug 31 2020 18:35 utc | 20

thanks debs... i would have been unaware of this unless you had brought it up....

@ 7 miss lacy... you say this every thread you post on now... and meanwhile your post is still up... maybe change your name to donkeytale for a better success rate..

@18 constantine / 19 grieved... it happens every time b gives a thread to a different author... some people's reading comprehension is very poor..

Posted by: james | Aug 31 2020 18:49 utc | 21

An interesting take. A NATO Member potentially in kahoots with Russia in their economy? Could NATO or the EU react? What when "Alabama gets the bomb"?!

Posted by: Oū Sī / 區司/ Usman | Aug 31 2020 18:58 utc | 22

"Montenegro's soon to be realized position appears (at least to this observer), to be the premier configuration for any Euro state determined to obtain the best deal for its citizens outside of either group of assholes."

Erdogan has been able to pull that off to date. Lukashenko couldn't, and I doubt Montenegro will. Small countries generally need the diplomatic and physical assistance of either Russia or China to stand against the US.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 31 2020 19:01 utc | 23

Grieved @19--

Seems what's happening in Montenegro fits into Crooke's second part of his initial essay about the downfall of Universalism and its companion Liberalism:

"The European project once may have sheltered under the wing of U.S. hard-power as an adjunct to America’s civilization mission, but that too is over: Trump has called Europe an enemy of America, on a par with China. The U.S. is no more Europe’s benevolent ‘uncle’ to deploy its hard power whenever Europe gets in a tangle."

Crooke as usual links to several essays whose views he incorporates to form his own all seeming to deal with the "Civilizational State" which are fundamentally different:

"they are organized around culture rather than politics.Linked to a civilization, the state has the paramount task of protecting a specific cultural tradition. Its reach encompasses all the regions where that culture is dominant." [Emphasis Original]

So instead of advancing the Liberal, Universalistic, Anglo-American European Project which he apparently now sees as dead, Macron wants to morph it into something different in a way to keep European identity:

“'We know that civilisations are disappearing; countries as well. Europe will disappear', Macron lauded the civilisational projects of Russia and Hungary, which 'have a cultural, civilisational vitality that is inspiring', and declared that France’s mission – its historic destiny – was to guide Europe into a civilisational renewal, forging a 'collective narrative and a collective imagination. That is why I believe very deeply that this is our project, and must be undertaken as a project of European civilisation'."

We've been occasionally touching this topic. Now there's a strong core of writings from which we can discuss this move, and I would include Putin's essay and interview on the topic too. Here are the three essays Crooke heavily refers to, "The Irresistible Rise of the Civilization State"; dated reference point, "The New Liberal Imperialism"; and "the Attack of the Civilization-State". And off in the background we hear the din coming from the drowning Outlaw US Empire that never had a civilization to begin with.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 31 2020 19:21 utc | 24

James so very very kind of you to let me come. Cheers sweetie.

Posted by: Miss Lacy | Aug 31 2020 19:59 utc | 25


With Macron on Lebanon and Germany's move against Belarus, I thought they were acting somewhat Indigently of the US. With Iran they are acting directly against the US. I see Germany have produced an up armored, up gunned tank that they think is capable of going head to head with the Russian Armata.

I think that even if they were to become fully independent of the US, Germany and France leading the EU will still view Russia as a hostile rival.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 31 2020 20:04 utc | 26

@ miss lacy... i just say the magic word and you regularly appear! but i always forget to mention it is because of my covid bias!

Posted by: james | Aug 31 2020 20:17 utc | 27


Posted by: paulmeli | Aug 31 2020 20:19 utc | 28

The tass take on the Montenegro election. The opposition coalition won 41 of the 81 seats.
"‘For the Future of Montenegro’ leader Zdravko Krivokapic told TASS that Montenegro’s opposition electoral blocs ‘For the Future of Montenegro’, ‘Peace is Our Nation’ and ‘Black on White’ intend to form a coalition government of experts that will dismiss Milo Djukanovic.

"The regime has definitely collapsed, you will see that as the votes are calculated the gap between the opposition and the ruling party and its satellites will only rise," he said. "Currently we think that an expert government will become the best solution for Montenegro, that is the best solution for the nation," Krivokapic added.

Asked about primary plans, he said that the first decision taken by the opposition government will be to revoke the law on freedom of faith, which infringes on interests of the Orthodox Church, as well pass the lustration law and the law on the property origin."

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 31 2020 20:22 utc | 29

So we now have full fledged Nazis on the comment thread?

Posted by: Michael Weddington | Aug 31 2020 20:36 utc | 30

Peter AU 1 @26--

Yes, IMO that seems a valid assumption since Macron as Crooke puts it wants to construct a "glass ceiling" so France can keep, presumably, Germany from being the core Civilizational-State of this new Europe without the UK that will soon rise. IMO, there's political tension everywhere in the West all brought about by its Neoliberalism. But I don't think there'll be war this time as the EU unravels.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 31 2020 20:45 utc | 31

Michael Weddington @30--

Oh, they've always been here; it's just that they're usually not so honest and open.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 31 2020 20:47 utc | 32

Victories unite, defeats divide:

Voice of America reporters: Trump-backed CEO “is failing” the US

Posted by: vk | Aug 31 2020 20:48 utc | 33

Thanks for the links, karlof1@24. I've only read the first two so far, and I do want to take issue with one of Crooke's statements in his 'second part':

"There was no such ‘thing’ as humankind in the ancient world: There were Assyrians, Greeks, Egyptians, Persians and so on, but no ‘humanity’ until – guess when – the Enlightenment, of course."

At least from the time of the ancient Greek philosophers, there was certainly an universal concept of humanity. Certainly Crooke's point is that the culturally different groups such as Greeks often put others into inferior or 'barbarian' categories in order to feel superior. But such differences didn't overcome general ideas about humanity.

I'll give as an example Plato's dialogue 'Meno'in which Socrates uses a slaveboy to demonstrate that humans have the same basic innate ideas about geometry. (That has always been my 'aha' moment in preferring Plato to Aristotle, who does consider Greeks superior, other nations inferior and slave material.)

Interesting essays, though. Thanks again!

Posted by: juliania | Aug 31 2020 20:53 utc | 34

Miss Lacy #25

James is always accommodating to those who are off their HCQ meds ;)

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Aug 31 2020 20:54 utc | 35

Peter AU1 #29

Thank you for the Tass link and key details. The NATO intolerance and ignorance will never tolerate this deviance because NATO is fascist to its bootstraps.
It sings the siren song that the future belongs to us ;)

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Aug 31 2020 21:07 utc | 36

Michael Weddington | Aug 31 2020 20:36 utc | 30:

I know, how lovely! And prolix, just like their hero, lucky old us.

Posted by: David G | Aug 31 2020 21:08 utc | 37

juliania @34--

As Pepe Escobar pointed out earlier this year, the Greeks divided their world into Greek speakers and non-Greek speakers, the latter being lumped together as Barbarians. The Romans borrowed that idea and all non-Latin speakers were Barbarians. So, the peoples that made up the Barbaric world weren't necessarily Barbaric as in badly behaved; rather, they just didn't speak the vernacular--the Etruscans, for example, were Barbarians in their own land simply because they didn't speak Latin, which is made clear in The Aeneid. Over time, the Greek/Roman distinction as to what constituted a Barbarian was altered into the general meaning it has today--uncultured, uncivilized, primitive.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 31 2020 21:25 utc | 38

I do not believe the Romans considered the Greeks barbarians.

Posted by: lysias | Aug 31 2020 21:31 utc | 39

The Republican Party in the USA is indeed Fascist insofar as it colludes with Big Business and the MIC. The Dem PArty is also Fascist wherein it, likewise, colludes with Big Business against the interests of the commons.

Collusion btw government and big business is the relevant and effective quality of Fascism.

Although this part of the definition has been nearly removed entirely by the Fascists.

Posted by: Kristan hinton | Aug 31 2020 21:44 utc | 40

What does the future hold for Montenegro post election? Eventual reunification with Serbia? What will NATO do? Will they refer to the loss of Montenegro as "front straightening" (Nazi Germany euphemism for retreat)? How will NATO survive without the 2% extortion racket that Montenegro provides? (joke) Life without pain has no meaning, and I think Montenegro will suffer some pain, as a small country has to be "thrown against the wall" to show them who is boss. Donny boy might not be up to the challenge, but Her Merkel is quite capable of it, supporting neo-Nazi's in Croatia and destroying the economy of Greece are two examples. Much mischief can can be had from Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo. Much like the US occupying eastern Syria and along Syrian's southern border. The cost (minus the corruption) would be small, and hey, you have to stay "in shape" and try to at least maintain appearances of some being relevant.

Posted by: Tom | Aug 31 2020 21:51 utc | 41

Last sentence should read The cost (minus the corruption) would be small, and hey, you have to stay "in shape" and try to at least maintain appearances of being relevant.

Posted by: Tom | Aug 31 2020 21:54 utc | 42

Yes, karlof1 @ 38, but that is my point on the difference between Plato and Aristotle. The concept of 'humanity' in general didn't just arrive at the time of the Enlightenment. It was prevalent long before -probably even when the earliest humanoids intermarried. I think we have to be careful with new definitions and statements of 'fact'. Multipolarity used to be a defining characteristic of the US, and it still is in New Mexico, where three cultures live side by side.

Posted by: juliania | Aug 31 2020 21:56 utc | 43

I wasn't sure in the three links you ended with, karlof1, why the United States couldn't also be a civilization-state like the others, as it devolves from being an empire, since the others mentioned had in the past had such aspirations of empirical status, and Turkey seems still to aspire to that. At one point we citizens of the US did really think 'from sea to shining sea only meant the actual borders of this country, and many of us would be happy for that understanding to be reinstated. The admixture of cultures which had been represented by the Statue of Liberty didn't have to be a corporate stew - better it had been, as many places it still is, lasagna!

Posted by: juliania | Aug 31 2020 22:18 utc | 44

@14 Carlton Meyer: "As I recall, all NATO members must agree on military actions, so even tiny members can veto things."

No, untrue. All NATO members must agree before another state can receive an invitation to join NATO.

In all other respects the treaty is written so that any one member can initiate consultation with any other group of NATO members on any topic covered by the treaty.

Remember, not all NATO nations joined the gang-rape of Serbia or Libya.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Aug 31 2020 22:58 utc | 45

So we now have full fledged Nazis on the comment thread?

Posted by: Michael Weddington | Aug 31 2020 20:36 utc | 30

I think, as karlof1 pointed, that various far-rightists and Nazis have been attending MoA threads for a long time without being so brazen as that latest goon. This is true for many alt-media that present dissident views vs the official narrative, as b does. Ditto for a number of Trotskyists.

The sad part is that on a number of social issues as well as foreign policy some far-rightists are on the right track, although for the wrong reasons. If only they abandoned these sick racialist fantasies that they entertain, they might be able to go somewhere.

Posted by: Constantine | Aug 31 2020 23:22 utc | 46

If only they abandoned these sick racialist fantasies that they entertain, they might be able to go somewhere.

@Posted by: Constantine | Aug 31 2020 23:22 utc | 46

If only? There you are, Constantine, pretending to be a pure leftist to then, not further this time, ending whitewashing the nazis....I would not be surprised if all of a sudden Annja Boetcher appears...
What about the obnoxious tendence to kill anybody who could oppose them or hold a narrative able to wake up the masses from the state of no-thinking they submit them through continuous brainwashing or plain terror by harassing of the brown shirts?

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Aug 31 2020 23:31 utc | 47

Over time, the Greek/Roman distinction as to what constituted a Barbarian was altered into the general meaning it has today--uncultured, uncivilized, primitive.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 31 2020 21:25 utc | 38

Very much correct. In fact, it is safe to say that the ancient Greek tribal groups first developed a perception of the non-Greeks as "barbarians" and then they began to collectively perceive themselves as members of a common Hellenic community (which, however, did not include political unity).

A similar case to the term "barbarian" can be seen in the various Germanic terms for Latin speakers (Walloons, Wallachians/Vlachs and Welsh for sub-Roman Britons) or the Slavic term for the Germans. The Slavs were the peoples of a certain common "slovo" (tongue or speech), whereas the Germanic people were the "nemici" ("dumb" as in unable to speak a language comprehensible to the Slavs).

Posted by: Constantine | Aug 31 2020 23:33 utc | 48

If only? There you are, Constantine, pretending to be a pure leftist to then, not further this time, ending whitewashing the nazis....I would not be surprised if all of a sudden Annja Boetcher appears...
What about the obnoxious tendence to kill anybody who could oppose them or hold a narrative able to wake up the masses from the state of no-thinking they submit them through continuous brainwashing or plain terror by harassing of the brown shirts?

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Aug 31 2020 23:31 utc | 47

First. Anja Boetcher is leagues above a clown like you. Her erudition and historical research on the subject of Nazism is admirable and she has been unrelenting in confronting incorrigible far-rightists infesting the comment threads using facts and scholarly research.

Second. At the very least, try to learn English before you comment on posts you don't comprehend. I responded immediately to the Nazi who posted his nonsense, exposing precisely the very genocidal beliefs of the Nazis which were implemented in actual policies. Only someone with comprehension issues would claim that I "whitewashed" the crimes of Nazism. In fact, I'm railing on modern neo-Hitlerite racist Russsophobia under a pseudo-liberal veneer that has become so prevalent in the contemporary west.

And finally, instead of posting links nonstop (even if some are quite intersting), do yourself a favor and read a bit of the history of socialist politics. I would suggest the relevant article of Karl Radek as representative of the Comintern on the occasion of Schlageter's execution by the French, addressing German patriots or even nationalists. Or the efforts of Lenin and Trotsky to come into common ground with ex-monarchist officers and officials, most of whom had been quite chauvinistic, anti-Semitic and anti-socialist up to the revolution.

Posted by: Constantine | Aug 31 2020 23:48 utc | 49

@Posted by: Constantine | Aug 31 2020 23:48 utc | 49

I do not post kinks non stop, but i am seeing that several people are in a coordianted effrot to send me "reading history", or whatever, so that I stopp posting here...

Posting links is what most people do here, including erudite vk to whom you, curiously, do not send to do anything, least reading.
In fact is here where i learnt to comment posting links, since in the past i just did my comment with my own oppinion and period. It was here where I learnt to search in tropemil Twitter accounts, as "b" stated he does, and the resto of sources I have been finding in the way...

Your recommendations on readings reaffirm the expressed impression about you....That Lenin tried to find common ground with anti-socialist quislings was not but a sign of the cmoing stroke...From Trotsky as that I am not os surprised, seeing where he ended as refugee...i nthe US...

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Aug 31 2020 23:59 utc | 50

@ 36 uncle tungsten... it's a fairly serious board most all of the time, so if i can find an opportunity to be silly, i'll take it! thanks for your support.. you seem the same!

Posted by: james | Sep 1 2020 0:05 utc | 51

And maybe in twenty-five years or so when some of the people involved will have tired of the eternal trench warfare of competing ideologies etc. there will be a new generation jumping in to take their place and keep the nonsense going. Anything to avoid reality?

Why not talk about whatever is the topic instead of aspiring to prove various illusions of purity in any form or direction? No human has any.

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Sep 1 2020 0:10 utc | 52


See if you feel like to answer this question...

La prueba del algodón...

How do you see that last intend of taking over of the Bundestag by a bunch of 200 nazi thugs?

Do you think also like someone here that was an "storming", meaning de broma, and not a real storming?

The person who argued this was an "storming", de broma, argued that the thugs had no weapons and that for that should had been considered "peaceful protesters", like those in Belarus of the first days trying to storm government buildings...

Do someone need a letal weapon to lit the Bundestag? No, of course, an IED hide in a backpack is enough...
Then, blaming the left, or the "woke" as is the fashion now, would be enough to start the hunting they are wishing to unleash in Europe...

Honestly, give me a damn with whom Lenin or Trotsky were trying to ingratiate themselves...I am not a parrot to go repeating what they did...These are other times, other land...
I will never find a common ground with certain kind of people. Period.

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Sep 1 2020 0:15 utc | 53

juliania @44 & Constantine @48--

Thanks for your replies! Here's Escobar's essay on the topic, "Barbarism Begins at Home", where there's much more beyond the excerpt:

"The original meaning of barbaros is rooted in language: an onomatopoeia meaning 'unintelligible speech' as people go 'bar bar bar' when they talk.

"Homer does not refer to barbaros, but to barbarophonos ('of unintelligible speech'), as in those who don’t speak Greek or speak very badly. Comic poet Aristophanes suggested that Gorgias was a barbarian because he spoke a strong Sicilian dialect.

"Barbaru meant 'foreigner' in Babylonian-Sumerian. Those of us who studied Latin in school remember balbutio ('stammer', 'stutter', 'babble').

"So it was speech that defined the barbarian compared to the Greek. Thucydides thought that Homer did not use 'barbarians' because in his time Greeks “hadn’t yet been divided off so as to have a single common name by way of contrast”. The point is clear: the barbarian was defined as in opposition to the Greek.

"The Greeks invented the barbarian concept after the Persian invasions by Darius I and Xerxes I in 490 and 480-479 BC. After all they had to clearly separate themselves from the non-Greek. Aeschylus staged The Persians in 472 BC. That was the turning point; after that 'barbarian' was everyone who was not Greek – Persians, Phoenicians, Phrygians, Thracians."

Note that Latin borrowed from the Greek lending credence to The Aeneid.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 1 2020 0:24 utc | 54

Seeing that there is a discussion on the merits (or lack thereof) of Adolf Hitler's early memoir "Mein Kampf" on this comments thread, perhaps Mr Thomas Dalton himself should be allowed to say something about the book he translated?

Chapter Synopses

It will be useful to provide a very brief summary of the main themes of each of the 27 chapters.

Volume 1

Chapter 1: Hitler’s early life. Relationship with parents. Early education. Interest in history and art. Budding nationalism. Covers birth in 1889 to mother’s death in late 1907, when Hitler was 18 years old.

Chapter 2: Time alone in Vienna. Marxism and international Jewry as main threats. Assessment and critique of Viennese government. Life of the working class. Study of the Social Democratic party, and its Jewish influence. Role of unions. Burgeoning anti-Semitism. Study of the destructive role of Marxism.

Chapter 3: General reflections on Austrian politics, and representative democracy. Failings of multi-ethnic states. Critique of Western democracy. Failings of ‘majority rule.’ Demise of the pan-German movement. Unfortunate conflict with the Catholic Church. Anti-Semitism and religion. Covers period up to age 23 (1912).

Chapter 4: Moves to Munich. Critique of German alliances. Four possible paths of German policy. Population growth, and the need for land. Need for alliance with England. Initial discussion of the role of Aryans. Marxism as mortal foe. Covers up to mid-1914.

Chapter 5: Outbreak of World War One. Hitler enlists, at age 25. “Baptism by fire.”

Chapter 6: Role and need for propaganda. Effective use by England; failure by Germany.

Chapter 7: Course of the Great War. Wounded in late 1916. Jews and negative attitudes rampant in Munich. Munitions strike in early 1918. Poisoned by mustard gas in October 1918, at age 29. November Revolution.

Chapter 8: Postwar time in Munich. Need for a new party. Negative role of global capitalism.

Chapter 9: Encounters German Workers’ Party (DAP). Early meetings. Joins DAP, as member #7, at age 30.

Chapter 10: Analysis of the collapse of the German Empire in 1918. Dominance of international capitalism. Effect of the press on the masses. Jewish control of press. Combating the syphilis epidemic. Cultural decay in modern art. Ineffective parliament. The army as a source of discipline.

Chapter 11: Detailed racial theory. Nature strives to improve species. Racial mixing between ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ types yields physical, moral, and cultural decay. Aryans as true founders of civilization. Aryan tendency for self-sacrifice. Aryan versus Jew. Jews as parasites. Fake Jewish ‘religion.’ Extended examination of “the way of Jewry”—historical, sociological, political. Marxist worldview. Jewish subversion of democracy. Ill effects of racial impurity.

Chapter 12: Evolution of DAP. Extended discussion of the need to nationalize the masses. How to organize a party. Gaining publicity. Second major meeting in October 1919. Growing success. Rejection of ‘intellectual’ weapons. First true mass meeting in February 1920. Transition to NSDAP.

Volume 2

Chapter 1: Corruption of democracy. Concept of ‘folkish.’ Transforming ideals into practice. Marxism pushes race equality. State must serve racial function: to promote the best.

Chapter 2: Three conventional concepts of state. State as means to end: advancing human race. Must maintain racial integrity. Strong minorities end up ruling. Racial mixing leads to decay. State must promote healthy children. Basic eugenic theory. Folkish education, for physical, mental, and moral strength. Promote willpower, determination, responsibility. Meritocracy.

Chapter 3: Citizenship based on race. Three classes: citizen, subject, foreigner.

Chapter 4: Aristocratic principle. Value of the individual. Marxism promotes mass thinking. Government rule by the best individuals, not majority.

Chapter 5: Need for an uncompromising worldview. Need for decisive leadership. 25-point NSDAP program is unshakable. Only NSDAP is truly folkish.

Chapter 6: Resumes autobiography. NSDAP must dominate mass opinion. Must fight against common views. Brest-Litovsk and Versailles. Importance of spoken word. Marxism flourished with speeches. Need for mass meetings.

Chapter 7: Lame bourgeois mass meetings. Need for publicity. Control of mass meetings. Violent protests. Party flag and symbol: swastika. First use in summer 1920. Party strength by early 1921. Mass meeting 3 Feb at Circus Krone. Attempted disruption.

Chapter 8: Right of priority. Many folkish movements. Futility of compromise and coalition.

Chapter 9: Three pillars of authority. In warfare, survival of the inferior. Deserters and Jewish revolutionaries in November 1918. Bourgeois capitulation. Need for a great ideal. Creation of the SA (storm troops). NSDAP is neither secret nor illegal. SA as trained fighters. March to Coburg in Oct 1922. French occupation of the Ruhr.

Chapter 10: War industries in World War I. Bavaria versus Prussia as diversion. Kurt Eisner, Jewish revolutionary. Growth of anti-Semitism from 1918. Catholic versus Protestant as diversion. Federation versus unification. Opposition to Jewish Weimar.

Chapter 11: Role of propaganda. Supporters and members. Need for restricted growth. Leadership principle versus majority rule. Acquisition of Völkischer Beobachter. Building the party. Dissolution on 9 Nov 1923.

Chapter 12: Question of trade unions. Necessity of unions. NSDAP must form a union. Union in service to the people. Priority of worldview.

Chapter 13: Foreign policy as means for promoting national interest. Unification of German people. England against Germany. France against England. Need for alliance with England and Italy. Jews seek world conquest, racial contamination. Question of South Tyrol. Jews oppose German-Italian alliance. Only fascist Italy is opposing Jews. Jews gain power in America.

Chapter 14: Russia policy is foremost. Top priority: need for land, living space. Victory goes to the strong. No colonies, but only an expanded Reich. Look to the East. Russia is ruled by Jews, cannot be an ally. Only possible alliances: England and Italy.

Chapter 15: German submission. Locarno Treaty as further submission. France seeks to dismember Germany. War with France is inevitable. France occupies Ruhr, opposes England. Must confront and destroy Marxism. Failure of Cuno’s passive resistance.

Even this concise summary demonstrates the controversial nature of the text.

Even in Thomas Dalton's summary of what the chapters in "Mein Kampf" cover, one can see that in Hitler's worldview, individual opinion counts for naught and the notion of a social contract between individuals and government, or between a gathering or organisation of individuals and a government, is dismissed.

The hive-mind society that makes up Hitler's vision of an ideal society (in which everyone is like an ant, trained to behave by years of conditioning so that particular behaviours become instinctual) is apparent, even in the context of an article written by someone sympathetic to Hitler's worldview.

Posted by: Jen | Sep 1 2020 0:26 utc | 55

Gratified for your post and especially this synopsis, Jen. It was quite surprising to see someone praising Hitler and Mein Kampf in MoA.

Posted by: Constantine | Sep 1 2020 0:36 utc | 56

@ Posted by: Jen | Sep 1 2020 0:26 utc | 55

It's just a diary. There's nothing special about it. There's no "Hitlerianism"; Hitler was not an intellectual, and never tried to make any effort to develop a theory of Nazism.

I think the mystique about Mein Kampf comes from the fact that - apart from being Hitler's only publication - it was "censored" in German language until recently.

In fact, it was never censored. Hitler left one collateral descendant left (I think one nephew) in Austria, who inherited the rights of publication of the book in German. This guy voluntarily chose to never sell these rights to any publisher, so it was de facto censored in Germany and Austria for the whole duration of the Cold War and beyond, until his death some years ago, when it entered public domain.

Posted by: vk | Sep 1 2020 0:44 utc | 57


I don't speak any dialect/language spoken in Spain, so I don't have a clue what you're trying to achieve here with your incomprehensible posts. Instead of posing, try to study and not dismiss whatever is inconvenient for your preconceived views.

You ashamelessly asserted that I whitewash Nazism, when I did the exact opposite. And instead of acknowledging that, you toss lame accusations, including mocking a German leftist whose erudition on the subject is above yours by many orders of magnitude.

You describe as quislings the very officers and specialists who fundamentally helped the Reds establish the USSR. Apart from your gross ignorance and misuse of the term "quisling", you exhibit the elitism prevalent in many leftists when you show contempt for anyone who doesn't adhere to your point of view. I guess the socially conservative Nicaraguans must be "quislings" too.

And you're right, these are different times and it is precisely now that one must be willing to engage with those who don't share your convictions. Instead, you are unable to stomach a simple wish that far-rightists would abandon their racist obsessions.

Posted by: Constantine | Sep 1 2020 0:52 utc | 58

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 1 2020 0:24 utc | 54

Homer treats the Trojans and some their allies as "Greek" as the Achaeans (the term "Greeks" or, more precisely, "Hellenes" appears only a couple of times and refers to the specific tribe that would be the source of the national label for all the Greeks eventually). If I recall correctly, it is the Carians who are described as "barbarophones".

The term "barbarian" began to take a negative cultural connotation mostly from the 4th cent. BC onwards and it was used to describe in this context even certain Greek tribal groups. That attitude most common among the sophisticated and rather uppity Atheneans who perceived themselves as the crem-de-la-creme of Greece.

Interestingly, in the inscription on three hundred Persian shields after the battle of Granicus, Alexander uses it not in a negative cultural manner, but as a multi-ethnic opposite to the united Greeks ("except the Lacedaemonians").

Posted by: Constantine | Sep 1 2020 1:02 utc | 59

“barcalounger lefties, who appear to be driven by whatever issue/subject/Thing, that all corporate media is currently venting about...”

Looks up at TV screen, sees media hysteria about Covid, goes on long rant about the invisible enemy. “Accept the new normal CovIDIOTS!” He shouts, pounding angrily upon his keyboard.

Strangely, so it would seem, he is entirely unaware that on this issue he is entirely alongside the modern media Goliaths. He stands alongside the BBC and CNN, MSNBC and Fox News, and in unison with the Guardian and NPR and Every other major media conglomerate on earth he shouts down those lone dissenters who dare to doubt the official line.

The sage has been driven to madness. Wisdom fled in the face of fear - the fear of death, and the safety and well being of all of mankind was sacrificed to it. Untrustworthy governments and corporate media mouthpieces were suddenly allowed free range to enact authoritarian agendas without a second thought.

“Lock down all of mankind, please do, just please please, oh dear government gods, please don’t let me die. Please Save me. I’ll say whatever you want me to!”

What a shame. It seems we are losing allies with each passing day.

The rest of you better wake soon. A tsunami is rising out of the sea. With the right kind of eyes, you can already see it. Open your eyes and you can see it too.

Posted by: Chris | Sep 1 2020 1:57 utc | 60

Chris @ 60 the buoy sensors record that the seas have risen from a few feet to nearly cloud height.. but still the swell of the wave has yet to be visible to those on the beach..and in the cities 200 to 300 miles inland..

What manner of resistance does mankind have? Oh yes, I remember
government advises that humanity should drain the swamps and pour its water into the rising sea..

Thank you Jen for TD version of Mein Kaumpf Hitler was an Regan was a Johnson, Bush a Regan, Bush an Obama, and Trump a concantenate of each of them. .. Hitler was in place to force the Jews into their Balfour established Homeland, and to position Germany for infrastructure destruction, to discourage long standing association and productive relationship of the Germans with the Ottoman and to deny the German people access to the oil beneath the Ottoman Territories. Without a way to legalize a monopoly in the Ottoman land the Global Aristocracy could own the oil under the Ottoman Empire. It takes a nation state to legitimize converting public property into private property, it takes a nation state to enforce private monopoly in land, copyright and patents and it takes a nation state to privatize public services into private services. The Ottoman system did not recognize private land ownership its monopoly power was found at the point of a sword so a means to make private ownership possible had to be established (Balfour).

Posted by: snake | Sep 1 2020 2:29 utc | 61

"Consequently it is entirely possible that a state with full NATO access will align with the Russian economic coadunate."

Montenegro may be a NATO member but so what? It's not as if NATO decisions are democratic such that Montenegro gets a say in it, much less act as a dark horse or trojan horse in NATO.

Posted by: occupatio | Sep 1 2020 3:12 utc | 62

Indigently? ... independently

karlof1 32

I have the feeling Macrons France and Merkels Germany are looking at an alliance that controls the European sphere for moving into the multi-polar world.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Sep 1 2020 3:56 utc | 63

Language is all, german in modern Russian is nemets, from nemoy, someone deprived of words, mute, dumb. Together with the once almighty dollar the main instrument of anglo saxon imperialism is the english language, an asset that will last much longer than the green back as a tool of empire.

The way to eradicate Russian culture from the broken parts of the Russian empire is to artificially eradicate the Russian language, an ongoing effort in Ukraine and now in Belarus. Kazakhstan is transitioning from cyrillic to latin alphabet. Language, together with propaganda, or control of the narrative, are the true remaining assets of the anglo saxon empire.

St. John's gospel first verse: In the beginning was the Word.. but the crazies prefer the Book of Revelations, when one simple verse says it all.

Posted by: Paco | Sep 1 2020 4:14 utc | 64

re Kristan hinton | Aug 31 2020 21:44 utc | 40
Thanks for pointing out a simple but oft ignored truth:
"Collusion btw government and big business is the relevant and effective quality of Fascism."
I realise many may not agree, but for me fascism lies at the heart of neoliberalism for exactly that reason. Old school liberals (in the original sense not that weird definition amerikans attach to liberals) used to preach a hands-off sort of economic libertarianism where free trade was about non-interference, even if they rarely practised that. However contemporary neoliberal politicians boast of the interventions made to promote a business interest/s, the bigger the better, which can only be regarded as a form of fascism.

Of course that is not the only reason the previous DPS regime in Montenegro should be considered fascist, it also interfered in religion to promote a racist agenda.

Montenegro has a diverse population made up of
Montenegrin 40%
Serb 28.5%
Bosniak 12%
Albanian 4.9%
'Other'/undeclared 9.4%

Serbs & Montenegrins practise orthodox xtianity, but because they were separated for about 400 years when Serbia was integrated into the Ottoman empire but Montenegro was not, church practises drifted apart.
Although the two churches had been separated for a long time, in 1920 the two factions decided to integrate into the Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC) .

The DPS gang won office at a time of heightened Montenegrin nationalism so they thought it would be a smart move to crank it up again for the 2020 election.
They inserted a contentious clause in a new law on religious 'freedom' which the Montenegrin parliament passed at the end of December 2019. It stipulates that all objects and real estate currently belonging to the SPC in Montenegro should be transferred to the state if the church fails to prove that these assets were in its possession before 1918.

Since the SPC only took control of all assets in 1920, most of the churches were owned by the now defunct Montenegrin Orthodox church and would be seized by the state.
DPS revealed their divorce from grass roots Montenegrins with that blatantly racist stance because they didn't just anger Serb Montenegrins, they seriously pissed off many Montenegrin Montenegrins angry that a bunch of rabidly racist politicians were sticking their noses into their church.

Now I have always considered that sort of attempt to force religions into racist hatred to be another of the primary indicators of fascism, so I most certainly stand by my assertion that the DPS regime was/is a fascist regime.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Sep 1 2020 4:41 utc | 65

Peter AU 1 @63--

IMO, your thesis has merit except IMO they're in competition as to which outgrowth of Charlemagne takes the Civilizational Mantle.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 1 2020 4:56 utc | 66

Debs "Collusion btw government and big business is the relevant and effective quality of Fascism."

I guess the dividing line between gov collusion and gov control is a fine line. Simply trashing the government of any country that has big business is a bit simplistic. Yankistan and the anglosphere have long had large companies or wealthy individuals dominating politics but projecting this onto any other country simply because they have some large businesses is just that. Projection.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Sep 1 2020 5:30 utc | 67

Some tweets from Dr. Marcus Papadopolos on Montenegro.

Funny, MSM told me that Belarus had the last dictator in Europe. No doubt the EU will say that there were irregularities in the vote, not mentioning that "their man" was the one caught with his hand in the ballot boxes.

"The basis upon which I would engage with “opposition parties” in Montenegro is as follows: First, that they pledge to withdraw Montenegro from NATO; and second, that they vow to seek reunification with Serbia. Both subject matters are, in my opinion, non-negotiable

Something that British or American mainstream media will not report on about the elections in Montenegro is how Albanians from Albania and Kosovo and Metohija crossed into Montenegro to obtain identification cards so that they could vote for the West’s Milo Djukanovic

Serbs: Montenegro will only be liberated when the pro-Western system in the country is uprooted and destroyed and when the traitors there are jailed or exiled. It is not suffice to simply win elections. Incidentally, the same rationale applies equally to Serbia"

And a connection of Belarus and Serbia from the past. Now is the time for Serbia and Montenegro to return that act of solidarity.

"Serbs, in 1999, President Alexander Lukashenko flew to Belgrade to show his support for you when the Serbian capital and the rest of Serbia was under bombardment by the accursed NATO. The Belorussian leader risked his life so that he could stand with Serbs at their hour of peril.

Serbs, standing with Alexander Lukashenko would be a demonstration of the cultural and spiritual unity of the Serbian and Belorussian peoples. Conversely, standing with the West would be a demonstration of support for your own enslavement and humiliation at the hands of the West."

Posted by: Tom | Sep 1 2020 5:49 utc | 68

@n #20

You've pretty much torpedoed your own thesis by asking people to read Mein Kampf for themselves, have you not? Some people did read it, or didn't you notice?

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Sep 1 2020 6:42 utc | 69

re Peter AU1 | Sep 1 2020 5:30 utc | 67 who reckoned:
"projecting this onto any other country simply because they have some large businesses is just that. Projection."

I would be interested if you could name a single neolib administration that hasn't actively colluded with business. What on earth do you imagine the corporate lobbyist gig is all about, if it isn't colluding with governments to make sure their clients become more profitable?

Lobbyists even get legislation written up for administrations nowadays - one of the reasons why many governments can knock out extremely holey (not sacred) legislation nowadays - full of unintended consequences - is that many of the best lawyers who draft legislation have left government employ in attorney-generals' etc, cos they are making far more money in the private sector.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Sep 1 2020 7:02 utc | 70

@67 Peter AU
I think more than collusion is required for fascism, the difference to me is who controls whom. If big business is subordinate to the government it isn't fascism. If corporate power controls the government it is. That IMO is what makes USA a fascist state and China, well socialism with Chinese characteristics or whatever.

Posted by: Jason | Sep 1 2020 7:52 utc | 71

For a moment there I thought debsisdead was a username from Kuroshin days. But it isn't. Attitude might have fit in tho.

Posted by: Tuyzentfloot | Sep 1 2020 8:11 utc | 72

Posted by: Michael Weddington | Aug 31 2020 20:36 utc | 30

"So we now have full fledged Nazis on the comment thread?

Welcome to the internet. I well remember the first time I was on the Syrian Civil War Reddit and realized I was reading a conversation with some ISIS supporters participating. Racists, right wingers, and other types of bigot and ideologue are not really that hard to come by on the Internet. I like the Internet precisely because you can read enemies of the state (and everybody else too) in their own words.

Posted by: Bemildred | Sep 1 2020 9:42 utc | 73

I don't wee why any Govt give two hoots about Montenegro.
I'd never heard of the place until the UK Govt's dodgy dossier, struggling to support their account of the Salisbury incident (See slide 4 ), which is unsurprising.
It has a population approx equivalent to two Fort Braggs , and terrain which is mostly mountains.
Its economy is based on tourism and doesn't look long term sustainable.
I don't see it has any strategic value.

Enlightem me. Why does NATO, or anyone else, care about Montenegro ?? It's going to collapse back into where it came from in the near future.

I won't take my coat off, I'm not stopping.

Posted by: Ken Platt | Sep 1 2020 10:34 utc | 74

@Posted by: Constantine | Sep 1 2020 0:52 utc | 58

It was not difficult to understand, the question I was posing to you about the storming of the Bundestag this past day, and the few words in Spanish were not relevant and so few that you could translate them with a translator, as I do many times with several languages in which I read information, but, then, you chose to evade answering.

You have a derogatory authoritarian tone anytime you adress me which speaks volumes on that, or you are not on the left, or you are a Trotskyist, as this style I have witnessed from them in an incipient Spanish leftist formation some time ago, when they want you to shut up and leave...especially when yo udiscuss their unelected leadership, incongruencies...or itself...

It is you who appeared here sending me to study...or to learn English!!...of all things( why in the Earth an alleged anti-imperialist leftist would send me to do such a thing, I wonder, when the numerous Americans here understand me quite well, and are not such purists in anything?... )

A warning to anybody here who could not have contacted ever with any leftist. That people show a deep knowledge in Marxism-Leninism does not imply they are from the left, there was/is a thing in every Western intelligence service called "Russian Desk", and as well you give for sure they have a "Marxist Desk"...( as a sample, a button, Pat Lang who still has not retired at his 80s...still wishing with all his rage going up the wilderness to kill ´em...). Most of Western intelligence services are widely infilitrated by the far-right, if not because there are remanants there from the fascist dictatorships Europe suffered during its history. The German BND has a real problem with this, although I do not think the CDU is so much worried about it...otherwise a purge would be done.... I mean well done...The same happens in Spain and Italy...btw....

To detect a real leftist, pay attention that its opinions are always in the side of the people and agaisnt any kind of imperialism and any form of capitalism or corporatism, whatever the country we are talking about; citing Marx or Mein Kampf or showing off history knowledge is not enough to be a leftist. Neither it is necessary to be a leftist to have any grade or recognition by the universities of TPTB, most leftists you will find in common jobs, self-taught people, as always has been...think of Stalin more than of Lenin in this....

It is impossible for a leftist to find a common ground with the far-right, since the far-right project of life is always erasing the left, as history has so widely showed.
That message of finding a common ground between the left and the far-right was what brought Hitler to power, as at certain time his party achieved fooling the German unions to march together with which the unions who had the trust of the working people ceded their legitimacy to their future executioners.
Bannon tried to fool the US people and that of the world through this trick of a "illustrated far-right", so as to get enough votes to grab power. Once in power we can witness what kind of "illustrated thugs" he has promoted in Europe.
Vox, a far-right party supported by Bannon and the Trump administration as a whole, and which financed its election campaign with funds coming from terrorist organization MEK ( on CIAs and Iranian diaspora pay roll...) called its followers to go Catalonia to beat the Catalan seccesionist to the shout "a por ellos!, and to this date keep harassing the ministries of Unidas Podemos in the government of coalition of the "mild" left in Spain in their own homes, day and night, without any judge intervening ( being as it is the judicial power not independent and also widely infiltrated by fascists...) stopping this clear undermining of rights and physical security of these people who moreover have little babies at home. They recently even had to suspend their holidays in Asturias due to this harassment...

They have gone into the streets with their supporters without masks, in the wosrst of the pandemic, offering the excentric view of people hitting the pan in the back seat of its own convertible Ferrari driven by his driver, while even a woman of the richest neigborhoods in Madrid took her service woman to hit the pan on her place...Where would be the common place between these people and their service people? Nowhere to be found, or course!

Believe me, it is impossible to find a common ground with this thugs, whose only objective in life is keeping squeezing and looting the poor and when something or someone places in their path they recurr only to harrasment, physical elimination and coup d´etat.

In the US there is long history of far-right people possing as leftist, labor or unionist, like LaRouche Organization ( to which our erudites here could well belong, since they have a recognized intelligence service, and their methods of harassment are well known...),and we all know how they ended beating the real unionist and leftist and helped Reagan to erase the unions and the real left from the USA...

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Sep 1 2020 10:54 utc | 75

@Posted by: Ken Platt | Sep 1 2020 10:34 utc | 74

The interest of NATO in Montenegro comes on the grounds of avoiding it raagroups with any former Balcanic remnants of former economic powerhouse making the competence to Germany called Yugoslavia and that that reagrouping does not fall to the side of the Russian world.
Moreover Montenegro have coast, with which could be a candidate to a Russian base in the Mediterranean..

Even in the case of being a tiny islet in the middle of the Mediterranean you will see such a fight...See Kastellorizo right now...all the more if there are oil resources in play...

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Sep 1 2020 11:06 utc | 76

@Posted by: Bemildred | Sep 1 2020 9:42 utc | 73

But those showing themselves as they are, are the most inoffensive, as they discredit themselves without any need of intervening...

The worst are those camuflated in the forums as the oppsite side, i. e. as leftists...These are those who really work to deprestigiate what is left of the international anti-fascist left.
Trotskyites, as their position in Syria, Lybia, Palestine and other imperialists wars show, are not included on the latter group of anti-fascist left, they support capitalism, currently in its imperialist form, thus no secrets to whomever has its eyes wide open and its brains without fogg...

Trotsky run to the US... of all places...where all the nazi criminals found harbor and then were relocated into the higuest office of the post-WWII "order"...por Dios!

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Sep 1 2020 11:14 utc | 77

There continues to be a great deal of confusion over what fascism really is. This is not surprising as there appears to be so many forms of fascism, with many contradictions between those forms. Is race a central factor? If so, then which race? Hitler's German? Tojo's Japanese? Mussolini's Italian? Chiang Kai Shek's Chinese? Suharto's Indonesian?

Or is religion central? But then which religion? Modi's Hindu? Tojo's Shinto? Franco's Catholicism?

Debsisdead gets closest by noting the collusion between the State and Big Business as a defining feature of fascism, but it needs to be noted that before attaining power fascists will attack the State. Ukraine, Syria, Venezuela, and Libya are nice current examples, with Belarus recently joining the club.

If one scans the summary that Jen @55 provided, a little clarity might be available. While Hitler's honestly expressed ideology in that summarized text is as much a confused mishmash as any other fascist's, when we subtract out all of the customizations that are particular to Germany we are left with opposition to Marxism. When all of the other decorations that are added to make it appealing to various target markets are stripped away, the universal core of fascism is always anti-communism. As with the Never-Trumpers, fascism is ultimately defined by what it is opposed to.

So why does fascism always have all of these other disparate aspects? Different religions, different nationalities, different bogeymen, etc? Because fascism is always the ultimate astroturf movement built by capitalist mass marketing. Whatever appeals to target demographics is what determines what gets stirred into the toxic brew. Anti-racism itself can even be used as well, so long as it is a very specific anti-racism that demonizes other races and sows division. Ex: The silly "White Fragility" meme being forced by capitalist mass media at present, anyone? Yes, oddly enough that is capitalist mass marketing for a fascist movement. Even anti-fascism itself can be part of the mix in populations where confusion exists about what fascism is; note the common forced meme about fascism being equivalent to socialism, for example, or the simple-minded idea of a "circular" political/economic spectrum where fascism and communism are the same.

This is important because we really are seeing marketing for fascism around the world today, even though understanding of Marxism is at a historic low point. That quote from Lenin, "There are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen", haunts capitalists, and so they are trying to be prepared for those weeks that are coming when decades happen.

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 1 2020 11:37 utc | 78

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Sep 1 2020 11:14 utc | 77

Sometimes Politics doesn't look much different than Religion, or Sports. TV makes them all kind of the same. You give them money and they entertain you and give your life meaning and purpose, a ready-to-wear identity.

Trotsky, well. I generally avoid anything to do with 20th Century left-wing politics, too depressing. They thought it was going to be so easy. Trotskyites always lose, they are losers.

Governments have always been criminal enterprises, all this theorizing about the "common good" is just part of the con like your insurance companies promises or our political party platforms.

Posted by: Bemildred | Sep 1 2020 11:40 utc | 79

Ken Platt @74: "[Montenegro]'s going to collapse back into where it came from in the near future."

And where did Montenegro come from?


NATO put a lot of effort into destroying and shattering Yugoslavia. Even Serbia is too big of a leftover fragment of Yugoslavia for NATO, so ANY suggestion of those fragments reuniting into a more powerful state gives the NATO types intestinal cramps.

By the way, any reversal of Yugoslavia's balkanization is progress, not collapse.

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 1 2020 12:03 utc | 80

Former US Ambassador to Germany, Grenell, still scolding Europe on what "The West" options are and what ebing Western does means...All summarizes onto "Forget about socialism!"...thus not common ground to be found...

One would say that a man who at his age is not even able to take care of his own skin, would hardly manage to protect "The West"...and that childish stylism....oh, please, mate....

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Sep 1 2020 12:31 utc | 81

@ all

-What is fascism?

The best definition of fascism I know of is Gramsci's (who saw its ascension and died because of it).

To put it simply, fascism is a fail-safe against socialism/communism. When the bourgeoisie loses control of the situation, it can still resort to ancient and fossilized forces in its own country (Church, peasants, feudal-era intellectuals, feudal-era nobility, etc.) plus the lumpen-proletariat to crush a communist revolution in the streets (masses against masses). To do such, they resort to every type of irrational narratives they can find to amalgamate this disparate group. In Mussolini's case, the narrative was the restoration of the Roman Empire; in Hitler's case, it was the creation of the Thousand-year Reich.

This fail-safe exists until our days. The post-war pact put the far-right forces of the Western countries in the "election proof" institutions where they could best serve the bourgeoisie: the intelligence and police forces and the Armed Forces. The social-democrats could then win the elections, but never seize ultimate power within their nations. That's why we still see embarrassing episodes today, like British soldiers using Corbyn's portrait for target practice or the neo-nazi cells inside the Bundeswehr.


-why do we still rationalize politics in the West in Left-to-Right sides?

The concept of Left and Right comes from the French Revolution (Jacobins on the Left; Girondins on the Right; plus the Swamp on the Center). It arose as pure convention and was soon forgotten after the Revolution collapsed.

It was unearthed in the wake of the post-war, by intellectuals/Cold Warriors that we identify today as being from the "center-left".

The reason the Western Left revived the concept was necessity. In the aftermath of WWII, the CPSU and the USSR were at the height of its prestige in the world. They were the shit back them: if you wanted to be a true revolutionary in 1945, you would want to be like a Bolshevik.

The Western socialists (social-democrats) then had to find a counter-narrative that could legitimize their weaker, subordinate and feeble position in the West, so the Western socialists could give up revolution. They then developed the the theory of Totalitarianism (the theory which stated the Soviets were basically Nazis) and its lesser known theory of the "Vital Center", published by Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in 1947.

The "vital center" theory stated that, in order to not fall into totalitarianism, a political specter, made of socialists, liberals and conservatives, was necessary, so all these ideologies could freely compete for power in State-form. This leviathanic State, manifested by republican chaos, would always result in the best government possible, because representative democracy never fails. It would also be more flexible: in a moment where a conservative was needed, a conservative was elected, and so on for a socialist and a liberal. This dynamic equilibrium would result in a "vital center", a de facto center ground, whose difference to totalitarianism was that it was "vibrant" (alive), to use today's liberal terminology.

The only thing the vital center didn't admit was fascism and communism (hence its complementary nature with the Totalitarianism theory). In these cases, Schlesinger not only admitted, but recommended, brutal repression and suppression. That's why we call those two ideologies "far-" in today's Western political vocabulary: they're "outside the spectrum". It's also common for Westerners today to call both the far-right and the far-left the same thing, as they "join hands", as if the political spectrum was a wheel, hence forming an elegant unity with the theory of totalitarianism.

That was the way Western social-democracy found to legitimize their weaker, subordinate position in relation to the USSR. That's why I consider studying the writers of Totalitarianism a study of the history of the Western societies, and not of the history of the USSR - they're telling more about themselves than about their enemy.


- what's the Trotskyist conundrum?

Simplifying and not entering on the merits and demerits of Trotsky's works:

According to Trotsky, the USSR was socialist for essentially three reasons:

1) expropriation of the means of production;
2) State monopoly of foreign trade;
3) centrally planned economy.

Here we have no polemics, as both sides agree the USSR is in fact socialist. The polemic comes when he talks about the instability of this set up.

According to Trotsky, this situation gives birth to a bureaucrat group, which controls the State. As they control how the economy is planned and how social wealth is distributed, they'll inevitably get more for themselves and distributes less to the rest. The problem here isn't the differences of wages between workers who work different amount of times or do different types of work, but the distribution of social wealth, i.e. wealth produced by the whole economy, to be redistributed equally among all members of society.

Why this bureaucrat "class" arises? Because the USSR was not self-sufficient, and was originally a very poor country. It doesn't produce abundant wealth in a way everybody can get enough. Distribution of wealth degenerates into distribution of misery.

The only two way outs of this situation, according to Trotsky: capitalist restoration or the rest of the world also becomes socialist, thus "lifting the siege" on the USSR.

The USSR in fact dissolved to a capitalist restoration, but China didn't. From this you can guess why Trotskyists are the only ones who consider China neoliberal - they must've fallen to a capitalist restoration, too, as socialism in one country ("Stalinism") is theoretically impossible in a non-degenerate state.

Posted by: vk | Sep 1 2020 12:32 utc | 82

China will unite Europe.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 1 2020 12:35 utc | 83

Schmatz @

So now I am a Trotskyist too, even though I explicitly made a point for a poster being one due to his attitude towards the Soviet project. Or even an agent of one of the alphabet soup of western agencies. Sure, when you cannot counter another poster due to your ignorance, you accuse him of all sorts of utter horsecrap, a good deal of which you're guilty yourself. You really have serious issues.

As for knowledge of English, I wasn't aware that any language used by humans is by default an imperialist one. I guess that is the reason that b, a German, operates his blog in the English language: maybe he is an imperialist. But then again, maybe the reason you should learn a bit more is to comprehend what others write to avoid misrepresenting their views, unless, of course, you are interested in defaming them.

Posted by: Constantine | Sep 1 2020 12:45 utc | 84

The only two way outs of this situation, according to Trotsky: capitalist restoration or the rest of the world also becomes socialist, thus "lifting the siege" on the USSR.

The USSR in fact dissolved to a capitalist restoration, but China didn't. From this you can guess why Trotskyists are the only ones who consider China neoliberal - they must've fallen to a capitalist restoration, too, as socialism in one country ("Stalinism") is theoretically impossible in a non-degenerate state.

Posted by: vk | Sep 1 2020 12:32 utc | 82

This is the perennial problem with Trotskyists and other elements in the radical left: they are always looking for the perfection which is easily found when you're not in position of authority and bear the responsibility for policies that affect nations. Nonstop criticism without offering practical solutions.

It is interesting that the original version of "Socialism in One Country" was an enhanced NEP, supported by Stalin and Bukharin (the latter offering the theoretical backing). It was opposed by Trotsky and his supporters and ironically, their program was adopted by Stalin in 1929-30 with some modifications. Their criticism afterwards, is that now Stalin had acted too rushly.

And yet, when Deng began his reforms in the 80s and the Vietnamese started implementing the Doi Moi policies at the same period, to a great extent they were basing their theoretical platform on the Soviet policies of the 20s, initiated by Lenin and afterwards continued by Bukharin and (up to 1929) Stalin.

Posted by: Constantine | Sep 1 2020 13:01 utc | 85

@ H.Schmatz | Sep 1 2020 11:06 utc | 76

Montenegro is on the Adriatic coast.
(I've driven down that coast road when it was Yugoslavia. It's an archetypal coast road, not quite wide enough for two trucks, a drop into the sea on one side and cliffs on the other.)
Russia already has a base in the Med, in a more hospitable environment than Montenegro.

@ William Gruff | Sep 1 2020 12:03 utc | 80

By "collapse" I wasn't suggesting it was going to get smaller, rather that it didn't have any viability as a state, and would inevitably merge with one of its neighbours.

Yugoslavia was not some economic powerhouse, it was up to its neck in debt. Tito was fiercely independent of the Soviet Union.
It would've been to NATO's advantage to get it onside post Tito but Bush seemed to want to sell it off to his mates, followed by Madeling Albright purusing it as some kind of vanity project.

Thanks for your replies on this.

I won't take my coat off .... etc

Posted by: Ken Platt | Sep 1 2020 13:06 utc | 86

Unreadable claptrap. Somewhere under the rhetoric, there is a message I suspect I might agree with. Stick to the angry, expletive commenting of yore.

Posted by: petra | Sep 1 2020 13:34 utc | 87

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 1 2020 11:37 utc | 78

Excellent remarks Hr. Gruff.

Also I’ve noticed that the memes deluging the us population via corporate media like “white fragility” o.s.v. are designed to fuel intra working class tensions as they are used by both “sides” in heated emotional exchanges. They shape thought so as to veil seeing the real enemy of everyday people today which I identify, grounded in my understanding of history and economics, as being a privatized financial system which has devoured its host.

Posted by: suzan | Sep 1 2020 14:02 utc | 88

I have a friend from Montenegro. Goes home for at least a month every summer. He is there now. Took some doing to arrange the travel in covid time.

What he has been telling me for years is the country has suffered a very longterm drought and endless heatwaves. No one left but old people. Place is many levels beyond falling apart. He is astounded that any in US government care. Nothing left to steal.

Posted by: oldhippie | Sep 1 2020 14:06 utc | 89

MeanWhile... In American 'AndersWo'(someplace else)...

NYC passes grim gun-violence milestone as shootings top 1,000 for the year

At Least 54 People Shot, 10 Killed In Weekend Gun Violence In Chicago
Cops clear BLM protesters from outside the White House with tear gas and rubber bullets while thousands march behind Jacob Blake's family in Kenosha as clashes continue across the country....

Watch: People chanting "death to America" in the streets of USA.
American Workers Have Been Given a Raw Deal by Trump
by Lawrence Wittner

During pre-pandemic years, the labor market was shifting, producing a rising percentage of workers concentrated in low-paying jobs. A study released by the Brookings Institution in late 2019 reported that 44 percent of American workers (53 million people) earned low wages, with median annual pay of $17,950 per year. Low-wage work was often precarious, with unpredictable schedules, reduced benefits, and unsteady employment. Low-wage workers usually remained stuck in these jobs, and even workers in the middle class were “more likely to move down the occupation ladder than up.” Unable to cover their living costs, substantial numbers of Americans worked at two or more jobs.

Overall, wages remained stagnant during the Trump era, with gains in take-home pay eaten up by inflation, leaving “real wages” for workers the same as 40 years before. By contrast, the compensation received by their bosses rose dramatically, leading to an executive-to-worker pay ratio of 339 to 1.

Millions of American workers also suffered injury and even death on the job. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2018 alone private sector employers reported 2.8 million nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses. Fatal work injuries numbered 5,280.

According to the U.S. Labor Department, in 2017 there were 2.5 million child workers in the United States !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OECD: the United States, in 2019, was exceeded only by Latvia !!!! in having
the highest percentage of low-wage workers

This is not entirely surprising, as the U.S. minimum wage has been stuck at $7.25 an hour since 2009, placing the United States behind Luxembourg ($13.78), Australia ($12.14), France ($11.66), New Zealand ($11.20), Germany ($10.87), Netherlands ($10.44), Belgium ($10.38), Britain ($10.34), Ireland ($9.62), Canada ($9.52), and Israel ($7.94).

U.S. workers had a longer work week than full-time workers in 24 OECD nations. In addition, the United States remained the only country with an advanced industrial economy that did not guarantee workers a paid vacation.

Although the United States had no legally mandated paid holidays, most advanced industrial countries offered at least six per year. As a result, close to one in four Americans had no paid vacation and no paid holidays, while the average American worker in the private sector received only 10 paid vacation days and six paid holidays.

The United States also remained the only advanced industrial nation that failed to guarantee paid maternity leave to workers.

Well-known Russian economist Sergey Glazyev – about the uniqueness of our economic model and the disastrous course of European integration

Posted by: Ashino | Sep 1 2020 14:09 utc | 90

All this writing of fascism. I haven't posted the below in a couple of years but this thread seems to call for it.


1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism

From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights

The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause

The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism

Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

5. Rampant sexism

Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

6. A controlled mass media

Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.

7. Obsession with national security

Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together

Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

9. Power of corporations protected

Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated

Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts

Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment

Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption

Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

14. Fraudulent elections

Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.

NOTE: The above 14 Points was written in 2004 by Dr. Laurence Britt, a political scientist. Dr. Britt studied the fascist regimes of: Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile).

Posted by: psychohistorian | Sep 1 2020 14:41 utc | 91

A good analysis, b , but I beg to differ, Europe is no going to war. We are re to many that remembers our past and I think they have said stop. I aas born in the last breaths of WWII and was given livid explanations from my both German and English ancestors ( yes true). Europe at least the northern part has had unimaginable prosperity (on behalf of many other people), they will not throw that away.
As a former officer and commander in the western armies, I say : NO MORE WAR!

Posted by: Den lille abe | Sep 1 2020 14:45 utc | 92

vk@82 is I think entirely wrong that only Trotskyists think China is capitalist ("neoliberal" is usually more a scare word than an idea.) Maoists too will even claim China is imperialist, though when this happened can be surprisingly vague. For instance the war of choice against Vietnam is never---so far as I know---deemed to be imperialist, or even criticized. Most of all of course, the nearly universal claim in the media is that real communism died with Mao (for which they thank God,) and China's success proves conclusively that capitalism has a future. Yet, it's true that serious figures in the government, in certain situations, will admit otherwise. (Here's an example:

As to the definition of fascism, I think the emergence of fascism in countries suffering defeat or trying to create a colonial empire exposes a critical aspect to fascism.* Of course trade unions and their political expression in social democracy, popular fronts and communism are suppressed. But even the members of the bourgeoisie are disciplined for the sake of the national crusade. Dictatorship in some form is a necessity for centralized command. So, I would define fascisms as the mobilization of a mystical version of the nation under a dictatorship/oligarchy. Select groups are scapegoated by both legal discrimination and illegal violence. The trade unions, and the political formations of workers such as social democrats, popular frontists and communists, are suppressed, while reactionary cross-class institutions are exalted, even privileged.** The particular forms of irrationalism are historically inherited, or copied from colonial empires that won.***

*Spain was defeated in el Desastre, the Spanish-American war. Even Italy could not be regarded as a real winner, despite Trieste. Japan of course did not lose, but faced huge obstacle in following up its victory in WWI. It was the custom at the time to acknowledge the relationship between Japan and the other fascist powers, despite the superficial differences. Japan did not have a major historical tradition of domestic minorities, being an island. And the illegal violence was assassination, rather than pogrom and ethnic cleansing of the Home Islands. But any definition of fascism should address why imperial Japan was fascist, or explain why it was incorrectly deemed fascist at the time.

**Spanish fascism, Croatian fascism, etc. were highly Catholic, rather than secular/modernist. But even Nazi Germany remained largely Lutheran and officially united with the Roman Catholic church, despite the occasional flirtations of some Nazis with Odinism etc. Japan's State Shinto was their version of the same. The emphasis on mass parties was about mass mobilization. The militarism of the Junkers or Bushido, fused with elites and promoted to the masses on a massive scale also relied on a heavy dose of irrationalism to sell the false proposition that the nation could benefit from empire. This is only true if you define nation apart from the majority of the actual, living, breathing people.

***This is clearest with Hitler, who basically dreamed of recreating the American West in Siberia, with brave German settlers killing off the Injuns/Slavs. And US eugenics and scientific racism and Jim Crow were direct inspirations for Nazi laws. The Spanish concentration camps in Cuba and the English concentration camps in South Africa during the Boer war were models closely emulated. Personally I think the first attempts at death camps can be found in the prison labor in the post-war South of the US. The mortality rates of blacks---who I am somehow convinced tended to be more resisters to the restoration of white supremacy than mere criminals---was horrifying. But it's true that the likes of Ava Duvernay merely see Lincoln restoring slavery.

If one objects that this definition implies that US and Israeli democracy overlap with fascism, I can only say that fascism, as a form of bourgeois class rule---which it is, as their property was protected, even if a handful of individual bourgois suffered, as in Putin's Russia today---is on a political spectrum with bourgeois democracy. Socialism and communism are on a different spectrum entirely. I agree with vk that theories of totalitarianism (and the implicit vital center,) are falsifications, ideological constructs rather than real ideas with discernible relationships to facts.

Constantine@84 criticizes Stalin for being too left by adopting the Trotskyist program. I can only say that if Bukharin had won, the USSR would have been defeated by Hitler. This likelihood I think is the prime reason why Stalin is so bitterly hated even today. Obviously I can't prove it. But then, it is not even clear that Bukharin would have even cared to fight Hitler. Another reason for the posthumous favoritism for Bukharin, I suppose.

As to Deng? I don't think the success of Chinese economy is not entirely due to capitalism, even if direct investment by foreign capitalists played a huge role. I think a lot of it is due to the remnants of property in the means of production, that have served to subsidize much of the development. It may be customary to think of these subsidies as inefficiencies, because the rising bourgeoisie in China resents any income and property they don't own. But, if they had their way, their government would be as effective in promoting capitalism as the US government. But I don't think an astronomical Hang Seng is any more a proof of a strong economy than an astronomical NYSE. The growth of the Chinese economy with such gross distortions by capitalist elements has generated an extensive petty bourgeois class that is apt to follow the billionaire bourgeois into revolution against the remnant foundations of socialism. Simultaneously there are millions left behind, hidden behind the misuse of averages.

Even worse, the capitalist roading politics of Xi is leading to meaningless wars. Deng invaded Vietnam for, basically, shits and giggles, something more monstrous than Mao ever did. Xi today is trying to dispossess Korean socialism even though the goal of putting in a servile norther regime committed to capitalism is insane. The fall of socialism in the north will pose an existential threat to China. Xi meanwhile is pandering to "national" prestige with pointless escapades in Ladakh and the South China Sea. But Xi is grossly mishandling the open sores of Hong Kong and the Islamist threat in the northwest. (No, the China Dream is not going to win over the Uighurs or the Turkmen or Mongols or very likely not even the Hui.) The likelihood that Xi isn't as doomed to failure as Bukharin in my view is extremely high.

psychohistorian@91 is fairly sensible in many ways. But the role of imperial projects, either to conquer an empire or create a new state, is still omitted here. Also, this overlaps so much with most states it is hard to say which aren't fascist. As capitalism declines, the happier forms of bourgeois democracy decline with it, in my judgment. But most people believe capitalism works fine, as in, see China. If most governments count as fascist, how useful is this definition? In some ways, even the Umberto Eco version of fascism, with it's mind reading and peering into the soul, is more specific, I think.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Sep 1 2020 14:50 utc | 93

steven t johnson@93 has a double negative which is really stupid grammar. It should be either "I don't think the success of Chinese economy is entirely due to capitalism.." Or it should be "I think the success of Chinese economy is not entirely due to capitalism..." But it's moronic to think it can be both!

Obviously steven t johnson's comment is completely worthless.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Sep 1 2020 14:56 utc | 94

suzan @88: "I’ve noticed that the memes deluging the us population via corporate media like “white fragility” o.s.v. are designed to fuel intra working class tensions as they are used by both “sides” in heated emotional exchanges."

Precisely! "White fragility" versus "Black entitlement and irresponsibility". These narratives are as tailored to specific demographics as are commercials for clothing or hair care products. This is done deliberately to split the working class population.

Sadly, when the Soviet Union was dissolved the population it previously protected was unaccustomed to this kind of marketing. Where we in the West have developed a tolerance (in the addictive drug sense) for coordinated mass media marketing and it takes higher doses of it in greater concentration to influence us, this kind of narrative spinning hit the unprepared people of Eastern Europe like brutally heavy doses of heroin. These same kinds of divisive narratives ripped Yugoslavia's society apart.

It is obscene hypocrisy that the "liberal" West preaches racial and religious harmony while feeding the world divisive poison.

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 1 2020 15:07 utc | 95

Here's google's definition of Jacobin -

a member of a democratic club established in Paris in 1789. The Jacobins were the most radical and ruthless of the political groups formed in the wake of the French Revolution, and in association with Robespierre they instituted the Terror of 1793–4.

A harder rightist (or more fascist) pov would be difficult to imagine.

Posted by: Kristan hinton | Sep 1 2020 15:25 utc | 96

What the heck is Trump reading? - not a bad website, not the best but Matt Drudge isn't a shill either ... 'Plane of Thugs' Talk Echoes Debunked FACEBOOK Post... - basically NBC making fun of Trump for running with admittedly a dogdy consiracy theory.

Sigh, what a waste. We get a President who instinctively knows that the the MSM is total BS and who actually tries to search for the truth but looks for it in all of the wrong places. I'd kill to be President if for no other reason then to get access to all of the classified info. Yeah, I know, I'd get stonewalled but I'd use my power to take my pound or two of flesh. BTW I don't think I'm a narcissist, more like a kid in a candy store.

Anyway, what the heck is Trump reading, Breitbart, who got into his head? It's as if someone gave him a list of the very worst websites to read. Here is my list of crap websites ...

Veterans Today (sorry Gordon Duff, I do think you mean well but you don't filter anything),

The Jerusalem Post (perhaps unfair, no worse than any of the Neocon garbage than you read in the U.S. but for some reason people think it is more expert because it has the mystique of being in Israel, all because you are near Syria doesn't mean you know about Syria if you treat is like a leper colony)

Newsmax / FOX news.

What is Trump reading? He comes out w/this bizzaro stuff on a regular basis.

Posted by: Christian J. Chuba | Sep 1 2020 15:38 utc | 97

Posted by: psychohistorian | Sep 1 2020 14:41 utc | 91

This is a good list and I don't remeber the name of the scholar who established it, but it really has to catch up with the developments of the post-Cold War era. The fundamental difference is that the most insidious form of fascism today is not overt, but comes through later day liberalism.

Specifically, intellectuals and arts have been coopted, while sexism and human rights are presented in a different light, used whenver convenient and discarded when not. THe use of religion has been transformed too, with the Anglo-American establishment creating a neopagan cult of its own that deifies the individual according to one's access to immense wealth and unfettered consumerism, while damning one for the opposite.

IMHO this is quite significant, because it is through the attachment to outworn tropes that Trump is exceptionalized as a fascist, when the conditions that would warrant such a label have been present for a long time, particularly after the collapse of the eastern bloc. In short, the advent of neoliberal, corporate fascism is a reality that clearly predates Trump. It is absolutely no coincidence that vilification of the USSR and anti-communism have been far more intense AFTER the dissolution of the socialist bloc and the passing of the supposed communist peril.

Posted by: Constantine | Sep 1 2020 15:51 utc | 98

@ Constantine | Sep 1 2020 15:51 utc | 98 who wrote about fascism

The scholar is noted at the bottom:
NOTE: The above 14 Points was written in 2004 by Dr. Laurence Britt, a political scientist. Dr. Britt studied the fascist regimes of: Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile).

The manifestations of fascism have changed but not the reason behind it, global private finance. Fascism is one of the "religious" outgrowths of global private finance.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Sep 1 2020 16:12 utc | 99

Watched a segment of the 3-part documentary about Pan-Am, Across the Pacific, which provides an outstanding dramatized look into the teamwork between business and government in expanding Empire all based on historical records. The engineering is fascinating as is what appears to be collusion between the actors. It's a very entertaining and educational 3 hours; and given the huge controversy currently surrounding the US Postal Service, it's very instructive to see how it was so fundamentally involved in building the Outlaw US Empire. While watching, the viewer can muse over the sort of political-economy being utilized and juxtapose the USA's method with that of the Europeans who saw airtravel as the natural monopoly it is.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 1 2020 16:15 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.