[Marxism] Fw:KAPD to NSDAP-reply to Chris (fwd from Carlos Rivera)

[David Walters <dwalters@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I should know better than to be surprised by such stupid replies, but
then
again this are uppose to be my pips...

> Comrade Carlos, by additive I suggest that we could build on the work
of
> our fellow reds rather than bust them. I accept Marx's credo of
> criticism, but I also understand Fidel's maxim about revolution:
in/for
> always, outside/against never.

I can't come to understand how socialist raison d'etat, uttered as a
principle for revolutionary government, applies to the search of
historical
fact and historical intepretation. This is quite simply mixing apples
and
oranges.

Parenti is doing a diservice to the revolutionary movement by having
glaring
errors, which create and nurture misconceptions about the nature and
historic origins/development of fascism.


> We might familiarize ourselves with the
> audience Michael Parenti endeavors to reach. They are non-specialists.
> They do not know what fascism is in the general sense, let alone its
> categorical distinctions.

Really? I thought Parenti's book was targeted at academic leftists who
wanted to be rallied to the class cause.

> To denounce Parenti's work as lazy because it
> doesn't delve deeply into the mutually discrete characteristics of
> Falangists, Fascists, Black Arrow, Nazis and SLORC is rather besides
the
> point.

The development of the german experience is NOT mutually discreet to
that of
other fascisms. It is significantly different. For one, it came to power
after winning democratic elections. For another, it originally came
from a
working class movement, with heavy anti-establishment subjectiveness.

This is not speacialist knowledge, but rather a glaring difference of
which
anyone who wants a general, not specialist, knowledge of fascism must be
aware of. I do agree details in a generally text are unneeded, but
wrongly
comparing the hitlerite Storm Troopers with the mussolinite Combat
Plows,
was Parenti's choice, not mine.


> It's like the difference between an introductory lecture for a
> general audience and an advanced course of study for specialists. Note
> the size of the text: it is a fairly slim, user-friendly,
> non-intimidiating pocketbook.

And I said as much.

> The benefit of Parenti's work can be
> found in its properties as an antidote to the pervasive red-baiting
with
> which US hegemony inundates its young people.

But sometimes the disease can be worse than the sickness. While it is
true,
that in the balance, the book is a positive addition, there is nothing
less
useful than a generation of leftists with unclear ideas about fascism.

Because if you don't know your enemy, you can't fight him. Which is what
happened to the KPD, but know we have an advantage over the KPD, called
perspective. To continue repeating the same honest mistakes of the KPD
after
the fog of war has lifted is plain dumb and anti-materialist.

> The benefit of your work
> is to build on this groundwork and take it to a higher power of
> scrutiny. Both have revolutionary utility.

Point being?

Of course, I would like to see comments on the actual contents of the
three
crticisms of historical fact I have of Parenti's work. To use an
academic
term, ya'll being tautological.

 Carlos