'Economic depression will lead to a rise in the far right' Yes or No?

[The RADICAL 10]

Why do you imply that a utopian goal of 'one world' is in some way not a desireable?

 

Whilst your caracature of marxism fits the Soviet and Maoist models it doesn't fit with the intentions of Marx nor with the intentions of the majority of by no means homogeneous group of people who identify themselves as left wing\socialist. Their view of communism is the striving towards a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life.

 

Since the earliest days of the first international there has been debate about whether revolution or reformism were the way forward. Even amongst those identifying themselves as revolutionary many didn't see that as necessitating violence or barricades so much as a big change in ideology over a short period of time. The ascendency of revolutionary thought between the first and second world wars was largely due to the reformists supporting their respective nation states rather than seeing beyond the national interests to the class interests that should have determined their allegiances. Since the 1940s in the Uk the main strand of communism has been explicitly reformist not revolutionary. The "British Road to Socialism" is seen as the defining point of that change.

 

Hi Wildcat. When I spoke of both the Capitalist and Communist goal of a 'one world' system - either based on global free-trade or international socialism - I was basing my opinion on what history has shown us so far.

 

I'm aware of the different interpretations of Marx, that a 'true' Marxist society has never been tried, that the Soviet Union was state capitalist etc. And I must admit that on paper Marxism sounds wonderful - Equal rights/contribution etc. But I must base my judgement on the various countries that have called themselves Communist and their Human rights record, motivating their people through fear and nationalism.

 

To me Marxism has been utterly and completely discredited. The British Left may have been on an explicitly reformist agenda since the forties, but the British Left has always been a huge disappointment. Peter Wright (Spycatcher) described them as being about as harmful (to the capitalist state) as a 'pond full of ducks'. With economic Marxism ditched, the left has anti-racism/war platforms to organise around. But no matter how many times it is re-invented/re-formed it will never again have mass appeal. It is just an intellectual exercise of global fairness.

 

Just how could a global Socialist movement take power from the top 500 corporations - it would have to be armed revolution. I don't doubt your sincerity about achieving your aims, noble as they are, but think that any global system is incapable of uniting the human family without destroying the rich diversity of beliefs, traditions and identity.

[Longcol 600]

The parallels between the events leading up to the Great Depression of the 1930's and what is happening now are uncanny.

 

The depression led to the rise of the far right and ultimately ended in the 2nd World war.

 

Could it happen again?

 

Well the far right in this country would need a better leader than Fat Nick Griffin for a start.

 

So a no vote from me.

[Anna K 10]

Well the far right in this country would need a better leader than Fat Nick Griffin for a start.

 

Totally agree. But you haven't read the thread have you...?

Edited February 16, 2009 by Ms Macbeth
Fixed quotes

[Wildcat 10]

Hi Wildcat. When I spoke of both the Capitalist and Communist goal of a 'one world' system - either based on global free-trade or international socialism - I was basing my opinion on what history has shown us so far.

 

I'm aware of the different interpretations of Marx, that a 'true' Marxist society has never been tried, that the Soviet Union was state capitalist etc. And I must admit that on paper Marxism sounds wonderful - Equal rights/contribution etc. But I must base my judgement on the various countries that have called themselves Communist and their Human rights record, motivating their people through fear and nationalism.

 

To me Marxism has been utterly and completely discredited. The British Left may have been on an explicitly reformist agenda since the forties, but the British Left has always been a huge disappointment. Peter Wright (Spycatcher) described them as being about as harmful (to the capitalist state) as a 'pond full of ducks'. With economic Marxism ditched, the left has anti-racism/war platforms to organise around. But no matter how many times it is re-invented/re-formed it will never again have mass appeal. It is just an intellectual exercise of global fairness.

 

Just how could a global Socialist movement take power from the top 500 corporations - it would have to be armed revolution. I don't doubt your sincerity about achieving your aims, noble as they are, but think that any global system is incapable of uniting the human family without destroying the rich diversity of beliefs, traditions and identity.

 

Arguably in the late fourties to seventies we had come a long way towards socialism, most of the key utilitites and energy providers were in public ownership, we had one of the best examples of democracy in the world. Compared with the nineteenth century and the conditions that workers faced in the Uk then, we have come a long way arguably the change has been so great t could be called revolutionary. By the seventies it may not have been everything and certainly it had flaws but the politics including those of the Tories were working within the context of socialist ideas around a welfare state etc. Indeed we still have that today although there has been significant erosion with us losing power and control of the infrastructure each time something has been privatised losing it to democratic accountability.

 

We were instrumental in setting up the United nations, the international labour organisation and the various international laws on human rights and the geneva convention. Of course business has a say in all of these things too. The essential nature of marxist thought in terms of a conflict between class interests remains (although the reality on a local level is much more complex with additional power structures to be considered - gender\disability\racial\religious etc). The class conflict however on a large scale remains primary and exhibits itself structurally through the business and union representatives of the ILO, and obviously where ever there is a strike.

 

To me then our interests are more directly served democratically through trade union structures, especially where they link up internationally than they do through Parliament. But we have made many gains through the parliamentary system that should not be forgotten. I don't share your view it has all been a failure, but I share you realism in the crippling factionalism that marks much of the left. But I can't see any other way of successfully protecting working class interests against the interests of Corporations or the owners of big business.

 

The myth that Socialism is dead, is popular in the commentators especially those paid for by the international news corporations, mouth pieces as they are of business interests. With the internet however, we now have the potential to much more easily subvert the self interested reporting of the news. (Take the role international solidarity played in protecting the Zapatistas from more aggressive attacks by the Mexican army and corporate interests) Socialism may have been on the decline in the Uk, but internationally I think the trend has been slow progress and there is certainly hope for the future.

 

I see no reason why the rich diversity of beliefs, traditions and identity should be in anyway harmed, except where those traditions conflict with basic human rights. If anything through soldarity and the breaking down of alienation people will be able to transcend current traditions creating a diversity of positive enabling new ones.

Edited February 15, 2009 by Wildcat

[The RADICAL 10]

Well the far right in this country would need a better leader than Fat Nick Griffin for a start.

 

So a no vote from me.

 

Griffin has stated in the past that he would have to 'step aside' if his party was on the verge of becoming a serious force in British politics. He described himself as having 'too much baggage'.

 

Anyway, his strategy is to position the BNP to where it regularly achieves 15-20% in national electoral contests. He thinks that a coming crisis (undefined) would give a nationalist party with that level of committed support a launchpad to government, similar to Holland after the murder of Pym Fortyn a few years back.

[tomarse 10]

The only way I can imagine any nation or state having a solid and working ethic, is for a global effort using tools that humanity has only recently developed.

 

At the end of the day, people will always blame people who they are distant from in favour of their loved ones, friends and acquaintances. This isn't a bad characteristic at all, but it will always come up when dealing with global and national matters... which is the issue, the only way to resolve society is through teamwork, not segregation!

 

I've never been a fan of people's reasons as to who controls whose money and who controls whose well-being, it seems that the perfect solution is one that isn't possible due to the available resources and trail of **** left from history.

 

Bring on the era of understanding!

Edited February 15, 2009 by tomarse

[Wildcat 10]

Griffin has stated in the past that he would have to 'step aside' if his party was on the verge of becoming a serious force in British politics. He described himself as having 'too much baggage'.

 

Anyway, his strategy is to position the BNP to where it regularly achieves 15-20% in national electoral contests. He thinks that a coming crisis (undefined) would give a nationalist party with that level of committed support a launchpad to government, similar to Holland after the murder of Pym Fortyn a few years back.

 

He has also got Mark Collett earmarked for succeeding him, someone who despite his young age has already acquired a lot of baggage, admiration for Hitler, inviting 15 year old girls back to his room at their conference last year etc. but one quote from the young Nazi and Proud documentary I think is particularly revealing about his personality.

 

"I like to break people. When you've broken them and sucked that last bit of life out of them. That's it. When people say that I am evil, yeah I am. But it all depends. I'm either the sweetest angel or the most evil being you've ever encountered. It just depends which side you push me. Never kill people. Push them to the point of despair where they do it themselves because that's when you've really won."

[Anna K 10]

Charming... Obviously a name to look out for.

[The RADICAL 10]

All it would take is a charismatic leader with a good line in spin to latch onto the public mood for a hanging, and he or she would be away... the rest would be drawn by the promise of power.

 

Tony Blair?

 

In all seriousness I think their were two key factors in the rise of the far right. The first, as mentioned, was the Depression. It radicalised the electorate and damaged the moderate parties, polarising political opinion between the Marxists and the 'bourgeois' groups (which all moved to the far right to compete with the Nazis).

 

The second major factor was the Nazi Party itself. Now the Nazis were a party of protest, with not much of a positive programme apart from a few token socialist policies. They had few practical solutions to Germany's problems. But their ideas had a wide appeal to the electorate, or did not seem to be so outrageous as to put people off. Adolf Hitler was a charismatic figure who was able to drum up mass support by the strength of his rhetorical denunciations of the Republic.

 

Could it happen again? Of course. Will it happen in our lifetime? Personally I don't think so.

 

But I've been wrong before.

Edited February 16, 2009 by The RADICAL

[Beebop 10]

To be honest if there is a shift to the far right it will have little to do with who is in charge at number 10.

 

I will speak from my own experiences here.....

 

What I hated when I was unemployed was the fact I could not get out of my situation, and yet society in general made me feel I was an outcast. No matter how hard I tried I could not get back into normal society " no job etc.... people view you like you are trash, you become more angry and if this goes on for a few years will turn to real hate"

 

In my case I did not blame asians/blacks etc... as I knew the people who were hurting me were the faceless people behind desks, who in my opinion made my situation worse. If there was to have been a civil war in the 1990s, I would not have wanted it to be based on race, more to break the society that I could not be part of. I do recall when the Kosovo war broke out, I was hopeing that it would blow up into a massive war, as I felt I had more chance of being a person of value in that situiation, than in normal society. (I couldn't join the army on medical grounds in the mid 90s).

 

In this recession, I am seeing the looks in peoples eyes and the tones of their voices and to be quite frank I personally am finding it scary.

 

I do hope that should peoples anger boil over, then the anger will be directed towards the people who are to blame for this nightmare, and not people whos racial origin is different to their own.

 

I do fear that people's desperation may turn into anger/hate to be directed at the wrong people. I don't think the BNP have any answers, I do thin perhaps UKIP maybe the best way forward to rid ourselves of the EU, and to put British workers 1st.

 

HOw did I get out of my predicament ????? hard work, people are going to have to lace up the shoes that I put on back in 1999 and begin that long march to job security (which took me 10 years), throw all that energy into studying for a new career, don't direct it towards hatred.

[mick 333 10]

I totally agree to your thread.

Edited February 16, 2009 by mick 333
misspelling

[L00b 441]

Reply to original post: inevitably.

 

The question is how much of a rise, very aptly debated in the thread so far.

Edited February 17, 2009 by L00b