/lit/ - Literature

>>19143251
this is the only good one I know of but it gets a bit schizo tier with baudrillard and the eustace mullins stuff

start with a. james gregor's work as an introduction to fascism

essentially, with fascism- DIRECT ACTION is the name of the game. you're going to have to organize with like minded people- preferably communists and other radicals bridge the gap with your differences. you want radical people in your group willing to do some crazy things.

that, is fascism.

>>19143550
oh and this isn't on the list, but read marx's political writings. basically anything political and radical, you would want to read.
people give marxists a lot of shit, but it's them you can thank for the 8 hour workday.

i don't know if, you were to become a fascist you'd really be concerned with "organizing trade unions" but that's just my bias I guess.
i suppose under capitalism however, having the commons seize foreign owned capital would be extremely patriotic and "fascist"

the dividing line between the marxists and the fascists is the question of the means of production. for marxists ownership must go to the commons, whilst in fascism the state was historically the regulator of production

that's up to you to figure out if the classes are inherently contradictory and if class warfare is inevitable. the fascists themselves never had agreement on this and some embraced class warfare while others were critical of it

fascism, or "fascists" more accurately were greatly influenced by nietzsche's dynamic individual. so they did not have much faith in scientific socialism or the masses achieving anything through their own means.

this website has a lot of information from the period:
http://bibliotecafascista.blogspot.com/2013/05/last-testament-of-benito-mussolini-1945.html

>The worker who fulfills his social duty with no other hope than a piece of bread and the health of his family repeats, on a daily basis, an act of heroism. Labourers are infinitely superior to all false prophets who pretend to represent them. These false prophets have an easy time of it due to the insensitivity of those who have the sacrosanct duty of taking care of labourers. It is for this reason that I was, and am, a socialist.
>The accusation of inconsistency is without foundation. My behaviour has always been consistent in the sense of looking to the substance, not the appearance of things. I have adapted myself, socialistically, to reality. As the natural development of society proved more and more of Marx's predictions to be wrong, true socialism retreated from the possible to the probable. The only feasible socialism that can be truly implemented is Corporativism—a merging point, a place of equilibrium and justice, with respect for collective interests.

rip, musso

Take the lainpill, lainposter

>>19143251
Listen to this anon>>19143550
>>19143602

Also completely correct, James a Gregor is best book on fascism you will read, if you have to pick one. You will immediately realize 99.999 % of people that use the term have no idea what it means or it’s history. Also completely right about Marx, you can disagree with his thought, but it is incredibly important and influential. Like the Bible or Quran, you can read it for it’s importance and legacy without having to convert to it.

>>19143610
>lainchart
>no John C. Lily

???

Just read A James Gregor and Zeev Sternhell and the authors they talk about ignore the schizos who recommend books published by American subhumans

>>19143631
Should have started with the dolphins I guess

>>19143602
>>19143617
>The fact is that as a young man Mussolini accepted all the essential theoretical and interpretive propositions of Marx. His published writings between 1902 and 1914 contain innumerable references to Marx and only seven allusions to Babeuf and eight to Proudhon. Both his published writings and what we can reconstruct of his reading during this period indicate a preoccupation with the ideas of Marx that far exceeds any concern he had for other thinkers. Mussolini's point of departure was unquestionably Marx. No adequate reconstruction of his thought is possible if that fixed point is neglected. Not only was he a convinced Marxist, he was a knowledgeable one as well. His published writings contain regular references to the works of Marx and Engels. He specifically refers to every major piece of Marx's published writings available at that time. He alludes to Marx's writings in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, the "Theses on Feuerbach," "Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right," A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, The Class Struggles in France, as well as Capital and the Communist Manifesto. In a number of places he not only alludes to The Poverty of Philosophy, but provides extensive quotations as well. He also provides quotations from the Contributions to the Critique of Political Economy, the Marx-Engels correspondence, Marx's articles in the New York Tribune, and the Communist Manifesto. There are references to Engels' The Conditions of the Working Class in England in 1845, quotations from the Anti-Duhring, and Engels' famous introduction to Marx's Class Struggles in France. He was not only familiar with the most important Marxist authors of the period, including Karl Kautsky and Wilhelm Liebknecht, some of whose work he translated, but he had read the works of theoreticians such as G. Plekhanov and Rosa Luxemburg, and Marx critics such as Werner Sombart. ... Whatever one thinks of his Marxism today, Mussolini was accepted by his socialist peers as a Marxist theoretician. He rose to leadership in the Italian Socialist Party at least in part on the basis of his recognized capacity as a socialist intellectual.