Against mirror world: fascists were not socialists(反对相反世界：法西斯主义者不是社会主义者)

（标题：国家资本主义黑皮书 ； 中间说明：将国家资本主义官僚政权说成“共产主义”以为资本主义和法西斯主义洗地 ；   最下方署名：一个读者：极右纳粹们屁都不知道。）

Anyone who has ever argued in person or online with Republican, alt-right, fascist, white nationalist, or the myriad overlapping identities of the Right today will recognize a few standard ahistorical moves they use to “win debates.” One is to bring out the “Black Book of Communism” whereby the body counts of state-capitalist, Stalinist, and Maoist, regimes are held up to show that “communism” has killed elevendy jillion people while capitalism has saved an equal amount, and simultaneously spread freedom, democracy, and wealth. The intent is never really to criticize these (state capitalist) regimes, but to prove capitalism is the only possible system a sane person would choose. A supporting argument notes that “capitalism is human nature” so stop pretending anyone who was not brainwashed by cultural Marxists at the University has a legitimate gripe with it. The vast majority of the people defending capitalism as freedom cannot tell you how capitalism works.

任何曾经与共和党，右翼，法西斯，白人民族主义者或今天的右派们的无数重叠身份进行过面对面或在线辩论的人都会认识到他们用来“赢得辩论”的一些标准的非历史性举动。一个是拿出记录国家资本主义者，斯大林主义者和毛主义政权的“共产主义黑皮书”展示“共产主义”已经杀死了数十亿人，而资本主义拯救了同等数量的人，同时传播了自由，民主和财富。 他们的意图从来不是真正批评这些（国家资本主义）政权，而是证明资本主义是一个理智的人唯一可能选择的制度。一个支持性的论点指出“资本主义是人类本性”，所以不要假装成任何没有被大学里的文化马克思主义者洗脑过的人会对此有合理的抱怨。 绝大多数以自由为名捍卫资本主义的人无法告诉你资本主义是如何运作的。

Especially popular these days are what I think of as the “mirror world” arguments. In our world we know capitalism is a system in which a ruling/owning class expropriates the surplus value of the labor power of the working class. Capitalism is a redistribution of value and wealth upward to a small dominating class. In mirror world, genius entrepreneurs and business people are “creatives,” “job creators” and “risk takers” whose “work” creates all wealth. The rest of us benefit from the hard work of this “John Galt” class. If you work hard you can be a boss someday, or a useful person like Kylie Jenner or Steve Jobs. Socialists “spend other people’s money” so they can drive the economy into the ground by giving out free stuff no one earned. It’s the people in urban areas, illegal immigrants, spoiled college students, feminists, and intellectuals who contribute nothing to society who get in the way of the normal functioning of such a perfect system.

这些天特别流行的是我认为的“相反世界”理论。 在我们的世界中，我们知道资本主义是一个统治/所有阶级剥夺工人阶级劳动力剩余价值的制度。 资本主义是将价值和财富重新分配到一个小型的主宰阶级手上。在相反世界中，天才企业家和商人是“创造者”，“创造就业者”和“冒险者”，他们的“工作”创造了所有财富。我们其他人受益于这个“John Galt”课程的辛勤工作。 如果你努力工作，你有一天可以成为老板，或者像凯莉詹纳或史蒂夫乔布斯那样有用的人。 社会主义者“花其他人的钱”，这样他们就可以通过赠送没有人获得的免费物品来毁灭经济。城市地区的人民，非法移民，被宠坏的大学生，女权主义者和知识分子，他们对社会没有任何贡献，妨碍了这种完美体系的正常运作。

Coming back to the subject of fascism, today the mirror world arguments depict antifa as violent thugs attacking peaceful marchers who only wanted to celebrate free speech. Antifa, or anyone in the street confronting white-nationalist wildings are the “real fascists.” Stormfronters, KKK, American Guard, Sons of Odin, Proud Boys, Rise Above Movement, White Aryan Resistance, Identity Evropa, Patriot Prayer and other groups who, together, mobilize fighting units to attack cities, terrorize and beat leftists, and demonize immigrants while calling for their deaths, are the Enlightened pro-democracy forces pushing against censorship and for civility. And aren’t the Proud Boys multi-ethnic, thereby proving they can’t be fascists? Never mind that Imperial Japan’s leaders were fascist, or that today’s Hindutva nationalists in India are fascists. Proud Boy Tiny Toese is Samoan! Who cares that he wears a “Pinochet Did Nothing Wrong” shirt? The “Right Wing Death Squad” line of clothing, is of course also not fascist in any way. “Pinochet killed zero people because communists aren’t people” is the Proud Boy line. If you see interviews with Proud Boy fighters, they usually portray themselves as under attack by hysterical communists, with themselves in the familiar Chris Kyle (“American Sniper”) role of the “sheep dog” fighting off the wolves to protect the herd (good, normal, Americans).

回到法西斯主义的主题，今天相反世界的论点将antifa描述为袭击那些只想庆祝言论自由的和平游行者的暴力的暴徒。 Antifa，或街上抗议白人民族主义者的人都是“真正的法西斯主义者”。风暴者，KKK，美国卫队，奥丁之子，骄傲男孩，崛起高于运动，白色雅利安抵抗，身份Evropa，爱国者祈祷和其他团体谁一起，动员战斗部队攻击城市，恐吓和殴打左翼，并在要求他们死亡的同时妖魔化移民，这些是开明的推动反对审查和文明的民主力量。并不是因为骄傲男孩是多种族的，从而证明他们不能成为法西斯主义者？没关系，日本帝国的领导人是法西斯主义者，或者今天印度的印度教民族主义者是法西斯主义者。骄傲男孩成员Tiny Toese是萨摩亚人！谁在乎他穿着“皮诺切特什么都没做错”的衬衫？ “右翼敢死队”系列的服装，当然也不是任何法西斯的方式。 “皮诺切特谁也没杀死，因为共产主义者不是人”是骄傲男孩的底线。如果你看到对骄傲男孩战士的采访，他们通常将自己描绘成遭到歇斯底里的共产主义者的攻击，他们自己也熟悉Chris Kyle（“美国狙击手”）扮演的“牧羊犬”角色，与狼群作战以保护羊群（好，正常，美国人）。

One of the most popular mirror world arguments posits that fascism has always been a leftist movement, anti-capitalist, and even socialist. These arguments often cite Nazi rhetoric used to appeal to the working class in the 1930s (and Trump also appeals to them today) from speeches on “the workers” or against bankers. They also like to bring up that Mussolini was a socialist (but leave out the part where he rejected socialism for nationalism) as evidence that fascism has always been socialist.

最受欢迎的相反世界论点之一认为，法西斯主义一直是左翼运动，反资本主义的，甚至是社会主义的。 这些论点经常引用纳粹的修辞，用于在20世纪30年代吸引工人阶级（特朗普今天也如此吸引他们）的来自“工人”或反对银行家的演讲。他们还想提出墨索里尼是一个社会主义者（但忽略了他拒绝社会主义以追求民族主义的部分），作为法西斯主义一直是社会主义的证据。

Here is Dinesh D’Souza whose anti-historical “research” often reads like a manifesto from a mass shooter, cherry picking data from left and right sources to make completely unhinged arguments:

这里是Dinesh D’Souza，他的反历史“研究”经常读起来像一个大规模枪击案的射手的宣言，从左右来源采摘数据，以制作完全无关的论点：

“But the most notable thing about, not only Mussolini’s Black Shirts, but about the National Socialists in Germany is that above all, They. Were. Socialists! They were socialists. Mussolini started out as a Marxist. He was the editor of the socialist journal in Italy. And so again, on the issue of fascism, in the 1930s and 40s, fascism and Nazism were widely understood to be left wing. They were understood that way by Mussolini, by Hitler, they were understood that way by FDR and by the New Deal. They were understood that way by reporters writing about the period. But after World War II a very interesting thing happens. Fascism becomes right wing. Right wing. This I want to suggest is another big lie. It is essentially the result of a kind of an intellectual sleight of hand in which after the war, when the horrors of National Socialism are now manifest for the world to see it becomes imperative to move fascism into the right wing column and pretend like it was some sort of excrescence of capitalism. That fascism was some sort of invention of the business community. Whereas in reality it arose out of an argument within socialism.”

这一大段胡搅蛮缠我懒得翻译了，由毫无逻辑的另类事实组成，大致意思就是“墨索里尼和希特勒自称社会主义，所以法西斯主义是社会主义”，呵呵呵呵，按照这种傻逼逻辑，共匪也是民主自由的，看看《历史的先声》中的那些对民主自由的鼓吹吧。当然，其中把法西斯主义等同于罗斯福新政，就更是完全在放屁了（罗斯福新政的一个重要改革是承认并法律保护独立工会，而法西斯主义禁止独立工会）。

-Dinesh D’Souza, “Socialism Into Fascism – The Left Is And Always Was The Problem” from Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jPaq86OnJs

So I thought it might be useful just to post what a couple of historical scholars of fascism have to say about whether fascism is either anti-capitalist or socialist. I don’t expect people on the far right to be persuaded by historically grounded arguments, but with such grounded sources, those on the left can better define our own goals in opposition to fascism and its progenitor, capitalism.

因此，我认为仅仅发表一些法西斯主义的历史学者对法西斯主义是反资本主义的还是社会主义的的说法可能是有用的。 我不认为极右纳粹们会被历史上有根据的论据所说服，但是如果有这样的根源，左派们可以更好地确定我们自己的目标，反对法西斯主义及其祖先，资本主义。

Excerpt from Robert O. Paxton’s The Anatomy of Fascism:

来自Robert O. Paxton的“法西斯主义剖析”摘录：

Another supposed essential character of fascism is its anticapitalist, antibourgeois animus. Early fascist movements flaunted their contempt for bourgeois values and for those who wanted only “to earn money, money, filthy money.” They attacked “international finance capitalism” almost as loudly as they attacked socialists. They even promised to expropriate department-store owners in favor of patriotic artisans, and large landowners in favor of peasants.

法西斯主义的另一个本质特征是它的反资本主义，反资产阶级的敌意。 早期的法西斯运动展现他们对资产阶级价值观以及那些只想“赚钱，赚钱，肮脏的钱”的人的蔑视。他们抨击“国际金融资本主义”几乎和他们攻击社会主义者一样大声。 他们甚至承诺征收百货商店所有者，支持爱国工匠和支持农民的大地主。

Whenever fascist parties acquired power, however, they did nothing to carry out these anticapitalist threats. By contrast, they enforced with the utmost violence and thoroughness their threats against socialism. Street fights over turf with young communists were among their most powerful propaganda images. Once in power, fascist regimes banned strikes, dissolved independent labor unions, lowered wage earners’ purchasing power, and showered money on armaments industries, to the immense satisfaction of employers. Faced with these conflicts between words and actions concerning capitalism, scholars have drawn opposite conclusions. Some, taking the words literally, consider fascism a form of radical anticapitalism. Others, and not only Marxists, take the diametrically opposite position that fascists came to the aid of capitalism in trouble, and propped up by emergency means the existing system of property distribution and social hierarchy.

然而，每当法西斯政党获得权力时，他们就没有采取任何措施来实施这些反资本主义威胁。 相比之下，他们以最大的暴力和彻底的态度对社会主义进行威胁。 在街头与年轻共产党人争夺阵地是他们最强大的宣传形象之一。 一旦掌权，法西斯政权就禁止罢工，解散独立工会，降低工人阶级的购买力，以及向军工提供资金，以满足极大的满足雇主。面对对资本主义的言论和行动之间的这些冲突，学者们得出了相反的结论。 有些人从字面上看，认为法西斯主义是一种激进的反资本主义。 其他人，而不仅仅是马克思主义者，采取截然相反的立场，认为法西斯主义者来帮助陷入困境的资本主义，而支持紧急情况则意味着支持现有的财产分配制度和社会等级制度。

This book takes the position that what fascists did tells us at least as much as what they said. What they said cannot be ignored, of course, for it helps explain their appeal. Even at its most radical, however, fascists’ anticapitalist rhetoric was selective. While they denounced speculative international finance (along with all other forms of internationalism, cosmopolitanism, or globalization—capitalist as well as socialist), they respected the property of national producers, who were to form the social base of the reinvigorated nation. When they denounced the bourgeoisie, it was for being too flabby and individualistic to make a nation strong, not for robbing workers of the value they added. What they criticized in capitalism was not its exploitation but its materialism, its indifference to the nation, its inability to stir souls. More deeply, fascists rejected the notion that economic forces are the prime movers of history. For fascists, the dysfunctional capitalism of the interwar period did not need fundamental reordering; its ills could be cured simply by applying sufficient political will to the creation of full employment and productivity. Once in power, fascist regimes confiscated property only from political opponents, foreigners, or Jews. None altered the social hierarchy, except to catapult a few adventurers into high places. At most, they replaced market forces with state economic management, but, in the trough of the Great Depression, most businessmen initially approved of that. If fascism was “revolutionary,” it was so in a special sense, far removed from the word’s meaning as usually understood from 1789 to 1917, as a profound overturning of the social order and the redistribution of social, political, and economic power. (Paxton. The Anatomy of Fascism, P.10-11)

这本书采取的立场是法西斯主义者所做的告诉我们的至少与他们所说的一样多。当然，他们所说的不容忽视，因为它有助于解释他们的吸引力。然而，即使在最激进的情况下，法西斯主义者的反资本主义言论也是有选择性的。虽然他们谴责国际金融投机（以及所有其他形式的国际主义，世界主义，或全球化——资本主义的或社会主义的），但他们尊重国家生产者的财产，他们将成为重振国家的社会基础。当他们谴责资产阶级时，他们是在谴责过于松散和个人主义使国家不够强大，而不是谴责剥夺工人的剩余价值。他们批评资本主义不是批评它的剥削，而是它的唯物主义，对国家的冷漠，无法激发灵魂。更为深刻的是，法西斯主义者拒绝接受经济力量是历史的主要推动者的观点。对于法西斯主义者来说，两次世界大战期间功能失调的资本主义并不需要根本性的重塑；只要将充分的政治意愿用于创造充分就业和生产力，就可以治愈其弊病。法西斯政权一旦掌权，就只从政治对手，外国人或犹太人那里没收财产。没有改变社会等级，除了将一些冒险者弹射到高处之外。最多，他们用国家经济管理取代了市场力量，但是，在大萧条的低谷，大多数商人最初允许了这一点。如果法西斯主义是“革命性的”，那么它就是一种特殊的意义，远离1789年至1917年通常理解的词义：对社会秩序和社会，政治和经济权力进行推翻和重新分配。（Paxton。法西斯主义剖析，P.10-11）

Excerpt from Ian Kershaw’s The Nazi Dictatorship dealing with the continuity of the class system under Nazis:

摘自Ian Kershaw的“纳粹独裁统治”，论述纳粹统治下的阶级制度的连续性：

The emphasis has, therefore, been far more heavily laid upon the essential continuities in the class structure of Nazi Germany, rather than upon incisive changes.

因此，重点更多地在纳粹德国阶级结构的基本连续性上，而不是强烈的变化上。

Schoenbaum himself had accepted that the social position of the elites remained relatively unscathed down to the last phase of the war. He may, however, have rather exaggerated the extent of the fluidity in social structures and the amount of upward mobility which took place. Of course, it is true that thrusting, energetic, ruthless, and often highly efficient ‘technocrats of power’ such as Heydrich or Speer pushed their way to the top. And the war certainly accelerated changes in the high ranks of the Wehrmacht. But the new political elite co-existed and merged with the old elites rather than supplanting them.

Schoenbaum本人已经接受了精英的社会地位相对毫发无损这一事实，直至战争的最后阶段。 然而，他可能会夸大社会结构的流动程度和发生了的向上流动的程度。 当然，像Heydrich或Speer这样的强势，精力充沛，无情，而且经常是高效的“权力技术官僚”确实被推向了顶峰。 战争肯定加速了国防军高层的变化。 但是，新的政治精英与老精英们共存并整合，而不是取代他们。

Non-Party preserves such as big business, the civil service, and the army recruited their leadership for the most part from the same social strata as before 1933. Education remained overwhelmingly dominated by the middle and upper classes. The most important and powerful Party affiliation, the SS, recruited heavily from the elite sectors of society. If the traditional ruling class had to make some room for social upstarts from lower ranks of society who had gained advancement through positions of power and political influence, such changes amounted to little more than a slight acceleration of changes already perceptible in the Weimar Republic.

大企业，公务员和军队等非党派代表在1933年以前从同一社会阶层中招募了他们的领导者。教育仍然被中产阶级和上层阶级的绝大部分所主宰。最重要和最强大的党派，纳粹党，从社会精英阶层进行大量招募。如果传统的统治阶级不得不为新贵们提供一些空间，这些社会新贵通过权力和政治影响力获得晋升，那么这种变化只不过是在魏玛共和国时期已经可以感受到的变化的微小加速。

At the other end of the social scale, the working class– deprived of a political voice, its social gains of the Weimar Republic reversed, and exposed in the shadow of mass unemployment to the brutal exploitation of employers backed by the repressive apparatus of the police state– had its living standard reduced in the first years of the Third Reich even from the lowly level of the depression era. The slight rise in real wages in the later 1930s was a by-product of the armaments boom, and was accompanied by intensified pressure– physical and mental– upon the industrial workforce. The class position of workers remained basically unchanged into the middle of the war– except that the most extreme exploitation now fell upon foreign workers.

在社会的另一端，工人阶级—被剥夺了政治声音，其在魏玛共和国得到的社会收益发生逆转，并暴露在大规模失业的阴影下被有警察国家这一压迫工具的暴虐的雇主剥削—在第三帝国的头几年，即使相比萧条时期的低水平，其生活水平也有所降低。1930s后期实际工资的小幅上涨是军备爆炸性增长的副产品，并伴随着对工业劳工的增强压力—身体和精神上的压力。 在战争中期，工人的阶级地位基本保持不变—除了最极端的剥削现在落在外国工人身上之外。

The most significant changes in the nature and composition of German labour occurred in the last phase of the war and were, in the main, the consequences of military service, losses at the Front, destruction of industries, dislocation of the workforce, evacuation and homelessness, and ultimately foreign conquest. Whatever changes had taken place by 1945 were, therefore, a product of Nazism’s collapse more than of its policies while in power. (Ian Kershaw, Nazi Dictatorship, 175-176)

德国劳工的性质和构成的最明显变化发生在战争的最后阶段，主要是军事服务造成的后果，前线的损失，工业的破坏，劳动力的错位，疏散和无家可归 ，最终是外国征服。 因此，1945年发生的任何变化都是纳粹主义崩溃的结果，而不是其执政时的政策。 （Ian Kershaw，Nazi Dictatorship，175-176）