|
I think there's a misunderstanding here... Not every kind of collective effort is essentially socialist or socialist derivative in nature...
The structure of the army is highly organised, controlled with the will of the individual suppressed for the will of the authority or collective goal, objective or aim enforced through 'military discipline', conditioning reflexes, propaganda, etc.
Are armed forces expressions of socialist ideology?
I seem to remember history making extensive reference to that well-known branch of liberals and socialists, The Roman Legions.
Is it possible that, with extensive exposure to how an entire society can be mobilised for war through an armed forces model as happened in 1914-18, with many positive results in planned economic expansion, social cohesion, etc, etc, Fascists might have seen no reason to end the mobilisation?
There is no denying that socialist thinking and the 'collectivism' of the military have cross-pollinated, but to my mind at least they are nowhere near the same.
__________________
"I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--
|