loquitor: assuming that one accepts the distinction you make between the features of "classical liberalism" and the actually existing capitalist mode of production that it does and does not speak about.
if i may, host--
there's a way in which you can link the stuff about goebbels to the problems that fascism created for american-style nationalist ideology by way of the (simple historical reality) of operation paperclip--you know, the americans controlled the master list of all german pows after ww2 and used this bureaucratic advantage to shelter a large number of german war criminals from prosecution--but most of this followed from a sense of wanting war reparations rather than from any elective affinity--and from a sense of wanting to get stuff like german intel about the soviets, as the cold war was already taking shape (war economies need war like a junky needs heroin, dontcha know)....but that is and is not a direct connection. and making it is problematic--there's some radio guy who i think is an old trotskyite who tries this one a routine basis--and it's a shame because he digs up alot of good information and then smashes it all down with simplistic interpretations.
the other problem--fascism as radicalized nationalism as ideological problem for the americans--you can kinda see playing out in more diffuse ways in the post-war period: one vector is visible via local german elections directly after the war, during which american occupation forces were willing t prevent kpd party members from winning elections by rigging them and/or allowing former nazis to stand...another via the erasure of the content of fascist ideology from the popular historical imagination concerning world war 2 by way of the blizzard to stupid war films that make nazis into a collection of fashion quirks, funny accents and the capacity to die in great anonymous number at the hands of the grizzled gi....and in the erasure of the magnitude of pre-war support for fascism amongst americans--but that's hard to say much about empirically (like in terms of numbers)...
i think that there *is* a problem---> fascism is primarily radicalized nationalism----both are a type of collective mental disorder orchestrated via ideology.
i don't imagine that a classic liberal would venture to speak to that, as notions of "individual freedom/liberty" are wholly abstract, not tied to anything at all, anywhere at all, just as "classical liberalism" has nothing to say about anyplace at all. so it seems to be applicable everywhere, should the motivation to apply it happen to take shape--such is the temptation of any metaphysics.
but that said, i kinda understand why loquitor would be perplexed--you keep skipping the middle steps of your arguments, comrade. someone reading your posts in the last section of this thread who is inclined to can insert those middle steps--but they aren't in the posts--and (for example) my attempt to fill them in creates problems because i don't have exactly the same linkages that you have in mind.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
Last edited by roachboy; 03-31-2008 at 12:39 PM..
|