The Lost Literature of Socialism

By George Watson*

      Book Summary

      The most powerful indictment I’ve seen of contemporary historiography has got to be the studied ignorance in the West of the evidence brought to light in this slim little bombshell of a book. You will never be able to look at Marx, Hitler, socialism, fascism, National Socialism, or the Holocaust the same way again.

      Watson, a fellow in English at St. John’s College, Cambridge, has been Sandars Reader in Bibliography and is editor of the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature.

      What Watson has quietly pointed out should shame an awful lot of history professors. What were you taught about Nazism? If you’re like me, it was that Nazism was opposed to socialism. Indeed, it was socialism’s “opposite”: Nazism and Marxism constitute the two polar opposite ends of the spectrum of political thought. That they may sometimes seem to resemble each other is supposed to show only that opposite extremes may wrap around until they meet on the other side, or that fascism is a “confusing” ideology, too vague and elusive to explain or categorize. Hitler, as Ian Kearnshaw and many others claim, “was never a socialist.” The Nazis’ name: “National Socialist German Workers’ Party”, is supposed to be somehow a “misnomer”—-some kind of “false advertising.”

      Or so we’ve been told. Watson’s little book basically explodes this fairy tale.

      In fact, Fascism and National Socialism were thoroughly socialist movements. They bitterly opposed the “bourgeoisideology of capitalism: they bitterly opposed individualism, free trade, private property, free enterprise, limited government, and classical laissez-faire liberalism. Moreover, “almost the whole of National Socialism,” as Hitler would freely admit (at least in private) was based on Marx. He explained in Mein Kampf: “As National Socialists we see our program in our flag. In the red we see the social idea of the movement.”

      How can this be?

      First of all, as even social-democrat Sidney Hook has admitted, “Anti-Semitism was rife in almost all varieties of socialism.” (Commentary, Sept. 1978)

      Listen to Proudhon, socialist founding father and mentor of Marx: “The Jew is the enemy of the human race. One must send this race back to Asia or exterminate it…By fire or fusion or by expulsion, the Jew must disappear… What the people of the Middle Ages hated by instinct I hate upon reflection, and irrevocably. …The hatred of the Jew, as that of the English, must be an article of our political faith.” (1847, Carnets)

      Remember that the most central, fundamental, and essential tenet of socialism is that moneylenders (“capitalists”) are evil economic “parasites.” “Vampires,” “bloodsuckers,” Marx called them. The Devil of the socialist catechism is the “bourgeoisie.” Indeed, Marx had another word which he used as an equivalent term for “bourgeoisie,”—-“Jews.” And in place of the word “capitalism,” we find the early Marx using the word ‘Judentum,’ i.e., “Jewry.” As early as 1843—-a hundred years before the Holocaust—-Marx published one of his first and most sensational newspaper articles, a vituperative anti-Semitic temper tantrum “On the Jewish Question,” makes Hitler’s own tirades look mild. Its thesis is that “mankind will never be emancipated until it is emancipated from Jews and Jewry.” It concludes: “The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Jewry.” Period. End of essay.

      Understand that this popular piece was written and published five years before the Communist Manifesto (1848) and long before Das Kapital attempted to rationalize this as an economic theory in the 1860s. Rather than that Marx’s dubious economic theory of exploitation accidentally drove him to anti-Semitism, it appears things must be more the other way around: that Marx’s anti-Semitism drove him to cook up the dubious economic theory.

      “If we are socialists, then we must definitely be anti-Semites,” Hitler explained during a party speech in Munich, August 1920, “How, as a socialist, can you not be an anti-Semite?”

      Note also that even the idea that Germany should wage a “world war” against Russia and the “barbaric” Slavs, and that the Slavs should be annhilated during this German “world storm,” was an idea proposed by none other than Friedrich Engels, writing with Marx’s approval in Marx’s newspaper, in 1849. Both the advocation of genocide, and of coercive state eugenics generally, were originally a widespread aspect of the socialist movement before WWII.

      “I have learned a great deal from Marxism, as I do not hesitate to admit.” Hitler expalined, “I have really put into practice what these peddlers and pen-pushers have timidly begun.”

      That the Bolsheviks, German Social Democrats, and National Socialists all hated each other, fought each other, and accused each other of being capitalist sell-outs can never serve to demonstrate that any of them were not thoroughly socialist. Their mutual hatred is no more significant than the fact that various Christian sects often will deny that other Christian sects are at all Christian in any way, and indeed accuse them of being agents of Satan. To anyone who happens to stand outside of Christianity and/or socialism, the hyperbole of such internal quarrels among sects is hardly to be taken seriously.

      That the Nazis supressed union violence no more means they weren’t socialists than the fact that the Soviets did the same. Socialism is the public ownership (right of control and disposal) of the means of production, and there is a difference between union control and public control. Orthodox socialism—-public ownership by the state or “society as a whole” collectively—-is incompatible with syndicalism, which is ownership by labor unions.

      * Watson’s unjustly marginalized book provides a fine introduction to a subject on which much more needs to be written.

This entry was posted in World and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The Lost Literature of Socialism

  1. Pingback: The Lost Literature of Socialism World’s Observatory

  2. Julia says:

    As a socialist (anarchist) I have to laugh at that book. First of all, the reason Proudhon and Marx “hated” Jews was because, during their time Jews were perceived as the worst of the worst capitalists (they were the bankers who were stereotyped as practicing usury and such). So in other words, you can’t label these socialist thinkers as “anti-semitic” and then claim socialist political thought is “rooted in anti-semitism” or whatever.

    And as well, even if socialism’s philosophers really were racist dickheads, how does that make anything they said about capitalism and private property false? That book is one giant ad hominem so yeah I wouldn’t take it seriously.

  3. The National Socialists were bitterly opposed to Marxism, they are not political movements from the same paradigm, there completely opposed in their time and place. Forming a socialized poltical group made up primarily German Nationals who were workers, does not make you a Marxist. Being opposed to international bankers operating under the guise of ‘Capitalism’ does not make you a Marxist. From the very inception of the German National Socialists they were utterly and completely opposed to Marxim/Communism/Bolshevism and remained so.

    Your Adolf Hitler quotes published here are fraudulent! The Hermann Rauschning Memiors are proven fakes. This was proven by the Swiss historian Wolfgang Haenel and presented to the annual conference in May 1983 of the Ingolstadt Contemporary History Reserch Center in West Germany.

    • Yet, the German communists opposed the socialists and social democrats before they focused on Hitlers Nazis. So the socialists too fought back against the communists in their self destructive efforts- for socialists would have been their supporters in a national front against Hitler; so their fighting communism does not make democratic socialists nazis! Being anti communist too was necessary to avoid stalinism in the civil war-within the -civil war’ as the International Brigade free marxists fought against the Madrid Stalinists. That fighting evil brands of communism did not make them fascists.
      Just note though despite misquotes- both killed enormous numbers of innocent unarmed people.
      Innocence is defined not by belief but lack of arms or fight; evil is defined by the mounds of bodies of such innocence. Communists everywhere have outnumbered the evil of all other groups. Marxism is pure unadulterated shit.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s