Republicans Wanted To Do Business With Hitler Too

Over the past dozen years I've pointed to the tiny little baby-step between Marxism and fascism that so many an alleged lefty has taken in the 20th and 21st century.  The old generation of neo-conservatives, the Kristols, Podhoretzes, Decters, etc. as Marxists of the Trotsky cult, most of them from New York City,  not all of them.  And they were preceded on that tiniest of roads by those such as Max Eastman and many of the first generation Marxists in the United States and elsewhere.   The idea that there is a whole world of political identities between fascism and Nazism on one end and Marxists on the other is one of the most absurd ideas that there ever were.   They are kissin' killin' cousins who favor gangster rule, oppression, slavery, and, most salient of all salient features in a political ideology, murdering many, many thousands and millions of people, cementing their gangster rule into place through terror, intimidation, robbing people of hope or even the expectation that more can be hoped for.  Being overtly political forms of gangsterism, opting for the more efficient means of controling instead of merely buying off the government, they have a cover story, an alleged ideology* which may or may not have some actual connection to their activities but which, if there, is at least secondary to it.  In Nazism it was an overtly Darwinist biological ideology centered in national identity, in Marxism it was allegedly internationalist and, when it bothered, opted for something closer to behaviorism, creating a new man through behavioral modification (by terrorism) and not breeding.  

This is something I have argued, now, with several of what I'm pretty sure were Putin regime rent-boy-trolls.  Their slightly imperfect English eventually trips a lot of them up.   With his  overt attack on "multiculturalism" and egalitarian democracy the Putin crime family is dropping more and more pretenses, working with America's indigenous criminal class, the Republican Party, to destroy democracy and to sell out the United States and Europe to Putin's plan to dominate as much of the world as he can.   You might want to watch this recent report from The Guardian to get the vibe

Remind you of something?   Clearly, in Putin, Hitler won that war.  It just took a few decades.  And through Republicans and our own Billionaire gangsters, the total idiocy of the Supreme-Court-ACLU line on "free (lying) speech, free (lying) press"  and the destruction of Christian morality, he might just conquer America, too.

* I am increasingly fascinated and disgusted to discover one after another of what was sold to me in my youth as the heroes of modernism were often overt supporters of fascism and Nazism, the rarity of modernists who were overt supporters of egalitarian democracy are very few and often not the most moderny of modernists.  Stravinsky was overt about his disdain for democracy as he supported Mussoilini in the 1930s - before he decided that arranging the Star Spangled Banner was in his interest (in what I now think was the mockery that some believed it to be, at the time) as he saw that the United States and democracy were the only alternative to depravity.  I've written at length about Gertrude Stein's not only expressed adoration of Hitler - she is credibly accused of nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize - she was an active collaborator with the Nazi puppet Vichy government, translating Petain's speeches for an American audience and writing an adoring introduction to them in which she compared the Nazi puppet to George Washington - I think her modernism must have made her especially stupid by the time she wrote that. 

Over the years of considering the close relationship of modernism with fascism and, in some instances, Marxists of every flavor of poison from Lenin to Putin (now that we know there's no real difference between commie apparatchik Putin and neo-Nazisky Putin) I've come to conclude that modernism is, as the great American painter Jack Levine noted, an expression of elitist snobbery.   Modernism's history, in almost every one of its major figures, has been elitist and superficial to one extent or another, it is no surprise to me, anymore when I find out that they were and, to the extent there still is modernism, are anti-democratic and prone to supporting gangsterism, especially those gangsters that will provide them with luxury and money and security.  Or they will cravenly do that.