Marx theorized that communism would be the natural resultant of the collapse of capitalism. For Marx, it wasn't if capitalism would ever fail, but when. In this light, it would be justifiable why fascism became popular following the end of WWI. Following the war, Europe's economies were shot--war had consumed too much money and now countries were left in debt to other countries and practically immobile economically. Stalin stood against capitalism, saying that capitalism depended on and led to war, and here was the proof. Capitalism was in no way the sole cause of WWI, but its gross presence in Europe certainly influenced the war's onset. People were disgruntled and afraid in the aftermath of the war and all looked for some sense of stability. Fascism grew out of the war's destruction as a hope for stability and as an answer to capitalism's failures. While capitalism promoted individuality, under fascism, the state was everything--everyone and everything did not work for themselves but for the prosperity of the state. For the countries that lost most in the war, including Russia, Germany, and Italy, fascism became a means for nationalism and revitalization. Capitalism had knocked them all down, and they were going to remake themselves in a new fashion. Fascist leaders argued that fascism was the way of the future, but we know now that things did not turn out the way these leaders envisioned. Capitalism has continued to thrive and the major fascist and communist states have not only disintegrated, but subsequently turned to capitalism. In this way, Marx's theory has so far proved to be false, and that maybe fascism was only a marker of its time. The delicate emotions and tensions involved in the aftermath of WWI provided ground for such radical governments to grow from. If it wasn't for the way policies were handled following the war--if Russia, Germany, and Italy hadn't come out on the more unfavorable side--it is possible that the fascist era wouldn't have developed at all. Fascism relied on turmoil and dissatisfaction in order to prosper; the aftermath of WWI provided it with the tools to do so.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is a good post. You point to a debate that has been going on for some time: did the initial success of communism bring about the reaction of fascism to fight it; or would fascism have emerged on its own? Some thoughts to bear in mind--why must fascism compost into capitalism? Why do we have to assume that capitalism and fascism are mutually exclusive? Looking at Nazi Germany, Hitler kept the market system--as long as it served the state's purposes, what is the problem. If the centrality of fascism is the state and its success in directing the will of the people to higher purposes, couldn't capitalism be subsumed within this context? You have an intuition that is worth exploring (concerning the "wildness" and uncontrollability of capitalism), but be aware that we also have "state capitalism" or capitalism directed by active state intervention--picking winners, losers, propping up companies, etc. We have some of that here in the US.
ReplyDelete