Michael Parenti’s twisted defense of socialism and fascism
In his book Blackshirts Reds, Michael Parenti sought to cover up the close ties between communist and fascist regimes and stop the comparisons between the two. Parenti attempts to paint fascism as a fundamentally capitalist ideology and movement, meant to protect the profits and interests of the bourgeois. Parenti claims in his book that
“Fascism historically has been used to secure the interests of large capitalist interests against the demands of popular democracy. Then and now, fascism has made irrational mass appeals in order to secure the rational ends of class domination.”1
This, of course, is ahistorical Marxist nonsense. Fascism and National Socialism have followed in very similar footsteps as communists. Many Marxists, like Parenti, have tried to cover up this fact for decades. Despite their efforts, we have immense amounts of evidence showing us the true story.
What is fascism?
Fascism is a political ideology that emerged in the early 20th century, characterized by authoritarianism, nationalism, and a commitment to maintaining traditional values and hierarchies. It has been associated with various movements and regimes, including the Italian fascist movement led by Benito Mussolini and the German Nazi Party led by Adolf Hitler.
Paul Gottfried and Ludwig von Mises, both steeped in the values and traditions of European civilization, have offered interpretations of fascism that place it within a specific historical context. Gottfried has been influenced by historian Ernst Nolte, who saw fascism as a reaction to the violence and disruption caused by the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. According to Nolte, fascists adopted the disruptive tactics and revolutionary spirit of their leftist opponents in order to defeat them.2 Gottfried and Nolte point out that this analysis of fascism has roots in Marxist thought, as it views the social strife in interwar Europe as the backdrop for fascism's rise to power and sees it as part of the Marxist belief about when a socialist revolution would first erupt.3
Mises, a classical liberal, saw Italian fascism in a similar way, though he did not begin from Marxist assumptions. Instead, he argued that Italian fascism was influenced by the ideas of French syndicalist Georges Sorel, who believed in the power of "redemptive myths" that would push the masses toward purifying violence.4 Mises saw fascism as a movement that responded to a particular historical situation and was not a timeless category. He also argued that it was rooted in European civilization, pointing out that it arose in a region with a long history of civilization and that the intellectual and moral heritage of Europe influenced its proponents.5
Gottfried and Mises both view fascism as a product of the crisis of European culture, with Gottfried arguing that it was a response to the breakdown of traditional values and Mises pointing out that it arose in a time of economic and social turmoil. Both also see it as fundamentally opposed to liberal values, with Gottfried arguing that it was a rejection of liberal democracy and Mises pointing out that it sought to use the same unscrupulous methods as the Third International (the Communist International) in its struggle against opponents.
Who supported fascism?
The communists spread a narrative that fascism in Italy and Germany was largely funded by the bourgeoisie and went against the majority opinion of the proletariat class. This is a narrative that they must push because the same Marxists support the idea that the majority opinion should always be respected. Rather than abandon the idea of mob rule, they must lie to defend it.
Fascism in Germany was far from a bourgeois movement. “After weighing all the facts,” writes historian Henry Ashby Turner, “we must recognize that the financial subsidies from industry were overwhelmingly directed against the Nazis.”6 Turner published a book titled German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler, in which he showed claims about the big business alignment with Nazis to be greatly exaggerated. A large majority of the Nazi party’s funds came from membership dues rather than support from big business. Businesses understandably preferred to support bourgeois parties rather than “workers” or “socialist” parties.7 While there certainly were capitalists who were friendly with the Nazis, most notably Henry Ford, this was typically driven by other motivations like anti-semitism rather than economics.
A group that certainly supported the Nazis far more than any capitalist was the communists. Many Nazis were former communists, including 55% of the Sturmabteilung.8 Despite the Nazis’ anti-Marxist leanings, Stalin and Hitler greatly admired each other and saw an opportunity for alignment.910 The signing of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact in August of 1939 was the first huge step in improving relations between the two nations. The Soviets provided the Nazis with intelligence through the Gestapo–NKVD conferences and transferred Jewish prisoners over to the Nazis.11 The Nazis also received from 1940 to 1941 alone: 139,500 tons of cotton, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, and much more from the Soviets.12 Supplies that significantly supported the German war effort.13
Fascism certainly was not a movement supported by big business in Italy either. The fascist government played an immense role in the economy to the detriment of the capitalists. Historian A. James Gregor observed that
“...the Italian business community, in general, welcomed the disappearance of Fascism. Fascism never served the interests of Italian business.”14
and
“…there is no credible evidence that Fascism controlled the nation’s economy for the benefit of the ‘possessing classes.’”15
Who did the fascists support?
Michael Parenti views fascism as:
“…all-out government support for business and severe repression of antibusiness, prolabor forces.”16
The reality of fascist regimes doesn’t come even close to this. The Third Reich actively sought to protect workers from “exploitation” from managers. The Reich’s Ministry of Labor released lists of offenses that would be considered the unjust exploitation of workers. Paying wages below state-mandated minimums, failing to compensate workers for overtime, failing to grant vacations, reducing hours, not providing meals, workstations being too cold or too hot, and having an unclean or hazardous work environment.17 Historian Richard Tedor writes:
“The record of court proceedings for 1939 demonstrates that the labor law primarily safeguarded the well-being of employees rather than their overseers. During that year, the courts conducted 14 hearings against workers and 153 against plant managers, assistant managers and supervisors. In seven cases, the directors lost their jobs.”18
In the Italian fascist system, a socialization law that expanded workers’ say in production and state life, was introduced. The law also sought to distribute wealth more equitably. Historian Stephen J. Lee noted:
“…workers were to participate in factory and business management, land reform was to be initiated and there were to be wage and price controls.”19
The businessmen and managers themselves did not fare well under Nazi rule. A letter written by a German businessman, and published by Marxist economist Günter Reiman, documented the everyday worries of industrialists under fascism. The businessmen never knew how much of their profits they’d be able to keep at the end of the day. The Nazi macroeconomic policy involved a sharp increase in taxation, so there was not much room for using fiscal policy to provide benefits in exchange for political support. In fact, fiscal revenues from corporate tax grew by 1,365% between 1932-33 and 1937-38, whereas total fiscal revenues grew by 110% in the same period.20 The system so closely resembled what the socialists advocated for that some businessmen
“…even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system”21
Despite this strong evidence of anti-capitalist bias, Parenti and other Marxists point to specific accounts of fascist suppression of labor. Parenti describes a situation in Italy in which large landowners and industrialists sought to maintain profit levels by cutting wages and raising prices. He also says that there was also a significant amount of violence and intimidation directed at labor organizations and socialist groups, including attacks on buildings, the killing of workers, and the arrest of workers. This violence continued up until the seizure of state power by Mussolini.22
While this type of violence did happen, it was usually done to suppress explicit Marxism rather than to defend of profits. Parenti’s examples clearly ignore the overall trend we can see in fascist history. He also neglects to mention that the very regimes he defends in his book have often performed similar acts of violence against workers and labor unions. One example occurred in the city of Novocherkassk, Russia, on June 1-2, 1962. The incident was sparked by a strike at the Novocherkassk Electric Locomotive Plant, where workers were protesting against food price hikes and labor conditions. On June 1, soldiers and police used force against a crowd of demonstrators, resulting in the deaths of at least 26 people and the injury of 87 others. In response, the Soviet government arrested and imprisoned many of the leaders of the strike and protest.23
Conclusion
Contrary to Parenti’s view, fascism is “…socialism with a capitalist veneer.”24 A system that may allow for the existence of some capitalists but is systematically aggressive against them. Fascist movements grew through the usage of socialist tactics and talking points mixed with nationalism and a sort of social conservatism. Fascism is, and always has been, far removed from capitalism.
Parenti, Michael, Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism, (1997)
Gottfried, Paul E. Fascism: The Career of a Concept (2016), p. 37.
Ibid, p. 27.
Mises, Ludwig von, Marxism Unmasked (2006), p. 30.
Mises, Ludwig von, Liberalism: In the Classical Tradition (1927), p. 48.
Toland, John, Adolf Hitler (1992), p. 277.
Turner, Henry Ashby, German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler (1985), p. 346.
Brown, Timothy S. Weimar Radicals: Nazis and Communists Between Authenticity and Performance (2009), p. 139
Zitelmann, Rainer, Hitler’s National Socialism (2022), pp. 510-517.
Lukacs, John, June 1941: Hitler and Stalin (2006), p. 21.
Rees, Laurence, World War Two Behind Closed Doors (2008), p. 54.
Ericson, Edward E. Feeding the German Eagle: Soviet Economic Aid to Nazi Germany, 1933–1941 (1999).
McMeekin, Sean, Stalin’s War (2021).
Gregor, A. James, The Search for Neofascism: The Use and Abuse of Social Science (2006), p. 7.
Ibid.
Parenti, Michael, Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism (1997), p. 8.
Klüver, Max, Vom Klassenkampf zur Volksgemeinschaft (1988), p. 117.
Tedor, Richard, Hitler’s Revolution (2014), pp. 80-81.
Lee, Stephen J. European Dictatorships (2000), pp. 171-172.
Reichs-Kredit-Gesellschaft, Germany’s Economic Situation at the Turn of 1938/39 (1939), p. 62.
Reiman, Günter, The Vampire Economy (1939), p. 6.
Parenti, Michael, Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism, (1997), p. 3.
Remnick, David. “Massacre in Worker’s Paradise.” Washington Post, 18 Dec. 1990, www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1990/12/18/massacre-in-workers-paradise/b0da3023-bba2-4512-ae0d-a2d72acf3d35.
Richman, Sheldon, “Fascism,” in Henderson, David R. The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics, 2nd ed. (2007)