top of page

The Big Big Lie

The Left’s support historically has been the working classes. This was a solid and respectable enough base, even if, paradoxically, many working class men actually held pretty right-wing views, while still insisting on voting Labour because their fathers had done so before them.

The Left has recently begun to abandon its working class base. In America, Clinton famously wrote them off as a “bunch of deplorables” and they are often even portrayed by the MSM as racists. In Britain one would be hard put to find a more obviously working class movement than the Football Lads Alliance, yet the MSM, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, describes them as “far-right racists”, notwithstanding the very significant number of Blacks in their ranks.

The Left’s base now would seem to be some fellow who has a whim on a Tuesday to don a Laura Ashley frock, rub blusher on his stubble and call himself Caitlin, and a lass who likes to shave her head, shove a length of tubing down her knickers and call herself Nigel. Not, prima facie, one would have thought, an obvious formula for ongoing electoral success.

What do we mean by left and right wing? These terms are a legacy of the French Revolution. Those who sought to maintain the status quo – the Catholic Monarchy and the established state religion – sat on the right of the French Assembly and were thus called “right wing”. Those deputies who wanted to violently overturn the old order and establish a new world order, the revolutionaries, were known as “left wing” because they sat on the left of the assembly. One could argue, at the risk of over simplification, that the right is defined by what it loves and the left is defined by what it hates.

Trump is often denounced as being extreme right-wing, but as America has neither a monarchy nor an established religion, this is clearly problematic. The term today has morphed into little more than an insult directed at anyone who opposes the latest revolutionary objectives of the left. Broadly, it is anyone who has some respect for what G.K. Chesterton called the “democracy of the dead”, i.e. folk who instinctively reverence and value the traditions and wisdom of their forefathers.

One of the biggest cons pulled off by the Left since WW2 is the big lie that Fascism is far right. It is difficult to imagine anything further from the truth. To understand the Left's motive for propagating this lie we first need to go back to the roots of the modern Left: Marxism. Karl Marx didn’t advocate initiating a working class (i.e proletariat) revolution, as popularly imagined. What Marx taught was that the exploitation of the working classes by capitalists would inevitably result in the capitalists becoming richer and the working classes becoming poorer. This inexorably, he fantasized, would result in a revolution of the proletariat.

This never happened. The working classes were doing rather well out of capitalism; the coming revolution had floundered on roast beef and package holidays. It’s true that the Russians had a revolution, but that had nothing to do with the workers rising up against capitalists, it was the military overthrow of an incompetent absolute monarchy, which was skilfully exploited by Leninists. Moscow did try to export their revolution to Spain, but this was a monumental failure from which the Left is smarting even to this day.

This failure of the proletariat to do what they were supposed to do resulted in a crisis in the left in the early part of the twentieth century. Put simply, the question was, if the proletariat were not the catalyst for the revolutionary changes the Left craved, what or who was? The Left broadly speaking broke into two factions, which faction you were in depended on how you answered this question.

The Bolsheviks under Lenin decided that the working classes were just too sluggish and inert to spontaneously rise up, so what was needed was a cadre of professional agitators. These professional agitators needn't come from the proletariat, they could be drawn from the intelligentsia, or even the capitalist classes themselves.

Fascists, on the other hand, were former Marxists who decided that if class was not the basis for the revolutionary change they longed for, then perhaps a highly centralised state controlling every aspect of life, with a centrally planned economy, could be. Mussolini had noted that men were prepared to lay down their lives for their homeland but not their class. In the First World War, for example, bakers would die beside bankers, and consider one another comrades in arms.

Fascism was not inherently racist; racism was a German bolt-on. Hitler's National Socialists can be viewed as a Fascist heresy. It was the result of mixing Darwin's evolutionary theories with fascism. So, instead of viewing the centralised state as the catalyst for radical change the left desired, the Nazis put their money on the German race.

Here's a little test - who wrote, "What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly god? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical real Jewry, would be the self-emancipation of our time." The answer is Karl Marx, the godfather of modern socialism. Hitler's anti-Semitism came out of the left, it was a product of Hitler's socialist hatred for capitalism. The Jews were in Hitler's left-wing mindset the poster boys for unproductive capitalism. The left will never tell you that - nor will they tell you that it is no coincidence that the British Labour party even today is still dogged with charges of anti-Semitism.

Mussolini was an ex-Communist as were all of the early Fascists. Lenin regarded Mussolini as a good revolutionary socialist and congratulated him for his decision to form the Italian Fascist party. And Hitler actually changed the name of his own party from German Workers Party to German Socialist Workers Party - that is what the "Z" in the acronym "NAZI" stands for.

Why then, you might ask, did Bolshevik thugs and Nazi Brownshirts fight one another. That invariably happens when revolutionary movements splinter into factions. The French revolutionaries finished up guillotining one another, and Lenin had Trotsky assassinated, but one could hardly argue from this that Trotsky wasn't very firmly on the Left.

If you put the 1919 Manifesto of Mussolini's Fascists alongside the manifesto of Corbyn's Labour party, or Obama's Democrats, you would be hard put to tell them apart:

Universal suffrage, lowering the voting age to eighteen, abolishing the elitist senate, mandating an eight-hour workday, a massive public works program, worker participation in industrial management, nationalisation of defence related industries, old age and sickness insurance for all citizens, state confiscation of uncultivated land, steeply progressive taxation, an 85% tax on war profits, and strong anti-clerical policies, including no religious instruction in schools. Hitler's program also included: persecution of bankers and other lenders on grounds of usury.

Remove "usury" and replace it with "City greed" or "Wall Street greed" and you pretty much have the manifesto of any modern Socialist party you care to mention.

Another fact the left won't tell you is that prior to WW2 the Western Left and progressives in general, and the American Left and progressives (the Democrats) in particular, were firmly in bed with Fascists - indeed, one could describe them as mutual admiration societies.

The left won't tell you, for example, that the Nazi's infamous race laws, which were passed in 1935, were modelled on the race laws of the Democrats, the American left - some thirty Democrat run American states at the time forbade interracial marriage. Amusingly, the Nazi drafting committee actually rejected some aspects of the American race laws as being too draconian: for example, under the Democrats' race laws one drop of Negro blood was sufficient to classify you as Black, whereas, under the Nazis' laws, one had to have at least three Jewish grandparents to be classified as Jewish.

F.D. Roosevelt, the nearest the left has to a canonised saint, was admired by the Nazis. A Nazi Newspaper wrote of Roosevelt's book, Looking Forward, "Many passages ... could have been written by a National Socialist. One can assume that he feels considerable affinity with the National Socialist philosophy."

Rexford Tugwell an economist who was part of Roosevelt's first "Brains Trust," a group of Columbia University academics who helped develop policy recommendations leading up to Roosevelt's New Deal, wrote of Fascism, " ... is the cleanest, neatest, most efficient operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious."

Roosevelt himself, wrote of Mussolini to a journalist, "I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman."

The love fest was mutual: American journalist Irvine Cobb visited Mussolini in 1926 and told him that a great many Americans called him, "the Italian Roosevelt". Mussolini responded, "For that I am very glad and proud. Roosevelt I greatly admire."

In England, the Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw wrote lauding Mussolini, while the utopian leftist novelist H.G. Wells actually called for what he called "liberal fascism" in the West, and emphasising the need for "enlightened Nazis".

As for racism, FDR infamously blocked Republican anti-lynching laws, and worked hard to convince the American left to support Southern Democrats in preventing this bill from coming before Congress.

At the Nuremberg trails after WW2 the allies sought to convict the leading Nazis of Crimes Against Humanity. Again, what the left will not tell you is that one of the items on the charge sheet to support this accusation of crimes against humanity was that the Nazis had promoted abortion in their occupied territories. Who today is ferociously pro-abortion, if not the left in general and the American Democrats in particular, even aggressively striving, just like the Nazis, to promote it beyond their own borders?

You may legitimately ask, if I'm right that fascism is firmly of the left, why do ninety-nine percent of folk believe that they are far-Right? That's easy: it's because the left own all the big megaphones (i.e. the mainstream media, academia and government) so they control the message 24/7. The simple fact is that because of Hitler's association with the Holocaust in the modern mind, if the Left allowed their association with fascism to become common knowledge it would be electoral suicide, so for over seventy-years they have kept up the big lie that Fascism is right-wing.

If you are interested in exploring and understanding this subject deeper, I cannot recommend too highly the book, The Big Lie by Dinesh D'Souza. It is one of the most insightful political books written in the last half-century. To purchase a copy, click HERE.


Who's Behind The Blog
bottom of page