I would have to disagree with this assessment. It's true that both 'movements' early rhetoric included this kind of material, but both came to understandings with the church. This is most notable in Italy where the state and the church did not recognize each other until the compromise put together by the fascists (returning to some modes of religious schooling if I remember correctly)
As to the second statement, (I am assuming when the word 'communist' is invoked that we are referencing groups involved in the ComIntern) your description is true for the so-called third period (I think this is the term, but I might have fucked this up)where the term social fascism became popular, but it wouldn't be very accurate in describing the popular front period where an alliance was emphasized. The same thing could be said for liberals and social democrats during the popular front period.
robert wood
> But Fascism and especially Nazism were anticlerical. Spain I will give
> you.
>
> I think its kind of interesting that fascists see liberalism and communism
> as basically the same thing, communists see liberalism and fascism as
> basically the aame thing, and liberals see fascism and communism as
> basically the same thing.
>
> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Marvin Gandall <marvgandall at videotron.ca> wrote:
>> ===================================
>> Conservative intellectuals didn't distinguish sharply
>> between liberal and
>> socialist values, which they saw as bastard twins of the
>> Enlightenment, each
>> subscribing in their own way to the principles of
>> secularism and democracy
>> which were in conflict with those of Throne and Alter
>> favoured by the right.
>>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>