On 2012-02-08, at 12:02 PM, Wojtek S wrote:
> Somebody: "German reactionary conservatism as expressed by figures
> like Ludendorff would have remained anti-democratic, militaristic,
> traditionalist, romantic, anti-Enlightenment etc. but not *Nazi* in
> the absence of a successful Bolshevik Revolution.
>
> [WS:] But this assumes that the military was the main driving force
> toward fascist power grab, as for example it was the case of Chile. I
> do not think, however, that you can make the same argument for Italy
> and Germany (Spain may be closer to Chile, though.). In these two
> countries, the military was more of an accessory for fascists in their
> power grab rather than the vanguard of fascism. It merely allowed
> fascists to neutralize their opposition. So the more accurate
> assertion would be that German militaristic figures would have
> remained anti-democratic, traditionalists etc. in the absence of the
> successful National Socialist party rather than a successful Bolshevik
> Revolution.
>
> Keep it in mind that the NS in Germany took the anti-Semitic and
> anti-Bolshevist route until 1928 and did not get very far on it.
> However, from 1928 they changed their strategy and focused on economic
> issues, renouncing Western European economic solutions and instead
> proposing large scale government programs. And it is their economic
> ideas not anti-Bolshevist diatribes that won them popular support in
> the early 1930s. My source on this is Anheier, Neidhardt & Vortkamp,
> "Konjunkturen der NS-Bewegung. Aktivitäten der Münchner NSDAP,
> 1925-30?" [Cycles of the Nazi Movement]. Kölner Zeitschrift für
> Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 50 (4):619-643.
>
> In sum, the support of the military should be conceptualized as a
> necessary (or perhaps enabling) but not a sufficient condition for the
> success of a revolutionary or a counter-revolutionary movement - at
> least in Russia, Italy and Germany. I think that Latin America (and
> probably Spain) are different, largely because the military play a
> rather different role in those societies, more of a an avenue for
> political climbers due to the rather closed nature of their elites.
>
> Wojtek
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk