Customer Reviews

Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

This is an unsparing, uncompromising defense of Marxism-Leninism from a respected scholar of political science. No politically engaged person should fail to read Parenti's book. It will be outrageous to some, inspirational to others, but thought provoking to all. The author takes on critics from the right and the left in a highly accessible writing style. His ideas are presented clearly and forcefully, without technical or theoretical jargon.

Among his politically-charged topics: communism and fascism, revolution, delusions within the left, the collapse of the soviet bloc, and perhaps most important, the ongoing necessity of class analysis in a postmodern world. Parenti's book serves as a clear statement and reassessment of where Marxism-Leninism stands in a world that has seemingly rejected those ideas but whose triumphal market economies move increasingly in a Marxian direction. "Blackshirts and Reds" fills a huge gap for the general reader and is not to be missed.

Parenti shares his most current thoughts on fascism, socialism, communism and capitalism in an unique and personal ways, without apologies. Although it's true that the book rehases running dispute between leninism and anarchism, it does carry a sense of intellectual honesty in defending and explaning his political convictions -- especially when most leftists find it now more opportune to be seen as a liberal socialist, even if their personal histories don't confirm such wish.

Parenti has always been out there defending revolutions and revolutionaries, although one can question his personal emphasis on the russian revolution and east european countries over other third world liberations. At the same time, he is quick to point out genunine concerns with the bureaucratic natures of soviet states and their ineffieciencies. Although this is similar to other liberal socialists, he distingishes himself from the pack by showing a truer appreciation and understanding to the difficulties of revolutions within the international domination of us imperialism as best exemplified by the sandanista revolution. The book devotes a whole chapter on "communist wonderland" on this subject. After reading this chapter one cannot honestly call him a communist apologist.

Ironically when the current political tide encourages more leftist intellectuals to be more critical of communist revolutions, Parenti refuses the opportunity to step in with the pack. There is a sense of sincerity in his uncompromising stance as one of the last remaining soldiers down in the tranches of fighting capitalism and imperialism.

Parenti does it again! In this book he traces brilliantly the appeal and development of the fascist movement, explaining how fascist leaders use irrational symbols to manipulate people who have very rational concerns about their diminished living standards. Parenti is one of the very few analysts who actually assesses the real economic impact of fascist governance; he proves that fascism lead to ever-greater brutalization of the workers, and a gross redistribution of wealth upward to the system's corporate benefactors. Parenti explores closely the actual record of Communist leadership; he provides a nuanced analysis that both praises the Communists for their achievements in the matter of social equity , and criticizes these states for their oppression of their people. Nonetheless, Parenti proves that even tyrants like Stalin were not quite as bad as their fascist counterparts, for every Communist leader had to constantly resist the imperialist pressures of the capitalist west. Parenti also brilliantly derides those so-called liberals who ignore the issue of class today. He points out that true progressives should be more concerned with the living conditions of working people than with some sterile, lofty, and ulimately meaningless debate over cultural issues. All in all, a very solid book; I didn't agree with everything in it, but I did agree with most of it. Parenti writes well, persuasively, and coherently. His writing comes as a much needed rejoinder to the rightist and centrist blather which currently dominates TV punditry, newspaper editorials, the mainstream news magazines, et al.

Michael Parenti is the best writer in the world covering international affairs, and also American domestic issues as well. In "Blackshirts and Reds" he again demonstrates his willingness to go against the orthodoxy of both the right, center and unfortunately left, by revealing facts and truths the powers that be just don't want to be bothered with; and many honorable leftists are afraid to utter for the fear of being branded as Stalinist sympathizers.

His description of the current social and economic conditions for the average Eastern European and citizens of the former USSR is worth the price of the book alone. The obvious conclusion is that they'd be much better off under the old egalitarian system than their current lives of penury under the new capitalist system that Yeltsin, the nomenclatura and the United States were and are so eager to throw upon them.

Propping up brutal undemocratic regimes (Chile, El Salvador, Indonesia, Guatamala, etc.) that are conducive to capitalist penetration and exploitation while obliterating democratically elected governments (Nicaragua, The Congo, Allende's Chile, Spain, Vietnam, East Timor, etc.) that want to follow a more egalitarian non-capitalist path are some of the things the capitalist powers have done during the last millenia. Of course they couch their criminal conduct (often carried out by the CIA, U.S. State Department and segments of the U.S. military, some times using proxies) in euphemisms such as "free markets" and "free elections." Parenti delves into much of this sordid history in this fine book.

He eloquently describes how and why the former USSR collapsed and he doesn't feel the need to constantly make casual asides about how evil Stalin supposedly was. He mentions how the Soviet Union's collapse had a lot more to do with the constant capitalist propaganda and glittery materialistic imagery of the West rather than with the failure of Communism itself. Today, the average Russian citizen would be much better off economically and socially (they wouldn't have to fend for their livelihoods against organized mafiosi or suffer through exploitative jobs or prostitute themselves) if they were still in a socialist state rather than living in the current capitalist nightmare that was rammed down their throats in a shock treatment manner.

Parenti touches on all of this. He also delivers an array of facts and figures which demonstrate that the Gulag and Stalin were no where near the hellishness that they're often labeled as being by pro-West capitalist sympathizers and their propaganda machine.

Lastly, his analysis of the manner in which the East Germans dealt with former sadistic Nazi criminals and fascist sociopaths (imprisoning them and holding them accountable for their execrable and hateful actions) as opposed to the coddling West Germany bestowed on them is some of the most fascinating and intellectually enlightening passages I've read in years.

I cannot recommend this book enough and I eagerly anticipate the intellectual joys his next book will bring.

In this brief, forceful polemic, Parenti takes strong exception to the post-Soviet declaration of "the end of history". He does his best to vindicate the successes of socialist nations in the 20th century, and to account for their failures and distortions. He makes a irrefutable case for the continuing central relevance of Marxian class analysis in understanding society and combating oppresssion.

The opening section is the most valuable for those already familiar with the basics of Marxism-- in it Parenti offers a penetrating analysis of Mussolini and Hitler's rise, laying Fascism bare as the last refuge of the ruling elites in defending their privilege from mass social movements. This is an important corrective to the tendency of ruling ideologists to lump fascism and socialism together.

Parenti takes a few gratuitous potshots at other leftists along the way, and ultimately fails to adequately address the tendency towards authoritarianism in 20th century communism. But this is clear, cogent writing, and nourishing food for thought for communists, anarchists, liberals, and reactionaries alike.

An accessible critical analysis of the reactionary historical role of fascism by one of the most advanced and consistent scholars today.

One wishes, though, that Parenti would have given more details on the early, corporatist designs of fascism -- designs which appear disturbingly similar to what institutional far-right planners and politicians in the U.S. are attempting to implement in the present context by whatever pretext they can to impose their more deceitful and technologically distracting but no less oppressive agenda on the entire world.

Nevertheless, Blackshirts and Reds is an excellent overall criticism of fascism because it serves at least as importantly as a principled and unapologetic primer on the continuing practical relevance of Marxism to social change, the author making concisely clear why the honest study of Communist theory and practice -- undistorted by its dedicated enemies -- is no idle exercise in nostalgia, but a necessary prerequisite to really understand and transform present-day society.

Parenti also includes, here and there, a welcome critique of Noam Chomsky, whose political shortcomings and acknowledged ignorance of and indifference to fundamental Marxism and its actual development may not be readily apparent to the casual observer unfamiliar with his particular anarchistic anticommunist bias, notwithstanding his progressive stand on certain issues whatever his way of reasoning.

Overall, this book was a real disappointment. Some of the author's points were right on such as the collusion between fascists and capitalists. However, it soon becomes clear that the book's real purpose is to criticize libertarian socialism (or as the author put's it "true socialism") and promote Bolshevism/state socialism.

This is evidenced by his avoidance of the Spanish Revolution/Civil War, Kronstadt Uprising, etc. Instead, he promotes the Soviet Union as a beacon of socialism for the oppressed working masses.

Voline in his "The Unknown Revolution" succinctly states, "the Bolshevik idea was to build, on the ruins of the bourgeouis state, a new "Workers' State" to constitute a "workers' and peasants' government," and to establish a "dictatorship of the proletariat."

The libertarian socialist idea was (and is) to transform the economic and social bases of scoiety without having recourse to a political st! ate, to a governemnt, or to a dictatorship of any sort. That is, to achieve the Revolution and resolve its problems not by political or statist means, but by means of natural and free activity, economic and social, of the associations of the workers themselves, after having overthrown the last capitalist government."

Fundamentally, it is a question of two different forms of organization.

Unable to address this directly, the book personally attacks two well known libertarain socialists, Georhe Orwell and Noam Chomsky. Whatever your problems may be with these two, they do not deserve the level of personal attack levelled against them in Mr. Parenti's book. However if you understand the slandeous history of marxism, leninism, stalinism, maoism or castroism personal attacks should come as no surprise. Check out Orwell's "Homage to Catalonia" for a first hand account of the treachery of the stalinists (so-called "communists"), Voline's "Unknow! n Revolution", Alexander Berkman's "The Bolshevik! Myth" and Murray Bookchins "The Spanish Anarchists: The Heroic Years". Gaston Levall also wrote an excellent book titled "The Anarchist Collectives" or something like that.

All of these books are a far better read, both for their clairity and honesty. If you are interested in history, revolution, etc. please check out these books.

"Have confidence only in yourselves and in the Revolution. Only yourselves-that is, your local grass-rooorganizations, organizations of the workers and not of the parties, and then your direct and natural unification (along regional lines)-only you can be the builders and the masters of the new life, and notthe Constituent Assembly, not a central government, not the parties nor the leaders!"----p. 236 VOLINE "The Unknown Revolution"

This book is a pathetic example of a bona fide Socialist as he rewrites history and political thought before you very eyes. There are numerous errors throughout the book but probably the most egregious is the authors link of Fascism to the right wing. While this may be the political fantasy of any and all true socialists it is far from the truth. But lets get into the debate immediately and see if we can bring some Fact to this work of fiction.

First of all the author incorrectly calls the German Nazi's a fascist party. This is so absurd that it is easily rebuffed here, but first let me give a little history. The term NAZI was a nickname given to the members of the National Socialist German Workers Party (Socialist is the operative word here.) This is of course Hitler's outfit, which formed the core of the Third Reich. National Socialists are just another variation on the theme of Socialism and they acquired their nickname though a cartoon character, "Ignaz", nicknamed "Nazi" who was the stereotypical Jew. Before the horror of the reality set in, it seemed a good joke on the posturing, parading, clearly anti-Semitic national socialists to share a nickname with a Jewish cartoon character. Later, Stalin thought up the switch of the applying the Italian "fascist" designation to German national socialist in order to erase from memory that the Nazis were, in fact, socialist.

Fascist just for you information, refers to members of an Italian political party, founded and led by Benito Mussolini, who was expelled from the Socialist Party of Italy and went on to start his own. The structure was a copy, the concept a variant of other socialist parties. "Fasces," a bundle of twigs with an ax, were carried before consuls of ancient Rome. Mussolini adopted the symbol, hence the name "fascist."

Other popular names of Socialist parties are Bolshevik's and Communists. It is interesting to note that in Hungary alone, the communist party went through four complete name changes during its tenure. It is an integral part of socialist operational methodology to make an instant switch once a label has been tainted with "mistakes" (such as too many atrocities), or when a new compendium of deceptions is about to be announced.

Regardless of the name that a socialist party chooses they all have the same elements in common. They are as follows:

1. Restriction of Individual Freedom
2. A strong central authority
3. The usurpation of legislative and judicial prerogative by the executive branch of the government
4. Some suspension of property rights.

Since Hitler's party and the Mussolini's party both urged the people to go along with all four of the above premises, both the fascist and the Nazi's (National Socialist German Workers Party) was in reality a Socialistic endeavor. To label it conservative is arrantly illogical deduction.

Since the author's main conclusion are drawn from such falsehoods the whole book is suspect and can be passed by and nothing but a propaganda front for the new-socialist.

This was my first Parenti book. I received a succinct lesson about life in Eastern Europe after the fall of Communism, and it wasn't all pretty.

Parenti's exposure of the Communist economic system as a public trough confirms the inefficiencies of the system. But he rightly talks about the social achievements of the Communists. What I would have liked to see, however, was how Parenti would tackle the difficult issue of Communist crimes, like Stalin's collectivization plans and purges.

Nevertheless, I devoured this book, and it led me to devour many other Parenti titles.

this book makes points that are easily understood yet quite deep in their meaning. i believe it's a good book for anyone that is not quite keen on what's really going on with rampant capitalism or what really happened when the soviet union ditched communism. i haven't highlighted a book this much since i was in school. amazing!