Counterjihad LGF

Loose Wire at LGF…….

Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs chooses the strange title of “Strommen: The Meaning of ‘Fascism’” to his most recent post, even though Strømmen does not offer any meaning to the word at all.

Øyvind Strømmen alludes to what it isn’t, but offers nothing in the way that would shed any light as to what exactly Fascism is. Here is something that might shed a bit of light on Fascism’s beginning.

Mussolini and a group of adherents launched the Fascist movement in 1919. The initiators were mostly men of the left: revolutionary syndicalists and former Marxists. They took with them some non-socialist nationalists and futurists, and recruited heavily among soldiers returning from the war, so that the bulk of rank-and-file Fascists had no leftwing background.

The Fascists adopted the black shirts of the anarchists and Giovinezza (Youth), the song of the front-line soldiers. Apart from its ardent nationalism and pro-war foreign policy, the Fascist program was a mixture of radical left, moderate left, democratic, and liberal measures, and for more than a year the new movement was not notably more violent than other socialist groupings.

To quote a line straight from Jonah Goldberg’s new book Liberal Fascism“, (Goldberg is quoting historian Richard Pipes on this point) “Bolshevism and Fascism were heresies of socialism.”

Minus the Holocaust, and all the other inhumane horrors committed by the National Socialists (aka…Fascists) as well as their “ethnic supremacy beliefs”, how does their brand of German socialism and party platform differ from Socialist ideals?

“Fascists preached the accelerated development of a backward country. Communists continued to employ the Marxist rhetoric of world socialist revolution in the most advanced countries, but this was all a ritual incantation to consecrate their attempt to accelerate the development of a backward country. Fascists deliberately turned to nationalism as a potent myth. Communists defended Russian nationalism and imperialism while protesting that their sacred motherland was an internationalist workers’ state.

Fascists proclaimed the end of democracy. Communists abolished democracy and called their dictatorship democracy. Fascists argued that equality was impossible and hierarchy ineluctable. Communists imposed a new hierarchy, shot anyone who advocated actual equality, but never ceased to babble on about the equalitarian future they were “building”. Fascists did with their eyes open what Communists did with their eyes shut. This is the truth concealed in the conventional formula that Communists were well-intentioned and Fascists evil-intentioned.” More here.

Fascists did not believe in individualism, everything was for the sake of the state, so how that “very uncomfortable truth” is supposed to characterize the Belgian Flemish party, the Vlaams Belang, which believes that “the state should serve the people, not the other way around“, is way beyond me.

But when you are on a anti-European Counterjihad crusade, any kind of logic will do, no matter how off kilter. *L* KGS

Note: One more point. Øyvind Strømmen tries to make the point of how other people wrongly sling the label of Fascist around to paint others in a bad light,…..but ends up doing the same himself. How odd.

When looking at the VB’s party manifesto, one can’t help but notice just how silly Strømmen’s posts and assumptions really are.

8 Responses

  1. When browsing to Strömmen’s site, he seems to be very eager in labeling people and political parties with the rubber stamp of “fascism”. However, he is less than specific when it comes to defining the term. I have come to a conclusion that he does not know that either and basically you should not pay too much attention to the labeling. It seems pretty arbitrary.

    All in all, Strömmen uses the standard leftist methods like guilt by association and smear by labeling. Fascist is a pretty strong word to use, but, traditionally, communists have had a low threshold of using the label. Berlin wall was supposed to protect the GDR from fascism, you know.

    “one can’t help but notice just how silly Strømmen’s posts and assumptions really are.”

    You really can’t blame Strömmen for selling his book. Too bad Charles is doing the advertising for him.

  2. I know Oyvind from his observations at another talkboard. He is a one hundred percent Islamo-apologist. On his old blog he wrote posts praising Tariq Ramadan and also, fantasizing about the possibility of European Christians and European Muslims combining together to creat a new, multi-culti religion that would appeal to both of them (which is impossible, since divinity of Christ is a central tenant of Christianity while denial of the divinity of Christ is a central tenant of Islam.) He clais that he didn’t take down his old posts from his old blog, but I looked and looked for them and couldn’t find them. Oyvind is very, very infatuated with Islam, and has huge double standards like all multi-cultis — he’ll post on his blog how horrible it is that somebody rolled a pig’s head into a European mosque, but will vociferously try to shut up anyone who draws conclusions between Muslim immigrants and hate crimes against Jews, women and gays. He also has big huge negative “issues” with Evangelical Christianity, going back to some Norwegian school he attended where conservative evangelicals had a lot of influence. On one of his postings, he also referred to Jesus as a “prophet” — which always made me suspicious that he was rather more than just infatuated with Islam, but had actually converted to the religion. Ovyind is an Islam lover par excellence, the sort of person that three or four years ago, CJ and LGF would have taken apart. Now they are kissing his ass like he was the Second Coming. Little do they know how chummy he is with the Tariq Ramadan set.

  3. Thanks to all for the comments! I believe that we have pretty much summed up the witch hunt mentality of Strommen and ilk. My heartfelt thanks to all of you.

    Chalons, another set of thanks is in order, for passing along that url link to the video of the Goldberg speech at the Heritage Foundation. I highly recommend viewing it.

    *L* KGS

  4. KGS, this is a critical issue of our day. We need to liberate the language and stop paying only lip service to George Orwell.

    You may find this find worthy of its own thread. A Canadian (more accurately, an Albertan Stand! – as Albertans are more like the Texans than other Canadians with their similar independent spirit) (original link at

    I don’t answer to the state!

    It is a thing of beauty.

  5. For better info on Fascism check out Hannah Arendt’s “Origins of totalitarianism” and also “Eichmann In Jerusalem”.

    The great majority of Italian Jews were members of the Fascist Party. The term was spun and exploited by the left to exonerate the terms “Nazism” and especially “Communism” – who, according to Arendt have much in common, vs. Fascism which is different. See here too, for some info.

    Kol Tuv,

    J. Izrael

  6. I can’t even tell you how much that picture you have in this post made me laugh!

  7. Thanks Natalie, I try to make these posts humurous when possible. Soft landings whenever you fall off your chair!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.