Date: Sun, 21 Sep 1997 08:49:49 -0400
Subject: M-I: Re: Bye bye
From: farmelantj-AT-juno.com (James Farmelant)



On Sun, 21 Sep 1997 13:21:00 +1000 "Hartin, Tony"
<thartin-AT-vitgcdu1.telstra.com.au> writes:

>I never claimed "scientific" status for my thoughts. In case you 
>missed
>the not-so-subtle irony it was a play on what AA claimed for himself.
>
>As far as Goldhagen goes, I have done no more than read the synposis,
>the crits, skim the book, listen to the debate and the opinions of 
>those
>I respect politically, and have come to the conclusion that it would 
>be
>a waste of time for myself to read it cover to cover.
>
>Nonetheless I did argue against the position that workers (at least)
>shared the blame for the Holocaust (yes that is what AA ended up 
>saying)
>and gave my analysis of fascism... and here it is again

Tony,

Your denial that German workers shared any of the blame for the
Holocaust confirms one of Andy's points concerning how the Goldhagen
debate has been running so far on this list.  If people on this list are
asked
in the abstract if people are responsible for their actions, if people
have 
cognition, and can share worldviews then list members will answer in
the affirmative.  If they are asked whether everything is reducible to
social
class, or to technology and economics, whether people are puppets on
strings they answer in the negative.  Yet when it comes to this
particular
issue all this gets tossed out the window in favor of a "vulgar" Marxism
which denies human agency and so denies the moral responsibility
of those ordinary people who either directly participated in the
Holocaust
or who passively acquiesced in its occurrence.  The fact is the Holocaust

would not have occurred without the participation of German workers
who not only served as policemen or guards but who manned the railroads
which transported Jews to the camps, who helped construct the camps,
and manufactured the equipment used to for mass murder.

Tony reposts his analysis of fascism: 
>  >  From: Hartin, Tony
>  >  To: Post to marxism-international
>  >  Subject:  re: Hitler's Willing Executioners
>  >  Date: Friday, 29 August 1997 10:26AM
>  >  Priority: High
>  >
>  > [...]
>  >
>  >  For the record here is my (not very original, but most
>  >  compelling to me) analysis of fascism.
>  >
>  >  Fascism arises primarily out of capitalism and its periodic
>  >  and long term crises. It is based in the middle class and
>  >  the de-classed, not the ruling class, not the working
>  >  class. It comes to power with the backing of the ruling
>  >  class in order to crush the organised working class. It is
>  >  the disparate class nature of fascist forces which require
>  >  an all-encompassing ideology like racial purity and/or
>  >  religion and/or nationalism in order to unite it.
>  >  Anti-semitism in the 30's fitted. Today, in Australia at
>  >  least, it is anti-asian and anti-aboriginal racism.
>  >
>  >  Fascism leads to mass murder IMO because it can't dominate
>  >  (for long) the means of production, like the ruling class
>  >  or the working class. In Germany it lead to murder on the
>  >  scale of the holocaust because of the backing of the ruling
>  >  class, the ability to utilise an advanced capitalist state,
>  >  and frustration (thanks to James H for this) at losing
>  >  WWII. Not, repeat not, because of "German culture", popular
>  >  or otherwise, ordinary or otherwise.
>
But Tony the Nazis did not pick anti-Semitism out of thin air to be the
"all-encompassing ideology" for unifying the disparate class forces
behind National Socialism.  Unless anti-Semitism had already been
a very significant part of German political culture it would have been
quite useless to this end.  In other words it may very well be the case
that fascism cannot consolidate itself without some form of mass murder
but the choice of group to be targeted occurs not by happenstance but
is shaped by widely shared views in the political culture.  If what
Goldhagen calls "eliminationist anti-Semitism" was not an important
part of German political culture then the Nazis would never have made
the targeting of Jews a central part of their political program.
The kind of position you are arguing seems to me to constitute a kind
of "vulgar" Marxism which denies the causal role of culture and ideology
in the making of history.  Marx and Engels on the other hand always
acknowledged that ideas can act as a force in history.

			James F.


     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---