Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site sdcrdcf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!alan
From: alan@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Alan Algustyniak)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Whither Are We Drifting? - (nf)
Message-ID: <1162@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 25-Jun-84 16:32:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcrdcf.1162
Posted: Mon Jun 25 16:32:34 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 30-Jun-84 01:21:19 EDT
References: <1005@ihuxq.UUCP> <9800007@ea.UUCP> <2231@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Reply-To: alan@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Alan Algustyniak)
Organization: System Development Corporation, Santa Monica
Lines: 43

mit-eddie!lkk says:

>The Nazis didn't run their govt. "for the good of
>the people" as much as "the good of the fatherland".  This was
>nationalism, the state for its own sake.

-- Good point. But recognize that by 'the state', it refers only to the
   particular state one considers his fatherland. E.g. a German
   nationalist believes that even 'the good of Americans' is below 'the
   good of Germany'; but 'the good of America' doesn't enter into it.

>  In this respect,
>Stalinist Russia was Fascist too, in that all personal rights were
>subjugated in the name of the state.  (This is not neccesary for a
>Marxist state, but happened to be true in the case of Russia, which had
>a long tradition of autocracy.)

-- As i see it, it was/is the other way around. Remember that according
   to Leninism, individuals are completely subservient to the state; the
   state has all the rights; the individual, none. Stalin was not a
   nationalist (in the political sense of the word), which is easy to
   recognize when you realize that he was Georgian. But he was a Leninist.
   The point i am trying to make (this is not one of my clearest letters)
   is that it is more natural to think of the NAZIs as having elements
   of Leninism in them, then to think of Stalinist Russia as having
   parts of Nationalism in it.  This helps to explain why the National
   Socialists were Socialists, rather than Stalinist Russia being Fascist.

   BTW, llk remarks that Socialism is when there is popular control of
   the means of production, and refers to unpopular govns as not being
   Socialist.  I might remind him that this defn makes America and
   NAZI Germany socialist states, but excludes the United Soviet
   Socialist Republics.


	Alan Algustyniak   (sdccsu3!sdcrdcf!alan)
        (ucbvax!ucla-vax!sdcrdcf!alan) (allegra!sdcrdcf!alan)
	(decvax!trw-unix!sdcrdcf!alan) (cbosgd!sdcrdcf!alan)

  P.S. Does anyone out there know where nations get there names? Why does
  the West call it USSR, if we don't believe it's Socialistic? Why call
  the Democratic Republics if they correspond to our defn of Democracy?