Fabianism

[FlashDangerpants]

It looks like Labour is about to have its own "Night of the Long Knives." Starmer the Fabian Socialist is trying to hold on to power...but will his own party even let him do that, after such catastrophic losses?

Well for one thing, whoever replaces Starmer will be no less of a "Fabian Socialist" than he. for another, that sort of purge is generally reserved for cults of personality disguised as political parties and that most definitely does not describe the UK Labour party. It's more of a MAGA/ Reform sort of deal.

And in keeping with that, a night of the long knives would surely be more appropriate for your good friend Nigel "Gas the Jews" Farage.

[Immanuel Can]

"...a surprise ultimatum was issued as Labour MP Catherine West told the PM's cabinet: challenge Starmer by Monday, or I will." (BBC)

Here come the knives.

[FlashDangerpants]

Oh dear. He seems to think the night of the long knives was when the Nazis got rid of their leader. He never was a very good historian though.

[Immanuel Can]

Oh dear. He seems to think the night of the long knives was when the Nazis got rid of their leader. He never was a very good historian though.

The "Night of the Long Knives" was a backstabbing exercise that happened within the German extreme Left. Nobody said anything about who was going to win this one. Nobody knows yet.

Not bothering with inane trolling, though.

[FlashDangerpants]

The "Night of the Long Knives" was a backstabbing exercise that happened within the German extreme Left.

Well I suppose it was technically the night when the final rogue anti-capitalist elements of the Nazi party (Rohm and Strasser) were murdered by the far right leadership.

[MikeNovack]

The "Night of the Long Knives" was a backstabbing exercise that happened within the German extreme Left.

Well I suppose it was technically the night when the final rogue anti-capitalist elements of the Nazi party (Rohm and Strasser) were murdered by the far right leadership.

Correct, not Within the extreme left at all.

The history is that initially it was unclear WHAT (besides populist) the National Socialists wpuld become. The Night of the Long Knives was when their "left" leadership and membership were violently purged.

[Immanuel Can]

The "Night of the Long Knives" was a backstabbing exercise that happened within the German extreme Left.

Well I suppose it was technically the night when the final rogue anti-capitalist elements of the Nazi party (Rohm and Strasser) were murdered by the far right leadership.

Correct, not Within the extreme left at all.

Yep, it was. Communists were International Socialists, but this was a fight internal to the National Socialists. Socialists both. Leftists.

[FlashDangerpants]

The "Night of the Long Knives" was a backstabbing exercise that happened within the German extreme Left.

Well I suppose it was technically the night when the final rogue anti-capitalist elements of the Nazi party (Rohm and Strasser) were murdered by the far right leadership.

Correct, not Within the extreme left at all.

The history is that initially it was unclear WHAT (besides populist) the National Socialists wpuld become. The Night of the Long Knives was when their "left" leadership and membership were violently purged.

Indeed. Well Otto Strasser was a committed Socialist from the start and he left the party when it abandoned Socialism. He felt that the tensions between a radical nationalist world view and a class based internationalist one could be resolved with socialist principles regarding property in particular intact. Hitler and his cronies were tactically unclear on what socialism is, but most definitely abandoned all that property stuff.

Here's an extract from Strasser's Hitler and I which can be read in full here, but I am borrowing this block of text from one of the posts in the FAQ at the 'ask historians' subreddit.

Adolf Hitler stiffened. ‘Do you deny that I am the creator of National-Socialism?’

‘ I have no choice but to do so. National-Socialism is an idea born of the times in which we live. It is in the hearts of millions of men, and it is incarnated in you. The simultaneity with which it arose in so many minds proves its historical necessity, and proves, too, that the age of capitalism is over.’

At this Hitler launched into a long tirade in which he tried to prove to me that capitalism did not exist, that the idea of Autarkie was nothing but madness, that the European Nordic race must organize world commerce on a barter basis, and finally that nationalization, or in Hitler and I socialization, as I understood it, was nothing but dilettantism, not to say Bolshevism.

Let us note that the socialization or nationalization of property was the thirteenth point of Hitler’s official programme.

‘Let us assume, Herr Hitler, that you came into power tomorrow. What would you do about Krupp’s? Would you leave it alone or not?’

‘Of course I should leave it alone,’ cried Hitler. ‘Do you think me crazy enough to want to ruin Germany’s great industry?’

‘If you wish to preserve the capitalist regime, Herr Hitler, you have no right to talk of socialism. For our supporters are socialists, and your programme demands the socialization of private enterprise.’

‘That word “socialism” is the trouble,’ said Hitler. He shrugged his shoulders, appeared to reflect for a moment, and then went on: ‘I have never said that all enterprises should be socialized. On the contrary, I have maintained that we might socialize enterprises prejudicial to the interests of the nation. Unless they were so guilty, I should consider it a crime to destroy essential elements in our economic life. Take Italian Fascism. Our National-Socialist State, like the Fascist State, will safeguard both employers’ and workers’ interests while reserving the right of arbitration in case of dispute.’

‘But under Fascism the problem of labour and capital remains unsolved. It has not even been tackled. It has merely been temporarily stifled. Capitalism has remained intact, just as you yourself propose to leave it intact.’

‘Herr Strasser,’ said Hitler, exasperated by my answers, ‘there is only one economic system, and that is responsibility and authority on the part of directors and executives. I ask Herr Amann to be responsible to me for the work of his subordinates and to exercise his authority over them. There Amann asks his office manager to be responsible for his typists and to exercise his authority over them; and so on to the lowest rung of the ladder. That is how it has been for thousands of years, and that is how it will always be.’

So, it is certain that if a person has rigidly defined Socialism as a construct that requires the removal of all means of production from the hands of the capitalist, and the disinheritance of the unproductive landlord class, then the Nazis under Strasser would have been at least half Socialist, but under Hitler they were no such thing.

If you take it further than that, as Mannie does, and assert that Socialists want to reach into your pocket and take away even the chewing gum they might find there (weird, but obsessives gotta obsess), then there is no reconciliation possible even in Strasserian terms to Socialism.

Also, only a handful of madmen ever have tried to prove that Capitalism doesn't exist.

[mickthinks]

… only a handful of madmen ever have tried to prove that Capitalism doesn't exist.

And here at the Phorum we have more than our fair shair!

[Gary Childress]

If capitalism doesn't exist, did feudalism exist?

[Gary Childress]

Looks like the 1% will continue to own the world if IC has anything to say about it. Can't have people succumbing to petty envy and jealousy of the 1% whenever the economy tanks and they're left homeless while the 1% curse at the increase in the price for caviar. Shame on the 99%.

[Immanuel Can]

Looks like the 1% will continue to own the world if IC has anything to say about it.

Who is this "1%" of yours, Mr. 10%?

[Impenitent]

if you are so concerned about the price of caviar, open a fish farm

-Imp

[Gary Childress]

Looks like the 1% will continue to own the world if IC has anything to say about it.

Who is this "1%" of yours, Mr. 10%?

I don't own anything other than my personal possessions. According to Socialism, EVERYONE is entitled to that. If it were indeed just a matter of "envy" then the poor would envy the middle class and everyone on up. The homeless would envy the working poor, etc. Private property is property which gives a person power over others. Personal possessions do not give people power over others.

Do you have a problem with that Mr. Totalitarian?

[Immanuel Can]

Looks like the 1% will continue to own the world if IC has anything to say about it.

Who is this "1%" of yours, Mr. 10%?

I don't own anything other than my personal possessions.

You're still in the world's top 10%. So when you redistribute to the people in the Developing World all your worldly goods, as any good Socialist would, then you can start talking about the 1%, I would say. Until then, your complaints ring pretty hollow.