Tom Woods gives a good argument here that exactly the opposite was more likely the case.
Two thoughts:
1. Very funny to see a Mises Institute guy chuckle at how crazy those LaRouchians are.
2. The fascism saving European civilization thing is a bit more pressing to me than the Rockefeller Foundation thing (hell, I've done research supported by Rockefeller Foundation money... if I was being groomed by the financial elite I apparently missed that memo).
But I do think Woods gave a good argument on the issue he was exploring. Yes, I know this is something of a backhanded compliment, although the "compliment" part is as genuine as the backhand.
Friday, August 31, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Dude, Mises was contrasting fascism with socialism in terms of liberalism. He recognized that socialism was far worse for liberalism due to its complete rejection of all things liberal, and that if socialism had taken hold of Europe, then their civilization would have been lost. In this context, indeed fascism saved European civilization, because it didn't fully disregard liberalism, which was at that time the foundation of all western civilization.
ReplyDeleteDaniel, was Mises speaking of "Austrofascism" of Engelbert Dollfuss in Austria?
ReplyDeleteDollfuss, compared to Hitler and Mussolini, was a moderate and more likely to build coalitions rather than make enemies. Those were times when militias supported by Stalin demanded armed revolution in his country, and what else were men like him likely to do, other than ban parties that were behind those acts of terrorism? Besides, Dollfuss was an enemy of Hitler, and his assassination was conducted by members of the Nazi Party of Austria, whom he had also banned.
OTOH, Mussolini tolerated publications of books criticizing his regime, written by Marxists and classical liberals. Those men lived freely without even being shadowed by the secret police. Benedetto Croce, Antonio Grazizei, and other such writers wrote openly against Fascism in Italy. So of course, Italian Fascists were a lot more liberal than Stalin.
Why are you asking Daniel? Why not read the man himself?
Deletehttp://mises.org/liberal/ch1sec10.asp