Anti(Fascists): The Globalist’s terror army

Modern antifascism is a simulacrum, a copy without the original, it opposes the "fascism" it invented itself, which in reality is not there

"As a result of the clash between Trump's supporters and anti-fascists in Berkeley, 6 people were injured," "protests against the Marin Le Pen rally in Paris turned into mass fights," "anti-fascists used Molotov cocktails at the rally Marin Le Pen," "anti-fascist groups are suspected of involvement in the terrorist attack In Dortmund " – these are just a few of press reports over the past ten days in which groups of left-liberal youth who call themselves" anti-fascists "are mentioned in one way or another. In Russia this movement is marginal. In the West, everything is somewhat different. There, it has long become an organic part of the System.

Antifascism: old and new

Modern antifascism is quite a young phenomenon. As a subculture, it took shape in the 80's, borrowing symbols and slogans from historical movements that opposed the extreme right in Europe in the 1920s-1940s. At the same time, the backbone of the new antifascist movements was different. It was made by anarchists and Trotskyists who were marginalized in resisting the historical fascist regimes even during the Spanish Civil War, where the role of various radical elements among the Republicans was quite strong. The Stalinist Communist parties played a much greater role in confronting the fascist regimes, but modern anti-fascists prefer to blame them as "crypto-fascism." What can we say about conservatives and nationalists like Erst Niekisch and Otto Strasser in Germany or about the participants in the Resistance movement in France, among which were leftists, rightists and even French nationalists. In other words, there is no ideological and historical continuity between the new anti-fa and the Resistance groups, who fought real fascists at all.

Financing of antifascism

But there is another, stronger connection. With financial capital. For example, the Tides Foundation, which is active in the US and receives financial injections from George Soros, regularly finances anti-fascist groups, including those, that organize mass riots such as the Berkeley clashes in February this year, when anti-fascists beat people, burned cars and beaten glass at houses.

The "anti-racist" movement Black Lives Matter, which mainly deals with the organization of mass riots, received in 2016 from George Soros through the Open Society Foundation and the Center for American Progress, headed by infamous John Podesta, $ 33 million. Another 100 million dollars were allocated by the Ford Foundation and the Borealis Philanthropy organization, which created for this purpose the Black-led Movement Fund

Financing anti-fascist and anti-racist initiatives in Europe is also one of the priorities of the Open Society Foundation, as well as of other American structures of influence. For example, the same Ford fund actively contributing to many anti-rasists initiatives across the Europe. The network of European organizations SOS Racisme, the beginning of which was laid in France, was originally created by the mainstream leftists at the request of President Mitterrand and the Socialist Party. The organization is still largely financed by the French state.

All anti-fascist networks in Europe are tied either to states or to charity funds financed by capitalists. There are simply no other money in Europe. It turns out a paradox, leftists and anarchists receive funds from the state and capitalists, that is, from their main "class enemies". But why?

Stormers of liberalism

The answer lies on the surface: the management of cash flows is necessary to reorient the radicals away from criticizing the bourgeois system and fighting it against action against mythical "fascism." Capitalism proposes, instead of fighting against it, to tackle the struggle with ideological phantoms, as well as opponents of the same capitalism from the right camp. It is very convenient, safe and profitable in terms of money.

Newly-voiced ideologists tell newcomers that the "fascists" are all for whom the emancipatory spirit of the Enlightenment is in any way unacceptable, who are not going to give up any collective identities, from the rootedness in tradition, ethnic, national, religious, who believe that the man is a man and a woman a woman and that marriage is a union of a man and a woman, who love their people and their history, who see in culture not only nihilism, but also the values ​​of continuity and the Logos.

In a word, the "fascists" are those who do not agree with the assignment to all possible perversions of the status of the social norm and the legal law. For a professional antifascist, any healthy, balanced, normal person is a "fascist". And with the fascist, as anti-fascists say, there is nothing to be puffed up with. A good fascist is a dead fascist. It reminds us something.

The problem is that the phenomenon of fascism is not at all ideologically integral. The application of the term itself to the various doctrines of the 1920s and 40s is an oversimplification. Expanding the same interpretation of "fascism" completely deprives the concept of any meaning. But it is accompanied by so many traumatic allusions for the post-war European consciousness that it is impossible to resist using it as a label. Call your ideological enemy "a fascist", and the masses are on your side. And no one will understand. The main thing is just to have time to cry out the cursed swear word first. And get a grant for this from the big capital and state machine.

Western intellectuals create the concepts of "eternal fascism" in the spirit of Umberto Eco, trying to maximally expand the definition of this phenomenon so that it can be applied to the maximum number of opponents of the liberal world order, de-legitimizing them in such a way and attacking them with "assault teams" of anti-fascists. So the the representatives of all non-system right-populist forces in Europe, from the Austrian "Freedom Party to the French "National Front" or the "Independence Party of the United Kingdom" were labeled as fascists.

The anti-fascists themselves live by a completely fascist principle. "Leave this chimera of conscience, the Fuhrer thinks for us." For anti-fascists - as a rule, ultra-liberal philosophers from among the former left really think. Such as the late Andre Glucksmann or the now-living Daniel Cohn-Bendit and Bernard Henri Levy. The latter literally does not get out of all sorts of Maidans, regularly declares how he hates ("fascist") Putin, and shoots documentaries when it is necessary to justify an American invasion of a particular country. Saddam Hussen, Gaddafi, Assad - you are "fascists"! - So, we are flying to you.

It is not known how these intellectuals differ from American neo-conservatives, since the basic principles - the spread of liberal democracy around the world, the overthrow of "totalitarian" regimes, the opposition of Russia, the support of the state of Israel and the United States - they are the same. Perhaps the only difference is that the neoconservatives (also for some reason, as a rule, represented by former Trotskyite Jews) love Israel and the United States a bit more.

Antifascism on the Service of Imperialism

The classical communist definition of fascism understood it as a complex socio-political phenomenon. Therefore, it mentioned a financial capital, as the main sponsor and beneficiary, and marked the imperialist aggressive nature of fascism. Anti-fascists do not care about such difficulties. Their perception of the world is flat, they are content with clichés and cliches. Otherwise they would see that there is something in common between them and the historical fascists.

Modern antifascism is not only financed by the same financial capital, but also fully in solidarity with the aggressive policies of Western countries. Antifascists participated in all the color revolutions that the West was pursuing. However, in Ukraine, for example, in 2014 they were not embarrassed by the presence of neo-Nazis on neighboring barricades.

Whether we take the war in Yugoslavia, the Kosovo conflict, the bombing of Libya - anti-fascists always take the position of the hegemon and its proxy. They are always on the side of the US and the "rebels" sponsored by them: from Bosniaks and Albanians to Islamic extremists in Syria. When they need, they support nationalists, religious extremists, anyone. Who here is a "fascist", and who is not, is decided by  Bernard-Henri Levy.

A typical example is antifascists and Trump. Immediately after the election of US President Donald Trump, in the US and Europe thousands of demonstrations against fascism, xenophobia and sexism took place. Trump was branded as a hedge of hell when he tried to "sell" to American society a proposal to start negotiating with Russia. But the same Trump struck a missile attack on Syria. And where are all these millions of people in pink hats? They beat alt-right Richard Spencer who organized demonstration against the war. Well, Bernard-Henri, who previously had attacked Trump, synchronized with the neocons, as he was pleased with both the Tomahawk attack on Syria, and with actions to intimidate North Korea, saying that "this is a courageous gesture."

Antifascism is fascism

Modern antifascism is a simulacrum, a copy without the original, it opposes the "fascism" it invented itself, which in reality is not there. It claims to be a succession to "anti-fascism", which was not, because what do the German Communists of the 1930s and Co-Bendit have in common? Attacking emptiness, it only helps maintain the stunted existence of another subcultural simulacra - neo-Nazism, his twin brother. Finally, he does not offer anything positive. Only to destroy, crush, to forbid.T ypical psychology of pogrom.

It is not surprising that anti-fascists display practically fascist behavior. Another characteristic feature of anti-fascists is anti-intellectualism. If their right-wing opponents try to organize a discussion or speech, the anti-fascists prefer to disrupt the event, but not enter into a dialogue and not justify their position. Another common feature is intolerance towards the bearers of other views. Another - a bet on physical violence and intimidation towards opponents. Finally, the absence of critical thinking, which does not allow us to see in the actions of those who direct them, a frank manipulation. Antifascists are blind to one eye: they see only pseudo-fascism and do not see the real one, to whom they serve faithfully.

To some it may seem surprising, but anti-fascism today is a reactionary phenomenon that protects liberal hegemony, the liberal status quo and liberal politicians. Those who do not want to change anything, who advocate attracting millions of migrants and reducing the social responsibility of the state and business, who undermine the national sovereignty of their countries in favor of transnational business and are tightly intertwined in world governance networks