MARCH.1946 7 1 THEquarrelbetweenfascismandcommunismisanother exampleoflethalnonsense.Thefactthatitforcesus intobothcivilandinternationalwarsmakesitperhapsthe mostdangeroussymptomofourintellectualbankruptcy. Ifweexaminethepresentmeaningofthesetwoterms,we findaboutthesamepoliticalandsocialconceptions.The samemarshallingofindividualandsociallife;thesame franticmilitarization;thesamedeceptiveunanimity,obtainedbythecoercionofasinglegroupwhichidentifies itselfwiththestateandholdsontoitspowerbythisconfusion;thesameserfdomoftheworking-classesinsteadof thewage-system.GermanyandRussia,morealikeinstructurethananyothertwonations,threateneachotherwith internationalcrusades,andeachdiscoversinhisopponent theApocalypticBeastHowcanwestillthinkthereisany rationaloppositionbetweenfascismandcommunism?A fascistvictoryonlymeans:wipeoutthecommunists;a communistvictoryonlymeans:wipeoutthefascists.Antifascistandanticorununistareequalymeaninglessterms. Theantifascists'standis:anythingbutfascism,anything beingfascismunderthenameofcommunism.Theanti- communists'standis:anythingbutcommunism,anything beingcommunismunderthenameoffascism.Forthisfine cause,eachenemycampresignsitselftodeath,andprepares tokill.Duringthesummerof1932,inthestreetsofBer- lin,crowdsoftengatheredabouttwolaborersorwhitecolarworkers,onecommunistandtheotherNazi;each ofthemalwaysfound,afterarguingawhile,thathewas putingforwardthesameprogramastheother,butafter amoment'sconfusion,thisdiscoverymadehimall the angrier.Thatwasfour-and-a-halfyearsago;theNazis stilltorturetheGermancommunists,andacatastrophicwar betweentheantifascistsandtheanticommuniststhreatens Franceherself. I f thishappens,theTrojanwarwilllook likeamodelofgoodsense;forthoughwemayagreewith asecondaryGreekpoetthatonlytheghostofHelenwas presentatTroy,evenaghostismorerealthantheconflict betweenfascismandcommunism. Whateverelseit is,theoppositionbetweendictatorship anddemocracy,whichaliesitselfwithorder versus freedom,isatrueopposition.But it issillytothinkaswe dothesedays,thatoneentirelyexcludestheother,for neithertermisanabsolute;it isacriterionwhichhelpsus tojudgeasocialstructure'scharacter.Clearly,therecan benoabsolutepartyordictatorship,oraperfectdemo- cracy,forthesocialorganismisacompoundalwaysand everywhere,invaryingdegrees,oflibertyandauthority. Thedegreeofdemocracyisintherelationsbetweenthe partsofthesocialmachine,anddependsonconditions whichaffecttheoperationofthemachine;andsoit is theserelationsandconditionsthatwesawchange. In- stead,westartwiththeideathatallgroups,nations,or partiestrulyembodyeitherDictatorshiporDemocracy, andaccordingtowhetherourtasteisfororderorfor freedom,wefeeldriventowipeoutits"opposite."Many Frenchmenhonestlybelievethattheirmilitaryvictoryover GermanywouldbeavictoryforDemocracy.Freedom residesinFranceandtyrannyinGermanyastheyseeit; soforMoliere'scontemporaries,asedativevirtueresided inopium. If "nationaldefense"onedayturnsFranceinto anarmedcampandclampsthenationundermilitaryrule, andthisnewFrancegoestowaragainstGermany,these BibliotecaGinoBianco menwill letthemselvesbekilled,afterkillingasmany Germansastheycan,withthetouchingillusionthatthey aregivingtheirbloodforDemocracy.Itneverstrikesthem thatNazismwasbornoutofaspecificsituation,that it mightbeworthmoretostimulateconditionswhichwould lettheGermanstaterelaxitsholdthantokillboysfrom HamburgandBerlin. . . . THEclassstruggle, atermwhichmightbemoreprecise, isthemostfundamentalandserious,perhapstheone realconflictwhichdivideshumanbeings.Whatislegiti- mate,vital,basicistheeternalstrugglebetweenthosewho ruleandthosewhoobey,sincesocialpoweritselfentails theobliterationofhumandignityinthosebelowThe ruling-class,whetheritknowsitornot,alwaysthinksless ofitssubjectsthanitself.Whereverauthorityexertsitself, itcannotrespect,oronlyinspecialcases,thehumanquali- tiesofitsinstruments. If ittakestheatitudethatmenare things,quiteincapableofresistance,itfindsthesethings verymaleable;foratthethreatofdeath,whichisthe supremesanctionofauthority,menaremorecompliantthan inertobjects.Aslongasthereisasocialhierarchy,whateveritsform,thebulkofmankindwillhavetofightfor itshumanrights.Theresistancefromthetop,if itordinarilyseemsinjust,hasitsownbasisinreality.First,from personalreasons;exceptforrarecases,theprivilegeddo notwanttogiveupanyrealormoralprivileges.Then, fromhigherones.Whoeverholdsauthoritythinksithis missiontopreserveorder,whichisessentialtosociety,and hecannotbelieveinanyorderbuttheonethereis.He isnotentirelywrong;untilanotherorderbecomesareal- ity,nooneknowswhetheritwillbeviable;forthereis definitesocialprogressonlywhenthepressurefrombelow changesthebalanceofpower,andcompelsnewsocial relations.Theencounterbetweenthepressurefrombelow andtheresistancefromaboveproducesaconstantlyunstableequilibrium,whichdefinesfrommomenttomoment thesocialstructure.Thisisnotwar; itcanchangeinto one,butitisnotpredestined.Antiquityhasleftusthestory ofTroy:but,also,ithasleftthestoryofthevigorous, unitedactionbywhichtheRomanplebeians,withoutblood, emergedfromastateborderingonslaverywithnewrights, andwithtribunestoprotectthem.Exactlyinthesameway, theFrenchworkers,bytakingoverthefactories,butwithoutviolence,woncertainbasicrights,alongwiththeirown representatives. ARTSRomehadagreatadvantageovermodernFrance. Insocialmatersitknewneitherabstractionsnorabsolutes,neithercapitalizedwordsnorisms. . .Pryintoany term,anyexpressionofourpoliticalvocabulary; it is emptyinside.Thisappliestothatpoliticalcry,sopopular atelection-time,"Smashthetrusts!"Atrustisaneconomic monopolythatbig-businessuses,notforthepublicinterest, buttoincreaseitsownpower.Andwhatissobadabout this? It isthefactthatamonopoly,instrumentaly,hasa wil-to-powerthatisalientothepublicgood.Still,this isn'twhatwewanttosmash;ourtargetisthefact,unim- portantinitself,thatthisarbitrarypowerisinthehands ofaneconomicoligarchy.Fortheseoligarchies,wepro- posetoexchangethestate,whichwieldsanarbitrarypower quiteasalientopublicwelfare;indeed,sincepowerbe-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTExMDY2NQ==