/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

idk

>>2402797
>Was he the grandfather of fascism? Did fascism originate from marxism + proudhonism?
>Or is this just a myth.
A myth or an over exaggeration of his influence. Reading Sorel's works, I don't see how a pro class war, anti nationalist, syndicalist, can be a core influence on Italian fascism as a whole.

i dont think so. sorel wasnt that bad but he was a good writer + wrote idealized descriptions of war in a way that is genuinely ridiculous & embarassing to anyone whose ever experienced war or been close to someone who has.

thats my impression at least. i only read the first half or so of his Violence book, & really enjoyed it up until where i was very angry with it. i suggest reading it if youve read marx & have a decent basis in our theory, if you havent read much yet i think it might obscure more than it clarifies.

but ultimately yeah i dont know too much about him, i dont even remember specifically what i read that put me off. but i definitely would not give him any responsibility for fascism, the man unequivocally sided with lenin when the bolshevik revolution came around, & he was similarly agitating against french participation in ww1. ᴉuᴉlossnW actually saw war & became a foundational fascist that pushed other people into war, for me the idea that somehow sorel is the secret origin is fucking ridiculous. giovanni gentile has a much better claim as far as originally articulating fascism as an ideology in a way that remains even halfway consistent with its precepts

>>2402890
>>2402882
I guess the cercle of proudhon gave sorel a bad rep. The cercle did connect sorel to fascism, even if sorels writings were no way fascistic

>>2402906
yeah i think thats probably it. he was absolutely associated with plenty of proto-fascists, the association of him with fascism isnt ridiculous in itself. but i do think it is very exaggerated in most tellings. you could consider him a "vitalist" maybe

>>2402797
He was onto something with his theory on the Myth; he gets a bad rap, really.

He wrote the playbook on taking power from limpdick succdems purely for the benefit of the bourgeois and his frustration with the Marxist movements became a rallying call for fascists considering communism as a dead end. His theories rested on putting forth ideology as the most important force for change, but he didn't understand what Marxist theory wrote, that puts ideology as a product of the mode of production, so his work ended up just serving fascist causes.

His return to Proudhon is also where most of the "fascist" influence comes from. Proudhon's mutualism ironically was a model for fascism, particularly National Socialism, with having a centralized "bank" or creditor manually steering the economy and complete contempt for workers. The similarities are just liberalism, which is how you can draw parallels. Proudhon hated Jews and blamed them for "ruining" liberalism too. He openly advocated genocide on them.

And he was absolutely a national syndicalist. I would hesitate to call him the "grandmaster" or whatever, but he was influential. Just because he liked Lenin didn't change that fact. In fact, someone posted a ᴉuᴉlossnW quote in a picture of Xi Jinping and one of the AMA people here was shouting it out as "amazing." Lots of socialists (liberal) and anarchists (liberal) fell into fascism.

>>2402967
>And he was absolutely a national syndicalist
How can Sorel be a "national syndicalist" if he wasn't a nationalist, and never used the term?

>Did fascism originate from marxism + proudhonism?
No man you're thinking of Bakunin and that only applies to Nazism.
Fascism on the other hand in Italy had neither.

according to bordiga, fascism was a movement led by disaffected syndicalists and anarchists:
>What remained in the fascist movement were the far-right groups plus those from the far left: ex-anarchists, ex-syndicalists, and ex-revolutionary syndicalists.
>https://www.marxists.org/archive/bordiga/works/1922/bordiga02.htm

>"this PMC armchair pseud is responsible for history happening"
idealist liberalism

>>2402797
Yes. Fascism originated from national syndicalism

My man here got his ideas thrown from the III International for being sorelian.
Although I haven't found online many books about sorel in spanish online. In english there are some

>>2403518
Also every Peruvian leftist claims him, from Senderistas to liberal catholics

>>2402797
Sorel changed his views alot, marxist to syndicalist, to monarchist, to eventually praising Leninist Russia. The only real consistency is his antil-liberalism so naturally fascists would find some solidarity in his works especially due to his rejection of materialism in favour of myth over mass movements which either leftists or rightists could adapt in their favour

>>2402797
>sorel was stupid tbh
How dare you insult the shining red sun in our hearts Georges Eugène Sorel, may the swift and moral sword of Sorelianism strike you down where you stand.
>Did fascism originate from marxism + proudhonism?
Fascism, excluding the ephemeral time when it was a general term for a group of Italian left-interventionists, is just an ultranationalist form of corporatism with Proudhonist diction. It has nothing substantively in common with either Marxism, Sorelianism, National Syndicalism, or Proudhonism.
>>2402974
Good litmus test for whether someone knows literally anything about Sorel or if they're just regurgitating whatever they've heard secondhand is whether they think Sorel was a natsynd (he wasn't) or an integralist (he really wasn't, in fact even warning Berth to not too closely associate with the monarchists in the Cercle)