Tober said:
Interesting chart. Where would you put Nationalistic Socialist? Also having communist and anarchists so close to each other looks weird. They should be polar opposites. The one where the state is supreme vs. the rejection of it. |
Nazis are just a variety of fascist specific to Germany. I could've added some sub-ideologies within Nazism like strasserism, for example, but I chose not to add too many syncretic ideologies because they probably can't be points, but rather imprecise fuzzy lines depending on which part of the syncretic ideology one emphasizes.
Marxist communists believed the state eventually would wither away as the material reasons for its existence reduced. So no, communism isn't about the state being "supreme." Even if Marxist-Lenist regimes became authoritarian and statist, they all believed there would be less role for the state over time. Marx himself believed in strong small "d" democratic power. Marxist-Leninists and their offshoots believed in a strong authoritarian or totalitarian state, but you can't say the same for say orthodox marxists, who believed a working class captured state should do some things and not necessarily others. So called "democratic centralism" and "vanguardism" were Lenin's innovations.
There are also non-marxist and marxist, non-statist communists who believed in communism in the vein of Kropotkin(Anarchist-Communism) as well as council communists, autonomists, etc, etc.
Socialist ideology is very diverse on the topic about the role of the state, but a majority of socialists believed the state is a manifestation of class power and should either be done away with immediately or will be outmoded/wither over time.
This is different from fascism where the state is considered a super-organism that all within a national body should work towards the health of even at the cost of the super-organism's cells (individuals.)
Last edited by sc94597 - 4 days ago
