Military Review

"Conservative revolution" as an attempt to return Germany to its own "special path" of development after the defeat in the First World War

34
"Conservative revolution" as an attempt to return Germany to its own "special path" of development after the defeat in the First World War

After the defeat in World War I, Germany found itself in a rather difficult situation - the terms of the Versailles Peace Treaty provided for not only exorbitant reparations (in order to make payments on schedule for 30 years, Germany had to annually transfer to the winners an amount three times the annual gross national product), but and territorial concessions, "decolonization" and army reductions.


Germany was losing an eighth of the territory with a population of 7,3 million people (10% of the pre-war population). The constitution of the Weimar Republic was drawn up on the principle of imitation: the election of the president by the people, as in the United States, an unrestricted vote of no confidence in parliament, as in England (with the difference that Germany did not have the historically established English two-party system), there were elements of plebiscitary democracy, which is characteristic of France.

As the historian Oleg Plenkov writes, the development of Germany since 1870 gave the Germans reasons to be convinced of their moral, scientific and spiritual superiority, since during this period there was amazing progress in all spheres of the country's life, Germany was the most dynamic country of European civilization. The Treaty of Versailles called this past into question, offering instead democracy, liberalism, parliamentarism, "self-determination", the League of Nations - and all this looked like a desecration of national dignity, a mockery of the victors [1].

The self-consciousness of German nationally minded people after the defeat in the First World War was infringed - the Germans had to abandon their former political principles in favor of the principles of the victors [2]. This was unbearable for the self-consciousness that had experienced painful humiliation - "rehabilitation" could only consist in completely tearing Germany away from the West and returning to its own path. This is what the "conservative revolution" tried to do in theoretical terms. In this work, we will try to answer the questions - what was the phenomenon of the "conservative revolution", what political positions did he adhere to, and how much did this trend influence Nazism.

The phenomenon of the "conservative revolution"


Fundamental monograph by Armin Mohler "The Conservative Revolution in Germany"
Fundamental monograph by Armin Mohler "The Conservative Revolution in Germany"

The ideology of the German “conservative revolution” is in many ways a unique intellectual phenomenon in stories Germany of the 5th century. The very phrase “conservative revolution” itself is paradoxical, as it incorporates seemingly incompatible semantic and lexical units [1]. The term "conservative revolution" unites the totality of the ideologies and organizations of the German "right", which was not satisfied with the role of preserving what can be saved, but set themselves the goal of resurrecting in a revolutionary way the most important national myths lost in the republic [XNUMX].

Actually, the very term "conservative revolution" in relation to a group of such diverse authors as Oswald Spengler, Ernst Jünger, Arthur Möller van den Broek, Carl Schmitt, Edgar Julius Jung, Ernst Nikisch, and others, was fixed only in 1949 with the release of Armin Mohler's book "The Conservative Revolution in Germany 1918-1932" (Konservative Revolution in Deutschland). It was after A. Mohler's book that such designations as "conservative revolution" and "national revolutionaries" ("Konservative Revolution" und "Nationale Revolutionäre") entered academic use [7].

The founder of the historiography of the "conservative revolution" Armin Mohler understood it as an intellectual movement that arose after the French bourgeois revolution, directed against its ideological origins and manifested itself primarily in the sphere of spirit and ideology. In his work The Conservative Revolution in Germany 1918-1932, Mohler defines the "conservative revolution" as a "German movement", contrasting it with the foreign German influence of the principles of the 1789 revolution. For him, this is a special type of political thinking, radically opposed to "progress" [3].

The “conservative revolutionaries”, whose general ideological mood can be defined, following Geoffrey Herf, as “reactionary modernism”, combining modernist admiration for technology with a total rejection of the values ​​of the Enlightenment and liberal democratic models, built a number of original models of the “right” type and left a significant creative heritage [4].

According to A. Moler, the First World War played an important role in the formation of the "conservative revolution" in two respects. First, a generation of "conservative revolutionaries" was born in the crucible of war. Secondly, the war destroyed the Wilhelmine era and the "old" German conservatism, to which the "conservative revolutionaries" had little sympathy.

Representatives of the young and middle generation of German conservatives opposed the return to traditional conservative ideology and politics, which led to the emergence of the Young Conservative movement, which set itself the goal of bringing the main ideas and goals of German conservatism into line with modernity. In fact, the “conservative revolution” was an attempt to create a new German conservatism and nationalism in the conditions of the interwar crisis of European modernity [5].

The main difference between the “conservative revolution” and the revolution of the left forces was that the first made plans for the future, inspired by the pathos of the past national greatness, images or myths of past times [1]. This gave the “conservative revolution” an advantage over the left, because, as some researchers note, “the language of the oppressed is poor, monotonous, the measure of need in this case is also the measure of the language”, the right myths, on the contrary, come from an excess of power, tradition, wealth [1].

The "conservative revolutionaries" opposed all previous forms of politics, their critical orientation was anti-liberal, anti-Marxist, anti-capitalist, anti-democratic, anti-parliamentary. In their political practice, they strove for a new synthesis of style and political thinking.

One of the ideologists of the "conservative revolution" Edgar Julius Jung defined it as follows:

“We call a conservative revolution the restoration of all those elementary laws and values, without which a person cannot build his relationship with nature and God and cannot create a true social order. Equality will be replaced by the inner identity of a person, class thinking will be replaced by a sense of hierarchy, bureaucratic coercion will be replaced by the internal responsibility of true self-government, the shapeless mass will be replaced by the right of the individual, inalienable from its national roots [6].”

The origins of the "conservative revolution" and its main currents


Antipathy to democracy and the republic in the German national consciousness was generated by the anti-Napoleonic wars, which has its own historical logic. The fact is that the opposition of such concepts as nationalism, militarism, conservatism, reaction, on the one hand, and liberalism, democracy, pacifism, on the other, which are firmly entrenched in modern political consciousness, is inadequate to the political reality of the first half of the 1th century. Then democratic France was militant and aggressive, and it was opposed by monarchical, conservative forces advocating peace [XNUMX].

It should be noted that the conservative ideology, in order to maintain its dominant position in society, was repeatedly forced to renew itself at the theoretical level, reproduce itself, enrich itself with new values, but always affirm and protect traditional values. Such features were characteristic of conservatism in the late 8th and early XNUMXth centuries, when Europe entered a period of deep crisis. Researchers of that period give different explanations for the current situation. Some associate this period with the "era of modernization", others - with the "revolt of the masses", others - with the crisis of the "Enlightenment" [XNUMX].

The ideas of the "conservative revolution" were determined by such thinkers as O. Spengler, K. Schmitt, L. Strauss, A. Möller van den Broek, E. Junger. Their political philosophy reflected both the general theoretical line of conservatism and ideas that were inverted from other ideological currents of the late 8th and early XNUMXth centuries [XNUMX]. For example, the German thinker Arthur Möller van den Broek, who was an opponent of Marxism, liberalism and capitalism, demanded an appeal to conservatism, the inculcation of a conservative worldview in all Germans, the formation of a "third party" - a party of all nationally minded Germans.

The ideology of the German "conservative revolution", on the one hand, absorbed the ideological cliches of German conservatism, radically strengthening them: nationalism, anti-liberalism, the opposition of the German folk spirit and German culture to the values ​​of Western civilization, the search for a special path for the historical development of Germany in line with the "German (Prussian ) socialism”, the idea of ​​a corporate state, an uncompromising struggle against the Weimar Republic. On the other hand, it was an attempt to create a new German conservatism and nationalism of a radical nature. Its leaders sought to give German conservatism a modern character [9].

To this should be added the existence of a widespread in the 1920-1930s. among intellectuals, the belief that technological progress, effective planning, and a gradual increase in the standard of living should help smooth out social contradictions in society. In this context, the main myths of German history arose and developed: the thesis of Germany's "special path" (Sonderweg), the "ideas of 1914", the concept of "Middle Europe" (Mitteleuropa) [9].

The most remarkable and unusual thing about the “conservative revolution” was that the distinction between “right” and “left” disappeared, and also that conservative goals were proposed to be achieved by revolutionary means. If the radical left revolutionaries saw what they wanted in the future, then the “conservative revolutionaries” saw it in the past [1]. In general, the "conservative revolution" was an anti-capitalist, anti-liberal, anti-Western movement - these formal signs make it possible to unite diverse conservative groups into a single whole.

Many right-wing associations, movements, and unions participated in the "conservative revolution". A. Moler, in his fundamental monograph, pointed to five groups within the “conservative revolution”: the Young Conservatives, the Bundische, the National Revolutionaries, the Völkisch, and the movement of the peasant population. The well-known German historian Sonteimer, in turn, adhered to a different classification and divided the “conservative revolutionaries” into four groups: German nationalists, conservative revolutionaries, national Bolsheviks, and völkisch. In this material, we will adhere to the classical classification of Mohler.

"Young Conservatives" were focused on the ideal of the medieval empire. It does not mean a cohesive nation-state with a unified people, but a mixture of peoples created by the sword of the conqueror. Rather, it is a supranational formation, which is based on a higher principle, and an individual people transmits its systematics to all other peoples and tribes, who transfer it to their private lives [3]. The "Young Conservatives" were more Christian-oriented than the rest of the "conservative revolution". The most significant "Young Conservatives" are Arthur Möller van den Broek and Edgar Julius Jung.

"National Revolutionaries" - representatives of the predominantly front-line generation. The credo of these intellectuals can be defined as "soldier nationalism". Fiery nationalists and admirers of the "German", modernists in spirit, but at the same time opponents of progressive thought, they longed for a real national revolution. Flirting with socialism, they were looking for a way out of the usual political divisions. Among the significant representatives of the "national revolutionaries" should be noted Ernst Junger, his brother Friedrich Georg Junger and Ernst Nikisch.

Völkische - a group inspired by spiritualism, theosophy and "Aryan mysticism". They formed the racist wing of the "conservative-revolutionary" quest and were often not taken seriously by representatives of other movements. The most influential representatives of Völkisch thought are Guido von List and Rudolf von Sebottendorff.

Bundische - a youth movement that was preceded by pre-war associations such as the "Migratory Birds". What can be attributed to the bundish proper is a few associations - the Free German Band, Eagles and Falcons, Artamans, etc. The bündish, as well as the movement of the peasant population ("Landvolk movement”), did not leave a significant intellectual legacy.

Oswald Spengler and Karl Schmitt A. Mohler does not correlate with a specific ideological group, because their influence goes far beyond narrow communities.

"Prussian socialism" by Oswald Spengler and "anti-liberal manifesto" by Arthur Möller van den Broek


Oswald Spengler
Oswald Spengler

The phenomenal success of Oswald Spengler's "The Decline of the Western World" (we are better known as "The Decline of Europe") among the reading public was due to the fact that the author exposed the crisis points in the development of Western civilization. The cultural-historical concept of Spengler was based on the idea of ​​the opposite of culture and civilization. Among the "conservative revolutionaries" in the interpretation of culture, Spengler adhered to a more or less classical interpretation, as it had developed in German humanitarian thought [9].

According to D. Herf, Spengler's worldview, his ideas are "on the border between the Prussian conservatives, who relied on industry, junkers, the army and the bureaucracy, and the post-war conservative revolutionaries" [10]. In the conditions of the crisis of Faustian culture, Spengler sought to develop the position of a lone intellectual, preserving the cultural heritage of centuries in the face of a rapidly advancing civilization.

However, the "Faustian man" of culture has the right to choose for himself the ethical position of his existence in civilization. This position was later designated as “heroic realism” in the worldview and philosophical sense, and in the political sense as “Prussian socialism”, the development of the principles of which was Spengler’s outstanding contribution to the ideology of not only the “conservative revolution”, but also German conservatism in general [9 ].

O. Spengler's work "Prussianism and Socialism" gives an interpretation of "Prussian socialism" as a special model of the state structure and national mentality. Socialism was understood by him rather as "sociality" - the ability to community, originating from tradition. Diverse interests lose their contradictions in the service of the nation to a higher idea. Individuals must serve the whole - the state. Sacrificing personal interests in favor of the community is defined by O. Spengler as a primordial Prussian virtue, opposed to the party antagonisms of the Weimar Republic (English liberalism and French democracy) and Marxist nihilistic socialism. O. Spengler considered the revolution of 1918 a betrayal, a defeat in an unlost war [8].

As the historian Sergei Artamoshin notes, when considering socialism, O. Spengler noted the relationship between the Prussian spirit and the socialist way of thinking. Not perceiving socialism as a derivative of economic contradictions, the philosopher emphasized the impossibility and absurdity of understanding socialism in the spirit of Marx and the need for a clear delimitation of them. A feature of Prussian socialism was an anti-liberal and anti-Marxist orientation, oriented against individualism and internationalism. It acted as the socialism of the state, not of the class. The ethics of Prussian socialism was based on the idea of ​​duty, which was expressed in the service of each person not only to the state, but to the whole society [11].

Arthur Möller van den Broek
Arthur Möller van den Broek

A somewhat different interpretation of the conservatism of the period of the "conservative revolution" was by Arthur Möller van den Broek. His concept of the state, like that of Spengler, was based on respect for the tradition that Prussia extended to the whole of Germany, cementing disparate state formations into a powerful state - the Prussian state instinct overcame the amorphousness of the Germans [8].

The Prussian style as a person's self-denial in the name of higher values ​​is declared by Möller as a model, on the basis of which the education of the German nation should take place - the "nationalization" of the German consciousness and the combination of culture and politics [8]. However, Möller, unlike Spengler, nevertheless derived socialism from the corporate concept of the state and the economy.

Möller van den Broek's main work, The Third Reich, was published in 1923, and in it he focused the fire of criticism on liberalism. Möller argued that "liberalism is a moral malady of peoples: it represents freedom from beliefs and passes it off as belief" [12]. The Western powers failed to defeat the Germans in a fair fight - and now they are trying to destroy Germany with the help of revolutionary and liberal-pacifist propaganda. And stupid Germans dutifully swallow this poison, Möller believed.

A. Möller's book "The Third Reich" is a strong and significant manifesto against liberalism. According to the thinker,

"liberalism kills culture, destroys the fatherland, it means the end of mankind."

“Liberalism claims that whatever it does, it does for the people. But he just pushes the people away, highlighting his own "I". Liberalism is the expression of a society that is no longer a community. A liberal person has missed the meaning that is inherent in every society when it arises. A liberal person does not represent an organic society, but only a disbanded one. For this reason alone, he does not know how to produce any values ​​that would unite the people and society (...). Liberalism is the party of the careerists. He is the party of the intermediate layer, who understands that it is necessary to squeeze between the people and the selection that the people carried out in itself. Adherents of this intermediate layer skip the development of the nation and invade it like a foreign body. They feel like individuals who owe no one, least of all to the people. They are completely unrelated to his history. They do not share his traditions. They don't empathize with his past. They do not even have ambition for the future. They seek only benefit in their present. Their latest idea is aimed at a huge International in which all differences between peoples, languages, races and cultures will be eliminated and completely destroyed [12] ”,

Moeller writes.

Möller van den Broek had a negative attitude towards Marxism as well. He considered Marxist socialism to be a product of liberal times, which considered human society based on the values ​​of liberalism. This consideration was materialistic and focused on protecting the interests of a certain class. The bourgeois state was aimed at protecting the interests of the bourgeoisie, and socialism, in turn, strove for the same, only in the interests of the proletariat. Thus, they both split society into segments instead of uniting it [11].

"Conservative Revolution" and Nazism


As historian Sergei Artamoshin notes, the history of the relationship between the “conservative revolution” and National Socialism during the years of the Weimar Republic is not characterized by homogeneity. At different stages, these relations were determined either by the desire of the Nazis to get closer to the "conservative revolution", or by the latter's calls to Nazism about the need for joint action.

Oswald Spengler did not have a stable relationship with the Nazi movement. He retired early from political activity, taking up the problems of philosophy. However, he could not completely move away from political reality. On July 31, 1932 and March 5, 1933, as well as in the presidential elections of 1932, in which Adolf Hitler put forward his candidacy for the post of Reich President of Germany, O. Spengler gave him and his party his vote, while, according to the testimony of Spengler's sister by saying:

"Hitler is a dumbass, but the movement must be supported."

Spengler had a meeting with the leader of the Nazis. The conversation between A. Hitler and O. Spengler, which consisted of Hitler's monologue about disagreement with the ideas of the "Decline of the Western World", ended in misunderstanding. At home, O. Spengler noticed that the NSDAP is “organization of the unemployed or parasites", and "The Decline of the Western World" is "book read by the Fuhrer in the volume of the title page».

Much earlier, A. Hitler tried to establish relations with the "June Club" and personally with Möller van den Broek. Subsequently, the name of the book of the German conservative "The Third Reich" was combined with the name of the Nazi state - the Third Reich. Of course, A. Hitler was intrigued by the opportunity to communicate with Möller van den Broek, but the outcome of the meeting did not please him. It took place at the beginning of 1922 at the request of K. Haushofer and with the mediation of V. Pechel in the "June Club". In a conversation with Möller van den Broek, he tried in every possible way to please him and offered cooperation [11].

"You will develop a spiritual weapon in the struggle for the renewal of Germany. I do not pretend to be more than to be a national drummer and gatherer of forces. Let's cooperate [14]!”

Hitler said.

But Möller van den Broek showed no such desire, and after the departure of the Nazi leader said that this "boy will never understand”, which Germany needs, and offered to go to a pub to wash down the sensations from the conversation with good wine [11].

One of the main thinkers of the "conservative revolution" Ernst Junger had a somewhat different relationship with Nazism. Unlike other revolutionary conservatives, at first he not only had contacts with them, but also actively published in the Volkischer Beobachter from September 1923. In 1926, E. Junger and A. Hitler contacted, which ended with an exchange of books. E. Jünger gave A. Hitler the book “Fire and Blood”, and Hitler gave him the first volume of “My Struggle” with a dedicatory inscription [11].

However, over time, the distance between Jünger and Hitler increased more and more. To Jünger, as a staunch supporter of "revolutionary conservatism", the NSDAP strategy seemed too legalistic. Subsequently, in National Socialism, E. Jünger saw the chaos of plebeian instincts breaking free. After 1933, Junger said a resounding "no" to the Third Reich, refusing honorary membership in the Prussian Academy of Fine Arts, often behaved defiantly and survived only thanks to the intercession of Hitler, who ordered not to touch the war veteran.

Much less fortunate was Edgar Julius Jung, who believed that National Socialism had a revolutionary temperament, but argued with the Nazis about the model of building the German state, was against the racial-biological model of the total state. He pointed out that the German revolution could only be a "Christian revolution". The Nazi government was not going to heed the calls of the German conservative E. Yu. Jung, but his criticism was heard. This is confirmed by the death of E. Yu. Jung, who was killed by the Nazis on June 30, 1934, as part of their "night of long knives" [11].

Carl Schmitt was perhaps the only representative of the "conservative revolution" who achieved a successful political career in the Nazi state (he was a member of the NSDAP for some time, received titles and titles). True, after 1936 it quickly ended, fortunately for him - painlessly. But subsequently, Schmitt suffered more than the rest for his opportunist position: Martin Heidegger and Arnold Gehlen continued to teach, Ernst Jünger did not experience visible difficulties, and all the indignation was focused on Schmitt, as a former Nazi [1].

The fate of the National Bolshevik Ernst Nikisch in Nazi times was quite tragic. The Nazis considered him a Marxist functionary who took part in the revolution, and after the Reichstag was set on fire in March 1933, E. Nikisch was arrested by the SA and put in one of the camps. His wife Anna turned for help to K. Schmitt, with whom he was familiar. She hoped that K. Schmitt's acquaintance with the German Vice-Chancellor F. von Papen would allow her husband to be rescued. And it really succeeded. But on March 22, 1937, the second arrest took place, when 7 Gestapo officers, in accordance with the order of R. Heydrich, came to his house. For 6 months he was in the Gestapo prison on Prinz-Albrecht-Strasse, after which he was sent to the Moabit prison in Berlin in September 1937. On January 10, 1939, E. Nikisch was sentenced to life imprisonment. Released from the Brandenburg-Görden prison on April 27, 1945 by units of the Red Army [11].

Some historians consider Nazism to be a product of the "conservative revolution", but this is not entirely true, and based on their facts stated above, it is at least strange to talk about the identification of "conservative revolutionaries" and Nazis. Here is what the historian Oleg Plenkov writes about this:

“The conservative revolution prepared the ground for Nazism, but it does not bear any responsibility directly for Nazism, because Hitler and his supporters acted as nihilists who sought to free themselves from any doctrinal attachment, which in politics leads to a complete usurpation of power (...). The state of the traumatic syndrome, the expression of which was the "conservative revolution", resulted in the Nazi "revolution" as a result of an extremely complex and unpredictable play of political forces, in which ordinary chance, intrigues, and personal motives of politicians played their role.

Conclusion


The time of the “conservative revolution” is post-war Germany, the specific conditions of which contributed to the emergence of strong tensions on the right side of the political spectrum.

The "conservative revolutionaries" were convinced of the need to awaken the national spirit and bring to their side the ideological force of nationalism, to overcome the liberal-parliamentary ideas about power, as well as to create an authoritarian state, to criticize and overcome the "bourgeois", coupled with liberal ideas about freedom as "freedom from ”, and, finally, the development of socialist forms of management [11].

It is noteworthy that in the XNUMXth century the main political force was precisely nationalism. It was nationalism that dealt the strongest blow to Marxism, from which it never recovered. As Oleg Plenkov writes:

“Marx and his followers, including Lenin, believed that classes were a more important reality than nations, that the economy determined the thoughts and beliefs of people. In fact, everything turned out to be the opposite. The German worker turned out to have more in common with the German manufacturer than with the French worker. In 1914, international socialism melted under the heat of nationalistic emotions [1]."

Использованная литература:
[1] Plenkov O.Yu. Catastrophe of 1933. German History and the Rise of the Nazis to Power. – M.: Veche, 2021.
[2] Krockow, Christian Graf von: Die Deutschen in ihrem Jahrhundert, 1890-1990. Rowohlt, Reinbek 1992.
[3] Mohler A. The Conservative Revolution in Germany 1918-1932. – M.: Totenburg, 2017.
[4] Moiseev D.S. The political doctrine of Julius Evola in the context of the "conservative revolution" in Germany. - Yekaterinburg: Armchair scientist, 2021.
[5] Terekhov O.E. "Conservative Revolution" as a Phenomenon of the Right Modernity in the Weimar Republic in German Historiography // Bulletin of the Kemerovo University. 2013. No. 2 (54). T. 3
[6] Jung EJ Deutschland und die konservative Revolution. — Deutsche uber Deutschland. Die Stimme des unbekannten Politikers. Munchen, 1932.
[7] Siplivy G.N. The Image of Soviet Russia in the Eyes of German "Conservative-Revolutionary" Intellectuals in the 1920s-1930s. Electronic scientific and educational journal "History". 2020. Vol. 11. No. 10 (96).
[8] Zhirnov N. F. Edmund Burke and the conservative political thought of Germany in the first half of the twentieth century // Bulletin of the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia. Series: Political science. 2009. No. 4. P. 55-64
[9] Terekhov O. E. Traditionalism, cultural pessimism, modernity: to the ideological origins of the German “conservative revolution” [Text] / O. E. Terekhov / Bulletin of the Tomsk State University. History. 2016. No. 3 (41). pp. 88 - 93.
[10] Herf, J. (2003) Reactionary Modernism. Technology, culture and politics in Weimar and the Third Reich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
[11] Artamoshin S.V. Concepts and positions of the conservative revolution: the intellectual trend of the "conservative revolution" in the political life of the Weimar Republic. – Bryansk, 2011.
[12] The myth of the eternal empire and the Third Reich / Arthur Meller van den Broek, Andrei Vasilchenko; [per. with him. A. V. Vasilchenko]. - Moscow: Veche, 2009.
[13] Oswald Spengler. Prussianism and socialism. M.: Praxis, 2002.
[14] Schwierskott HJ Arthur Moeller van den Bruck und der revolutionare Nationalismus in der Weimarer Repubiik. – Gottingen, 1962.
Author:
34 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. parusnik
    parusnik 20 December 2022 06: 00
    0
    And I recognize the sweetheart by his gait .. in the sense, by the title .. Exactly .. I already heard something, but in a slightly different form, about "healthy conservatism" as the foundation of ideology for Russia. The author pushes through the idea of ​​a "conservative revolution."
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 20 December 2022 08: 30
      +4
      Quote: parusnik
      The author pushes through the idea of ​​a "conservative revolution."

      The article is very interesting, the author does not "push through" anything, Spengler was somehow forgotten, reminded.
  2. parusnik
    parusnik 20 December 2022 06: 24
    +2
    It was nationalism that dealt the strongest blow to Marxism,
    That is, the ideology and direction of politics dealt a blow to philosophical, economic and political doctrine? And shattered into dust? In other words, ideology won over science?
  3. Fat
    Fat 20 December 2022 08: 40
    +2
    hi The article is good and at the same time it is a vivid example of "tunnel vision". The author draws conclusions by considering one projection and not paying attention to the others, which are necessary to obtain sufficient information about a three-dimensional object. This is probably why Troy was found by the adventurer and amateur Schliemann, and not by a professional scientist smile
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 20 December 2022 08: 56
      +2
      Quote: Thick
      The author draws conclusions

      The author, by the way, does not draw any conclusions.
      O. Spengler considered the history of mankind as a change of civilizations, not states or nations.
      And, we are now seeing this in the example of Europe
      1. Fat
        Fat 20 December 2022 09: 14
        +2
        Quote: bober1982
        The author, by the way, does not draw any conclusions.
        O. Spengler considered the history of mankind as a change of civilizations, not states or nations.
        And, we are now seeing this in the example of Europe

        It is noteworthy that in the XNUMXth century the main political force was precisely nationalism. It was nationalism that dealt the strongest blow to Marxism, from which it never recovered.
        (c) Viktor Biryukov
        1. bober1982
          bober1982 20 December 2022 09: 21
          0
          Quote: Thick
          It was nationalism that dealt the strongest blow to Marxism, from which it never recovered.
          (c) Viktor Biryukov

          On June 22, 1941, the German proletariat, as part of the Nazi hordes, unanimously invaded the boundaries of the world's first state of workers and peasants and, not in a Marxist manner, began to commit atrocities.
          Marx's theory was dealt a severe blow.
          1. Fat
            Fat 20 December 2022 09: 52
            +2
            Yeah never been able to recover Oh well. fellow That is, nationalism defeated Marx's theory finally and irrevocably? crying request
            Who "controverted" Nazism? IMHO the USSR under the leadership of the CPSU (b) and later the CPSU ... The author titled the article: "Conservative revolution" as an attempt to return Germany to its own "special path" of development after the defeat in the First World War
            And suddenly it seems to me: "Conservative revolution" as an attempt to return Russia to its own "special path" of development after the defeat in the First Cold War
            And I got acquainted with other articles of the author, he writes quite a lot and well smile
            1. bober1982
              bober1982 20 December 2022 10: 04
              0
              Quote: Thick
              And it suddenly seems to me: the “Conservative Revolution” as an attempt to return Russia to its own, “special path” of development after the defeat in the First Cold War

              You argue in a Marxist way, which is why we do not understand each other.
              If Spengler spoke about the decline of Europe, now we can talk about Europe as a dying corpse. And, all hope for her is in Russia
              1. Fat
                Fat 20 December 2022 10: 43
                +2
                Not in the least "Marxist", however, if "Marxism is a science", and science is developing, then probably. Theor stepped. physics from "transcendental" to almost "transcendental" (according to Kant), they are already looking for a "particle of God" smile
                1. bober1982
                  bober1982 20 December 2022 10: 54
                  0
                  Quote: Thick
                  Theor stepped. physics from "transcendental" to almost "transcendental" (according to Kant)

                  Woland had a desire to send Kant to Solovki, he (Satan) warned him (Kant) at breakfast that he had composed something absurd.
          2. Foul skeptic
            Foul skeptic 20 December 2022 13: 04
            0
            Marx's theory was dealt a severe blow.

            On the contrary, one more direct confirmation of the words of the Marxists that the irresponsible proletariat is not capable of implementing the ideas of Marxism. From the same opera as "We know that any unskilled worker and any cook is not capable of..."
  4. kor1vet1974
    kor1vet1974 20 December 2022 09: 44
    +1
    An article on lovers of the Pinochets, Stresners, Salazars, Franco, etc. ... And Hitler? Hitler is different. smile
    1. Cartalon
      Cartalon 20 December 2022 11: 20
      +3
      That is, there is no difference between Hitler and Salazar?
      In this case, Lenin is equal to Pol Pot?
    2. Foul skeptic
      Foul skeptic 20 December 2022 11: 29
      +1
      I got the same feeling when I read it.
      As soon as I got to the mention of Mohler, I immediately got a strong feeling that now they would start talking about the varieties of Mr. ... on.
  5. Illanatol
    Illanatol 20 December 2022 13: 56
    0
    It was nationalism that dealt the strongest blow to Marxism, from which it never recovered. As Oleg Plenkov writes:

    “Marx and his followers, including Lenin, believed that classes were a more important reality than nations, that the economy determined the thoughts and beliefs of people. In fact, everything turned out to be the opposite. The German worker turned out to have more in common with the German manufacturer than with the French worker. In 1914, international socialism melted under the heat of nationalistic emotions [1]."


    The warm hit the soft.

    Nationalism can be opposed to internationalism or cosmopolitanism. Marxism is on a different plane, as it were.

    About the unity of the worker and the manufacturer - nonsense and propaganda, it is well known in which direction this propaganda leads. Half a step - welcome to fascism.
    And what this "heat of nationalist emotions" led Germany to (twice already) is well known.
    Maybe it's still worth learning from history?

    "You are going the wrong way, gentlemen..."
    1. parusnik
      parusnik 20 December 2022 14: 05
      +1
      The warm hit the soft.
      How, how, here on the site, they cried over ideology, so the author proposes an ideology .. Judging by some comments, it suits them .. Not everyone has come yet, lovers of "revolutionary conservatism" laughing
      Maybe it's still worth learning from history?
      And history teaches nothing. laughing hi
      1. Illanatol
        Illanatol 20 December 2022 14: 25
        +1
        Quote: parusnik
        And history teaches nothing.


        ... someone who doesn't want to learn lessons.
        Smart people learn from the mistakes of others, average minds learn from their own, and ... no one is able to teach them.
        1. parusnik
          parusnik 20 December 2022 14: 32
          +2
          ... someone who doesn't want to learn lessons.
          Well, they don’t want to ... The hope is glimmering in our heads that we have fascism, there will be another ... with a "human face", and not like theirs .. smile
          1. Illanatol
            Illanatol 21 December 2022 08: 48
            +1
            Quote: parusnik
            The hope is glimmering in our heads that we have fascism, there will be another ... with a "human face", and not like theirs ..


            The problem is not in the face. For most of the Germans, Hitlerism was quite comfortable until it began to burn on the Eastern Front.
            The hope that "let us have everything (even at someone else's expense) and let us get nothing for it." The dream of former impunity, those times when it was possible to turn other countries into their colonies without interference.
    2. Cartalon
      Cartalon 20 December 2022 14: 17
      +1
      It cannot, but it resists, but in China they combined Marxism with nationalism, nationalism remained, Marxism disappeared somewhere.
      1. Illanatol
        Illanatol 20 December 2022 14: 31
        0
        Quote: Cartalon
        It cannot, but it resists, but in China they combined Marxism with nationalism, nationalism remained, Marxism disappeared somewhere.


        Was he there?
        Marx, by the way, himself pointed out that his Marxism is exclusively for European countries, and trying to give it the features of universality is a mistake. Socialism in China was and is, but not according to Marx.
        In strict accordance with Marx.
        Socialism can be harsh and cruel towards the individual. Since its purpose is not at all to make the life of a single individual more comfortable.
        Like evolution and natural selection. An absolute boon for the population (species) as a whole, but the real tin - for a single individual.
        1. Cartalon
          Cartalon 20 December 2022 14: 40
          +2
          Considering that Russia, Marx, did not consider Europe to be, it can be assumed that there was no correct Marxism anywhere, the theory is divorced from life, well, actually from attempts to build socialism it is clear that it didn’t work anywhere or anything.
        2. bober1982
          bober1982 20 December 2022 14: 44
          0
          Quote: Illanatol
          Socialism can be harsh and cruel towards the individual. Since its purpose is not at all to make the life of a single individual more comfortable.

          This is well said by Hieromonk Seraphim Rose ("Man against God"), Lenin's dream ........ the whole society will be one office, one factory, with equality of labor and equality of pay.
    3. bober1982
      bober1982 20 December 2022 14: 19
      0
      Quote: Illanatol
      "You are going the wrong way, gentlemen..."

      Our world is a world of complete absurdity, no matter what plane you look at, along with its classes, Lenin and nationalist ideas.
      1. Illanatol
        Illanatol 20 December 2022 14: 32
        +3
        Order, the complexity of which is beyond our understanding, is perceived by the mind as chaos.
        1. Fat
          Fat 20 December 2022 14: 50
          +1
          hi
          Quote: Illanatol
          Order, the complexity of which is beyond our understanding, is perceived by the mind as chaos.

          This is the "Tunnel of Reality" by Robert Anton Wilson. You need to understand that you have already read it. smile
          1. Catfish
            Catfish 20 December 2022 15: 28
            +2
            Hi Andrew! smile

            perceived by the mind as chaos.


            "Everything is not what it seems and not vice versa"?
            1. Fat
              Fat 20 December 2022 15: 58
              +1
              hi Hi, Konstantin.
              Quote: Sea Cat
              "Everything is not what it seems and not vice versa"

              Well, in general, yes, if I understand you correctly. Each person has his own "tunnel" of reality - this is genetics (people are primates smile ), imprinting (almost immediately after birth, even geese understand where their mother is), conditioning (conditioned reflexes), learning and experience ...
              The sociologist Talcott Parsons used the word "interpretation" to refer to how consciousness perceives reality. We are taught to understand the world by those who are already part of a shared reality.
              According to Parsons, a society is a system consisting of subsystems, which correspond to certain unspoken rules....
  6. iouris
    iouris 20 December 2022 21: 14
    0
    The topic of German history is relevant for Russia and for Russians, because. German history is closely intertwined with our history. From the time of Peter the Great to the unification of relatively small German states by Bismarck, Russia played a large role in this political "space".
    Germany is a young state. It was actually created by Bismarck and the General Staff of the Prussian army in a very short time. It is difficult to understand the causes of WWI and subsequent events without understanding the preceding (rather short but turbulent) history of the Second Reich. However, it is practically not reflected in our historiography. "Americanism" has won everywhere in Russia. If during WWII German soldiers could find German textbooks in Russian villages, today it will be difficult in the capital of the Russian Federation. Schoolchildren are taught a "foreign" ("American") language. Russia in a foreign language is called RUSSIA ("rush"). But there was a time when Russia was written and read in a foreign language as Rossia. Well, I digress a little.
    I recommend the author to continue research in accordance with this recommendation and, in particular, to show why German foreign policy eventually threw the methodological heritage of the great Bismarck into the abyss (and Burbock even retroactively declared him a corrupt official) and explain how Soviet and Russian politicians brought their state to before the catastrophe, voluntarily (!) renouncing the political leadership won by the Soviet people. And we see what the leadership of Germany led to.
  7. Altmann
    Altmann 20 December 2022 23: 04
    0
    = the article is extraordinary, interesting, but also difficult to understand. modern Germany adheres to this philosophy, because it also understands that it is still an occupied country, in fact a US colony, so the return to this philosophy is also perceived by people as a desire for the survival of the nation from the many "barbarians" settled on the "land of Germany". It was also a time of cooperation between the Soviet Union and the Vynar Republic. Perhaps that is why articles on this topic appear in various magazines and, finally, the arrest of German "pensioners" accused of starting a revolution. am
    1. Fat
      Fat 21 December 2022 00: 07
      -1
      hi
      pseudo German and pseudo Russian "revanchism" of one field of berries on the field of mutual distrust and all-consuming fear. I don't care who started, now it's important who finishes the next confrontation... In any case, either side will attribute "success" to itself. And, yes, exclude the European Union from the "winners". The entire confrontation between the Russian Federation and the United States is directly aimed at the collapse of this association.
  8. Illanatol
    Illanatol 21 December 2022 08: 57
    0
    Quote: Cartalon
    Considering that Russia, Marx, did not consider Europe to be, it can be assumed that there was no correct Marxism anywhere, the theory is divorced from life, well, actually from attempts to build socialism it is clear that it didn’t work anywhere or anything.


    It is necessary to distinguish between Marxism as a set of methods for analysis and as a program for building a new society.
    Marxism as a methodology is quite relevant and correct. And as a program - yes, outdated. So what? Can socialism be built exclusively in the way that Marx and Engels spelled out? Why all of a sudden?
    Everyone is looking for their own way and can find it.
    The fact that attempts to build it so far have been unsuccessful only proves that the grapes are still green and its time has not come.

    However, really big Western capital has long lived in "socialism for its own." All these market charms, such as a free market and competition, are not for these gentlemen. They have long ago organized their "collective farm for super-billionaires", divided everything that is possible on our ball and manage it together, fortunately they are even related to each other. The circle of these real masters of life, these sharks of globalism, is terribly narrow. Well, any market husk can continue to compete among themselves for crumbs from the master's table, believing in "freedom of private initiative" and other liberal nonsense.
  9. Illanatol
    Illanatol 21 December 2022 09: 10
    +1
    Quote: bober1982
    This is well said by Hieromonk Seraphim Rose ("Man against God"), Lenin's dream ........ the whole society will be one office, one factory, with equality of labor and equality of pay.


    Um. And if we turn to nature, to nature, so to speak ... will we see something else?
    Anthill, bee hive - on what principles do they exist?
    There is no equality of labor and remuneration for labor?
    And who arranged this natural order of things, from the point of view of believers?
    Isn't it the Creator?

    And, by the way, where does the quote "it is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a coal than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven"?
    I would not oppose head-on Christianity (especially the original) and communist ideas.

    Man versus God. And how do you know that this is not part of the Creator's plan? Maybe he wants his children to rise up against the will of the Heavenly Father, thereby proving to him their viability and maturity.
    That parent who wants to see in children only weak-willed executors of his will, who do not have their own will and convictions, is bad.