Dave Renton

In this very interesting book author tries to give definition of what fascism is. He tries to define it from the perspective of the mass movement that caused fascism to rise its ugly head and ha dto confront it first - socialist revolution in Russia in 1917.

Author starts from the "left definition" of fascism as just another tool of bourgeoisie against the socialist revolution, over the "right definition" of fascism as general threat to society to finally end up with a dialectical analysis of a fascism as a mass reactionary movement. While first two definitions try to simplify the fascism they cannot explain its nature and why people decide to join it. Because people did join it and they weren't all necessary evil people but people that found themselves in deep troubles (economically) after the WW1. While suitable for political purposes (especially Russian Soviets attempt of obtaining control over the International) these simplified approaches just could not provide good enough explanations. It fails because there were movements that were military juntas and dictatorships but they never became fascism dictatorships and devolved very soon to normal society.

Explanation of fascism as mass reactionary movement manages to explain paradoxical nature of fascism as a movement that on one hand mobilizes the masses against the big capital but on other hand works hand in hand with big capital against any opposition to it. This schizophrenic nature of fascism enables it to basically keep under control all parts of the society (divide and conquer) and rule them all through further corruption of existing state mechanisms [until total control is achieved]. And while fall of society continues (since fascism being highly unstable structure cannot provide stability because it would mean the end of it) fascism slowly turns more and more to violence and oppression, first internally and then externally. This explanation was rejected at first because of inability to acknowledge that ordinary people could join reactionary movement. But what else is to expect in case when revolutionary movement declares whole classes of people as enemies of the revolution. What is to expect when middle class, that worked hard but never achieved fortune that would make them independent, now sees lower classes (factory workers) living better than them. When one class of society gets restricted and it cannot grow and move up, reactionary movement will find fertile ground. And with fascism violence follows very close. And at first fascism looks very much like revolutionary movement which is first trap it lays down for masses to step on.

And this is something that we need to be aware in our times. Radicalism of every kind will only create oppositional radicalism. Declaring whole parts of the nation as enemies of the state, declaring that they constantly crawl through the mud and apologize constantly will just create atmosphere were more and more radical movements will pop up and there is nothing more radical than fascism.

Highly recommended book.… (meer)

A quick read. A comprehensive read, as well. This book is political biography of Lev Davidovich Bronstein who changed his name to Leon Trotsky while fleeing imprisonment.

Dave Renton evaluates the philosophy behind one of the kingpins in Russian socialism and seems to deflect any blame for Stalin's murderous plunder away from Trotsky.

The book, set up like a textbook was helpful with sidebars of useful information, be it players in the revolutions or world events that effected Russia's direction. Interestingly, on the bottom of the page was a synopsis of each page, summed up in a word or three.… (meer)

C.L.R. James (1901-89) was one of the leading black intellectuals of the 20th century, and was influential in the Pan African and US civil rights movements, independence for his home country of Trinidad, and the socialist and Trotskyite movements. He was born in Trinidad and lived for many years in the UK and the US, and was closely linked to Leon Trotsky, Kwame Nkrumah (the first president of Ghana), Richard Wright, V.S. Naipaul (his fellow countryman, who eventually turned against him), Dr. Eric Williams (the first prime minister of Trinidad and Tobago), and the American Marxist Max Shachtman. He was an ardent critic of Stalin, who he felt betrayed the Russian Revolution and did not support the independence movements in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean. However, his first love was cricket, and he turned to the life of a writer and intellectual only after he proved to be nothing more than a competent player of the sport. Cricket would always be important to him, as his book Beyond a Boundary is widely considered to be the best book ever written about the sport, and he was a regular cricket reporter for The Manchester Guardian throughout much of his adult life.

Renton's short but accessible and interesting biography demonstrates how the rules and play of cricket influenced James' development as a socialist and intellectual. As a young man in Trinidad and his early years in the UK he loved the attire, proper rules and moral code of the sport, especially in comparison to the raucous and wanton behavior of his people, and he viewed the British culture as inherently superior. Later on, however, he learned more about the pastoral and egilatarian aspects of cricket, particularly as it was played in the countries of the British Empire and in working class Britain, and this coincided with his changing political views.

This book is an excellent introduction to James, socialism, and the Pan African movement, in addition to cricket, and is highly recommended as a starting point for further study in these areas.… (meer)