The Greek gene eternally unchanged

13418924_1221499827884602_2035604570890529451_n

A random event that occurred in 1935 (about 60 years after the discovery of the statue): the photojournalist Basil Tsakirakis had visited the Archaeological Museum of Athens, to admire unique exhibits. There, in a room there was a copy of the Hermes of Praxiteles (the original is in the museum of Olympia). Among the guests, the experienced photojournalist saw a young Greek who guided a Spanish group. When the group approached the statue of Hermes was the miracle. Statue and Greek tour guide identified. The camera of photojournalist immortalized the moment of a unique and historic event. The Greek gene eternally unchanged. The similarity is staggering. The ancestor and descendant in the course of 2500 years. Even in the locks (locks of hair) the similarity is amazing. The discovery of Praxiteles’ model is a fact – the name of the young Greek, Nikolaos Zafiropoulos, Thessaloniki resident.

Advertisements

O God of battles!

still-of-laurence-olivier-in-the-chronicle-history-of-king-henry-the-fift-with-his-battell-fought-at-agincourt-in-france-1944-large-picture
Laurence Olivier in The Chronicle History of King Henry the 5th with His Battle Fought at Agincourt in France (1944)

“O God of battles! steel my soldiers’ hearts;
Possess them not with fear; take from them now
The sense of reckoning, if the opposed numbers
Pluck their hearts from them.”

William Shakespeare – Henry V (IV.i) The English camp at Agincourt

How Hitler Defied the Bankers

tumblr_oylz84SMsB1w388tko1_1280

MANY PEOPLE take joy in saying Wall Street and Jewish bankers “financed Hitler.” There is plenty of documented evidence that Wall Street and Jewish bankers did indeed help finance Hitler at first, partly because it allowed the bankers to get rich (as I will describe below) and partly in order to control Stalin. However, when Germany broke free from the bankers, the bankers declared a world war against Germany.

When we look at all the facts, the charge that “Jews financed Hitler” becomes irrelevant.  Los Angeles Attorney Ellen Brown discusses this topic in her book Web Of Debt.

When Hitler came to power, Germany was hopelessly broke. The Treaty of Versailles had imposed crushing reparations on the German people, demanding that Germans repay every nation’s costs of the war. These costs totaled three times the value of all the property in Germany.

BreadLineInflation700copy

Private currency speculators caused the German mark to plummet, precipitating one of the worst runaway inflations in modern times. A wheelbarrow full of 100 billion-mark banknotes could not buy a loaf of bread. The national treasury was empty. Countless homes and farms were lost to speculators and to private (Jewish controlled) banks. Germans lived in hovels. They were starving.

Nothing like this had ever happened before — the total destruction of the national currency, plus the wiping out of people’s savings and businesses. On top of this came a global depression. Germany had no choice but to succumb to debt slavery under international (mainly Jewish) bankers until 1933, when the National Socialists came to power. At that point the German government thwarted the international banking cartels by issuing its own money. World Jewry responded by declaring a global boycott against Germany.

Hitler began a national credit program by devising a plan of public works that included flood control, repair of public buildings and private residences, and construction of new roads, bridges, canals, and port facilities. All these were paid for with money that no longer came from the private international bankers.

NSAutoBahn700-500x561

VolkswagenAdvert700-500x752

The projected cost of these various programs was fixed at one billion units of the national currency. To pay for this, the German government (not the international bankers) issued bills of exchange, called Labor Treasury Certificates. In this way the National Socialists put millions of people to work, and paid them with Treasury Certificates.

Under the National Socialists, Germany’s money wasn’t backed by gold (which was owned by the international bankers). It was essentially a receipt for labor and materials delivered to the government. Hitler said, “For every mark issued, we required the equivalent of a mark’s worth of work done, or goods produced.” The government paid workers in Certificates. Workers spent those Certificates on other goods and services, thus creating more jobs for more people. In this way the German people climbed out of the crushing debt imposed on them by the international bankers.

AHYouth-500x367

Within two years, the unemployment problem had been solved, and Germany was back on its feet. It had a solid, stable currency, with no debt, and no inflation, at a time when millions of people in the United States and other Western countries (controlled by international bankers) were still out of work. Within five years, Germany went from the poorest nation in Europe to the richest.

motherhood-500x781

Germany even managed to restore foreign trade, despite the international bankers’ denial of foreign credit to Germany, and despite the global boycott by Jewish-owned industries. Germany succeeded in this by exchanging equipment and commodities directly with other countries, using a barter system that cut the bankers out of the picture. Germany flourished, since barter eliminates national debt and trade deficits. (Venezuela does the same thing today when it trades oil for commodities, plus medical help, and so on. Hence the bankers are trying to squeeze Venezuela.)

GermanAmputee700-500x690

Germany’s economic freedom was short-lived; but it left several monuments, including the famous Autobahn, the world’s first extensive superhighway.

AHViewingAutobahn2-500x754

Hjalmar Schacht, a Rothschild agent who was temporarily head of the German central bank, summed it up thus: An American banker had commented, “Dr. Schacht, you should come to America. We’ve lots of money and that’s real banking.” Schacht replied, “You should come to Berlin. We don’t have money. That’s real banking.”

(Schacht, the Rothschild agent, actually supported the private international bankers against Germany, and was rewarded by having all charges against him dropped at the Nuremberg trials.)

This economic freedom made Hitler extremely popular with the German people. Germany was rescued from English economic theory, which says that all currency must be borrowed against the gold owned by a private and secretive banking cartel — such as the Federal Reserve, or the Central Bank of Europe — rather than issued by the government for the benefit of the people.

Canadian researcher Dr. Henry Makow (who is Jewish himself) says the main reason why the bankers arranged for a world war against Germany was that Hitler sidestepped the bankers by creating his own money, thereby freeing the German people. Worse, this freedom and prosperity threatened to spread to other nations. Hitler had to be stopped!

Makow quotes from the 1938 interrogation of C. G. Rakovsky, one of the founders of Soviet Bolshevism and a Trotsky intimate. Rakovsky was tried in show trials in the USSR under Stalin. According to Rakovsky, Hitler was at first funded by the international bankers, through the bankers’ agent Hjalmar Schacht. The bankers financed Hitler in order to control Stalin, who had usurped power from their agent Trotsky. Then Hitler became an even bigger threat than Stalin when Hitler started printing his own money.

(Stalin came to power in 1922, which was eleven years before Hitler came to power.)

Rakovsky said:

“Hitler took over the privilege of manufacturing money, and not only physical moneys, but also financial ones. He took over the machinery of falsification and put it to work for the benefit of the people. Can you possibly imagine what would have come if this had infected a number of other states? (Henry Makow, “Hitler Did Not Want War,” www.savethemales.com March 21, 2004).

Economist Henry C K Liu writes of Germany’s remarkable transformation:

“The Nazis came to power in 1933 when the German economy was in total collapse, with ruinous war-reparation obligations and zero prospects for foreign investment or credit. Through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full-employment public-works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began. (Henry C. K. Liu, “Nazism and the German Economic Miracle,” Asia Times (May 24, 2005).

In Billions for the Bankers, Debts for the People (1984), Sheldon Emry commented:

“Germany issued debt-free and interest-free money from 1935 on, which accounts for Germany’s startling rise from the depression to a world power in five years. The German government financed its entire operations from 1935 to 1945 without gold, and without debt. It took the entire Capitalist and Communist world to destroy the German revolution, and bring Europe back under the heel of the Bankers.”

These facts do not appear in any textbooks today, since Jews own most publishing companies. What does appear is the disastrous runaway inflation suffered in 1923 by the Weimar Republic, which governed Germany from 1919 to 1933. Today’s textbooks use this inflation to twist truth into its opposite. They cite the radical devaluation of the German mark as an example of what goes wrong when governments print their own money, rather than borrow it from private cartels.

In reality, the Weimar financial crisis began with the impossible reparations payments imposed at the Treaty of Versailles. Hjalmar Schacht, the Rothschild agent who was currency commissioner for the Republic — opposed letting the German government print its own money… “The Treaty of Versailles is a model of ingenious measures for the economic destruction of Germany. Germany could not find any way of holding its head above the water, other than by the inflationary expedient of printing bank notes.”

Schacht echoes the textbook lie that Weimar inflation was caused when the German government printed its own money. However, in his 1967 book The Magic of Money, Schacht let the cat out of the bag by revealing that it was the PRIVATELY-OWNED Reichsbank, not the German government, that was pumping new currency into the economy.  Thus, the PRIVATE BANK caused the Weimar hyper-inflation.

Like the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Reichsbank was overseen by appointed government officials, but was operated for private gain. What drove the wartime inflation into hyperinflation was speculation by foreign investors, who sold the mark short, betting on its decreasing value. In the manipulative device known as the short sale, speculators borrow something they don’t own, sell it, and then “cover” by buying it back at the lower price.

Speculation in the German mark was made possible because the PRIVATELY OWNED Reichsbank (not yet under Nazi control) made massive amounts of currency available for borrowing. This currency, like U.S. currency today, was created with accounting entries on the bank’s books. Then the funny-money was lent at compound interest. When the Reichsbank could not keep up with the voracious demand for marks, other private banks were allowed to create marks out of nothing, and to lend them at interest. The result was runaway debt and inflation.

Thus, according to Schacht himself, the German government did not cause the Weimar hyperinflation.  On the contrary, the government (under the National Socialists) got hyperinflation under control. The National Socialists put the Reichsbank under strict government regulation, and took prompt corrective measures to eliminate foreign speculation. One of those measures was to eliminate easy access to funny-money loans from private banks. Then Hitler got Germany back on its feet by having the public government issue Treasury Certificates.

Schacht , the Rothschild agent, disapproved of this government fiat money, and wound up getting fired as head of the Reichsbank when he refused to issue it. Nonetheless, he acknowledged in his later memoirs that allowing the government to issue the money it needed did not produce the price inflation predicted by classical economic theory, which says that currency must be borrowed from private cartels.

What causes hyper-inflation is uncontrolled speculation. When speculation is coupled with debt (owed to private banking cartels) the result is disaster. On the other hand, when a government issues currency in carefully measured ways, it causes supply and demand to increase together, leaving prices unaffected. Hence there is no inflation, no debt, no unemployment, and no need for income taxes.

Naturally this terrifies the bankers, since it eliminates their powers. It also terrifies Jews, since their control of banking allows them to buy the media, the government, and everything else.

Therefore, to those who delight in saying “Jews financed Hitler,” I ask that they please look at all the facts.

* * *

http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com

A Glorious Death

Michel Martin Drolling, Dying Warrior
Michel Martin Drolling, Dying Warrior

“To know how to suffer, to forbear, and to die, such are the first secrets which place us beyond reach of affliction, the desires of the flesh, and the fear of annihilation. The man who seeks and finds a glorious death has faith in immortality, and universal humanity believes in it with him and for him, raising altars and statues to his memory in token of eternal life.”

Eliphas Levi – The Doctrine of Transcendental Magic

Impresa di Fiume – The March on Rome Rehearsals

legione-fiumana
Quis Contra Nos – Who can be against us? The flag of Reggenza Italiana del Carnaro

During World War I (1914–1918), Italy made a pact with the Allies, the Treaty of London (1915), in which it was promised all of the Austrian Littoral, but not the city of Fiume. After the war, at the Paris Peace Conference, 1919, this delineation of territory was confirmed, with Fiume remaining outside of Italian borders, instead joined with adjacent Croatian territories into the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.

Gabriele D’Annunzio was angered by what he considered to be handing over of the city of Fiume. On September 12, 1919, he led around 2,600 troops from the Royal Italian Army (the Granatieri di Sardegna), Italian nationalists and irredentists, into a seizure of the city, forcing the withdrawal of the inter-Allied (American, British and French) occupying forces. Their march from Ronchi dei Legionari to Fiume became known as the Impresa di Fiume (“Fiume Exploit”).

Foto_Fiume
Gabriele D’Annunzio (in the middle with the stick) with some legionaries (components of the Arditi’s department of the Italian Royal Army) in Fiume in 1919. To the right of D’Annunzio, facing him, Lt. Arturo Avolio (commander of the Ardit’s department of Bologna Brigade).

On the same day, D’Annunzio announced that he had annexed the territory to the Kingdom of Italy. He was enthusiastically welcomed by the Italian population of Fiume. This move was opposed by the Italian government and D’Annunzio tried to resist pressure from Italy. The plotters sought to have Italy annex Fiume, but were denied. Instead, Italy initiated a blockade of Fiume while demanding that the plotters surrender. During his time in Fiume in September 1919, Filippo Tommaso Marinetti called the leaders of the Exploit “advance-guard deserters” (disertori in avanti).

On September 8, 1920, D’Annunzio proclaimed the city to be under the Italian Regency of Carnaro with a constitution foreshadowing much of the later Italian Fascist system, with himself as dictator, with the title of Duce.
The name Carnaro was taken from the Golfo del Carnaro (Kvarner Gulf), where the city is located. It was temporarily expanded by D’Annunzio in order to include the island of Veglia. The only other State to recognize the Italian Regency of Carnaro was the Soviet Union.
The Charter of Carnaro (Carta del Carnaro) was a constitution that combined anarchist, proto-fascist and democratic republican ideas. D’Annunzio is seen as a precursor of the ideals and techniques of Italian fascism. His own explicit political ideals emerged in Fiume when he coauthored with syndicalist Alceste De Ambris, the leader of a group of Italian seamen who had mutinied and then given their vessel to the service of D’Annunzio. De Ambris provided the legal and political framework, to which D’Annunzio added his skills as a poet.

The constitution established a corporatist state, with nine corporations to represent the different sectors of the economy, where membership was mandatory, plus a tenth corporation devised by D’Annunzio, to represent the superior individuals.
The legislative power vested in a bicameral legislature consisting of a Council of the Optimates (Consiglio degli Ottimi) and a Council of Corporations (Consiglio dei Provvisori). Joint sessions of the Councils (Arengo del Carnaro), would be responsible for treaties with foreign powers, amendments to the constitution, and appointment of a dictator in times of emergency. The charter designated “music” to be one of the fundamental principles of the Fiume State.
The approval of the Treaty of Rapallo on 12 November 1920 turned Fiume into an independent state, the Free State of Fiume.
D’Annunzio ignored the Treaty of Rapallo and declared war on Italy itself. On 24 December 1920 the Italian army and a bombardment by the Royal Italian Navy forced the Fiuman legionnaires to evacuate and surrender the city.
The Free State of Fiume would officially last until 1924, when Fiume was eventually annexed to the Kingdom of Italy under the terms of the Treaty of Rome, 1924. The administrative division was called the Province of Carnaro.

Gabriele D'Annunzio and Italian Legionnaires Occupy Fiume
Gabriele D’Annunzio and Italian Legionnaires Occupy Fiume

The Italian Province of Carnaro

Outline of a New Constitution for the Free State of Fiume

Quis Contra Nos?

STATUTUM ET ORDINA TUM EST JURO EGO SI SPIRITUS PRO NOBIS QUIS CONTRA NOS?

FlUME OF ITALY 27 August, 1920

The Enduring Will of the People

Fiume, for centuries a free Commune of ancient Italy, declared her full and complete surrender to the mother-country on October I0, 1918. Her claim is threefold, like the impenetrable armour of Roman legend.

Fiume is warden of the Italian marches., the furthest stronghold of Italian culture, the most distant land that bears the imprint of Dante. From century to century through all vicissitudes, through strife and anguish, Dante’s Carnaro has done faithful service to Italy. From her as from a centre the spiritual life of Italy has shone forth and still shines forth over shores and islands, from Volosca to Laurana, from Moschiena to Albona, from Veglio to Lussino, from Cherso to Arbe. This is her claim from history.

Fiume, as of old Tarsatica, placed at the southern end of the Liburnian rampart stretches thence along the Julian Alps and is contained entirely within that boundary which science, tradition and history alike confirm as the sacred confines of Italy. This is her claim from position.

Fiume, with will unwavering and heroic courage, overcoming every attack whether of force or fraud, vindicated her right, two years ago, to choose her own destiny, her own allegiance on the strength of that just principle declared to the world by some of her unjust adversaries themselves. This is her claim founded on Roman right.

In contrast to this threefold claim stands the threefold wrong, iniquity, cupidity, and force to which Italy submits in sorrow, leaving unrecognized and unclaimed the victory that she, herself, has won. Thus it comes to pass that the inhabitants of the free city of Fiume, faithful to their Latin origin and determined to carry out their lawful decision are framing a new model for their constitution to suit the spirit of their new life not intending to limit that constitution to the territory which, under the title ‘corpus separatum’ —was assigned to the crown of Hungary, but offering it as a free alternative to any of those communities of the Adriatic which desire to break through all hindrances and rise to freedom in the name of a new Italy. Thus, in the name of a new Italy, the people of Fiume, taking their stand on justice and on Iiberty, swear that they will fight to the utmost with their whole strength against any attempt to separate their land from the mother-country and that they will defend for ever the mountain boundary of their country assigned to it by God and by Rome.

Read more: here

D_Annunzio speech in Fiume
D’Annunzio speech in Fiume

 

 

Nicola Bombacci: from Lenin to Mussolini

800px-Brodskiy_II_Bombacci

By Erik Norling (from the book «Revolutionary Fascism», pages 35-46)

On 29th April 1945 the main fascist leaders were assassinated at the hands of communist partisans. And between those fascists we find, curiously, Nicola Bombacci, former maximum figure of Italian communism, founder of the Italian Communist Party (PCI), a personal friend of Lenin with whom he was in the USSR during the years of the Revolution, nicknamed the “Red Pope” by the bourgeoisie and finally unconditional follower of Mussolini, whom he joined in the last months of his regime. Is his history a story of betrayal or conversion? Or perhaps, the natural evolution of a national-bolchevik?…

A young revolutionary

Nicola Bombacci is born within a Catholic family (his father was a farmer, a former soldier of the Papal States) from Romagna, in the province of Forli, on 24 October 1879, a few kilometers from Predappio, where four years later would be born the future founder of Fascism.
It is a region marked by fierce worker struggles and by peasants accustomed to rebellion, a land of extreme passions. By father imposition he joined the seminary but quickly abandons when his father died.
In 1903 he joined the anticlerical Socialist Party (PSI) and decides to become a teacher so he can serve the lower classes in their struggle (again the similarities with Duce are evident, having studying in the same college) but quickly devotes his body and soul to the socialist revolution. His ability to work and his organizational skills got him in the staff of the socialist media outlets, allowing him to increase his influence within the labor movement, then becoming Secretary of the Party Central Committee, where he will meet a young guy: Benito Mussolini, who, let us not forget, was the promise of Italian socialism before becoming national revolutionary.

Nicola Bombacci at the 2nd World Congress of the Comintern. 1920
Nicola Bombacci at the 2nd World Congress of the Comintern. 1920

Opposing the moderate line of social democracy, Bombacci along with Gramsci will found the Communist Party of Italy after the internal break up of the PSI and will travel in the early 20’s to the USSR, to participate in the Bolshevik Revolution, where he had previously been as representative of the Socialist Party and was won over by the Soviet cause. There he befriends Lenin who will tell him in a reception in the Kremlin these famous words about Mussolini: “In Italy, comrades, in Italy there is only a socialist that can lead the people to revolution: Benito Mussolini,” and shortly after the Duce would start a revolution, but fascist …

As leader (Antonio Gramsci was the theorist, Bombacci the organizer) of the newly created PCI, he becomes the authentic “public enemy No. 1” of the Italian bourgeoisie, who nicknames him as “The Red Pope”. He will brilliantly revalidate his deputy chair, this time in the lists of the new formation, while the fascist squads begin to take the streets facing the communist militias in bloody combats. Bombacci will endeavor to stop the march of fascism to power but he will fail, from the pages of his newspapers he launches tirades against fascism and claiming the defense of the communist revolution. It is a time when blackshirt squads sing irreverent songs such as: “I don’t fear Bombacci / With Bombacci beard we will make spazzolini (brushes) / To brighten the bald of Benito Mussolini”. Period when communism is full of internal tensions and Bombacci enters into controversy with his fellow party comrades, being one of the friction points the choice between nationalism and internationalism. He had shown nationalist tendencies before, that did portend his future line. While he was still in the Socialist Party and as consequence of the document protesting against the action of D’Annunzio in Fiume, Bombacci rebelled and wrote about him that he was “Perfectly and profundly revolutionary; because D’Annunzio is revolutionary. Lenin said it in the Congress of Moscow”.

The first fascism

In 1922 the fascists march over the capital of the Tiber; nothing can stop Mussolini to take the power, even if he is not absolute during the first years of the regime. As a deputy and member of the Central Comitee of the Party, as well as responsible for foreign relations, Bombacci frequently travels abroad. He participates in the IV International Communist Congress representing Italy and in the Comitee of the Antifascist Action he interviews himself with the russian bolshevik leaders.
He has already half of his life dedicated to the proletariat cause and he is not willing to give up his effort to put in practice his socialist dream. He becomes an enthusiastic advocate of an approximation of Italy to the USSR in the comitee and in the communist press, talking securely in the name of and by instigation of moscow leaders, but using a national revolutionary discourse that disturbs the Party, that is in full disbanding after the fascist victory. The relations with the revolutionary Soviet state would be an advantage to Italy as a nation who also is going through a revolutionary process, even if fascist. He is immediatly accused of being heretic and he is asked to rectify his positions. They can’t accept that a communist demands, like Bombacci did, “overcoming the Nation without destroying it, we want it bigger, because we want a government of workers and farmers”, socialist without denying that the fatherland is “sacred and undeniable right of every person and of all groups of men”. It is called the “Third Position” where fascism revolutionary nationalism meets up with communist revolutionary socialism.

Bombacci is progressively marginalized within the PCI and condemned to political ostracism, although he did not cease contacts with some russian leaders and the russian embassy where he worked at, besides that one of his sons lived in the USSR. He sincerely believed in the Bolshevik revolution and, unlike his italian comrades, the russians had a national sense of revolution and never will deny his friendship with the USSR, even after joining permanently to fascism.

With the expulsion from the party in 1927, Bombacci enters a stage that we can qualify as the years of silence that lasts until 1936, when he launches his magazine called “La Verità” and culminating in 1943 in a gradual conversion to fascism. However it is too easy to consider that Bombacci just changed arms and baggage to fascism as those who want to accuse him of being a “traitor”. We will see a slow approach, not to fascism but to Mussolini and the left wing fascist movement, where Bombacci feels cozy and within family, near his revolutionary conceptions, corporatism and social laws of this fascism that “all the postulate is a program of socialism”, according to what he said in 1928.

This way we prove that Bombacci was not a fascist, but he supports the achievements of the regime and the figure of Mussolini. He did not approach the fascist party – never signed up for the National Fascist Party – despite his acknowledged friendship with Mussolini, he did not accept jobs and neither renounced his communist origins. His independence was worth more. However he became convinced that the state proposed by the Corporate Fascism was the most perfect realization, socialism put into practice, a state superior to communism. He never concealed his ideals, in 1936 he was writting in the journal “La Verità”, confessing his adherence to fascism but also to communism:

“Fascism did a great social revolution, Lenin and Mussolini. Soviet and fascist corporate state, Rome and Moscow. Much had to be rectified, nothing we have to apologise, because today as yesterday we are moved by the same ideal: the triumph of labor.”

While this was going on, Bombacci has a long epistolary exchange with Duce trying to influence the old socialist in his social policy. The maximum historian of fascism, Renzo de Felice, wrote about this that Bombacci had the merit of having suggested Mussolini more than one of the measures of the 30’s. In one of these letters, dated July 1934, he proposes a program of municipal economy (which Mussolini would put in practise) where Bombacci tells the Duce, that this is him showing his “willingness to work more on what now concerns the interest and the triumph the Corporate State … “, as also from the pages of his magazine where many times he struggles for an autarky that makes Italy an independent country and able to face the plutocratic powers (read the U.S. but also France and England).
Because of that he strongly supports the intervention in Ethiopia in 1935, but not as colonial campaign but as a prelude to the confrontation between the “proletarian” countries (among whom was Fascist Italy) and the “capitalists” that would inevitably happen, that “world revolution which would restore the global equilibrium”. The Italian action would be a “typical and unmistakable proletarian conquest” designed to defeat the “capitalist” powers and whose experience “should be taken as really important … for the redemption of the people of color that were still under the most terrible oppression of capitalism”.

Against Stalin

Between the years 1936 and 1945, hard times for fascism because the armed conflicts were initiated, prelude to the defeat, Bombacci adds his ideological adherence to Mussolini. It is a man with almost 60 years, he has seen how many of his socialist dreams have not been realized, but he is an eternal idealist and is not willing to abandon the struggle for socialism, “this work of redemption and economic upliftment of the Italian proletariat that the socialists of the first hour had started”.
His publishing is an economic ruin, his biographers have left constancy of the difficulties and hardships that he suffered. It would have sufficed an opportunistic step to integrate into the official fascism and he would have been provided all the aids of the state apparatus but he does not want to lose his independence although sometimes he accepted grants from the Ministry of Popular Culture.

This phase coincides with a profound reflection on his past mistakes and a series of attacks on Russian communism that had been sold to the capitalist powers betraying Lenin postulates. So writes Bombacci in November 1937, relations between the USSR and the democratic countries had only one explanation that would reveal everything else “the reason is only one, frivolous, vulgar, but true: the interest, money, business so this former communist could openly declare that “we proclaim with a clear conscience that Bolshevik Russia of Stalin became a colony the hebrew-masonic international capitalism…”.
The anti-semitic allusion is not new in Bombacci nor the socialist theorists of the beginning of the century, because we should not forget that anti-Semitism had its most fervent advocates precisely between doctrinaire revolutionaries of the late nineteenth century, when the Jew embodied the figure of the hated capitalist. In Bombacci we don’t find a racialist anti-semitism but rather social, according to the positions of Mediterranean jewish problem differently from German or French anti-Judaism.

When World War II starts, and especially when it starts on the Eastern Front, Bombacci participates fully in anti-communist campaigns of the regime. As communist leader knowledgeable of the USSR his voice is heard. However not deny his ideals, rather deepens the thesis that Stalin and his henchmen have betrayed the revolution. Writes numerous articles against Stalin, about the real conditions of life in the so called “communist paradise”, the measures adopted by him to destroy all the successes of Leninist socialism. In 1943, shortly before the fall of Fascism, concluded Bombacci summarizing his position on a flyer:

“Which of the two revolutions, fascist or bolshevik, will make history in the twentieth century and will remain in history as the creator of a new order of the world and social values?
Which of the two revolutions solved the agrarian problem truly interpreting the wishes and aspirations of the peasants and the economic and social interests of the national community?

Rome has won!

Moscow materialistic and semi-barbaric, with a totalitarian capitalism of a state-boss that wants to join with full force (Five Year Plans), leading his citizens to the blackest misery, the industrialization existent in the countries that during the nineteenth century followed a bourgeois capitalist process. Moscow completes the capitalist stage.

Rome is something different.

Moscow, with the reform of Stalin, portrays itself institutionally in terms of any bourgeois parliamentary state. Economically there is a substantial difference, because, while the bourgeois government is formed by representatives of the capitalist class, here the government is in the hands of bolshevik bureaucracy, a new class that is actually worse than the capitalist class because it has full control of work, production and life of citizens.”

The Italian Social Republic

When Mussolini was deposed in July 1943 and rescued by the Germans a few months later, the National Fascist Party had already crumbled. The organic structure had disappeared, the party leaders from the privileged strata of society run away en masse to Badoglio government and Italy was divided into two (in the south of Rome the Allies advance towards the north).
Mussolini regroups his most faithful, all of them old comrades from the first hour or young enthusiasts, almost none high-level leader, who still believe in the fascist revolution and proclaims the Italian Social Republic. Immediately fascism seems to return to his revolutionary origins and Nicola Bombacci adheres to the proclaimed republic and gives Mussolini all his support. His dream is to undertake the construction of the “Republic of workers” in which both he and Mussolini have fought together in the early twentieth century. Just like Bombacci, other known leftist intelectuals join the new government: Carlo Silvestri (socialist deputy, after the war a defender of the memory of the Duce), Edmondo Cione (socialist philosopher who will be authorized to create a socialist party apart from the Republican Fascist Party), etc.

The first contact with Mussolini occurs on 11 October, just a month after the proclamation of RSI, and is epistolary. Bombacci writes Mussolini from Rome, the city where fascism collapsed noisily (the Romans destroyed all the symbols of the regime in the streets), but there are still many fascists at heart there, and this is the moment that he chooses to declare Mussolini that he is with him. Not when everything was going well, but in the harsh moments just like the true comrades do.

BLOG“Today I am more with you than yesterday” – Bombacci confesses – “the vile betrayal of the king/Badoglio brought ruin everywhere and the disgrace to Italy but freed her of all the commitments to the pluto-monarchists of 22. Today the path is free and in my opinion we can only resort to the socialist shelter Above all: the victory of the guns. But to assure the victory it must have the adherence of the working masses. How? With decisive and radical deeds in the economic-productive and syndical sector… Always at your service with great affection for already thirty years.”

Mussolini was harassed by the military situation, but he was more determined than ever to carry out his revolution now that he freed himself from the ballast of the past, authorizes the most radical of the party to take power and begins a phase called “socialization”(name proposed by Bombacci and accepted by Duce) which will result in the enactment of laws with clear socialist inspiration, in relation to the creation of trade unions, co-management of enterprises, distribution of profits and nationalization of industries of importance.

All this was summarized in the 18 points of the first (and only) congress of the Republican Fascist Party in Verona, document drafted jointly by Mussolini and Bombacci, who would serve as base to the Social Republican State. In foreign policy he will attempt to persuade Mussolini to make peace with the USSR and to continue the war against the Anglo-Saxon plutocracy, resurrect the Rome-Berlin-Moscow axis from the geopolitical thinkers of National Bolshevism of the 20s, proposal that seems to have succeeded in Mussolini who will write several articles for the republican press on this issue even though this proposal had a tenacious opposition from a broad sector of the party, particularly Roberto Farinacci. Bombacci travels to the north and reinstalls himself near his friend Walter Mocchi, another veteran communist leader converted to Mussolini fascism who works for the Ministry of Popular Culture.

If for many the last Mussolini was a broken man, puppet of the Germans, it is surprising the adherence he receives from men like Bombacci, a true idealist, of imposing stature, with a beard and a compelling oratory, allergic to everything that meant accommodating or to become bourgeois, whereas it is not even now accepting a salary or stipend (only in early 1945 his name appears on a list of proposed salaries of the Ministry of Economics and as Chief of the Single Confederation of Labour and Technique). Bombacci will become personal advisor and confidant of Mussolini, to attract again the workers to the bases of the party. Proposes the creation of union committees, open to non-fascist militants, free union elections and travels to factories from the industrialized North (Milan-Turin) explaining the social revolution of the new regime and why he joined it.
The old revolutionary fighter seems to rejuvenate again, after a rally in Verona and several visits to socialized companies he writes the Duce on December 22, 1944: “I spoke for one hour and thirty minutes in a theater open and enthusiastic… the audience composed of mostly workers cheered by shouting: yes, we want to fight for Italy, for the republic, through socialization … in the morning I visited Mondadori who is already socialized and I spoke to the workers who constitute the Board of Management that I found them full of enthusiasm and understanding for our mission”.
While the military situation deteriorated, the communist terrorist groups (the tragically famous GAP) had already decided to eliminate him by the danger that his activity represented to their objectives.

But the war is almost over. Benito Mussolini, advised by former Socialist deputy Carlo Silvestri and Bombacci, proposes to hand over the power to the Socialists, integrated into the National Liberation Committee. In April 1945, the German military authorities surrender to the Allies, without informing the Italians, it’s the end. Abandoned and alone.

Twilight of a National Revolutonary

Mussolini_e_Petacci_a_Piazzale_Loreto,_1945
From left to right, the dead bodies of Bombacci, Mussolini, Petacci, Pavolini and Starace in Piazzale Loreto, 1945.

During the last months of the ISR, Bombbaci continued to campaign to recover the masses and to avoid them to join by Bolshevism. In late 1944 published a pamphlet entitled ‘This is Bolshevism’, reproduced in the Catholic newspaper “Crociata Italica” in March 1945.
Bombacci insists in the criti
cism of the real stalinist communism, deviations that destroyed the true revolutionary syndicalism in Europe with Russian interference. In these last weeks of life of the republican experience Bombacci is alongside those who still believe in a compromise with the enemy so as to prevent the ruin of the country. Loyal to the end, he will stay with Mussolini even when everything is definitely lost.

Prophetically, he talks about this to his workers in one of his last public appearances in March 1945:

“Brothers in faith and fight … I did not renounce to my ideals for which I fought and for which, if God lets me live longer, I will fight forever. But now I find myself in the ranks of the colors of the Italian Social Republic, and returned again because now it is serious and it is truly decisive to fight for the rights of the workers … “

Nicola Bombacci, always faithful, always serene, will accompany Mussolini in his last dramatic journey to death. On the 25th of April he is in Milan. The account of Vittorio Mussolini, son of Il Duce, on his last encounter with his father, accompanied by Bombacci, shows us the entirety of him:
“I thought about the fate of this man, a true apostle of the proletariat, at some point staunch enemy of fascism and now alongside my father, without any position or prebend, faithful to two different bosses until death. His calmness served me as comfort.”

Shortly thereafter, after Mussolini separated from the column of his last faithful to save them from having the same destiny as him, Bombacci is arrested by a group of communist partisans along with a group of fascists. On the morning of April 28 he was placed against the wall in Dongo, in the north of the country, next to Barracu who was a valiant veteran mutilated of war, Pavolini, the poet-secretary of the party, Valerio Zerbino, an intellectual and Coppola, another thinker.
All of them scream, before the murderous platoon, “Long live Italy!”. Bombacci while pelting riddled by bullets from the communists, shouted: “Long live socialism!”.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION

1) It’s not true that during the twenty years of Regime, fascist economy was capitalist. Any legislative action attests to the continuing aggression by the part of the national state and proletariat on the overwhelming power private. Same corporatism, which has nothing to do with the classist meaning assigned it after by the Marxist dialectics, has been a counter-current experience compared to capitalism, because it focuses on organic unity of society. Capitalism naturally exerted containment against Duce’s authoritarian revolution, and although rooted in a logic of action / reaction, the regime still managed to impose on the industrialists relations of harmony between work and capital, between society and individuality. In this logic of harmony developed during that two decades the capital-work relation. That revolutionary work did not stop during the regime. This should be clarified in relation to those who still argue that the regime was bourgeois and capitalist.

2) During the Social Republic the presence of the reaction is low and its specific gravity reduced, so that Mussolini could go further. The capitalist is reabsorbed by the organic social structure, and he remains, except in cases in which this role goes beyond the political sphere, the owner of capital and enterprise. But its role is valid only if it acquires social function, and so that it becomes participating and joint responsible. It is no longer above others, no longer master, but he manages control joint with workers. The marked social vocation is evident. This has a definite economic meaning, but an even more important political issue.

3) Certainly the Social Republic, as he had at birth “meant” to the tragic end, he had to impress more strongly the trace of the true dignity for all the Peoples. As the sun before sunset greets us with a light yet stronger.

4) Socialization (Fascist Socialism) is altruism, is the dignity of Work, and moral and political uprightness of the workers. If you are selfish you will be worse than your masters

5) The enemies of Bolshevism and Fascism were the right wing pluto-monarchist.

6) Capital in the service of work and not work in the service of capital … The profit in the service of man and not man in the service of profit …

7) If Lenin, which I have always admired deeply, had he lived, the program of the USSR would have been different. We probably saw Fascism, Nationalism and Bolshevism united against another enemy: the Plutocracy.

8) Dear Comrades *,… I have not changed, are always the same. Comrades! Look me in the face, comrades! You are now wondering if I am the same socialist agitator, the founder of the Communist Party, Lenin’s friend that I was before. Yes, I’m still the same! I never denied the ideals for which I fought and for which I will always fight. I was next to Lenin in the beaming days of the Revolution, I believed that Bolshevism was the vanguard of working-class triumph, but then I realized the deception. Socialism shall not be realize by Stalin, but by Mussolini, which is Socialist, even if for twenty years he has been hampered by the high class, who then betrayed him. But Mussolini was freed of all the traitors and he needs you, the workers, to create the new proletarian state!
*words Compagno(communist) and Camerata(fascist) correspond to the same word, Comrade, in english, but they have a very different meaning in italian language!In deutsch: compagno-genosse, camerata-kamerade

9) “I had a great social revolution, Mussolini and Lenin. Soviet and Fascist Corporative State, Rome and Moscow. We have very to correct, but nothing to be forgiven, today as yesterday the same ideal joins us together: the triumph of Work.”

10)”Duce, I have already written in “The Truth” – having had a first impression – of what Freemasonry, Plutocracy and the Monarchy were plotting against you. Today more than ever I am with you. The dirty betrayal of the King and Badoglio , which has unfortunately dragged Italy into ruin and dishonour, there has, however, freed you from all the components of a pluto-monarchist right-wing of 1922 …».

11) To honour a hero like me, the Communist Bombacci, does not need to force to throw into disrepute other heroic figures, however.

Nicola_Bombacci_Grave
Tomb of Nicola Bombacci in Camp X of the Maggiore Cemetery in Milan

Fatherland

landscape9 adolf
Forest landscape by Adolf Hitler

“An experience, which initially seemed very trivial, still occupies me. Years ago I took a Sunday excursion with my boy. The short train ride made such a deep impression on the little fellow that he asked me in Tegel: “Are we still in Germany?” At first we laughed about it. But then it dawned on me that the child didn’t deserve to be laughed at on account of this question. Quite the contrary! He had started to form a concept of Germany. I have met folk comrades who have never in their life left their village. Many of our big city children are the same. Even many of us who have fought for Greater Germany have remained rather provincial.

It is hard to free oneself from the bonds of the provincial. Each initially sees the world from the perspective formed by origin, social circumstances, intellectual level and occupation. Newspapers and radio have certainly helped to create change, but our concepts of Germany are necessarily again and again distorted by local patriotism, if not by distrust and jealousy.

The positive results cannot yet be measured from the fact that now Germans are shown Germany, that German workers whose wages never before enabled travel can now see how Germans live in other provinces. It is not just the strength through joy, rather also their strength through knowledge that our village, our city alone is not Germany, that we have a fatherland, big and magnificently beautiful, and that we are sons and daughters of a single, robust, industrious and ambitious folk.”

Alfred Kotz, Command and Obedience (trans. Gerhard Lauck)