I want to thank Tim Romano again for his reply to my recent post, exploring
the reasons behind Pound's decision to embrace fascism.  I would like to
focus for the moment on one aspect of that reply, which deals with the
relation between Pound's alleged anti-communism and his fascist beliefs.
You wrote:

<<I conclude that Pound would have been content to remain an
"aristo-democrat" had the threat of world communism not arisen. He found
communism abhorrent,
and his anti-communism was integral to the support he gave the fascist
cause.>>

You made this point earlier in our discussion.  Are you sure this is
correct?  I think this may represent a very serious misinterpretation of
Pound's intellectual development, and the reasons he became a fascist.  I
want to encourage you to make a case for your position.

As I understand your position, you believe that Pound generally liked the
democratic system of the US, and interpreted the Constitution from an
Aristo-democratic perspective, and that --- fearing the rise of communism
---- Pound came to support the fascists as the most viable force to defeat
communism.

Is that a fair summary?

I would then ask, when did Pound first become an anti-communist?  When did
he become a fascist?  What quotes can you produce to sustain this view, the
view that Pound became a fascist as a result of his anti-communism?

I would submit that Pound's fascism led him to speak as  an anti-communist,
and not vice versa.  In 1926 Pound expressed extreme admiration for
Mussolini.

He said, " I personally think very well of Mussolini.   If one compares him
to American presidents (the last three) or Britishs premiers, etc.  In fact
one can NOT without insulting him.  If the intelligentisai don't think well
of him, it is because they know nothing about "the state" and government
[as if Pound did??!!], and have no particularly large sense of values."

So it should be clear from this quote, and from countless others that Pound
"thinks well" of Mussolini because of his "values".  Members of the
"intelligensia" who do not support Mussolini are ipso facto immoral. [That
the "intelligensia" did not support Mussolini should have tipped Pound off
to the fact there was something wrong]

Pound did not support Mussolini because of any strategic or tactical
necessity to oppose communism.  As far as I know, Pound NEVER SAYS his
support for Mussolini stems from a principled anti-communist position.

I defy anyone to find any quote prior to 1940 where Pound expresses any
strong anti-communist sentiments, in the form of a reasoned argument, or
even in an off hand comment.

Have you read "Jefferson and/or Mussolini" (1933)?  In that work, Pound
expresses approval for what Lenin had been attempting in Russia.  He spoke
approvingly of Lenin as a writer, and as an intellectual.


In  1924, just after Lenin's death, Pound wrote that both fascist and the
Russian revolution were "equally interesting developments."  That is hardly
a condemnation of communism.  He also said, "no country produces two
Napoleons or two Lenins in succession . . . ," and states that Russia will
not be able to acheive its goals because of the death of Lenin, implying
that Italy will acheive its goals because Mussolini is still alive.  There
is no condemnation of communism or of Lenin in this 1924 letter.

Pound seems to think that as long as a country is ruled by a strong,
committed individual, who has almost unlimited power, that country will fare
well.  It does not matter whether the ideology is STATED to be this or  that
ideology. Communism and Fascism were both very similar in that the working
people were to submit to the collective, and to the maximal leader.  Pound
saw very little difference between Mussolini and Lenin during the 20's; both
merited admiration because they were strong figures, iron willed, and
undisputed leaders of their parties.

So when does Pound become anti-communist?  Find some quotes-- ANYONE-- where
he displays this anti-communist tendency from which his fascism is supposed
to stem?  The only strong statements I have ever read, which were
anti-communist, were those contained in the Radio Broadcasts, especially
after Germany goes to war with Russia.  Did Pound make any anti-communist
statements during the period of the Hitler-Stalin pact (up to and during the
period of the partition of Poland)?  I don't think so.

I have yet to find any deviation of Pound's opinions from the fascist party
line, as it was proclaimed in Italy.  Mussolini did not denounce the Russian
communists during the time of the Hitler - Stalin pact, so Pound did not
either.

Pound's numerous denunciations of Stalin, during 1943 and 1944 were the
simple reflex actions to the dictates of fascist centers of propaganda in
Berlin and Rome.  It is hard to believe that they were the result of a
carefully thought out critique of communism.  In fact, you may recall that
Pound originally thought very highly of Mao, as late as 1950 (Strange way to
feel, if Pound was such an anti-communist!)  He later went back on his
positive statements about Mao, NOT because Mao was a communist, but because
he learned that Mao was "harrassing Confucians".

So where is the evidence that Pound was essentially a fascist BECAUSE he
opposed communism?  If this were the case, then Pound would be making this
decision based on some calculus of "realpolitik". He would be saying
something like, "well, fascism is not necessarily valuable in itself, but as
tool to oppose the Red Menace, I should support it as a matter of policy."
Yet you agreed in a previous post that this sort of "realpolitik" is alien
to Pound's thought process.

In "Jefferson and/or Mussolini" Pound expressed the view that fascism would
not work very well in America.  Why?  Not because fascism is alien to, or
opposed to America's political ethos,  but because there is no figure of
Mussolini's stature in the US.  In the following quote he once again
expresses admiration for Lenin.

"That is not to say that I advocate fascism in and for America, or that I
think fascism is possible in America without Mussolini, any more than I or
any enlightened bolshevik think communism is possible in America without
Lenin . . . "   (Jefferson and or Mussolini, 1933).

The phrase "enlightened bolshevik" does not seem to imply any anti-communist
sentiment, nor do any of the other references to Lenin in "Jefferson and/or
Mussolini."  By 1933, Pound support for Mussolini was entirely solidified,
and given that his major tract for Mussollini does NOT contain denunciations
of communism (or of Lenin), where can we find evidence for the view which
Tim Romano espouses?

I admit that there may be some evidence that I have missed, but in light of
the general pattern of Pound's poltical development, which I have outlined,
it seems more likely that Pound's anti-communists statements of the 40's
(which are really anti-Stalin statements) stem from Pound's willingness to
follow the fascist line while he was in Italy.

Regards,

Wei





________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com