World Revolution and Conquest ? Methods ? Then EJ, Spengler and World State

[Bertil Haggman <bertil.haggman@helsingborg.se>]

Umberto Rossi wrote:

> You are well documented, but you seem to take into account
> only one side of the question.  I have been a member of the Italian
> army for 1 year due to my military service, and I worked as a typist
> in a high territorial command.  I can tell you that "we" (i.e. the
> Italian Army and the NATO) had similar plans, and they were quite
> detailed.  From a theoretical point of view (and with military
> matters you never know where the plans end and reality begins) we
> were ready to face such an attack,

Yes, Umberto, of course face an attack, that is crucial. Counterattack, 
naturally, that would have been necessary. Countermeasures, yes.

 and to counter attack.  I suspect
> the overall strategy of those plans was known in the Western high
> commands, and countermeasures had been developed.  That's the game
> of the Cold War, and both the blocs were playing it quite seriously.

> As for the use of tactical nuclear weapons, well, come on!  That was
> a relevant element in the strategic plans of both the East and the
> West at least since 1960 (but probably even before).  It is called
> the doctrine of the "flexible answer", and it replaced the 50s
> doctrine of the Sword and the Shield.  Even old fighter-bombers like
> the F-84 we had at the end of the 50s were able to deliver a tactical
> nuclear bomb, and surely we Europeans didn't build the Tornado just to
> defend our air space.  That's a plane devised to deliver H-bombs on
> Eastern strategic targets while Ivan and Sergej are having breakfast.

But first strike like the WP plans. Strange theory this "one-is-as-bad-
as-the-other". On one side a totalitarian regime with maybe 60 million
of its inhabitants killed in various ways, on the other elected
governments.

> With this I do not want to say that "we" are the villains and "they"
> are the victims.  I just wish to make it clear that during the Cold
> War everybody made plans, and got ready for war, and built offensive
> weapons (the stealth "fighter" isn't a fighter at all, it is a strike
> airplane).

> As for the medals they found in Eastern Germany, well--we know the
> Germans are always so efficient and usually a bit too serious.
> probably they really believed that the war was near.  But I suspect
> that the Russians (and they were the ones who really decided if,
> when, and how) knew that the 3rd WW was not so close.

Umberto, thanks for your addition to the question of which side was
planning "first strike". This is very interesting but not so relevant
to EJ after all. Have always had this problem of understanding the
comparison between a NATO of democracies and a totalitarian system
with the final goal of world conquest. So what is "similar plans".
Don't think for a moment that NATO was planning to strike at the
Warsaw Pact to send Italian soldiers to fight and occupy the
vast territory between the Elbe and Vladivostok. On the other
hand the WP plans for conquest and occupation of Western Europe
were real enough. Will send you a short article (in English) 
I wrote when Professor Gemzell of Copenhagen University published 
the result of his research on WP plans for WWIII in Danish media.

And then the stuff I continued to discuss with Giles off-list on 
Cominform, Comintern, handbooks like "Der bewaffnete Aufstand" on 
communist armed revolt in Europe in the 1920s, Czech Defector General 
Jan Sejna's revelations in the 1970s, Soviet and East European support 
for terrorist organizations in Western Europe (wrote a book on that in 
1984 (!!), the recent Venona revelations etc. etc.

Again I apologize for letting Umberto trick me into continuing this
debate on the list. Please, everybody who wants to continue this, 
keep firing at me off list.

To excuse myself I feel an urge to quote EJ on Oswald Spengler and
the world state (some Nietsche there also):

"Es scheint, dass zyklische Systeme den Geist gemaesser sind."

_An der Zeitmauer_ , new edition 1991, p. 59

"Spenglers Verdienst liegt darin, dass er den grossen Gedanken
der Entweicklung, wie Herder und Goethe sie verstanden, auf
sein Geschichtsbild anwendet, und das zu einem Zeitpunkt,
an den dieser Gedanke durch Missverstendnis, und Verflachung
des Hegelschen nich nur im historischen Selbstbewusstsein
der Gebildeten, sondern bis in die politische Praxis hinein
zu einer Art von optimistischen Religionsersatz vereinfacht
worden war.

Demgegenueber ist Spenglers Geschichtsbild, vor allen hinsichtlich
der Kulturprognose, mit recht pessimistisch. Es fuehrt von der
Vorstellung der linearen und eo ipso aufsteigenden Entwicklung
zu zyklischen Konfigurationen zurueck. Dadurch uebt es grossen
und wachsenden Einfluss aus."

Ibid, p. 62.

"Schon Nietsche sieht den Weltstaat und dann seinen Verfall voraus. Es
kann nicht anders sein.

Denn alles, was entsteht
Ist wert, dass es zugrunde geht."

Ibid., p. 68.

Another long contribution. Sorry.

Greetings

Bertil Haggman
bertil.haggman@helsingborg.se