262
PARTISAN REVIEW
WEHRWIRTSCHAFT
That democratic capitalism cannot effectively
MEANS FASCISM
·
· 1
d ·
f
·
orgamze nallona pro uctwn or war
IS
now
being admitted even by its own leaders. "We
have nothing to offer," said Winston Churchill, speaking for his
cabinet a few days after assuming power, "but blood, toil, tears
and sweat." And theN.
Y. Times
recently headlined a speech by
President Roosevelt comparing democracy and fascism: "DEMOC·
RACY MAY NOT BE QUITE SO EFFICIENT, HE SAYS, BUT
THAT IDEA IS OVERRATED."
What a retreat from the proud materialism of the twenties,
when efficiency was the supreme value of all good Americans!
When capitalist society, based on materialistic conquest, admits its
relaJive inefficiency to fascism, the game is up.*
The dilemma which confronts any democratic capitalist
wehrwirtschaft
("war economy") is that it can not win the enthu·
siastic support of either the masses or the bourgeoisie, nor can it
establish sufficient control over either class by force.
Since it is impossible to satiify the material needs and
desires of the masses, what is needed here is a judicious mixture
of demagogy and repression. This is just what Hitler relies on, hut
Roosevelt finds himself unable to turn the trick. With the best will
in the world, he cannot completely crush the workingclass, since
they will consent to such a loss of their liberties only if they are
convinced they have something to gain. But all of Roosevelt's
efforts to arouse mass enthusiasm for "democracy" seem to
he
inadequate: The Word is indeed impotent. What is required is
what Hitler has been able to supply: a new "radical" demagogy
which boldly recognizes the bankruptcy of the old system (which
the masses have found wanting) and which pretends to create a
superior new one. But the demagogy of both Roosevelt and Will·
kie, as is inevitable, proceeds on the contrary assumption: that the
present system is desirable and must be preserved just as it is–
even, indeed, just as it was in the time of Lincoln and Jefferson!
The same problems arise in relation to the bourgeoisie. As
the experience of this war has shown, certain sections of the ruling
class in the democracies already recognize the superiority of fas·
•Scapegoat• to explain thia failure are, of couree, in order now. Most popular
it
the Popular Front.
But thote who believe in thit bogeyman muat explain how it
i1
that (1) France could not rearm any
better under the two
yean
of
consenative
govemrnentt which followed the Popular Front, (2) England,
which enjoyed a conservative government for many yean before the war wu no better prepared than
France, and (3) production of munitions in England quadrupled, accordinc to a recent report, to par·
liament. between April (when a 1trai1ht Con1enath·e eovernment
wu
in power) and June (after a month
of the Churchill-Labor Party re,imo).
