Neumann rejected orthodox Marxist accounts of fascism as finance-capital dictatorship

Evidence

Still, Neumann’s analysis was more complicated than the orthodox Marxist position, classically expressed by George Dimitrov at the seventh World Congress of the Comintern, that fascism was “the open, terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic, and most imperialist elements of finance capital.” 100 To Neumann, “The German economy of today has two broad and striking characteristics. It is a monopolistic economy - and a command economy. It is a private capitalistic economy, regimented by the totalitarian state. We suggest as a name best to describe it, ‘Totalitarian Monopoly Capitalism.’ ” 101 This was demonstrated, he continued, in such ways as compulsory cartelization legislation. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 509

Categorization

• DEFINE: Introduces Neumann’s coinage ‘Totalitarian Monopoly Capitalism’ and contrasts it explicitly with the Comintern’s orthodox formula.
• XREF: This debate over fascism’s class character prefigures later Frankfurt School analysis and the ‘state monopoly capitalism’ debates in postwar Marxism. — connects to: Neumann rejected state capitalism and the primacy of politics thesis. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 508; Marxist theory could not theorize nationalism and so evaded it — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on…, 33; Institute members split over whether fascism was capitalism’s political form — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 509 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Comintern factions defined fascism as armed dictatorship of capitalist fractions #contradicts (0.80)
• Marxist theory could not theorize nationalism and so evaded it #complicates (0.75) — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 33
• Institute members split over whether fascism was capitalism’s political form #responds-to (0.75) — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 509