The war against Fascism was the most glorious chapter in our national history. We were the Big Damn Heroes saving the world from the Axis-- and unlike Soviet atrocities, we were allowed to get up close and personal with the victims of German and Japanese fascism. They got to tell their stories before the entire human race. There are no museums to the victims of the Soviets and the Maoists, and the war against international Communism was not a war of liberation, not a war of heroism and glory, but a chess game where each side used petty dictators as pawns. We won the war against Fascism, and then used the Fascists to fight a war against the Communists. This is why I'm fond of saying that when we defeated Germany and Japan, we won the war but lost the argument-- we used their own methods against them and against every enemy we've fought since.
There is also the matter that Soviet intelligence operated far longer, and was much more effective, then Nazi intelligence. The Soviets funded and indoctrinated insurgents and dissidents in countries all over the world, including the United States, and those unwitting pawns undermined our war efforts in every major conflict against Communism during the Cold War. The revolutionary and so-called "student" movements in the 60s and 70s were largely Soviet creations-- and, when the Cold War died, these Communists and Communist sympathizers didn't go away, they integrated themselves into our education system and into more acceptable government and community action. As much as our Democratic Party isn't by any stretch of the imagination a Communist organization, these radicals have insinuated themselves into it handily.
Mostly? Jews. This country is full of Jews and they wield disproportionate wealth and influence in our society. (Facts which I applaud them for. They are, by and large, a superior people.) The victims of Soviet atrocities were mostly Russians and Ukrainians and Latvians, who have no significant influence in this country. And Soviet aggression, unlike Fascist aggression, was not direct and overt but instead relied on fomenting revolutions and civil wars in countries under colonial occupiers and failing governments-- so even where they failed, there are large segments of the population that view them ambivalently at least, if not warmly.
Communism believes in a world without power and violence and hypocritically uses power and violence to attempt to realize it. Fascism believes in power and violence as an inevitable and necessary part of human existence, and seeks to channel them into productive and life-affirming ends. Both are horrific when they fail, but all human social structures are horrific when they fail and Communism is inherently doomed to failure because it is inconsistent-- it fails from the very moment that it is born and continues to fail until it collapses. Fascism survives and thrives until it is defeated by superior external forces, which is in accordance with the natural order and nothing to be ashamed of. It's worth noting, despite the fact that the Axis Powers were defeated, that it took almost the entire rest of the world to do so.
Materially, they appear similar, but Fascism's goals for society are not material, but spiritual. Communism rejects the spiritual side of Man's existence and denies his spiritual needs, while Fascism is focused primarily on the spiritual well-being of the people. It has admittedly only achieved mixed success on this front, with the most notable failure being Germany, but Fascism genuinely promotes the triumph of passion and vitality over despair.
They're different ideals, and they're not the ideals we are taught to pay lip service to in church and school. It is true that Fascism promotes ambition and ruthlessness as virtues, but people tend to overlook that it also promotes loyalty and cooperation and love. It is not enough to cultivate personal power and pursue personal ambitions; the true Fascist must also encourage and inspire his family and his neighbors to cultivate power, and bind them all together in the service of something greater than petty hedonism. The Fascist leader must not merely be powerful and ambitious, he needs to command the loyalty of other powerful and ambitious men, and he needs to cultivate an atmosphere in which ambition and loyalty are rewarded with greater power and responsibility.
No social structure is perfect, but Fascism doesn't have to be perfect to work.
The only way for the leadership of the Organic State to accumulate more power is for the Organic State itself to accumulate more power.
How is the propagation and accumulation of power "sinister"? How is the rejection of pure, unfettered materialism "sinister"? Egalitarianism and materialism are the roots of Communist ideology, and are the source of both its failure and its hypocrisy.
And how is paying lip service to values you don't believe in better than honesty?
