This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
I guess the obsession of labeling far-right ideological stances "fascist" keeps persisting in certain left-wing circles. If they would only do the leggwork to read actual fascists from the 20s, 30s and 40s instead of reading easy digestable books like "How Fascism Works" by Jason Stanly, "Ur-Fascism" by Umberto Ecco and muddy the waters with Wittgensteins' argument about language games, they might actually find out that things just aren't that simple. Start by reading: The doctrine of Fascism [i](Gentile & Mussolini)[/i], The Philosophic Basis of Fascism [i](Gentile)[/i], Fascism for the Millions [i](Mosly)[/i], The Alternative [i](Mosly)[/i], ... . Or scholars like Robert Paxton [i](The Anatomy of Fascism)[/i], James Gregor [i](The ideology of fascism the rationale of totalitarianism ; Giovanni Gentille: Philosopher of Fascism ; Italian Fascism and Developmental Dictatorship ; Mussolini's Intellectuals)[/i], Roger Griffin [i](Fascism ; Fascism: A Quick Immersion)[/i], Michael Mann [i](Fascists)[/i], ... . And even people that study contemporary right wing populism like Cas Mudde [i](Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe ; The Ideology of the Extreme right ; The Far Right in America ; Populism: A Very Short Introduction)[/i] and Jan-Werner Müller [i](What is Poppulism)[/i]. And you'll find out, that labeling Donald Trump and his movement as a fascist one is pretty hard to do.
That there are certain aspects of the movement that is also found in fascism is undeniable. However, if (as the person in the video says) you accept that Fascism is an ideology. Then you should also accept what an ideology actually is, and what it is is a coherent system of ideas that all work together to make a sort of worldview or ideological position. You can start cutting these systems of ideas up, and atomise them into all the diffrent ideas that make up the entire world view and label these ideas as being "fascistic" because they are a part of fascism. But once you start doing that, a lot of things (as the video concludes) are suddenly "fascist". Because doing such a thing with an ideological position is stupid, because the ideology itself is the complete structure of all those ideas. If you start cutting things up and start using these atoms as your reference guide, then I'm pretty sure Stalinism will be a really tough cookie to get out of the fascist bracket. While Stalinism isn't fascist, it does share a lot of ideas that also persist in fascism. You also find fascist elements in people that support monarchies, theocracies, ... and other traditionalist frameworks that try to gain political hegemony. Because all these types of ideologies, belong into this far right bracket, but they aren't the same.
I also wonder why this patriarchical view as a key tendency of fascism keeps persisting. It's probably because the only variants of fascism that we have for examples came to be in regions where males were higher up in the hierarchy in the past. However, this patriarchical part that lingers in our examples of fascism aren't because they are essential for fascism. Fascism builds it's ideas with the nation as the unit from which it reasons. And the nation has this rich mythic past that is constructed by the nationalists (the video is right), which is not something that you only find in Fascism. It's a part of European culture ever since nation building became a thing at the end of the 18th century. Because of the past where the male had the most dominant status, this trickles through in fascist myths that are constructed in those regions. However, if fascism becomes adopted in a country that had a matriarchy, the romantic ideal wouldn't be dominated by manlyhood. It would be dominated by strong women. Because of the history that the nation has. This strong man idea, isn't part of fascism, it's an outcome of the shared past of the nation that gets mystified and romanticised and idealised by nationalists.
That there are certain aspects of the movement that is also found in fascism is undeniable. However, if (as the person in the video says) you accept that Fascism is an ideology. Then you should also accept what an ideology actually is, and what it is is a coherent system of ideas that all work together to make a sort of worldview or ideological position. You can start cutting these systems of ideas up, and atomise them into all the diffrent ideas that make up the entire world view and label these ideas as being "fascistic" because they are a part of fascism. But once you start doing that, a lot of things (as the video concludes) are suddenly "fascist". Because doing such a thing with an ideological position is stupid, because the ideology itself is the complete structure of all those ideas. If you start cutting things up and start using these atoms as your reference guide, then I'm pretty sure Stalinism will be a really tough cookie to get out of the fascist bracket. While Stalinism isn't fascist, it does share a lot of ideas that also persist in fascism. You also find fascist elements in people that support monarchies, theocracies, ... and other traditionalist frameworks that try to gain political hegemony. Because all these types of ideologies, belong into this far right bracket, but they aren't the same.
I also wonder why this patriarchical view as a key tendency of fascism keeps persisting. It's probably because the only variants of fascism that we have for examples came to be in regions where males were higher up in the hierarchy in the past. However, this patriarchical part that lingers in our examples of fascism aren't because they are essential for fascism. Fascism builds it's ideas with the nation as the unit from which it reasons. And the nation has this rich mythic past that is constructed by the nationalists (the video is right), which is not something that you only find in Fascism. It's a part of European culture ever since nation building became a thing at the end of the 18th century. Because of the past where the male had the most dominant status, this trickles through in fascist myths that are constructed in those regions. However, if fascism becomes adopted in a country that had a matriarchy, the romantic ideal wouldn't be dominated by manlyhood. It would be dominated by strong women. Because of the history that the nation has. This strong man idea, isn't part of fascism, it's an outcome of the shared past of the nation that gets mystified and romanticised and idealised by nationalists.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@PrincessAwesome
Fascism is an ideological position that takes "the nation" as it's core unit around which they build their worldview. In other words, they are hard core nationalists, and the concept of the natin is defined by an origin myth. It sees the nation as an organic body which needs to get every member of the nations' attention and submission, for they are perceived as parts of the body that is the nation.
It has an obsession with the decline, humiliation and victimhood of the Nation. It compensates this by building a mass movement that is focused around concepts of vitality, unity and purity. It also has an obsession with "order" [i](the nation needs to run like clockwork)[/i]. These concepts need to be achieved so that the nation can reach it's destiny. Fascist rise to power by making uneasy coalititions with traditional elites. Fascism rejects the enlightenment and the idea of universal humanity. It's lead by a vanguard [i](an elite that knows what is best)[/i] and it believes that normal people never achieved political change, only elites can set out the lines for the future.
Because it rejects these ideals that you find in the enlightenment [i](liberty, equality, fraternity, pursuit of happiness,...)[/i] it rejects concepts like: democracy and capitalism. These things threaten order and unity. They also hate socialists, because they cut up the nation in a labor force and capitalists which threatens unity inside the nation. To solve this, they seek for strong charismatic leaders that can function as a sort of messiah that will lead the nation to it's destiny, hence dictatorship. In the economy they try to bundle all forces in function of the nation inside a fascist corporatist framework. But "the state" which is the personification as "the nation" as power holds strong control on literally every aspect of life [i](including religion)[/i]. As Mussolini said: [i]"Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."[/i].
Fascism also promotes miltairism. All fascist governements try to organise society as a strong lead militairy outfit. They believe that violence has a purifying effect. They are so called "anti-intellectuals", but in the case of fascism, that means that they hate people that study without taking action. People that just produce scientific works and don't put them into practise are looked upon with disdaine.
Fascism is an ideological position that takes "the nation" as it's core unit around which they build their worldview. In other words, they are hard core nationalists, and the concept of the natin is defined by an origin myth. It sees the nation as an organic body which needs to get every member of the nations' attention and submission, for they are perceived as parts of the body that is the nation.
It has an obsession with the decline, humiliation and victimhood of the Nation. It compensates this by building a mass movement that is focused around concepts of vitality, unity and purity. It also has an obsession with "order" [i](the nation needs to run like clockwork)[/i]. These concepts need to be achieved so that the nation can reach it's destiny. Fascist rise to power by making uneasy coalititions with traditional elites. Fascism rejects the enlightenment and the idea of universal humanity. It's lead by a vanguard [i](an elite that knows what is best)[/i] and it believes that normal people never achieved political change, only elites can set out the lines for the future.
Because it rejects these ideals that you find in the enlightenment [i](liberty, equality, fraternity, pursuit of happiness,...)[/i] it rejects concepts like: democracy and capitalism. These things threaten order and unity. They also hate socialists, because they cut up the nation in a labor force and capitalists which threatens unity inside the nation. To solve this, they seek for strong charismatic leaders that can function as a sort of messiah that will lead the nation to it's destiny, hence dictatorship. In the economy they try to bundle all forces in function of the nation inside a fascist corporatist framework. But "the state" which is the personification as "the nation" as power holds strong control on literally every aspect of life [i](including religion)[/i]. As Mussolini said: [i]"Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."[/i].
Fascism also promotes miltairism. All fascist governements try to organise society as a strong lead militairy outfit. They believe that violence has a purifying effect. They are so called "anti-intellectuals", but in the case of fascism, that means that they hate people that study without taking action. People that just produce scientific works and don't put them into practise are looked upon with disdaine.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@PrincessAwesome Trumpism appears to be an extremely weird blend of authoritarian American exceptionalism and christianity. I don't see Donald Trump going against capitalists interests for instance, neither do I see him nationalise part of the industry if it doesn't serve the interests of the nation. He's pretty much advocating for a non-globalised free market system at home. And he protects that market with tarrifs. I also don't see him as someone that is going to structure the state as a strong militairy unit. And I don't see him as someone that perceives "the nation" as an organism, where you can just sacrifice part of the poppulation as long as it serves the nations purpose. And I also don't think he gets away with submittig the church under the state.
He's a right wing poppulist, meaning: poppulist, nativists and authoritarian. His romantic vision of the nation is based in this American Exceptionalist idea. That's also a bit of a paradox, because the man clearly isn't part of liberalism and he's a reactionairy conservative. But this American Exceptionalism is still rooted in the enlightenment and liberalism, so it's incredibly weird to see someone taking such a wide spread, but he seems to get away with it so far, mainly because his base has no clue. They just get off on the "exceptional" part and don't really think much more of it.
He's a right wing poppulist, meaning: poppulist, nativists and authoritarian. His romantic vision of the nation is based in this American Exceptionalist idea. That's also a bit of a paradox, because the man clearly isn't part of liberalism and he's a reactionairy conservative. But this American Exceptionalism is still rooted in the enlightenment and liberalism, so it's incredibly weird to see someone taking such a wide spread, but he seems to get away with it so far, mainly because his base has no clue. They just get off on the "exceptional" part and don't really think much more of it.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@PrincessAwesome Read the first part of my last message again.
Human1000 · 51-55, M
@Kwek00 Having read the excellent introduction/essay of this book, the History of Fascism, you are right. Someone said recently, you can get a whole lot of awful before you get to fascist. There are many pernicious forms of authoritarianism before you get to fascist. Italy was fascist, but also didn’t get to the level of totalitarianism that Germany had (or the Soviet Union, for that matter).
[image deleted]
[image deleted]
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@Human1000
[quote]Someone said recently, you can get a whole lot of awful before you get to fascist. [/quote]
Fascism is not nescessarily more awfull then another type of authoritarianism. My issue with the over use of the word "fascist", is that every conservative authoritarian ideology becomes "fascism" as if there is nothing else out there and it's the only thing to fear if you have a more liberal mindeset.
That books has the Verdinaso logo on the bottom right corner... that guy went deep into the tank if he discusses them.
[quote]Someone said recently, you can get a whole lot of awful before you get to fascist. [/quote]
Fascism is not nescessarily more awfull then another type of authoritarianism. My issue with the over use of the word "fascist", is that every conservative authoritarian ideology becomes "fascism" as if there is nothing else out there and it's the only thing to fear if you have a more liberal mindeset.
That books has the Verdinaso logo on the bottom right corner... that guy went deep into the tank if he discusses them.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@Human1000 Who argues against that? Fascism bundles all the elements of the nation into a strong coherent unit. To do so, everyone has to have their heads in the same direction. Unity, becomes crucial for "the nation" to reach it's destiny. That's why everything gets subjugated to the nation. Fascist try to ban everything that doesn't follow the orthodoxy, subjugates religion and the economy. Everything dances to the tune of the fascist harmony. It's totalitarian because it has to be to reach this pure order and unity.
[quote][i]The rights of the State as expressing the real essence of the individual. And if liberty is to he the attribute of living men and not of abstract dummies invented by individualistic liberalism, then Fascism stands for liberty, and for the only liberty worth having, the liberty of the State and of the individual within the State. [b]The Fascist conception of the State is all embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism, is totalitarian, and the Fascist State — a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values — interprets, develops, and potentates the whole life of a people.[/b][/i]
- Benito Mussolini, [i]The Doctrine of Fascism (1932)[/i][/quote]
[quote][i]The rights of the State as expressing the real essence of the individual. And if liberty is to he the attribute of living men and not of abstract dummies invented by individualistic liberalism, then Fascism stands for liberty, and for the only liberty worth having, the liberty of the State and of the individual within the State. [b]The Fascist conception of the State is all embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism, is totalitarian, and the Fascist State — a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values — interprets, develops, and potentates the whole life of a people.[/b][/i]
- Benito Mussolini, [i]The Doctrine of Fascism (1932)[/i][/quote]
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@PrincessAwesome
[quote]I [b]don't[/b] see Donald Trump going against capitalists interests for instance, [b]neither do I see him[/b] nationalise part of the industry if it doesn't serve the interests of the nation. He's pretty much advocating for a non-globalised free market system at home. And he protects that market with tarrifs. I also [b]don't see him[/b] as someone that is going to structure the state as a strong militairy unit. And I [b]don't see him[/b] as someone that perceives "the nation" as an organism, where you can just sacrifice part of the poppulation as long as it serves the nations purpose. And I also [b]don't think[/b] he gets away with submittig the church under the state.[/quote]
If you only read what you like to hear, you are always right of course.
Do you know what confirmation bias is? Maybe you should look into it.
[quote]I [b]don't[/b] see Donald Trump going against capitalists interests for instance, [b]neither do I see him[/b] nationalise part of the industry if it doesn't serve the interests of the nation. He's pretty much advocating for a non-globalised free market system at home. And he protects that market with tarrifs. I also [b]don't see him[/b] as someone that is going to structure the state as a strong militairy unit. And I [b]don't see him[/b] as someone that perceives "the nation" as an organism, where you can just sacrifice part of the poppulation as long as it serves the nations purpose. And I also [b]don't think[/b] he gets away with submittig the church under the state.[/quote]
If you only read what you like to hear, you are always right of course.
Do you know what confirmation bias is? Maybe you should look into it.
PrincessAwesome · 22-25, F
@Kwek00 Are you being bad faith now? You literally defined MAGA as Fascist. Yes, it doesn't have EVERY feature that Nazi Germany or Francoist Spain had. No two countries are the same. But MAGA has the defining features of Fascism. It's an ultra-nationalist authoritarian movement.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@PrincessAwesome I said he's a nativist and an authoritarian and a poppulist. Those 3 elements don't make him a fascist. I'm pretty sure Fascists don't see him as one of them, he's just a way for them to promote aspects that overlap. Fascism wants to take full control of every aspect of life, I don't see Trump as some sort of "anti-capitalist", neither do I see him all the other things that seperates fascism from other far right ideologies.
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
@Kwek00 call it whatever you want, he is out to destroy what we call a democratic republic, so that he can be emperor, or whatever you care to call it!
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@samueltyler2 That's not what this conversation is about, unless you think that Fascism is "that what is out to destroy a democratic republic and wants to replace it with dictatorship".