I think what we call it matters less than what we do about it. Everyone, especially those with a platform need to clearly articulate what is happening and why it is so bad. I think many people if asked would not be able to define fascism or a fascist and many would be alarmed at the use of these terms. We need to use simple clear language that everyone can understand and keep repeating the key messages.
That was an interesting article. I agree that the word "fascist" is used too easily by people who don't really understand its meaning. That is not to say the fascists do not exist in our world. However, before using Turkey as an example, the biggest fascist regime in existence today is the zionist government in Israel which qualifies in every meaning of the word. They are intent on destroying all of their "enemies" and stealing their land to create their idea of the "Great State of Israel" which would stretch from the Mediterranean to well into areas of the Middle East, continually being supplied with the latest in missile and drone technology to achieve their aims
The political environment in which ‘fascism’ takes hold is always based on a state of stress, emergency. The 1929 bank collapse in the USA and Europe, like the one in 2008, was caused by financial adventurers doing idiotic things with other people’s money. It created a state of confusion, anger and fear in both cases, which then shaped the political environment in which ‘fascist’ tendencies could take hold. It will take another period of war to get rid of it, which Putin will provide.
Fascism is founded on a belief in the primacy of the "nation". The nation is not an arbitrary collection of individuals but is formed by a "people" who share a common cultural, ethnic and even racial identity. Rooted in 19th century racial theories, which perverted Darwin's Theory of Evolution, the "state" is not the outcome of random geopolitical processes, but the territory inhabited by a “nation.” For fascism, there is an almost mystical connection between state is and its people, making it only legitimate form of political organisation above the individual. This is a sentiment was expressed by Marageret Thatcher and has been repeated by Nigel Farage.
Fascism emerges as a series of measures taken against “other peoples” who occupy the nation state but do not “belong” to it. They are conceived as pathogens “invading” the body of the nation and are blamed for the ills of the country simply because they are different, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.
The “invaders” must be “neutralised” to restore the health of the “nation” and thereby solve its problems. Neutralisation can take the form of enforced integration, apartheid, deportation and even – in the case of the Nazis – genocide. The features of fascism described in the article arise from the different strategies utilised by fascists to “cleanse” the nation. These strategies rely on authoritarianism to override any laws protecting the rights of minorities and those in government or the judiciary who are seen to be “collaborating” with them.
When set against this understanding of fascism, is it legitimate to call the populist right “fascist?” Absolutely.
The term socialist is thrown around by MAGA politicians endlessly to describe people who would not remotely fit any normal definition of socialist. Meanwhile Trumps MAGA regime fit multiple definitions of fascism, as it has evolved in history
Trump hardly has an idea what he’s doing. His entering the war in the Middle East proves it: the hawks did shout louder than MAGA and off he went. Tomorrow MAGA complains very loud and hey presto, his taco self intervenes and the action is stopped.
Fascism, as seen in Italy and Germany in the aftermath of the Great War (World War 1) isn't going to manifest so obviously in the 21st century. What isn't widely known is that the USA stayed out of World War 2 until Pearl Harbor because the few were profiting from Italian and German slave labour. Not just the likes of Ford, but also the Jewish capitalist families were making fortunes from the concentration camps which is why they downplayed the holocaust until the camps (Auschwitz-Berkenau mainly) were liberated and the full horror was revealed by the Allies. The likes of trump and farage won't declare themselves as fully fascist until democracy has been completely eroded. If then. The current system of FPTP in the UK was designed to keep Labour and Tory in power but with the advent of so many political parties on the Far Right of the political spectrum, as well as those in the centre of the spectrum, we are seeing landslide majorities won with a smaller fraction of the total vote. I compare both GOP and Reform to Fascist parties of the 1930's (I am including the British Fascists here) because all of them had/have the same goal. Rule by creating anarchy and then offer a solution. As you said, they are not completely Fascist by any definition of Fascism, yet! I hesitate to call either trump or farage Fascist although they both lean that way because they are not, again as yet, displaying every text book definition of what makes a person a Fascist. Mosley was openly Fascist and led the British Fascist Party. The National Front was a Fascist Party led by White Supremacists. The one thing in common with all of these is the attitude (again trump and farage display some of these attitudes but not all) so I consider them as neo-Fascists.
Thank you for untangling a knot of terror, historical memory and numbing complexity. We are heading into a fog concealing a host of nightmares. By the time we can plainly see what we're up against it will be too late. If we pounce too soon the horror will evade us and grow stronger. Mebbe we need to create new terms to describe whats happening now as a tech informed development of what's gone before. The thing that is Curtis Yarvin spiels many neologisms for his vision which might be subverted?
I think what we call it matters less than what we do about it. Everyone, especially those with a platform need to clearly articulate what is happening and why it is so bad. I think many people if asked would not be able to define fascism or a fascist and many would be alarmed at the use of these terms. We need to use simple clear language that everyone can understand and keep repeating the key messages.
That was an interesting article. I agree that the word "fascist" is used too easily by people who don't really understand its meaning. That is not to say the fascists do not exist in our world. However, before using Turkey as an example, the biggest fascist regime in existence today is the zionist government in Israel which qualifies in every meaning of the word. They are intent on destroying all of their "enemies" and stealing their land to create their idea of the "Great State of Israel" which would stretch from the Mediterranean to well into areas of the Middle East, continually being supplied with the latest in missile and drone technology to achieve their aims
The political environment in which ‘fascism’ takes hold is always based on a state of stress, emergency. The 1929 bank collapse in the USA and Europe, like the one in 2008, was caused by financial adventurers doing idiotic things with other people’s money. It created a state of confusion, anger and fear in both cases, which then shaped the political environment in which ‘fascist’ tendencies could take hold. It will take another period of war to get rid of it, which Putin will provide.
Fascism is founded on a belief in the primacy of the "nation". The nation is not an arbitrary collection of individuals but is formed by a "people" who share a common cultural, ethnic and even racial identity. Rooted in 19th century racial theories, which perverted Darwin's Theory of Evolution, the "state" is not the outcome of random geopolitical processes, but the territory inhabited by a “nation.” For fascism, there is an almost mystical connection between state is and its people, making it only legitimate form of political organisation above the individual. This is a sentiment was expressed by Marageret Thatcher and has been repeated by Nigel Farage.
Fascism emerges as a series of measures taken against “other peoples” who occupy the nation state but do not “belong” to it. They are conceived as pathogens “invading” the body of the nation and are blamed for the ills of the country simply because they are different, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.
The “invaders” must be “neutralised” to restore the health of the “nation” and thereby solve its problems. Neutralisation can take the form of enforced integration, apartheid, deportation and even – in the case of the Nazis – genocide. The features of fascism described in the article arise from the different strategies utilised by fascists to “cleanse” the nation. These strategies rely on authoritarianism to override any laws protecting the rights of minorities and those in government or the judiciary who are seen to be “collaborating” with them.
When set against this understanding of fascism, is it legitimate to call the populist right “fascist?” Absolutely.
The term socialist is thrown around by MAGA politicians endlessly to describe people who would not remotely fit any normal definition of socialist. Meanwhile Trumps MAGA regime fit multiple definitions of fascism, as it has evolved in history
Trump hardly has an idea what he’s doing. His entering the war in the Middle East proves it: the hawks did shout louder than MAGA and off he went. Tomorrow MAGA complains very loud and hey presto, his taco self intervenes and the action is stopped.
Fascism, as seen in Italy and Germany in the aftermath of the Great War (World War 1) isn't going to manifest so obviously in the 21st century. What isn't widely known is that the USA stayed out of World War 2 until Pearl Harbor because the few were profiting from Italian and German slave labour. Not just the likes of Ford, but also the Jewish capitalist families were making fortunes from the concentration camps which is why they downplayed the holocaust until the camps (Auschwitz-Berkenau mainly) were liberated and the full horror was revealed by the Allies. The likes of trump and farage won't declare themselves as fully fascist until democracy has been completely eroded. If then. The current system of FPTP in the UK was designed to keep Labour and Tory in power but with the advent of so many political parties on the Far Right of the political spectrum, as well as those in the centre of the spectrum, we are seeing landslide majorities won with a smaller fraction of the total vote. I compare both GOP and Reform to Fascist parties of the 1930's (I am including the British Fascists here) because all of them had/have the same goal. Rule by creating anarchy and then offer a solution. As you said, they are not completely Fascist by any definition of Fascism, yet! I hesitate to call either trump or farage Fascist although they both lean that way because they are not, again as yet, displaying every text book definition of what makes a person a Fascist. Mosley was openly Fascist and led the British Fascist Party. The National Front was a Fascist Party led by White Supremacists. The one thing in common with all of these is the attitude (again trump and farage display some of these attitudes but not all) so I consider them as neo-Fascists.
Thank you for untangling a knot of terror, historical memory and numbing complexity. We are heading into a fog concealing a host of nightmares. By the time we can plainly see what we're up against it will be too late. If we pounce too soon the horror will evade us and grow stronger. Mebbe we need to create new terms to describe whats happening now as a tech informed development of what's gone before. The thing that is Curtis Yarvin spiels many neologisms for his vision which might be subverted?