Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
[Fascism is] a genuinely revolutionary, trans-class form of anti-liberal, and in the last analysis, anti-conservative nationalism. As such it is an ideology deeply bound up with modernization and modernity, one which has assumed a considerable variety of external forms to adapt itself to the particular historical and national context in which it appears, and has drawn a wide range of cultural and intellectual currents, both left and right, anti-modern and pro-modern, to articulate itself as a body of ideas, slogans, and doctrine. In the inter-war period it manifested itself primarily in the form of an elite-led "armed party" which attempted, mostly unsuccessfully, to generate a populist mass movement through a liturgical style of politics and a programme of radical policies which promised to overcome a threat posed by international socialism, to end the degeneration affecting the nation under liberalism, and to bring about a radical renewal of its social, political and cultural life as part of what was widely imagined to be the new era being inaugurated in Western civilization. The core mobilizing myth of fascism which conditions its ideology, propaganda, style of politics and actions is the vision of the nation's imminent rebirth from decadence.
compared2what? » Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:59 pm wrote:JackRiddler wrote:The "Tea Party," now pretty much defunct as a factor in US politics, was a successful effort by the Republican Party right-wing to rebrand itself as a secular economic justice movement in the wake of the 2008 election, so as to take Congress in 2010.
I wasn't really thinking exclusively about the movement that went under that name in 2010. I equally well might have said "the Patriot movement," or "the "Libertarian" movement," or "the recent rise of the extreme right in American, which has quite rapidly become very influential nationally on a populist, electoral, and media level, after having been dead as a dodo outside of a handful of local precincts for the better part of half a century or more, and which is very much in the picture in a way that's making a very real difference for congressional races all over the country this year."
Or something of that nature.It partly owes its success thanks to the incoming administration's intentional dissolution of the movement that had brought it into power; its total capitulation to the zombie bankers; and its creation of a Neo-Clintonian cabinet with nothing but neoliberals and vetted national-security wonks at the helm of the key departments. That created the vacuum for allowing a right-wing counterpopulist movement to present itself as the new opposition to tyranny in a country that had just repudiated the Bush agenda and shifted a few feet to the left.
I think you're vastly underestimating the phenomenon to which the Tea Party belongs. You can't just return the return-of-the-repressed to storage when you're done using it for leverage. (Not "you, JackR"; I mean "you, the stupid mainstream right.")
Freedom Rider: Who’s the Fascist?
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
The U.S. public loves fascists; they elect them, constantly. Donald Trump, who “says he would raise the minimum wage and stop the endless efforts at regime change,” is called a fascist by some. But Hillary Clinton “is happy to bomb Libya or Syria or any other country,” and played a major role in mass Black incarceration. Barack Obama is the war-maker and deporter-in-chief. “All of the major party candidates fit the F word description in some way.”
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
“No one comes into office with any intention of undoing America’s leadership as the world’s worst jailer.”
Donald Trump is the ill spoken, boorish, graceless version of every American president in modern history. He differs from them only in his unconcealed appeals to white nationalism. But Democrats aren’t much better. They pretend to work on behalf of human, civil and economic rights but those claims are lies. They are meant to hide their partnerships with corporate America, very wealthy individuals and the worldwide imperialist project.
If Trump is a fascist then he will fit in nicely with the pantheon of horrific men we are told to respect and venerate. Barack Obama charges and convicts whistle blowers with the little used espionage act from the era of Woodrow Wilson. He claims and has exercised an invented right to kill Americans. His predecessor invaded and occupied Iraq but he continues the dirty deed there and in Afghanistan. He tries to fool the public by assassinating “al Qaeda number two,” over and over again. Al Qaeda certainly doesn’t lack for plan B staffers.
Bush the younger cut tax rates for rich people but Obama didn’t change that. Under the guise of compromising with intransigent Republicans he did the same thing. When he and the Democrats controlled Congress in 2009 and 2010 they raised the minimum wage a paltry 70 cents.
Conversely, Donald Trump says he would raise the minimum wage and says he would stop the endless efforts at regime change. Neither Hillary Clinton nor Bernie Sanders have questioned that fundamental premise of American foreign policy. Hillary Clinton has already proven herself to be particularly blood thirsty. She is happy to bomb Libya or Syria or any other country. Her so-called expertise amounts to nothing more than an expansion of state sponsored terror committed by the United States.
“It is a Democratic president who brought back a cold war against Russia and recklessly brought troops to the edge of that country’s borders.”
Trump says he wouldn’t cut Social Security while Barack Obama famously declared that he and his 2012 Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, agreed on the need to cut this program that was once called the “third rail” of politics.
Every president since the 1980s has grown the horrific mass incarceration industry. Using wars on drugs as a pretext they have locked up 2 million people, half of whom are black. No one comes into office with any intention of undoing America’s leadership as the world’s worst jailer.
American history teaches black people to be, at the very least, wary of public officials who are beloved by red necks as much as Trump is. When Trump speaks of preventing Muslim immigration or deporting all of the estimated 11 million undocumented people in this country he is making inherently racist appeals.
That is why he is protested and rightly so. But the protesters have already missed the mark by giving a pass to equally questionable policy actions and statements coming from Democrats. It is a Democratic president who brought back a cold war against Russia and recklessly brought troops to the edge of that country’s borders. This scenario was unheard of during the worst days of the cold war and now risks nuclear confrontation. That is because George W. Bush unilaterally abrogated the missile defense treaty with Russia. Perhaps he can be called a fascist also.
The trade deals passed by American presidents with congressional connivance grow worse. There is no longer any pretense that their goal is to help corporations maximize profits and minimize everyone else’s rights. Not even members of Congress were allowed access to the text of the Trans Pacific Partnership legislation.
“If a politician has the right establishment credentials and knows how to give prepared speeches he or she can get away with committing any outrage.”
If Trump is protested, Obama ought to be as well. He is spending his last year in office on an imperialism tour. He goes to Hiroshima for photo opportunities with atomic bomb survivors while building more nuclear warheads than any other president. He tells endless lies about Russian “aggression” but he is the provocative head of state.
Trump should be disliked by Latinos and everyone else when he says that Mexican immigrants are rapists and murderers. But Obama is the deporter in chief, sending a record number of Latino immigrants out of the country with dubious rationales, devastating them and their families.
Apparently all of the major party candidates fit the F word description in some way. Trump’s bombast and ignorance make him the easiest to pick out of the crowd but appearances are deceiving. It seems that if a politician has the right establishment credentials and knows how to give prepared speeches he or she can get away with committing any outrage.
In just the last 40 years American presidents or their allied partners in crime have killed people in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Congo, Somalia, Haiti, Grenada, Gaza, Kosovo, Serbia, Sudan, Syria, Libya and Yemen. What do they have to do to be called fascists? Showing bad manners seems to be the only thing that sets off expressions of outrage among Americans.
There is already fascism in the White House, the Justice Department, the State Department and Congress. The only question is who will be the next person to keep that sick machinery running.
JackRiddler » Sun Jul 24, 2016 5:44 pm wrote:The primary driver of the antifa movements as I have known them is defense against real, organized if mostly lumpen nationalist forces in many countries who call themselves fascist, pay homage to classical fascist ideology, and (most saliently) practice violence against their otherized scapegoats, generally targeting black or immigrant people at random or specific leftists/activists (and thus also antifa). [Interestingly they're no longer uniformly anti-gay since gay rights are now an indicator of Western/Christian superiority to the Islamic animals, etc.]
[The existence of such dangerous and avowedly fascist hardcore militants and organizations] should not be a handicap to discussing the word as a less or more appropriate descriptor for historical phenomena, institutional inclinations, playbooks, logics that lead in certain directions -- or as a type of government system in some countries that governments of liberal democracies have frequently supported within their geostrategies [throughout the postwar period!].
But terms are flexible and often poorly applied, so you get confused debates like in [both fascism threads]. Fascism for example has been opportunistically taken up by right-wing pundits to hurl at anything they don't like (PC fascism, feminazis, etc.).
I dislike the definitive statement [that "the United States is not fascist," not because it is untrue, but because it essentializes] both "United States" and "Fascist." The US is not remotely capital-F fascist but it sure has a lot of fascism in it. The definitive statement implies that it would be somehow wrong to point out the latter. I prefer the much smarter thread that started a year earlier that simply asks what fascism IS. [i.e., this one.]
As an example, you could also argue for the thesis (and some do, seriously) that the United States is not capitalist, since there are so many varieties thereof and no pure form has ever (or could have ever) existed. [Or see how libertarians talk about the U.S. economy or Obama as "socialist."]
Terms are never going to fit perfectly to perceptions or realities, so the discussion is important.
The primary driver of the antifa movements as I have known them is defense against real, organized if mostly lumpen nationalist forces in many countries who call themselves fascist, pay homage to classical fascist ideology, and (most saliently) practice violence against their otherized scapegoats, generally targeting black or immigrant people at random or specific leftists/activists (and thus also antifa). [Interestingly they're no longer uniformly anti-gay since gay rights are now an indicator of Western/Christian superiority to the Islamic animals, etc.]
I dislike the definitive statement [that "the United States is not fascist," not because it is untrue, but because it essentializes] both "United States" and "Fascist." The US is not remotely capital-F fascist but it sure has a lot of fascism in it. The definitive statement implies that it would be somehow wrong to point out the latter. I prefer the much smarter thread that started a year earlier that simply asks what fascism IS. [i.e., this one.]
As an example, you could also argue for the thesis (and some do, seriously) that the United States is not capitalist, since there are so many varieties thereof and no pure form has ever (or could have ever) existed. [Or see how libertarians talk about the U.S. economy or Obama as "socialist."]
American Dream » Tue Aug 16, 2016 3:45 pm wrote:We're still left with the problematic use of the term "fascist" in popular culture. Granted there's always going to be a gray zone but I think the usage is far too sloppy. A fascist is not necessarily: anyone who espouses an authoritarian policy someone else doesn't like, a racist, an imperialist, a violent bigot, a xenophobe, a right winger, etc. etc. They could be, but need not qualify just because the user of the term does not like them..
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests