I feel like it's a very ill-defined term in the imperial core, but also there seems to be no coherent agreement on the left. Many thinkers have different definitions that often overlap.

Lenin called fascism "capitalism in decay"

Fanon called it "colonialism at home"

Umberto Eco offers his own incoherent mess of a definition

Roger Griffin defines it as a "palingenetic ultranationalism" that imagine a mythical "rebirth" of some previous glory (Rome, the volk, MAGA), and in doing so seek the "dominance of the insiders of the ultra-nation over those outside of it."

Parenti states that fascism "offers a beguiling mix of revolutionary-sounding mass appeals and reactionary class politics", adding that if fascism means anything "it means all-out government support for business and severe repression of anti-business, pro- labour forces."

Andreas Malm adapts Griffin's definition in White Skin, Black Fuel to a "palindefenIve, palingenetic ultranationalism", etc, adding that in addition to the sense of rebirth to some mythical glory time, there is also a mythical defense of the ultra-nation from those who are defined as foreign, be they Muslims, central American refugees, judeo-bolsheviks, etc.

I find the most functionally useful definition of fascism is Parenti's: the violent oppression of the left to maintain the dominance of the ownership class. However I feel like it lacks the element of violent chauvinism against arbitrarily defined others in society. That is to say I suppose I also lack a coherent definition.

What say you comrades?

  • Dimmer06 [he/him,comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Fascism is petty bourgeois politics taken to their logical conclusion. The petty bourgeoisie are bourgeoisie so they can't strike at the base of their decaying system (private property). Instead they attempt to regulate all other aspects of life (nation, gender, sexuality, even the market economy) which capitalism necessarily liberalizes to open up markets in to combat the fall of the rate of profit. Because the petty bourgeoisie will never actually be revolutionary, they form reactionary alliances with the big bourgeoisie who happily use them to crush the left.

    Edit: I forgot to mention that the people who are criminalized by fascism tend to be imprisoned and enslaved to serve the big bourgeoisie.