Eh, Ur-Fascism works fine for what it wants to work at, providing a rundown of fascist semiotics. Does it outline the historical and material roots of fascism? No, but that's already been covered by various Marxists and Marxism-influenced scholars, especially Dimitroff with his core idea that fascism is capitalism in decay, "the terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinist, most imperialist elements of financial capital." A capitalist system aching so much under its internal contradictions that it turns the mechanisms of imperialist oppression developed in the periphery inward, against the populace of the imperial core itself. That's a good explanation, it is my explanation as well, but it is also fully compatible with Eco's Ur-Fascism, because Dimitroff and Eco analyze two completely different layers of the issue, Dimitroff how fascism originates and Eco with which signifiers it operates in the emotional manipulation of the masses that is so crucial for the actively anti-rational, anti-empiricist, purely mythologizing fever dream that is fascism. Adorno and Horkheimer with their studies of the authoritarian character are also useful to grasp this propagandistic and psychosocial dimension of fascism. We need to understand how our enemies think. We also need to understand which material conditions have brought them there, that is fundamental, but we have to grasp both this "why" and that "how".
The problem with libs trying to wrap their treat-filled heads around fascism isn't that they always cite Eco, there's nothing wrong with that, the problem is that libs, being wide-eyed, bumbling idealists, would never even begin to imagine that a pure critique of semiotics is not enough to understand a subject, that like all of their beloved theories it misses its material foundation and is therefore standing upside down, with no contact to anything outside of the dazzling and blinding world of big brain ideas they would so love to inhabit.
brilliant comment overall.
i'd like to bring to discussion, though, the fact that many 20th century theorists have associated fascism to industrial and financial capital, but to me it seems that 21st century fascism is more tightly linked with landowners and agribusiness. if you check voting patterns in Brazil, the US and Italy it seems to corroborate that - at face value it looks like a fight between god hating cosmopolitan globohomos and common folk.
Industrial capital is backing 21st century fascist movements as well, fossil fuel industry is bankrolling a ton of fashy agitprop. ofc these sectors do not have to be behind capital completely - a lot of bankers in 1920s Germany backed the NSDAP, Jewish bankers obviously didn't. What's relevant here is that fascism also means that crisis exacerbates capitalist competition to the point were members of the bourgeois class eventually just have their fascist allies kill other members of the bourgeois class for their assets.
We need to understand how our enemies think. We also need to understand which material conditions have brought them there, that is fundamental, but we have to grasp both this “why” and that “how”.
Eh, Ur-Fascism works fine for what it wants to work at, providing a rundown of fascist semiotics. Does it outline the historical and material roots of fascism? No, but that's already been covered by various Marxists and Marxism-influenced scholars, especially Dimitroff with his core idea that fascism is capitalism in decay, "the terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinist, most imperialist elements of financial capital." A capitalist system aching so much under its internal contradictions that it turns the mechanisms of imperialist oppression developed in the periphery inward, against the populace of the imperial core itself. That's a good explanation, it is my explanation as well, but it is also fully compatible with Eco's Ur-Fascism, because Dimitroff and Eco analyze two completely different layers of the issue, Dimitroff how fascism originates and Eco with which signifiers it operates in the emotional manipulation of the masses that is so crucial for the actively anti-rational, anti-empiricist, purely mythologizing fever dream that is fascism. Adorno and Horkheimer with their studies of the authoritarian character are also useful to grasp this propagandistic and psychosocial dimension of fascism. We need to understand how our enemies think. We also need to understand which material conditions have brought them there, that is fundamental, but we have to grasp both this "why" and that "how".
The problem with libs trying to wrap their treat-filled heads around fascism isn't that they always cite Eco, there's nothing wrong with that, the problem is that libs, being wide-eyed, bumbling idealists, would never even begin to imagine that a pure critique of semiotics is not enough to understand a subject, that like all of their beloved theories it misses its material foundation and is therefore standing upside down, with no contact to anything outside of the dazzling and blinding world of big brain ideas they would so love to inhabit.
well said
:rosa-salute:
deleted by creator
brilliant comment overall.
i'd like to bring to discussion, though, the fact that many 20th century theorists have associated fascism to industrial and financial capital, but to me it seems that 21st century fascism is more tightly linked with landowners and agribusiness. if you check voting patterns in Brazil, the US and Italy it seems to corroborate that - at face value it looks like a fight between god hating cosmopolitan globohomos and common folk.
Industrial capital is backing 21st century fascist movements as well, fossil fuel industry is bankrolling a ton of fashy agitprop. ofc these sectors do not have to be behind capital completely - a lot of bankers in 1920s Germany backed the NSDAP, Jewish bankers obviously didn't. What's relevant here is that fascism also means that crisis exacerbates capitalist competition to the point were members of the bourgeois class eventually just have their fascist allies kill other members of the bourgeois class for their assets.
This is beautifully put, thank you.