I think her reasoning is not very strong but as to whether trump or these populist right wingers are "fascists" I'm on samuel moyn's side that they're an entirely new modern terrible thing and that the more rigorous you want to be when comparing them to real historical interwar fascism the less accurate the description becomes.
The mass politics aren't there, neither for them nor for us, neither is the civil militarization, not nearly at the level where it'd actually be relevant. So you're just kinda left with, "they're racist and want to reverse rights", yeah that's called being a conservative and a reactionary, but it's not fascism. And that goes both for trump (who's brand of populism is more like classic american white nativism than a fancy european ideology) and for the surging far-right in europe. The strongest claim one can make is that they're "like" fascists, or they're "neo-fascists" or something, but a 1 to 1 comparison I think loses power the more these parties turn out to not do the most significant things that fascists do, because they can't, you can't conjure up a mass social movement out of the current moment.
The 2 exceptions I make are India, since the BJP's oficial militarized gangs resemble fascist militias way more than anything in europe and north america (but that might just be my ignorance about the country).
And Israel. And I think it says a lot how much money academics, journalists, pundits, "human rights advocates" and center-left activists have made by painting the contemporary right or far-right as fascist, but are COMPLETELY SILENT about the categorization when faced with a real contemporary example.
As to whether it's good that we call all these people fascists now as a political move, if you're one of those "you gotta understand something to fight it" guys then you probably oppose it on that principle but I think after a few years of this political climate you can see how there's good and bad things about it as a strategy.
The good is that it's basically "red-tagging" (when you call every lib a communist) but for conservatives, by labeling people much to the right of where they actually are based on 1 or 2 positions, in theory that brings the overton window and the range of acceptable politics left, and that remains while the accusation has credibility, which is until the political center starts taking positions from the far right (on say migration), because the centrists CAN'T be the fascists.
The bad is that it creates an emergency situation, which might drive some people towards real (not online) leftist militancy (that's what happened to me) but it probably drives far more people into the center, because if "the fascists are coming" and you have hitler on your mind, then you're not gonna bother with radical politics, you should be afraid, and if you're afraid you're gonna want to give power only to people who uphold "democratic" institutions like parliaments, laws and norms, and not all radicals want to uphold those norms for good reason. And we've seen what that entails, it's getting in line "anti-fascitly" behind Biden-Harris, Macron (which is what the NFP still did with their alliance) or Costa (Portugal).
I had the thought just the other day that the US might be best described as "post-fascist", seeing as how elimination of any real left is an already completed project, suppression of marginalized groups and workers is fully institutionalized, and then there's of course the historical slavery and genocide that most people now just shrugs at if they're even mentioned all.
seeing as how elimination of any real left is an already completed project, suppression of marginalized groups and workers is fully institutionalized
Yeah that's a big factor too that I forgot to mention, I remember when Biden just straight up called off that big railworkers (I think) strike, or how Macron can push his retirement age reform even through mass contestation. We talk about fascists ultimately serving capitalism to fight violently fight the worker militancy in germany and italy (I read an interview once where an old german guy said that if you moved into their city, and you didn't immediatly join a party or a labour union, you would get beaten up and harassed, because it was assumed that you were there to be a scab, that's the level of militancy there was), but you don't need that kind of violence to defeat the current level of militancy, you just sign the act to make the strike illegal and workers understand that if they keep going you'll send in the national guard, or, like Macron, you wait them out.
In a way, it's like you don't NEED fascism when centrists can accomplish some of the same goals.
I tend to frequently at the moment call every lib/conservative a fascist these days on Hexbear, but honestly you're probably more spot on with this.
The question is if it matters. To me, what you describe is just fascism in the 21st century. Whereas Israel and BJP are more traditional 20th century style fascism. It's a good discussion to have!
I tend to frequently at the moment call every lib/conservative a fascist
Yeah so do I, I called the german green party Nazis the other day, sometimes you just wanna let out how much you hate these people.
To me, what you describe is just fascism in the 21st century. Whereas Israel and BJP are more traditional 20th century style fascism.
Yeah that's what makes the most sense to me too, to say that these people ARE fascist but they're, just, fascists with the material conditions that we have now, which make them not actually resemble or be able to do what old-school fascism actually was.
I think her reasoning is not very strong but as to whether trump or these populist right wingers are "fascists" I'm on samuel moyn's side that they're an entirely new modern terrible thing and that the more rigorous you want to be when comparing them to real historical interwar fascism the less accurate the description becomes.
The mass politics aren't there, neither for them nor for us, neither is the civil militarization, not nearly at the level where it'd actually be relevant. So you're just kinda left with, "they're racist and want to reverse rights", yeah that's called being a conservative and a reactionary, but it's not fascism. And that goes both for trump (who's brand of populism is more like classic american white nativism than a fancy european ideology) and for the surging far-right in europe. The strongest claim one can make is that they're "like" fascists, or they're "neo-fascists" or something, but a 1 to 1 comparison I think loses power the more these parties turn out to not do the most significant things that fascists do, because they can't, you can't conjure up a mass social movement out of the current moment.
The 2 exceptions I make are India, since the BJP's oficial militarized gangs resemble fascist militias way more than anything in europe and north america (but that might just be my ignorance about the country).
And Israel. And I think it says a lot how much money academics, journalists, pundits, "human rights advocates" and center-left activists have made by painting the contemporary right or far-right as fascist, but are COMPLETELY SILENT about the categorization when faced with a real contemporary example.
As to whether it's good that we call all these people fascists now as a political move, if you're one of those "you gotta understand something to fight it" guys then you probably oppose it on that principle but I think after a few years of this political climate you can see how there's good and bad things about it as a strategy.
The good is that it's basically "red-tagging" (when you call every lib a communist) but for conservatives, by labeling people much to the right of where they actually are based on 1 or 2 positions, in theory that brings the overton window and the range of acceptable politics left, and that remains while the accusation has credibility, which is until the political center starts taking positions from the far right (on say migration), because the centrists CAN'T be the fascists.
The bad is that it creates an emergency situation, which might drive some people towards real (not online) leftist militancy (that's what happened to me) but it probably drives far more people into the center, because if "the fascists are coming" and you have hitler on your mind, then you're not gonna bother with radical politics, you should be afraid, and if you're afraid you're gonna want to give power only to people who uphold "democratic" institutions like parliaments, laws and norms, and not all radicals want to uphold those norms for good reason. And we've seen what that entails, it's getting in line "anti-fascitly" behind Biden-Harris, Macron (which is what the NFP still did with their alliance) or Costa (Portugal).
I had the thought just the other day that the US might be best described as "post-fascist", seeing as how elimination of any real left is an already completed project, suppression of marginalized groups and workers is fully institutionalized, and then there's of course the historical slavery and genocide that most people now just shrugs at if they're even mentioned all.
I am admittedly an idiot though, so yeah.
Yeah that's a big factor too that I forgot to mention, I remember when Biden just straight up called off that big railworkers (I think) strike, or how Macron can push his retirement age reform even through mass contestation. We talk about fascists ultimately serving capitalism to fight violently fight the worker militancy in germany and italy (I read an interview once where an old german guy said that if you moved into their city, and you didn't immediatly join a party or a labour union, you would get beaten up and harassed, because it was assumed that you were there to be a scab, that's the level of militancy there was), but you don't need that kind of violence to defeat the current level of militancy, you just sign the act to make the strike illegal and workers understand that if they keep going you'll send in the national guard, or, like Macron, you wait them out.
In a way, it's like you don't NEED fascism when centrists can accomplish some of the same goals.
That part about you being an idiot is the only part you're wrong about 🤗
Oh you
Alt-fascism. Neo-fascism. Crypto-fascism. I think at some level it's a distinction without a difference.
I tend to frequently at the moment call every lib/conservative a fascist these days on Hexbear, but honestly you're probably more spot on with this.
The question is if it matters. To me, what you describe is just fascism in the 21st century. Whereas Israel and BJP are more traditional 20th century style fascism. It's a good discussion to have!
Yeah so do I, I called the german green party Nazis the other day, sometimes you just wanna let out how much you hate these people.
Yeah that's what makes the most sense to me too, to say that these people ARE fascist but they're, just, fascists with the material conditions that we have now, which make them not actually resemble or be able to do what old-school fascism actually was.
Dang this is one of the best comments I’ve seen on this site