From a lemmygrad post on fascism
The western left’s use of the term fascism, is borderline white-supremacist at this point. Fascism was a form of colonialism that died by the 1940s, and is only allowed to be demonized in public discourse, because it was a form of colonialism directed also against white europeans. It was defeated, and Germany / Italy / Japan reverted to the more stable form of government for colonialism (practiced by the US, UK, France, the Netherlands, Australia, etc): bourgeois parliamentarism.
British, european, and now US colonizers were doing the exact same thing, and killing far more people for hundreds of years in the global south, yet you don’t hear ppl scared of their countries potentially "adopting parliamentary democracy”. They haven’t changed, and their wealth is still propped up by surplus value theft from the super-exploitation of hundreds of millions of low-paid global south proletarians.
This is why you have new leftists terrified that the UK or US or europe “might turn fascist!!”, betraying that the atrocities propagated by those empires against the global south was and is completely acceptable.
Make no mistake about it: parliamentary / bourgeois democracy is not only a more stable form of government, it’s also far more effective at carrying out colonialism, and killing millions of innocent people.
This is why you have new leftists terrified that the UK or US or europe “might turn fascist!!”, betraying that the atrocities propagated by those empires against the global south was and is completely acceptable.
While the criticism is on point, I think you’re underselling the legitimate dire fear modern leftists have when they see the brutality of the periphery returning home. We have to recognize that - individually - we’re incredibly weak in the face of a mobilized police state. And we have every reason to be horrified of The Jakarta Method being visited on LA or Atlanta or Houston, particularly if we’re members of that domestic political underclass so often targeted for abuse.
Any opposition must be a unified and organized resistance. But we are also plagued by mass surveillance, structural alienation, and a profound sense of vulnerability cultivated over decades of “War On” maximalist state propaganda. So we’re feeling weak, we don’t know who we can trust, and we see this horrifying inevitability cresting over our heads like a tsunami.
This isn’t a betrayal of comrades abroad but a reflection of our own dismal moral, disunity, and despair. It represents one more hurdle for a modern western left to overcome and should be received as such, rather than used as a bludgeon to degrade left-wing moral even further.
Far better to be awake and aware and justifiably afraid of the threat of fascism than blind to it as the unaligned, compromised by it as the liberals, or enthusiastically participatory as the conservatives.
I think you’re underselling the legitimate dire fear modern leftists have when they see the brutality of the periphery returning home.
Liberal democracies have historically been as brutal to their domestic populations as any historical fascist formulation. You can look at how the US treated (and still treats) it’s internal colonies / minorities. Nazi Germany explicitly wanted to carry out in eastern europe, what the US successfully carried out against native peoples, and failed.
Even outside of internal colonies, if you look at how the US or Britain treated its workers or its poor of their own races(they arguably entirely defeated its domestic working class movement, rebased their countries on finance capital, and exported class struggle to the global south), it doesn’t look any different than how the historical fascist countries also defeated their working class movements.
To me, the basis of this is western chauvinism, and belief that “liberal democracy” isn’t far worse. By pointing a finger at fascism, they get to keep their belief in the supremacy of their mode of government, that continues to wreak havoc on not just the globe, but internally also. It’s a subtle form of western-supremacist scapegoating (pointing a finger at a settler-colonialism that dared to attack western countries also)
I don’t disagree that liberal democracies are capable and have been brutal to their populations, but to say they are just as brutal as fascism is just disingenuous. Contrary to popular belief, the average American does not live day to day in fear that they are about to get fucked by the state for no reason at all, and that’s even acknowledging the measures the state goes to criminalize and punish the most desperate in us society. We don’t fear state repression and death for the wrong opinion, looking a certain way.
It’s even more absurd to conflate fascism with European western democracies with their myriad of safety nets. I think painting things in this light doesn’t make socialism more appealing, just makes fascism look more acceptable and less dangerous.
I agree with critiques on us imperialism and the need for socialism, I just think it’s strange to treat fascism with kids gloves
Contrary to popular belief, the average American does not live day to day in fear that they are about to get fucked by the state for no reason at all, and that’s even acknowledging the measures the state goes to criminalize and punish the most desperate in us society.
We don’t fear state repression and death for the wrong opinion, looking a certain way.
US cops kill ~1000 people every year, imprisons thousands of innocent people in its war on drugs and enslaves them in prison camps, keeps ~40k immigrants in prison camps (about 7k of them are children), and holds many political prisoners. The US even executed an innocent man just a few months ago.
Oh, and just like 2 years ago facebook handed over chat messages of a woman helping her daughter get an abortion to local cops. She’s in prison now.
And these are only recent things, the US is an entire country built upon the graves of indigenous peoples: something nazi germany aspired and failed to do in eastern europe.
You can find a lot more here
None of that is fascism. It’s just run of the mill liberalism.
Anyone downvoting this, should be able to explain why what the the US and European powers did to Africa, Asia, and the americas during the 1700-1900s, was any better or fundamentally different than what fascist formulations from 1920-1945 did. And those atrocities were all done using a far more stable form of government: bourgeois parliamentarism / liberal democracy.
People really need to read Losurdo’s - Liberalism, a counter-history. Liberals invented the slave trade, and the victorian holocausts. The only difference between them and the fascists, are that they’re far better at colonialism and genocide than the fascists were.
I still think the distinction matters, fascism is the empire turned inwards.
America exerting fascism on other populations is just textbook liberalism. The facade of democracy and relative peace at home is different than fascism. Fascism demands obedience of the local population and is a full merger of corporation and state. Laws don’t matter, only the head of states will matters.
They’re both bad, but I think it’s disingenuous to tell people who are about to live under fascism that the liberal government they just had was also fascism because they oppressed populations around the globe.
Basically the time for lectures was when we were living under fake “fascism” and the time for gun and survival training is now
Umm… millions of Afrasians lived under Fascism, something that began in the 1920s. With all due respect to the Italian lower classes, their suffering differed in significant ways from that of their Libyan and Somali counterparts.
While not exclusive to it, they are elements of fascism.
It’s funny that we have all these lists and essays and books on how fascist ideology and policy is a confluence of many such elements, yet people still act as tough “is this person/party/state fascist?” is a simple yes or no question with no gray area.
There’s a joke that if you ask 10 people to define fascism, you’ll get 10 different answers.
It’s an imprecise term whose definition changes with every author who makes a try of it. Even the more popular lists of traits like Eco’s or Paxton’s have a lot of issues and contradictions which ppl have pointed out.
Any posts that even mention fascism always devolve into ppl trying and failing to agree on its definition, the point of this deflective practice enabling ppl to uphold their own liberal democracies as being sacred and less genocidal.
USA 1941:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute
The German Nazis loved the whole salute to the flag thingy.
Also Henry Ford - The International Jew
Also American Eugenics SocietyDidn’t they quickly stop this after it became the Nazis favorite thing?
They only changed it in 1942, which is 9 years after Hitler rose to power and 3 years before his reign ended.
The U.S. Did Not Defeat Fascism in WWII, It Discretely Internationalized It
When the United States entered WWII, the future head of the CIA, Allen Dulles, bemoaned that his country was fighting the wrong enemy. The Nazis, as he explained, were pro-capitalist Aryan Christians, whereas the true enemy was godless communism and its resolute anti-capitalism. After all, the U.S. had, only some 20 years prior, been part of a massive military intervention in the U.S.S.R., when fourteen capitalist countries sought—in the words of Winston Churchill—to “strangle the Bolshevik baby in its crib.” Dulles understood, like many of his colleagues in the U.S. government, that what would later become known as the Cold War was actually the old war, as Michael Parenti has convincingly argued: the one they had been fighting against communism since its inception.
Never forget, the fruit of the tree of capitalism is fascism.
Capitalism unrestrained and left to do its thing, as it has, always leads to fascism. Fascism is the takeover of the state by the capitalists.
This is why fascism is blooming all over the western world. The global capitalist economy is simply in full bloom sitting on entirely captured nation states and fruiting.
The fruit being concentration camps, war, poverty, and scapegoating. Anything to blame literally anyone and everything else for all the inhuman malice the capitalists are doing to attempt to satiate their unquenchable greed.
If anyone still cares about maybe not ending the world for humanity, the capital markets must be destroyed, and speculative investment by passive robber barons not actively participating in laboring to produce products and services must be outlawed. But don’t worry, we’ll fade into the oblivion of greed made climate change out of cowardice. We’ll probably be grateful to die to that after the Fascists have had their fun.
Fascism is the takeover of the state by the capitalists.
What. Capitalism is already the takeover of the state by capitalists. The state apparatus is just the means by which the dominant class exerts its power.
It is inevitable that capitalists will conquer their state, but with constant vigilance, for a time, capitalism can and is used as an engine to serve society, so long as it is heavily regulated and hobbled. The Nordic nations for example.
It’s when the capitalists begin to be allowed to influence their government, and convince the people THEY can live larger than their neighbors if it weren’t for all the social equity evil government enforces, capitalism’s signature siren call.
The Nordic countries still have free to roam policies. Capitalism here capturing their own regulators and being allowed to warp public opinion with blatant self serving lies through for profit media pulpits make some Americans eager to shoot other Americans.
I’m not for capitalism at all because it eventually leads here, to fascism, and eventually someone in power will be dumb or corrupt enough to let their guard down. But we let our capitalists conquer our government, as have several western nations. And here we are.
Nope. The Nordic countries are still controlled by capitalists, they (akd most of western Europe as well) just have given the workers some welfare policies in order to appease them and stop any revolutionary ideas. It’s no coincidence that these policies were in place while the Eastern bloc was around and they began to dismantle the welfare state as soon as the USSR fell and they felt they could get away with it.
(Disclaimer: I’m not saying that the welfare state is evil, and that we’d be better with the shitty US way of doing things)
I feel like it’s unamerican in regards to the values our country espouses, even though it completely and utterly fails to uphold them.
“American values” are just a smokescreen, they aren’t failed, more they serve their purpose of obfuscation well.
Nah man, Americans have values. Freedom, perseverance, independence, self expression. It’s just that we have utterly failed to uphold those values in our actions. Even in the beginning, talking about slavery being terrible but still allowing it for political reasons right at the founding.
Those values only really served as a way for the ruling class that founded America to justify itself. They weren’t genuine.
I’m talking about the shared cultural values of the society we have today, views shared by most Americans. Most Americans like free speech. Most Americans like liberty. Et cetera and so on. These are things that are part of our culture. You aren’t any less of a person for recognizing that these are values that are held by this culture.
I am also saying that despite culturally sharing in these values, our society also fails to actually support them in very big ways.
And I am telling you that the cultural aspects came from a desire from the ruling class to support freedom for Capitalists to do what they want, and morally justify it. That’s why these values never seem to actually be supported, just gestured towards.
So you admit that those cultural aspects are actually there. Which are failed when they are used to support the ruling class.
Which was my point.
They succeed in their purpose, to obscure the systems that uphold the ruling class. These cultural values didn’t appear out of thin air, but deliberately to preserve the wealthy Capitalists that founded the country.
“Espouses but fails to uphold” sounds more like negligence to me. Negligence would be allowing fascism through inaction (like democrat administration). But the US does far worse than that (funding genocide and propping up fascism elsewhere)
Nah, I liked how I phrased it. We’ve been failing to uphold our ideals since the beginning, even Thomas Jefferson was a hypocrite who hated slavery but sure as hell did a lot of it.
Jefferson didn’t hate slavery, he even pledged support for France against Haiti’s slave rebellion.
You left off Hitler being impressed by Henry Ford.
Being very impressed by US segregation laws too.
The nazi’s eugenics programs were copy-pasted from California’s even, they were explicit about that.
