Who are the Fascists?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jlw
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jlw

Guest
[Juan Non-Volokh, The Volokh Conspiracy - -”]June 21, 2005 at 1:53pm] 0 Trackbacks / Possibly More Trackbacks

**Who Are the Fascists? **
In a post last September suggesting the Bush Administration has fascist tendencies, Brian Leiter wrote the following:

Much may turn on what is meant, of course, by “fascism,” which is why I started by alluding to the erosion of freedom and democratic values. . . . one might well think that “some provisions of Bush’s PATRIOT Act, his detention of American citizens without charges, his willingness to let corporations write legislation, and the so-called ‘Free Speech Zones’ around his public appearances are all steps on the road to American fascism.” . . .

. . . as the Italian philosopher, and Mussolini contemporary, Giovanni Gentile put it, in a definition Mussolini subsequently claimed credit for: “Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.” And herewith a modern American Heritage Dictionary definition of “fascism”: “A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.” There is nothing unreasonable, plainly, in worrying that the Bush Administration and its policies represent the coming of fascism in the above sense to the American landscape (mainstream economists, like Paul Krugman and Brad DeLong, have documented the merger of state and corporate power during the Bush years at length)–but it is perhaps more fascism of the Italian, not Nazi, variety, since it has no racial component.

VC reader Steven Hamori thinks that Leiter (like many contemporary commentators and perhaps the editors of the American Heritage Dictionary as well) is confused about the definition of fascism, and misinterprets the oft-repeated Mussolini/Gentile quote that “Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.” Hamori writes
[The quote] has circulated in the left wing blogshere for as long as I can recall… I believe it to be a real one too although some credit it to Giovanni Gentile (Mussolini allegedly took credit for it while not originally uttering it).

[According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Gentile"]Wikipedia:]"Gentile, described both by himself and Mussolini as ‘the philosopher of Fascism’, was the ghostwriter of ‘A Doctrine of Fascism’ which, signed by Benito Mussolini, described Fascism in the Italian Encyclopedia (which was edited by Gentile).”

The problem is that a ‘corporate’ in Italian of the period is not a business organization. A corporate is a production planning board made up of workers, owners, and others involved in production advocated by the syndicalist school of socialism. Their beloved quote is actually Mussolini (or maybe Gentile) making a connection between fascism and socialism . . .

[Again, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism"]Wikipedia]"Historically, corporatism or corporative (Italian corporativismo) is a political system in which legislative power is given to corporations that represent economic, industrial and professional groups.” “Under Fascism in Italy, business owners, employees, trades-people, professionals, and other economic classes were organized into 22 guilds, or associations, known as “corporations” according to their industries, and these groups were given representation in a legislative body known as the Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni.”

Hamori concludes:
I doubt Leiter knows anything about the history of fascism. Intellectually, the progressive left has a lot more in common with it than the ‘libertarian right’ (the real liberals). . . . If anyone advocates a merging of ‘business corporate’ and state it is the regulation happy / anti competition left. The average ‘right winger’ says let an uncompetitive business fail.For more on the socialist roots of Mussolini’s fascism, see here.

Related Posts (on one page):


  1. *]Who Are the Fascists?
    *]Nazi Germany = McCarthy Era = America Today?
 
It is the common popular perception of what Fascists are that is more influential than what the perception of scholars or political scientists is.

Some people on this Board have tried to argue that the Nazis were more leftist than rightist. But, what is the common perception? That Nazis are liberals or left-wingers? Hardly. The common popular perception is that they are right-wing nasties and thugs, and that perception isn’t going to go away.
 
40.png
Richardols:
It is the common popular perception of what Fascists are that is more influential than what the perception of scholars or political scientists is.
The common popular perception is that they are right-wing nasties and thugs, and that perception isn’t going to go away.
As long as the scholars and political scientists at our public universities are generally leftists, you’re right. :whistle:

Shhhh. Don’t let any of your liberal friends read post #1, it might ruin their knee-jerk response to any conservative viewpoints that have been fostered by years and years of leftist talking-points during their public schooling. 😉
 
We can make comparisons of any government to Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc. Just like we can “prove” anything taking quotes out of context.

The Nazis are known, not for a strong economy or for returning pride in their country, but are known for brutal repression, expansionism and genocide.

It is not fair for anyone to portray others as Nazis unless they match the Nazis in their brutality.

I could compare the Democrats to Lenin since they both want to take away from the rich to give to the poor.
 
40.png
mlchance:
Liberal? Certainly not. Leftist? Certainly.
And when Communist mobs were battling Nazi mobs in the streets of German cities, everyone else though that it was an intra-party argument?

The common perception, nevertheless, is that Nazis were right-wingers. I can’t see that popular opinion will change on that.
 
40.png
Richardols:
The common perception, nevertheless, is that Nazis were right-wingers. I can’t see that popular opinion will change on that.
Yeah, and popular opinion means everything. :rolleyes:
 
40.png
Richardols:
And when Communist mobs were battling Nazi mobs in the streets of German cities, everyone else though that it was an intra-party argument?
Actually, in a way, yes. Both were socialists. Both were about governmental control over the lives of their people.

Governmental control can hardly be attributed to the right side of the aisle these days, at least, very much less so than today’s Left, whose home is in the Democrat party.
 
40.png
Richardols:
And when Communist mobs were battling Nazi mobs in the streets of German cities, everyone else though that it was an intra-party argument?
Obviously not. It was an argument between to two forms of socialism. On one side were pro-agrarian, anti-industrialist internationalists. On the other side were less-concerned-about-agrarian-issues, pro-industrialist nationalists. On both sides were socialist tyrants.
40.png
Richardols:
The common perception, nevertheless, is that Nazis were right-wingers. I can’t see that popular opinion will change on that.
Well, for good or ill, popular opinion doesn’t define reality. Living in a world where too many people base their decisions on the latest fads or opinion polls, I can see from where the confusion arises.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
Both the Communists and the Nazi facists (the Italian fascists are kind of a different story) had in common a fundamentally flawed worldview that man can be pounded into any shape (man is completely malleable that is) they wanted. While there are certainly some folk on the right that hold this view, the true inheritors and champions of this worldview are the secular humanists who are typically (though not exclusively) leftist.

Scott
 
Scott Waddell:
Both the Communists and the Nazi facists (the Italian fascists are kind of a different story) had in common a fundamentally flawed worldview that man can be pounded into any shape (man is completely malleable that is) they wanted. While there are certainly some folk on the right that hold this view, the true inheritors and champions of this worldview are the secular humanists who are typically (though not exclusively) leftist.

Scott
Well said. :tiphat:
 
I want to add that what gives it away is the dehumanizing reductionist arguments. Marxism was an attempt to reduce man to economic motives. Nazis reduced man to genetic/racial makeup.

Why both of these can be lumped together and associated with the left is when we take a look at other reductionist arguments. The sexual revolution proponents, inarguably leftists, attempt to reduce man to irresistable sexual motives. Notice that the homosexual movement has latched on tooth-and-nail to the genetic explanation. What they are really doing is abolishing Man by abolishing reason.

I can’t think of anything similar on the right except perhaps anti-freewill fundamentalist Christians.

Scott
 
Scott Waddell:
I want to add that what gives it away is the dehumanizing reductionist arguments. Marxism was an attempt to reduce man to economic motives. Nazis reduced man to genetic/racial makeup.

Why both of these can be lumped together and associated with the left is when we take a look at other reductionist arguments. The sexual revolution proponents, inarguably leftists, attempt to reduce man to irresistable sexual motives. Notice that the homosexual movement has latched on tooth-and-nail to the genetic explanation. What they are really doing is abolishing Man by abolishing reason.

I can’t think of anything similar on the right except perhaps anti-freewill fundamentalist Christians.

Scott
Good Lord, Scott, another great articulate post.
 
Nazism and Communism represent two extremes of progressivism at odds since the French Revolution. On Earth, Fraternity, Equality and Liberty are oil and water.

The Nazis pursued a Liberty interpreted as Will to power. The Nazis recognized that “freedom” would lead to conflict. They used a Darwinistic, scientism to justify their status and use of power.

Communist pursued Equality. Equality justified the actions of the state.

Both considered their movements progressive and they were. They were both movements away from the traditional Judeo-Christian concepts of man and GOD.

Both movements were embraced by progressives in this country. Eugenics was touted by Holmes, Wilson, Sanger, T. Roosevelt, Communism by others.
 
Communism, Fascism, and Nazism are, politically, all variants of Leftist worship of the State. Their struggles with each other aren’t because of ideological disagreements, but because of power (IMHO).

While democrats and liberals, might be in close agreement with Communism, Fascism, and Nazism, socially they don’t deserve the comparisons. The democrats and liberals aren’t mass murderers. Then again, neither are the republicans and conservatives, who are frequently compared to Nazis and Fascists.

In this short “course”, Flunking Fascism 101, it outlines some of the pilars of fascism in the Manifesto of the Fascist Struggle, written by the father of Fascism himself, Mussolini (so no, this isn’t right or left wing propoganda–it is the actual beliefs of fascism presented by its founder). The italicized words are Mussolini’s.
*For the political problem: We demand: *

*a) Universal suffrage polled on a regional basis, with proportional representation and voting and electoral office eligibility for women. *

*b) A minimum age for the voting electorate of 18 years; that for the office holders at 25 years. *

*c) The abolition of the Senate. *

*d) The convocation of a National Assembly for a three-years duration, for which its primary responsibility will be to form a constitution of the State. *

*e) The formation of a National Council of experts for labor, for industy, for transportation, for the public health, for communications, etc. Selections to be made from the collective professionals or of tradesmen with legislative powers, and elected directly to a General Commission with ministerial powers. *

*For the social problems: We demand: *

*a) The quick enactment of a law of the State that sanctions an eight-hour workday for all workers. *

*b) A minimum wage. *

*c) The participation of workers’ representatives in the functions of industry commissions. *

*d) To show the same confidence in the labor unions (that prove to be technically and morally worthy) as is given to industry executives or public servants. *

*e) The rapid and complete systemization of the railways and of all the transport industries. *

*f) A necessary modification of the insurance laws to invalidate the minimum retirement age; we propose to lower it from 65 to 55 years of age. *

*For the military problem: We demand: *

*a) The institution of a national militia with a short period of service for training and exclusively defensive responsibilities. *

*b) The nationalization of all the arms and explosives factories. *

*c) A national policy intended to peacefully further the Italian national culture in the world. *

*For the financial problem: We demand: *

*a) A strong progressive tax on capital that will truly expropriate a portion of all wealth. *

*b) The seizure of all the possessions of the religious congregations and the abolition of all the bishoprics, which constitute an enormous liability on the Nation and on the privileges of the poor. *

c) The revision of all military contracts and the seizure of 85 percent of the profits therein.

As with National Socialism and Communism, it is easy to see that far from being a right-wing ideology, fascism is simply another variant of leftist worship of the State.

In 1925, Mussolini encapsulated the heart of fascist philosophy in a memorable phrase:

Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato. This means “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.”
 
Manifesto of the Fascist Struggle said:
*b) The seizure of all the possessions of the religious congregations and the abolition of all the bishoprics, which constitute an enormous liability on the Nation and on the privileges of the poor. *

It is ironic to tar a member of the Religious Right with the fascist brush, as one seldom hears James Dobson calling for the government seizure of all church-owned property.
 
40.png
jlw:
Yeah, and popular opinion means everything. :rolleyes:
Not so much popular opinion, but popular perception. And, the popular perception for decades has been that the Communists are the ultimate leftists and the Nazis the ultimate rightists. That perception won’t change.
 
40.png
mlchance:
Well, for good or ill, popular opinion doesn’t define reality.
No, it does not, but popular perception, rather than opinion, can be more governing than any reality.
Living in a world where too many people base their decisions on the latest fads or opinion polls, I can see from where the confusion arises.
I don’t think that the perception of the Fascists/Nazis as the ultimate right-wingers is a fad or was based on opinion polls. This has been believed since the 1920s.
 
40.png
Richardols:
I don’t think that the perception of the Fascists/Nazis as the ultimate right-wingers is a fad or was based on opinion polls. This has been believed since the 1920s.
It came into vogue in the 60s, largely due to the efforts of socialist/communist apologists.

That point aside, the fact remains that fascism and Nazism are both forms of socialism and, thus, are leftist ideologies.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
40.png
Richardols:
Not so much popular opinion, but popular perception. And, the popular perception for decades has been that the Communists are the ultimate leftists and the Nazis the ultimate rightists. That perception won’t change.
You are right, as long as the scholars and political scientists at our public universities are generally leftists, fully invested in that perception, you’re right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top