[lit-ideas] What is Fascism
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Lit-Ideas " <Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:38:46 -0800
What is Fascism? In an Amazon.com review of Michael Mann's Fascists, Chuck
Crane wrote, "If asked to define Fascism, I could say 'It is a vague epithet
used by people who have no bloody clue what they are talking about, and who
could not give a coherent definition of it if they tried.' And this would
cover nearly all uses of the term in the mainstream media and the internet."
In this note I shall not achieve an utterly "coherent definition," but I
hope to move past the "fascism as epithet" mode. I suppose fascism will
continue to have value as an epithet - epithets not needing coherent
definitions as long as they do their prime job of conveying hostility and
abhorrence against their target.
In a review of five books on fascism,
http://www.ics.ul.pt/corpocientifico/antoniocostapinto/pdf/ceh-acpinto.pdf,
Antonio Costa Pinto after admitting that there is no good short definition,
writes, "the five key terms, some with internal tensions, are nationalism,
statism, transcendence, cleansing and paramilitarism." He then goes on to
pick out passages from Mann's book that develop these terms a bit:
1. nationalism: the 'deep and populist commitment to an "organic" or
"integral" nation';
2. statism: this is concerned with goals and organisational form. The
organic conception imposes an authoritarian state 'embodying a singular,
cohesive will [as] expressed by a party elite adhering to the 'leadership
principle' (p. 14). Mann is well aware of the tensions between 'movement'
and 'bureaucracy' and confirms that 'fascism was more totalitarian in its
transformational goals than in its actual regime form' (p. 13);
3. transcendence: this is the typical neither/nor of fascism as a 'third
way'. Mann stresses that the 'core constituency' of fascist support can be
understood only by taking their 'aspirations to transcendence' seriously.
'Nation and State comprised their centre of gravity, not class' (p. 15);
4. cleansing: 'Most fascisms entwined both ethnic and political cleansing,
though to differ[ring] degrees' (p. 16);4
5. paramilitarism: both a key fascist value and an organisational form. Just
as many analysts have done before him, Mann stresses that 'what essentially
distinguishes fascists from many military and monarchical dictatorships of
the world is [the] "bottom-up" and violent quality of its paramilitarism. It
could bring popularity, both electorally and among elites' (p. 16).
Further down in his review, Pinto lists a definition by Paxton: "Fascism may
be defined as a form of political behaviour marked by obsessive
preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by
compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity; in which a mass based party
of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective
collaboration with traditional elite groups, abandons democratic liberties
and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints
goals of internal cleansing and external expansion."
Pinto doesn't precisely accept either Mann's or Paxton's "definitions" in
total. Of Paxton he writes that "his attempt to obtain a balance between
various stages in the definition is very difficult to achieve, since it is
not part of a rigorous 'anchor', thereby underlying the need to use
different conceptual tools for each stage. 'Fascism in action looks much
more like a network of relationships than a fixed essence'.
In an earlier Mann's book, The Nature of Fascism, Pinto quotes him as
writing "without power organisations, ideas cannot actually do anything',
meaning that we must therefore add to its values, 'programs, actions and
organisations'.
Comment (a) Islamism or Islamic Fundamentalism as Fascism:
The term "fascism" has been applied to Islamism but does it fit the
"definitions" above? It doesn't fit the first part precisely. If we look
at Mann's definition it isn't (1) nationalistic or (2) statist in the sense
that Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were. Islamism must be forced to fit by
referring to the "ummah" as being the equivalent of the nation and the
state. But if one does put the Ummah in the place of the State then the
Fundamentalists, the Islamists, do view it in an excessive manner
comparable to the to the way the Nazi's viewed Germany.
There is certainly an element of (3) transcendence in Islamism. They
believe that Allah intends them to be victorious over all infidels.
Transcendence can be seen in the motivation of the suicide bombers, for
example.
There is also an element of (4) cleansing in Islamism. Considerable
attention has been directed toward the cleansing of Islamic leadership that
doesn't fit their Fundamentalist standards.
There is definitely an element of (5) paramilitarism in Islamism. Al
Quaeda and Hezbollah are the most prominent examples today but there are
great numbers of these paramilitary groups in existence.
Comment (b) American Right as Fascism:
(1) Nationalism is at low ebb in America. The most militant element, Mead's
"Jacksonians," are not as enthusiastic about their nation as they once were.
They seem willing to return to their isolationism: leave us alone and will
leave you alone. If we compare present day nationalism to earlier periods,
it doesn't measure up.
(2) Statism as defined by Mann doesn't fit America. The Neocon desire to
spread the American form of Liberal Democracy doesn't fit because it lacks
Mann's authoritarianism. They did not go beyond the bounds of the American
Liberal Democracy in their desire to promote American Liberal Democracy.
There is little (3) transcendence in the Conservative political position.
The majority of Americans are Christian, but Separation of Church and State
remains secure. In fact the ACLU and the Courts continue to
enthusiastically attempt to erase any element of Christianity that in even
the vaguest way relates to the state.
There is no (4) cleansing of a Fascist nature being advocated by the Right.
Although they might wish to cleans America of the Left they have no wish to
go beyond the means provided them in the Constitution for doing this - which
hardly fits the definition of Fascist cleansing.
There are no (5) paramilitary forces of any significance on the American
Right. Small groups of the disgruntled exist in areas of Texas and Idaho
and call themselves militias, but they seem not to be engaged in any overt
activities. And perhaps the ATF and FBI have given up leaning on them for
firearms infractions after the debacles at Waco and Ruby Ridge.
Lawrence
Other related posts:
