As always, absolutely didactic content. The ability you have to explain complex issues in a clear language for everybody to understand is unmatched. Thanks for the content Abbey!
Your synopsis of Fascism was excellent. And very much
appreciated. I immediately put it on 3 Political Boards on Pinterest ( 480 followers).
As a amateur historian , it has maddening me beyond no end- that so many Americans do not understand what Fascism is!.
NOT a clue - they often just use it as a slur. I had one fool on substack point out that Fascism was Socialist - because that word ' Socialist ' is part of the words to describe NAZI. I immediately blocked him.
Side note ; on Pinterest they do not censor articles that describe Fascism or have the word in a title, they will censor your comments ( no matter what) if the Words Fascist or Fascism is used.
There are so many interesting points in your comment, Lillian. Genuinely, thank you for sharing them. It's jnteresting to see that Pinterest censors text but not images, Tiktok is really pioneering censorship of image/video content. It's fascinating to watch, worrying to live.
In her conversion with Elon Musk this week, the Alternativ für Deutschland (AfD, a far right party here in Germany) cited the myth that Hitler was a leftist because of "national socialism" and his (totalitarian, obviously) economic policy. It's such a weak argument to make, whether you're talking economics or otherwise. My response would be to either cite the definition of fascism, or ask the person saying this whether they, then, consider themselves socialist seeing as they support similar policies to Hitler.
So is fascism then, a them and us ideology that attempts to invoke change along those lines (them being the losers and us being the winners) through violent means?
Violence is not necessarily a prerequisite like ultranationalism is, but it does seem inevitable given fascism's military roots and the nature of “nation states” as securitised objects.
Excellent reading. Unfortunately facism is extremely resilient. It shows up again and again. Brutal force is not the panacea. It must be something else to cancel this. Any ideas, suggestions ...
How does Lincoln’s famous speech then measure on the metric of fascism?
“that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
This is a really good question and one I think Roger Griffin deals with only indirectly in his opening chapters.
The difference here is in birthing a *new nation* as opposed to *re*birthing the nation based on some vague/selective historic image of what that nation *was*. The emphasis is on *re*birth rather than *new* birth. Political Action that seeks a *new* nation could be reform, revolution, etc. That does not fit the definition of *palingenetic* (rebirth) ultranationalism.
Thank-you for sharing these brief summaries with those of us who can't access the academic world, and for acknowledging the fact that having to work for a living is a barrier to learning and enhancing one's knowledge about the world. It's a barrier that isn't really acknowledged anywhere, much less addressed.
The necessity of paid work was one of the barriers that prevented me from finishing my undergrad. Nonetheless, I try to stay as informed as I can, and writing like yours helps.
I would love to further explore the idea that “Fascists are not the villains of their own story.” I think we have been taught history in such a way that this was never acknowledged — and that’s a problem.
The last video addressing political apathy as the soil for authoritarianism is spot on. I work as vocational teacher in Germany and mentionable parts of students’ utterances pipeline from political apathy towards chauvinist and xenophobic AfD-rhetoric. The worst part is their immunization against critique and discourse which Zizek and others have already fleshed out as one of fascism's core elements.
From Wikipedia, there used to be a table with characteristics:
Fascism:
1.- "Fascist negations" – anti-liberalism, anti-communism, and anti-conservatism. [anti-liberalism can include leftist regimes, like the pretense of Current Mexico´s one]
2.- "Fascist goals" – the creation of a nationalist dictatorship to regulate economic structure and to transform social relations within a modern, self-determined culture, and the expansion of the nation into an empire. [this does sound like the US]
3.- "Fascist style" – a political aesthetic of romantic symbolism, mass mobilization, a positive view of violence, and promotion of masculinity, youth, and charismatic authoritarian leadership. [still sounds like the US]
Authoritarianism:
Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law. [this sounds like the US]
1.- Limited political pluralism, which is achieved with constraints on the legislature, political parties and interest groups. [This sounds like the US since decades at least]
2.- Political legitimacy based on appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency."
3.- Minimal political mobilization, and suppression of anti-regime activities.
Ill-defined executive powers, often vague and shifting, used to extend the power of the executive.
Despotism:
In political science, despotism (Greek: Δεσποτισμός, romanized: despotismós) is a form of government in which a single entity rules with absolute power [like a gerontocratic political class]. Normally, that entity is an individual, the despot (as in an autocracy), but societies which limit respect and power to specific groups [like Politicians] have also been called despotic.
We all know that the American far right views the American left wing as a group to be dominated or chased out of the country. They want to deny the left wing any power forever. Bizarrely, the American left views the right wing in the in the same terms.
When I try to point this out to people on the left, I get nothing but blank stares. Because the American left doesn't embrace violence as a path to transforming the country, we cannot call them fascists. But what term can we use to talk about the extreme illiberalism seen on the American left?
So someone who is a kind of religious reactionary and wants to recreate the Middle Ages in modern form but has no use for nation states is not a fascist?
As always, absolutely didactic content. The ability you have to explain complex issues in a clear language for everybody to understand is unmatched. Thanks for the content Abbey!
Thank you! I'm looking forward to sharing more of my Tiktok work over here on Substack. Let's see if the content survives the switch.
Your synopsis of Fascism was excellent. And very much
appreciated. I immediately put it on 3 Political Boards on Pinterest ( 480 followers).
As a amateur historian , it has maddening me beyond no end- that so many Americans do not understand what Fascism is!.
NOT a clue - they often just use it as a slur. I had one fool on substack point out that Fascism was Socialist - because that word ' Socialist ' is part of the words to describe NAZI. I immediately blocked him.
Side note ; on Pinterest they do not censor articles that describe Fascism or have the word in a title, they will censor your comments ( no matter what) if the Words Fascist or Fascism is used.
Once again, thank you.
There are so many interesting points in your comment, Lillian. Genuinely, thank you for sharing them. It's jnteresting to see that Pinterest censors text but not images, Tiktok is really pioneering censorship of image/video content. It's fascinating to watch, worrying to live.
In her conversion with Elon Musk this week, the Alternativ für Deutschland (AfD, a far right party here in Germany) cited the myth that Hitler was a leftist because of "national socialism" and his (totalitarian, obviously) economic policy. It's such a weak argument to make, whether you're talking economics or otherwise. My response would be to either cite the definition of fascism, or ask the person saying this whether they, then, consider themselves socialist seeing as they support similar policies to Hitler.
Thanks. Love the style.
So is fascism then, a them and us ideology that attempts to invoke change along those lines (them being the losers and us being the winners) through violent means?
Violence is not necessarily a prerequisite like ultranationalism is, but it does seem inevitable given fascism's military roots and the nature of “nation states” as securitised objects.
TL;DR: everything I don’t agree with is fascism
Excellent reading. Unfortunately facism is extremely resilient. It shows up again and again. Brutal force is not the panacea. It must be something else to cancel this. Any ideas, suggestions ...
How does Lincoln’s famous speech then measure on the metric of fascism?
“that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
Is “a new birth of freedom” apocalyptic?
This is a really good question and one I think Roger Griffin deals with only indirectly in his opening chapters.
The difference here is in birthing a *new nation* as opposed to *re*birthing the nation based on some vague/selective historic image of what that nation *was*. The emphasis is on *re*birth rather than *new* birth. Political Action that seeks a *new* nation could be reform, revolution, etc. That does not fit the definition of *palingenetic* (rebirth) ultranationalism.
Thank you for that excellent piece of work. Please, do continue.
Love to see you here! This 3 min format will defiantly come handy when I’m talking the train and I don’t want to listen things but rather read.
PS: Happy new year!!
Thank-you for sharing these brief summaries with those of us who can't access the academic world, and for acknowledging the fact that having to work for a living is a barrier to learning and enhancing one's knowledge about the world. It's a barrier that isn't really acknowledged anywhere, much less addressed.
The necessity of paid work was one of the barriers that prevented me from finishing my undergrad. Nonetheless, I try to stay as informed as I can, and writing like yours helps.
I would love to further explore the idea that “Fascists are not the villains of their own story.” I think we have been taught history in such a way that this was never acknowledged — and that’s a problem.
The last video addressing political apathy as the soil for authoritarianism is spot on. I work as vocational teacher in Germany and mentionable parts of students’ utterances pipeline from political apathy towards chauvinist and xenophobic AfD-rhetoric. The worst part is their immunization against critique and discourse which Zizek and others have already fleshed out as one of fascism's core elements.
Fantastic post, thank you!
Great summary. Social media needs more of this. Quick reads that explain a topic to help people think things through and form their own opinions.
From Wikipedia, there used to be a table with characteristics:
Fascism:
1.- "Fascist negations" – anti-liberalism, anti-communism, and anti-conservatism. [anti-liberalism can include leftist regimes, like the pretense of Current Mexico´s one]
2.- "Fascist goals" – the creation of a nationalist dictatorship to regulate economic structure and to transform social relations within a modern, self-determined culture, and the expansion of the nation into an empire. [this does sound like the US]
3.- "Fascist style" – a political aesthetic of romantic symbolism, mass mobilization, a positive view of violence, and promotion of masculinity, youth, and charismatic authoritarian leadership. [still sounds like the US]
Authoritarianism:
Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law. [this sounds like the US]
1.- Limited political pluralism, which is achieved with constraints on the legislature, political parties and interest groups. [This sounds like the US since decades at least]
2.- Political legitimacy based on appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency."
3.- Minimal political mobilization, and suppression of anti-regime activities.
Ill-defined executive powers, often vague and shifting, used to extend the power of the executive.
Despotism:
In political science, despotism (Greek: Δεσποτισμός, romanized: despotismós) is a form of government in which a single entity rules with absolute power [like a gerontocratic political class]. Normally, that entity is an individual, the despot (as in an autocracy), but societies which limit respect and power to specific groups [like Politicians] have also been called despotic.
Easy, right?
We all know that the American far right views the American left wing as a group to be dominated or chased out of the country. They want to deny the left wing any power forever. Bizarrely, the American left views the right wing in the in the same terms.
When I try to point this out to people on the left, I get nothing but blank stares. Because the American left doesn't embrace violence as a path to transforming the country, we cannot call them fascists. But what term can we use to talk about the extreme illiberalism seen on the American left?
The left uses Violence
Occupy BLM Antifa SJP
Plethora of 60s Violent and Terrorist Groups
Organized Labor Violence
Support for Hamas
What an absurd post
So someone who is a kind of religious reactionary and wants to recreate the Middle Ages in modern form but has no use for nation states is not a fascist?