Defining Fascism

[Ken Hanly]

One important element missing in Brad's helpful description is the very
significant role given to the superior individual and leader of the Volk.
Fascism and National Socialism are at one and the same time an attempt to
restore some type of organic unity to the people under a "natural" superior
leader who exemplifies the Volk in word and deed and a rejection of
collectivism either of the communist type or even of  bourgeois democracy.
Democracy results in the triumph of the mediocre and the suppression of the
superior and natural leaders of the Volk. The  mass man of bourgeois
democracy is the antithesis of the genuine authentic individual. Hence the
appeal of  Nazism to a  philosopher such as Heidegger

Cheers, Ken Hanly

----- Original Message ----- > <<
> Brad DeLong:
>
> I always thought that fascism had five important elements:
>
> - --A strong belief that--through social darwinism--morality is
> ultimately tied to blood and race, understood as descent and genetic
> relationship.
>
> - --A strong rejection of the classical "liberal" belief that
> individuals have rights that any legitimate state is bound to respect.
>
> - - -In its place, an assertion that individuals have duties to the
> state, seen as the decision-making organ of the collectivity.
>
> - --A strong belief that parliamentary democracy is not the way to
> choose the leaders of the state: a combination of charismatic
> expression and bureaucratic oligarchism is.
>
> - - -A strong fear of Marxist communism, and an eagerness to use any
> and all weapons--suspension of parliamentary democracy, mass
> propaganda, rallies, street violence, and so forth--to combat it.
>
>
> So I don't think calling the current Russian or the current Chinese
> governmetn "fascist" is terribly useful. They have some of these
> elements, but not all of them.
>
>
> Michael Perelman:
>
> Brad's definition of fascism was excellent, except the part below might
> use some modification.  I think that he should add that the state has
> the
> responsibility of serving the people (Volk) as a whole.  Of course, no
> fascist regimes did that any more than liberal regimes respect the
> rights
> of individuals when they are inconvenient.
>
> >>
>
> --
> John K. Taber
>