Defining Fascism

[Christopher Rhoades Dÿkema]

Brad comments that his definition doesn't fit well with the current Russian
and Chinese régimes. This makes sense. Does it also make sense to say that
fascism as described, was a kind of phenomenon that arose in capitalist
states that were more or less advanced, but still had large population
components that were, or recently had been peasants with roots in pre
modernity, but which had been touched just enough by market relations that
they were susceptible to the kind of blandishments that Brad describes and
which would have fed into their anomie? That would account for a number of
things that seem to be unclear in this discussion, in particular, the fact
that "fascism" seem inapt to any current circumstances.

Christopher Rhoades Dÿkema

"John K. Taber" wrote:


> OK, I stand corrected. I like Brad DeLong's definition
> of fascism. I'll run with it pending further comments from
> lbo-sters.
>
> I also like Michael Perelman's comment.
>
> <<
> 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