> >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.
>
> A nice argument, but it increases one's fear that China or India may
> develop their own forms of fascism in the future...
================
Not to mention the US, of course.
Ian