Nathan Newman wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ian Murray" <seamus2001 at home.com>
> > It would be more interesting to hear what characteristics the
> Chinese state
> > has that people feel distinguish it from what was classically
> considered
> > fascist states?
> >
> > Nathan Newman
> ===========
> -Persistant, aggressive geographic expansion.
>
> Now it seems that there has been a merger of "imperialist" with "fascist"
> which confuses the word completely.
>
> Franco's Spain had no particular geographic expansionist goals yet is
> generally considered fascist. The same holds for a number of the Latin
> American countries often held out as having fascist characteristics.
>
> By this definition, was Italy not fascist until it began its North African
> misadventures?
>
> Charles seems to reduce fascism as well purely to warfare but that makes
> fascism over-inclusive a term, since the Roman empire would be a fascist
> state, British colonialism would be fascist, and so on.
>
> He also wants to claim that a key element of fascism was anti-communism and
> anti-Sovietism; China of course was guilty of the latter at points in its
> occasional alliances with the US against the Soviet Union during the last
> two decades of the Soviet Union and in practice suppresses anyone promoting
> real Marxism or worker-led communism. But such a limited definition also
> negates the class analysis Charles also argues for in analyzing fascism--
> fascism is defined as a form of monopoly capitalism dominated by the state,
> a definition that fits the evolving business class in China. With the
> ruling Communists assuming control of large chunks of capitalist enterprise,
> where is the difference from classic corporatism that was the hallmark of
> fascism?
>
> -- Nathan Newman