See comments below...
----- Original Message ----- From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" <furuhashi.1 at osu.edu> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 11:24 AM Subject: Re: fascist?
> >otherwise...what's this, "fascism" is something that must be fought
> >by "armed struggles by all people".
>
> I'm talking about _the fascist state_, like the Third Reich.
>
> Yoshie
----- Original Message -----
From: "kelley" <kwalker2 at gte.net>
>
> chip? is this true? if so, then we should rise up against ObL? I must be
> confused or readint the above wrong. help me out???!!!
>
>
> kelley
>
I agree with Yoshie that all progressive forces need to fight against fascist states. There is disagreement over whether or not any fascist states exist today. I would argue the Taliban regime in Afghanistan qualifies as clerical fascist, but as this list has demonstrated, this view has its critics.
I would add my view that the same applies to fascist political and social movements. Also controversial terrain.
= = = =
From: "September 11, Terrorism, and Blowback," by Douglas Kellner:
"To terrorism, I would append that progressives should be now, as previously, against fascism. The supposed perpetrators of the September 11 events were allegedly both terrorists and fascistic Islamic fundamentalists who support a theocratic state that would abrogate human rights and employ torture and murder in the name of supposedly higher theological values. In the contemporary world, such fascism should opposed and more democratic and progressive modern values and democratic politics should be defended. "
http://www.publiceye.org/frontpage/911/d-kellner-911.htm
= = =
This is my rap:
"Given the trends we are facing, people who want to defend democracy have to fight on four fronts. We must organize against:
*** The rise of reactionary populism, nativism, & fascism with roots in white supremacy, antisemitism, subversion myths, and the many mutating offspring of the Freemason/Jewish banker conspiracy theories. *** Theocracy and other anti-democratic forms of religious fundamentalism, around the world, which in the US is based in White Anglo-Saxon Protestant with its subtexts of patriarchy and homophobia. *** Authoritarian state actions in the form of militarism and interventionism abroad and government repression and erosion of civil liberties at home. *** The antidemocratic neocorporatism of multinational capital with its attack on the standard of living of working people around the globe.
As we promote progressive solutions, we must also join with all persons across the political spectrum to defend the basic ideas of mass democracy, even as we argue that it is an idea that has never been real for many here in our country. The principles of the Enlightenment are not our goal, but resisting attempts to push political discourse back to pre-enlightenment principles is nonetheless a worthy effort. "
http://www.publiceye.org/equality/StrategiesTOC.htm#TopOfPage
(Adapted from Berlet, Chip. (1998). "Following the Threads: A Work in Progress." In Amy Elizabeth Ansell, ed., Unraveling the Right: The New Conservatism in American Thought and Politics. New York: Westview.)
= = = =
I agree with Kellner and now would add opposing terrorism to this list.
This is all part of my (perhaps ill-phrased) argument that leftists need to speak out against fascism and terrorism for two reasons:
1) They suck.
2) If the left doesn't say it explicitly, there are some folks who might assume we support them.
These folks fall into two categories.
a) People with grievances being recruited by both left and right forces.
b) People who hate the left and will use our silence to falsely accuse the left of being soft on terrorism and/or fascism.
I have already seen examples of both.
:-(
-Chip Berlet