>
> CB: I'm not sure what you mean by "why fascist ?".
Jerry Monaco
The argument goes:
Fascism is a very imprecise term, and in the current context mostly used as a term of abuse.
^^^ CB: But Doug knows that almost since the beginning of this list I have been giving a definition of fascism that is relatively precise as far as political terms go. For one thing, I refer to the UN's legal definition of Crimes Against Peace. Legal definitions of crimes are fairly precise in the political discussion context. I also use " open terrorist rule of the most reactionary, chauvinist , bellicose sector of finance capital ". So, as precision goes in these discussions this is relatively precise usage.
^^^^
"Fascism" as a self-conscious movement does not seem to exist in U.S. society today. Fascism was a historical mass movement from historically contingent places and times. To use the term fascism for U.S.movements today, if it is not simply a term of abuse for extremists that you don't like, is either anachronistic or a very loose analogy.
^^^^^^^ CB: I don't use "fascism" to refer so much to a movement. More to refer to the form of rule.
However, "fascism" should be used rhetorically to bring to bear the emotional force of the attitude toward the European fascists, bring it to bear on the ultra-rightists in the current political context. In other words, we _should_ be verbally "abusing" the ultra-right. It's politically correct to verbally "abuse" the ultra-right. Not 'cause we don't like them (smile) ,but because they are dangerous.
The analogy is not loose, but dangerously tight.
^^^^^^
I think those who are asking the question here "Why call X group or political tendency fascist?" are getting at a deeper question that they are not addressing. To what extent are political labels more than just ideological place holders? To what extent are political labels "structural" or beyond the historical moment.
^^^^ CB: The "deeper" answer is that fascism, as analyzed by Dimitrov and others is a form of capitalist rule in its imperialist stage, wherein, the bourgeois democratic-republican form is discarded in desperation. As long as we have imperialism, there is a potential that it will "go to" fascist rule. The Left should be permanently on watch against fascist tendencies coming to dominate the state in imperialist nations. The Bush administration has demonstrated some alarming tendencies in this regard.
^^^^^
clip-
The only sense I can make out of the demand "Why call it fascist?" is to demand that you give a structural-historical account of why this label should be applied to movements we encounter today or might potentially encounter tomorrow.
Jerry Monaco
^^^^^^^^ CB: See above for some structural-historical discussion.