Really Marv?
There is no such thing as a fascist movement after 1945, it is all histrionics?
There are only a tiny handful of obscure fascist movements in the world?
There is no connection between fascist movements and "real" politics?
There is no connection between right-wing populism and fascism?
There is no connection to the mass base of the Tea Party movement and the potential for fascism?
If a movement is libertarian in rhetorical style it can have no connection with fascism?
Anything analysis after the 3rd Comintern is a waste of time?
Anything analysis after Dimitrov is a waste of time?
Anything analysis after Kautsky is a waste of time?
Anything analysis after Trotsky is a waste of time?
If Mussolini didn't write it then it is not a useful definition of fascism?
=====================
I am not complaining about nitpicking points, I am complaining that the discussion here has been based almost totally on out of date and refuted ideas, and a basic ignorance of the field known as fascist studies which includes a wide range of political viewpoints, but has moved past all of the above claims some 20 years ago.
I find much of value in Griffin, Eatwell, Payne, Paxton, Renton, and many other scholars of fascism, even though I can happily nitpick many points of disagreemnt.
What I would really find useful is a serious discussion of the current moment and the dynamic between right-wing populism and fascism. It is a serious issue.
What I have seen so far is primarily self-indulgent armchair pontification based ona near total ignorance of contemporary research.
It is like watching a group of botanists discuss the work of Luigi Pirandello.
I am agitated and impatient with the level of the discussion of a group of people who are obviously quite smart and yet who seem unaware that what they "know" about fascism is almost totally wrong. You claim that the discussion here "seems pretty consistent with standard analyses of the movement." Actually, no. It is consistent with a discussion held in the late 1950s.
This could be a forum for a serious discussion. I look forward to it starting.
-Chip
________________________________
From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org on behalf of Marv Gandall Sent: Fri 2/19/2010 7:06 AM To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Fascism, right-wing populism,and contemporary research
On 2010-02-19, at 12:27 AM, Chip Berlet wrote:
> You know, it would be really refreshing if someone here at LBO Talk other that Woj actually bothered to read some of the scholarship on fascism written during the last 20 years.
>
> For the cram course, start here:
>
> http://www.hnn.us/articles/122469.html
>
> In utter despair at definitions and arguments that are 50 years out of date...
=============================
What exactly in this material - mainly aimed at the Jonah Goldberg and other right-wing commentators' nutty conflation of liberalism, socialism, and fascism - did you find new and exciting and at variance with what most contributors to this thread already understand about fascism? It seems pretty consistent with standard analyses of the movement and it's ideology dating back to it's heyday in the 30's. It would be appreciated if you could curb your your agitated impatience, typical of those who look for differences where they don't exist or exaggerate them where they do.
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk