[lbo-talk] Fascism, right-wing populism, and contemporary research

James Leveque leveque.james at gmail.com
Fri Feb 19 11:21:41 PST 2010


Doug Henwood wrote:


>I know that ideology exists in a non-simple relationship with material
>interest and political outcomes, but the TPers are fiendishly anti-
>statist, esp central-statist. That's the opposite of fascism, if that
>word retains any meaning. They have a lot in common with long-standing
>traditions in right populism, American style. Was that always
>potentially fascist, or is it just that way now?

I've been reading Robert Paxton's 'Anatomy of Fascism' and he has an interesting thesis on why fascism never gained much of a foothold in France in the early 30's. Amongst other things, the fascist movement in rural France really never could make common cause with urban bourgeoisie and viewed urban shopkeepers as more of an enemy. I'm assuming that the average TPer dislikes and distrusts cities and urban culture in general (also a long tradition in the American right), which, I think, throws into doubt the TPers ability to gain a foothold in cities. So if they are potentially fascist, there's still a question of whether or not they could even put a fascist program into effect. -- James Patrick Leveque MSc Student in Comparative & General Literature School of Literatures, Languages and Cultures University of Edinburgh



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list