[lbo-talk] Fascism American style

Wojtek S wsoko52 at gmail.com
Mon Oct 14 07:18:30 PDT 2013


[WS:] The f word is certainly an invective of choice in many political diatribes, which sort of debases its analytic usefulness. However, fascism can also be a useful analytic category.


>From an analytic point of view, historical fascism has four characteristic
attributes that distinguish it from other political forces:

1. Reliance on wealthy donors and rabble-rousing demagoguery to gain political momentum in electoral politics (this is the key differentiating factor from ordinary conservatives, who also speak for the rich but stay away from rabble rousing and preach conservative stasis instead, as Robin Corey aptly observed); 2. Once its supporters get elected to the parliament, they invariably act like a wrecking ball to sabotage the functioning of that political body (they more crazy their behavior the better because it makes them immune to political influences while gaining them publicity and further mobilizing their rabble supporters); 3. Once their wrecking ball tactic creates a stalemate and a political crisis - they push forward their leadership as the only possible solution of that crisis (this an attempt at power grab - the ultimate goal of their tactic); 4. Once the power grab have been successfully accomplished, they use their power to switch off democratic governance altogether and eliminate their political opponents.

Thus far, the Pee Party Republicans have clearly demonstrated fascist attributes 1 through 3. Step 4 is a bit trickier, because unlike Germany or Italy, the US is far more decentralized both geographically and politically (separation of powers) - so switching off democratic governance is more difficult than it was in Germany or Italy. A more likely fascist scenario in the US is elimination of the opposition (cf. Mccartyism) while maintaining the facade of the democratic process

-- Wojtek

"An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list