Let's define fascism - Because every thread is a new definition

[Toucan]

1. The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”
2. The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
3. The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”
4. Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
5. Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”
6. Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”
7. The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”
8. The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
9. Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”
10. Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”
11. Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”
12. Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”
13. Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”
14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

-14 signs of fascism, Umberto Eco, Italian writer who lived through fascism.

If we accept this list we can see that Trump is not a fascist however he is quite close to being more of a fascist than not.

Here is a link to the full essay. It is called Eternal Fascism (ur fascism) and it is really interesting in its full form.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/

 

[Your Weird Fetish]

None of this stuff seems to really address its ideological roots or how it differs from other political philosophies, so much as symptoms of its presence and preconditions for it arising.

 

[Toucan]

None of this stuff seems to really address its ideological roots or how it differs from other political philosophies, so much as symptoms of its presence and preconditions for it arising.

Umberto Eco essentially states that such things are useless because the ideological justifications that fascism gives for itself are ultimately beside the point when it comes to its practical effect on the world. Fascism comes in many shapes and sizes and there is no real way of quantifying it. For instance he points to the three fascist powers of europe (spain germany and italy) who all had wildly divergent ideas of what fascism should be (spain resembled a theocracy, germany a military state and italy a corporate state) but ultimately they all acted in the same way.

However I would add a 15th symptom to the list. I think that no Fascist regime is complete without a cult of personality. A sort of pantheon made up of the various leaders and heroes and martyrs of the party

 

[Your Weird Fetish]

Umberto Eco essentially states that such things are useless because the ideological justifications that fascism gives for itself are ultimately beside the point when it comes to its practical effect on the world. Fascism comes in many shapes and sizes and there is no real way of quantifying it. For instance he points to the three fascist powers of europe (spain germany and italy) who all had wildly divergent ideas of what fascism should be (spain resembled a theocracy, germany a military state and italy a corporate state) but ultimately they all acted in the same way.

However I would add a 15th symptom to the list. I think that no Fascist regime is complete without a cult of personality. A sort of pantheon made up of the various leaders and heroes and martyrs of the party

Ok but all these things apply to non-fascist regimes pretty strongly and given how much of Europe's history in the early 20th century was defined by a fight between fascism, communism, and liberalism, it seems fucked up that one of those essentially doesn't exist as a definable entity.

 

[Dagwood]

Fascism is international socialism with the dividing lines between in- and out- groups drawn along national boundaries instead of class boundaries.

Mussolini liked socialism, but he liked Italy more. He tried to strike a "third way" between the capitalist systems, which he saw as greedy and exploitative, and international socialism, which sought to erase national borders and which he though was doomed to failure for being economically illiterate. His solution was to re-order Italian society so that everything would be run by a single strong leader for the benefit of all, and by everything he meant _everything_. Corporations, the arts, the press, all would be controlled - though not necessarily owned - by the government. Emotional appeals/populism/patriotic fervor were tools used to control the populace or gain its approval but were just means to the end of establishing a fascist state that would reap the "benefits" of socalism's centralized control without losing Italy as a distinct nation.

 

[Toucan]

Ok but all these things apply to non-fascist regimes pretty strongly and given how much of Europe's history in the early 20th century was defined by a fight between fascism, communism, and liberalism, it seems fucked up that one of those essentially doesn't exist as a definable entity.

The REALLY fucked up thing is that they resembled each other more than they didnt.

 

[Your Weird Fetish]

The REALLY fucked up thing is that they resembled each other more than they didnt.

Well fascism is basically communism's weird nephew.

 

[Toucan]

Well fascism is basically communism's weird nephew.

Not even that but the imperial powers of france and england exhibited many of the qualities of a fascist state in those times too, perhaps even more so since they had been given a head start on conquering other nations.

I think its a bit of a canard to make a distinction between Monarchy and fascism. Fascism is essentially a sleeker and more modern version of monarchy. If you are interested in reading there is a really interesting book called 'totalitarian art' by igor golomstock where he compares the officially recognised and lauded art works of the totalitarian powers. He even goes so far as to include saddam husseins iraq and saudi arabia and the united kingdom. What you end up finding is that art produced in these countries stagnated during times of totalitarian repression and they all universally depict a sort of romanticised realism of heroism or plentiful harvests or scenes from official history.

 

[Piss Clam]

Mussolini liked socialism, but he liked Italy more. He tried to strike a "third way" between the capitalist systems, which he saw as greedy and exploitative, and international socialism, which sought to erase national borders and which he though was doomed to failure for being economically illiterate. His solution was to re-order Italian society so that everything would be run by a single strong leader for the benefit of all, and by everything he meant _everything_. Corporations, the arts, the press, all would be controlled - though not necessarily owned - by the government. Emotional appeals/populism/patriotic fervor were tools used to control the populace or gain its approval but were just means to the end of establishing a fascist state that would reap the "benefits" of socalism's centralized control without losing Italy as a distinct nation.

Isn't the definition of Fascism Mussolini's words? Shouldn't we look there. Just as we look to Karl Marx.

 

[Joan Nyan]

Fascism was the political ideology of the Italian government between 1925 and 1945. Extending it to any modern day political ideology is silly.

 

[Commander Keen]

No one can define fascism because not even the ivory tower political scientists can agree on what it is. The only real-life example is Mussolini's Italy and Italians can't into government after Rome fell so I wouldn't list that as a prime example of pure fascism.

I automatically dismiss anyone who calls someone a fascist or claims the US federal government is currently fascist. No one knows what it means, there's no universally agreed upon definition, so you're just bullshitting.

 

[Hell0]

Guys, Facism was really in our hearts the whole time.

 

[AnOminous]

No one can define fascism because not even the ivory tower political scientists can agree on what it is. The only real-life example is Mussolini's Italy and Italians can't into government after Rome fell so I wouldn't list that as a prime example of pure fascism.

I automatically dismiss anyone who calls someone a fascist or claims the US federal government is currently fascist. No one knows what it means, there's no universally agreed upon definition, so you're just bullshitting.

Generalissimo Francisco Franco wants a word with you.

 

[Krokodil Overdose]

I'm going to use Nick Land's definition: "Fascism is therefore broadly identical with a normalization of war-powers in a modern state, that is: sustained social mobilization under central direction." I realize this covers communism as well, but that's actually part of his thesis: Fascism is actually existing Communism as practiced in one country. The USSR and the Third Reich were supposed to be "communist" and "fascist" respectively, but in practical terms, there was very little daylight between them. (This definition comes from an article he dropped just before the 2016 election, "The F Word." I recommend giving it a look if you can take Land's prose style- he's done a lot of drugs, and it shows.)

 

[SigSauer]

I would suggest watching Cultured Thugs videos. This dude is an OG Fascist and could tell you anything you'd want to know about it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHibZA-Qs78

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsAIuAMjzsc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp04VmdRyoI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ukylWmPfXA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McqXbRp92sI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-Le1pgsEDE

Also, ignore the LARPY faggots who call themselves the "American Blackshirts". They have nothing in common with Italy, they are about as "Fascist" as the bugmen who wear balaclavas and smoke meth while throwing bricks at real fascists. ABS is fucking gay.

 

[Commander Keen]

Generalissimo Francisco Franco wants a word with you.

No, he doesn't. A one party totalitarian dictatorship with smatterings of monarchy for flavor does not a fascist regime make. Just because someone is a dictator (or regent-for-life or whatever the spaniards cooked up) it doesn't make them a fascist.

But in your own definition of fascism it may fit. But, like I pointed out, there has only been one legitimate regime that has embraced the label of fascist and the intellectuals who sit around and talk about this stuff all day can't agree on what fascism actually is. So this is all moot.

If I sound dismissive of political scientists it's because that was my undergraduate major. Yes, I had to go to grad school for something entirely different in order to become employable.

 

[Toucan]

No, he doesn't. A one party totalitarian dictatorship with smatterings of monarchy for flavor does not a fascist regime make. Just because someone is a dictator (or regent-for-life or whatever the spaniards cooked up) it doesn't make them a fascist.

Not even when he refers to himself as a fascist and the official ideology of the falangist party is expressly described as borrowing from Italian fascism and self described as fascism ?

 

[Commander Keen]

Not even when he refers to himself as a fascist and the official ideology of the falangist party is expressly described as borrowing from Italian fascism and self described as fascism ?

I'm trying to find where generalissimo Franco explicitly said his rule was a fascist one, but I can't. Everything I've found has been mixed with the fascist label applied by armchair historians.

So please point me to where you found a quote by Franco saying "this is a fascist regime" or something like that. I can't find it.

I still wouldn't say that merely borrowing a few tenets from Italian fascist government makes you a fascist. Every major government on the planet shares a few commonalities with National Socialism but you wouldn't call them nazis.

Edit: typo

 

[Toucan]

So please point me to where you found a quote by Franco saying "this is a fascist regime" or something like that. I can't find it.

Alright.

A totalitarian state will harmonize in Spain the operation of all the capabilities and energy in the country, that inside the National Unity, the work esteemed as the most unavoidable must be the only exponent of the people's will.
-Victory speech in Madrid (19 May 1939), Franco. (I understand it doesnt directly state it is fascism but if it doesnt make you think 'fascist' then nothing will.)

Fascism, since that is the word that describes us, fascism presents, wherever it manifests itself, characteristics which are varied to the extent that countries and national temperaments vary. It is essentially a defensive reaction of the organism, a manifestation of the desire to live, of the desire not to die, which at certain times seizes a whole people. So each people reacts in its own way, according to its conception of life. Our rising, here, has a Spanish meaning! What can it have in common with Hitlerisim, which was, above all, a reaction against the state of things created by the defeat, and by the abdication and the despair that followed it?
-Again Franco in an interview with Henri Massis in 1938

And finally here is a clip from a documentary about the Spanish civil war where the official ideology of the falangist party is admitted to be fascism.
https://youtu.be/81RhewkQbOk?t=33m53s
and then this clip later on
https://youtu.be/81RhewkQbOk?t=38m56s
Incidentally I highly recommend watching that documentary in full it is incredibly well done and possibly the best explination of the Spanish Civil war most people will ever come across.

I do not understand your obsession with trying to rigidly contain the definition of fascism to Mussolini when it is obvious that the ideology was adapted by both Hitler and Franco and others in South America and Africa.
Just because Mussolini came up with the idea of fascism doesn't mean that every slight veriation of that idea needs to be called something completely different and be judged using completely different metrics.
I wonder do you apply the same criteria to Communism since there are Varying degrees to that ideology too (Leninism Stalinism Maoism etc)

It would be like saying that every breed of dog be called something unique and that only one breed of dog may be hold the title. Its a bit grammar nazi-ish.

 

[Commander Keen]

Alright.

A totalitarian state will harmonize in Spain the operation of all the capabilities and energy in the country, that inside the National Unity, the work esteemed as the most unavoidable must be the only exponent of the people's will.
-Victory speech in Madrid (19 May 1939), Franco. (I understand it doesnt directly state it is fascism but if it doesnt make you think 'fascist' then nothing will.)

Fascism, since that is the word that describes us, fascism presents, wherever it manifests itself, characteristics which are varied to the extent that countries and national temperaments vary. It is essentially a defensive reaction of the organism, a manifestation of the desire to live, of the desire not to die, which at certain times seizes a whole people. So each people reacts in its own way, according to its conception of life. Our rising, here, has a Spanish meaning! What can it have in common with Hitlerisim, which was, above all, a reaction against the state of things created by the defeat, and by the abdication and the despair that followed it?
-Again Franco in an interview with Henri Massis in 1938

And finally here is a clip from a documentary about the Spanish civil war where the official ideology of the falangist party is admitted to be fascism.
https://youtu.be/81RhewkQbOk?t=33m53s
and then this clip later on
https://youtu.be/81RhewkQbOk?t=38m56s
Incidentally I highly recommend watching that documentary in full it is incredibly well done and possibly the best explination of the Spanish Civil war most people will ever come across.

I do not understand your obsession with trying to rigidly contain the definition of fascism to Mussolini when it is obvious that the ideology was adapted by both Hitler and Franco and others in South America and Africa.
Just because Mussolini came up with the idea of fascism doesn't mean that every slight veriation of that idea needs to be called something completely different and be judged using completely different metrics.
I wonder do you apply the same criteria to Communism since there are Varying degrees to that ideology too (Leninism Stalinism Maoism etc)

It would be like saying that every breed of dog be called something unique and that only one breed of dog may be hold the title. Its a bit grammar nazi-ish.

I'm really not. My point is that no one can agree on what fascism actually is so I'm reluctant to label something "fascist" just because it upsets my sensibilities. HOWEVER, if a government explicitly states that it is a fascist government then I'm cool with it.

I have no issue whatsoever with a government saying "so we're fascists now" and then other people saying it's a fascist regime. I do have an issue with the slobbering masses yelling "FASCIST! YOU'RE A FASCIST CUNT! FAAAAAAAASCIST!" because they don't know what it means. I don't know what it means. No one knows what it means. But if a government in power releases a statement or manifesto or whatever that states "this is a fascist government" then I'll accept the fascist label. However, if a government does not apply the fascist label, then I am forced to compare its policies to previous examples that are widely agreed to be fascist regimes.

The term "fascist" is now a pejorative used by people who tend to lean left politically to discredit their opposition. At least here in the USofA. It's the same with the "socialist" label, but there seems to be a lot more agreement on what "socialism" actually is and it is more strongly defined.

Full disclosure: I have a BS and MS in political science so I fully admit to being autistic in regards to government. Yes, I was completely unemployable and had to get a second MS in order to find work outside of a coffee shop. Or, in my case, the alcohol industry.