Reply to comment

I'm not opposed to having a

I'm not opposed to having a continuing discussion of fascism - in fact the more we discuss it's nature and history as a mass right-wing populist movement the more we increase our understanding of it's sources and of strategies to fight it. But until there is an international revolutionary left strong enough to constitute a threat of it's own to neo-liberal capitalism I can't see a return to the private financing and state tolerance of fascist groups having much appeal to the ruling class, even in Europe. This is doubly true of the US. The 1% doesn't need a fascist movement to repress a working class that is non-ideological, weak, unorganized and demoralized, and, moreover, capitalists don't want one anyway. Other forms of authoritarianism will do just fine, and the preference is for those forms that - unlike fascism - don't mobilize the masses and preserve capital's political control. Fascism cost capital loss of political control, and led to WWII and the loss of a lot of money, massive destruction and millions of lives. Fascism is the last line of defense against a bold and threatening anti-capitalist working class - once we have one of those we will also have a ruling class desperate enough to support it's own subordination to a mob of armed street thugs. Hence the irony: the better we do our jobs the greater the threat of fascism.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <b> </b> <br> <br /> <a> </a> <em> </em> <strong> </strong> <cite> </cite> <code> </code> <ul> </ul> <ol> </ol> <li> </li> <dl> </dl> <dt> </dt> <dd> </dd> <div> </div> <img> <style> <font> </font> <blockquote> </blockquote> <hr>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.